Armor differentiation is better done by differentiating armor, rather than fidgeting with weapons or attributes. Medium and heavy armor should come with integral damage reduction, rather than it being nothing but a very bad feat for heavy armor only
Allowing characters to reduce damage from armor is exactly the same as giving the character more hit points. I would like for there to be more of a variety of armor classes and ways to generate them than the current 3-type armor system that makes you need Dexterity, need it less, or not need it but suck because you don't have it. Adding more variation in weapon damage, and giving more incentives for Strength and other ability scores than Dexterity.
As for Constitution? Just get rid of it. Just...get rid of it. Either tie bonus HP to Strength (and rename Strength to 'Body', 'Fitness', or similar) because one's physical fortitude is inextricably linked to one's fitness and swolitude, taking care of one's body just handles all of that, or eliminate stat-based bonus HP altogether and leave it up to feats or class abilities to determine your health. I know, I know, I know - Constitution is one of the Six Sacred Scores and thus can never be mucked with, but if I were allowed to make a second change to D&D? It would be to completely rejigger how ability scores work. Constitution, Wisdom, and possibly Charisma would all just disappear, and in their place an expanded skill system would cover the gaps. If an ability score cannot be used as the foundation for several different types of specialized skill training, it has no business being an ability score. The Six Sacred Scores are holding this game back and have been for multiple editions now.
Constitution will never be dumped from the game. I understand why it could help to get rid of it, but as it's impossible to even rename the Six Scores (to differentiate Wisdom and Intelligence), getting rid of one altogether is even less likely of happening.
My suggestions to rebalance the ability scores were under the assumption that the Six Scores will be part of D&D until the end of the hobby, and were ways to make the best balance of what we have in the game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I'd have the adventures be shorter modules rather than long campaign-sized monstrosities. Smaller digestible bits, level 1-3, 4-6, 7-9, etc, that could be mixed and matched, like one could do years ago.
Another way to balance ranged and melee combat it to make Strength be needed to use certain heavier ranged weapons (Bows, heavy firearms, etc).
Yeah I like compound bows in PF2E
I could see leaving the Short and Long Bows and the Hand and Light Crossbows as Dex weapons but then make the Heavy Crossbow a Strength base weapon and repurpose the Over-Sized Bow from Waterdeep: Dragon Heist into a composite bow that is also a Str base weapon that does 2d6 +Str mod damage. Also make Smaller firearms like pistols Dex and larger firearms like Rifles Str too.
Another way to balance ranged and melee combat it to make Strength be needed to use certain heavier ranged weapons (Bows, heavy firearms, etc).
Yeah I like compound bows in PF2E
I could see leaving the Short and Long Bows and the Hand and Light Crossbows as Dex weapons but then make the Heavy Crossbow a Strength base weapon and repurpose the Over-Sized Bow from Waterdeep: Dragon Heist into a composite bow that is also a Str base weapon that does 2d6 +Str mod damage. Also make Smaller firearms like pistols Dex and larger firearms like Rifles Str too.
I think you misunderstood my meaning. Rolling to hit with ranged weapons should definitely be Dexterity based, but in order to shoot with certain ranged weapons should require Strength to be used, but not necessarily determine damage or anything else.
(Though, I do like the oversized longbow from W:DH, and its Dex to hit and Str for damage could work for a few different weapons as well.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Another way to balance ranged and melee combat it to make Strength be needed to use certain heavier ranged weapons (Bows, heavy firearms, etc).
Yeah I like compound bows in PF2E
I could see leaving the Short and Long Bows and the Hand and Light Crossbows as Dex weapons but then make the Heavy Crossbow a Strength base weapon and repurpose the Over-Sized Bow from Waterdeep: Dragon Heist into a composite bow that is also a Str base weapon that does 2d6 +Str mod damage. Also make Smaller firearms like pistols Dex and larger firearms like Rifles Str too.
In what way is a Heavy Crossbow STR based?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
5e may be a simpler form of D&D that previous versions, but it is STILL an extremely complicated game. And so it should be. The game is designed to encompass a parallel universe, and fully populate all aspects of that universe. There have to be myriad rules to cover that.
And that is the secret: No, you don't. You don't need rules for everything. Really. You only need rules for the situations that you encounter. And starting from a simple framework, the DM can adjudicate what happens. I have played RPGs with very, very simple rules. Amber Diceless Roleplaying Game has four attributes and a very simple rule, whoever has the highest attribute wins. And we played years-long incredible campaigns about universes which are much more complex than the ones in D&D.
It has been proven in 3e and 4e that you cannot make an exhaustive system that covers everything without holes and without destroying the spirit of the game. There is no point to it.
New players can get into D&D if the other players and DM are considerate of their lack of basic knowledge. But never, ever, should that lack of knowledge be allowed to let some rule be relaxed. Constant education of the rules make all players better.
Again no, it does not. Really. And this is also why I'm against rule-heavy systems, because they stiffle the creativity of both the players and the DM. And the worst is when the rules are so heavy that the DM cannot know them all and players abuse this.
Better knowledge of rules (beyond basic knowledge) does not make a better player. Having a more optimised character does not make a better player. This is not a boadgame, this is not a wargame, it's a roleplaying game and what makes a player better is when he can better live the story while playing his character. All the other ideas that distract him from this make worse players.
The game is part role-playing, but it is heavily game mechanics based. Virtually every spell, every weapon, every action, has a distance attached to it. You want to play a game where stuff is hand-waved, theatre of he mind....good luck with that.
I have described the location where I play as having 3-5 games operating simultaneously, each by a DM with their own level of adherence to RAW. I am the most strict. There is one fellow, a player, who is virtually blind. We have all tried to make accommodations for him, but he is by far, the worst player any of us have had to deal with. He is now with his 3rd DM and that DM is tearing his hair out, because the player always wants to step outside the rules and do something so off the wall that it totally disrupts the game. This is not just because of his disability. Other players describe to him what the set up is, then the player goes off on some non-rules based tangent that always starts with "OK, I want to....", which then totally stops the game as each DM tries to grasp what he wants to do, then realizes it is impossible not only for that particular class the player is running, but ANY char, to do that, within the confines of 5e. The word for that is called "chaos".
You want to play a rules light game, play Dungeon World. But those that play 5e , or virtually any version of D&D, realize that the rules are in place because the game was designed that way. And yes, there is no "Rule of Cool" at my table. There is to varying degrees at the other tables, but every single one of the other DM's does adhere to the vast majority of the rules.
You can call it bad DM'ing, but when the DM has to adjudicate every single action a player wants to make, that is exhausting to the DM, and detracts from the story, and slows the game down. Let alone when some player says "You let player X do action Y, but you won't let me do action Z, and is almost the same thing." Sorry, just no.
I find that the more you attempt to play DnD like a math-game, the more disappointing it is. It's like trying to get satisfaction out of life by spending all your time reading other people's experiences of life on the internet. It's always going to be a ghost of the real thing.
"The Dungeons & Dragons roleplaying game is about storytelling in worlds of swords and sorcery. It shares elements with childhood games of make-believe. Like those games, D&D is driven by imagination. It’s about picturing the towering castle beneath the stormy night sky and imagining how a fantasy adventurer might react to the challenges that scene presents."
Literally the first paragraph in the Basic Rules. If I was to change one thing in 5e, it would be to emphasize this, over, and over, and over again. After every chapter, after every table. D&D does not function well as a math game, if you want to do that, video games beat it out. Video games are flashier, faster, and many of the fantasy based ones out-class D&D in its own genre. As a math-game.
As a social activity, as a storytelling game, as something driven by imagination and the social bond between players, D&D outclasses everything else. It is a game for friends. It is a game for fun. The understanding of this philosophy is what separates the people endlessly griping about how D&D mechanics are insufficient, and the people actually having fun playing the game. Is the game perfect? No, it was made by humans, and we're not capable of perfection. But I believe the vast majority of the game-ruining errors experienced with this game are errors found between the chair and the character sheet.
I find that the more you attempt to play DnD like a math-game, the more disappointing it is. It's like trying to get satisfaction out of life by spending all your time reading other people's experiences of life on the internet. It's always going to be a ghost of the real thing.
"The Dungeons & Dragons roleplaying game is about storytelling in worlds of swords and sorcery. It shares elements with childhood games of make-believe. Like those games, D&D is driven by imagination. It’s about picturing the towering castle beneath the stormy night sky and imagining how a fantasy adventurer might react to the challenges that scene presents."
Literally the first paragraph in the Basic Rules. If I was to change one thing in 5e, it would be to emphasize this, over, and over, and over again. After every chapter, after every table. D&D does not function well as a math game, if you want to do that, video games beat it out. Video games are flashier, faster, and many of the fantasy based ones out-class D&D in its own genre. As a math-game.
As a social activity, as a storytelling game, as something driven by imagination and the social bond between players, D&D outclasses everything else. It is a game for friends. It is a game for fun. The understanding of this philosophy is what separates the people endlessly griping about how D&D mechanics are insufficient, and the people actually having fun playing the game. Is the game perfect? No, it was made by humans, and we're not capable of perfection. But I believe the vast majority of the game-ruining errors experienced with this game are errors found between the chair and the character sheet.
I fail to see what you are directly talking about, but math is an important part of D&D. D&D 5e is one of the editions that is the least in-depth. We no longer have monsters that are 95% immune to magic, or giant number bonuses like 3e, and have organized all of the monsters into challenge ratings that give the same amount of XP each time for the same CR. Math is less prevalent in this edition than many previous editions, but it is still important to the game.
Without math, this game would just be the "make-believe" games we played as children. It needs math and rules and numbers to be a "role-playing game" instead of just "role-playing." The game needs numbers, and in any edition there will be people trying to get the highest numbers, which is not bad. It's a core part of our hobby.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I find that the more you attempt to play DnD like a math-game, the more disappointing it is. It's like trying to get satisfaction out of life by spending all your time reading other people's experiences of life on the internet. It's always going to be a ghost of the real thing.
"The Dungeons & Dragons roleplaying game is about storytelling in worlds of swords and sorcery. It shares elements with childhood games of make-believe. Like those games, D&D is driven by imagination. It’s about picturing the towering castle beneath the stormy night sky and imagining how a fantasy adventurer might react to the challenges that scene presents."
Literally the first paragraph in the Basic Rules. If I was to change one thing in 5e, it would be to emphasize this, over, and over, and over again. After every chapter, after every table. D&D does not function well as a math game, if you want to do that, video games beat it out. Video games are flashier, faster, and many of the fantasy based ones out-class D&D in its own genre. As a math-game.
As a social activity, as a storytelling game, as something driven by imagination and the social bond between players, D&D outclasses everything else. It is a game for friends. It is a game for fun. The understanding of this philosophy is what separates the people endlessly griping about how D&D mechanics are insufficient, and the people actually having fun playing the game. Is the game perfect? No, it was made by humans, and we're not capable of perfection. But I believe the vast majority of the game-ruining errors experienced with this game are errors found between the chair and the character sheet.
I fail to see what you are directly talking about, but math is an important part of D&D. D&D 5e is one of the editions that is the least in-depth. We no longer have monsters that are 95% immune to magic, or giant number bonuses like 3e, and have organized all of the monsters into challenge ratings that give the same amount of XP each time for the same CR. Math is less prevalent in this edition than many previous editions, but it is still important to the game.
Without math, this game would just be the "make-believe" games we played as children. It needs math and rules and numbers to be a "role-playing game" instead of just "role-playing." The game needs numbers, and in any edition there will be people trying to get the highest numbers, which is not bad. It's a core part of our hobby.
Original DnD was basically math game. Crunch is part of it's bones. You remove that you have a different system. There are several systems that already exist and are better suited if you want that style.
I posted in another thread but was told this would be a better place to post my initial thoughts.
Things id like to see in either a new edition or in a future rulebook
1. options for a disabled character, ie: rules to play a blind character or an amputee. I mean id like to play a blind swordsman like Zatoichi or the lone wolf from Sekiro. I do know that there was an UA for magical prosthetic limbs but who knows if that will ever be official but if it ever is, its a magic item that requires attunement and is something that wouldnt be readily available to a starting low level character ie a lvl 1 adventurer
2. weapons or feats that bolster unarmed strike or natural weapons. I mean come on brass knuckles are an actual thing and i for the life of me can not fathom the reason that either of these options are not able to have the finesse weapon option
3. rules for monk flurry of blows using monk weapons instead of unarmed strikes. I have watched enough anime and martial arts movies to see monks/other martial artists attacking in a flurry of blows using a sword, spear or other weapons.
4. rules for an actual spell less ranger or new ranger spells for a melee ranger.
No. Just, no. If that were to be brought back, it would not be fair.
Back then, if you rolled that you got less than the equivalent of the Magic Initiate feat. There really was a special class called the Psionicist. The complete Psionics handbook came out in 1e and was still compatible for 2e. It just required you to roll that to make the class eligible. But most DMs I knew handwaved a lot of that.
Anyway you can send me this?
It's not done, but here's the link to my thread on it:
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/homebrew-house-rules/73878-epic-levels-21-30
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Thanks!
Allowing characters to reduce damage from armor is exactly the same as giving the character more hit points. I would like for there to be more of a variety of armor classes and ways to generate them than the current 3-type armor system that makes you need Dexterity, need it less, or not need it but suck because you don't have it. Adding more variation in weapon damage, and giving more incentives for Strength and other ability scores than Dexterity.
Constitution will never be dumped from the game. I understand why it could help to get rid of it, but as it's impossible to even rename the Six Scores (to differentiate Wisdom and Intelligence), getting rid of one altogether is even less likely of happening.
My suggestions to rebalance the ability scores were under the assumption that the Six Scores will be part of D&D until the end of the hobby, and were ways to make the best balance of what we have in the game.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Another way to balance ranged and melee combat it to make Strength be needed to use certain heavier ranged weapons (Bows, heavy firearms, etc).
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
This. So much this.
So, not many people seemed to like my suggestions for balancing the ability scores, huh?
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Yeah I like compound bows in PF2E
I could see leaving the Short and Long Bows and the Hand and Light Crossbows as Dex weapons but then make the Heavy Crossbow a Strength base weapon and repurpose the Over-Sized Bow from Waterdeep: Dragon Heist into a composite bow that is also a Str base weapon that does 2d6 +Str mod damage. Also make Smaller firearms like pistols Dex and larger firearms like Rifles Str too.
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Characters for Tenebris Sine Fine
RoughCoronet's Greater Wills
I think you misunderstood my meaning. Rolling to hit with ranged weapons should definitely be Dexterity based, but in order to shoot with certain ranged weapons should require Strength to be used, but not necessarily determine damage or anything else.
(Though, I do like the oversized longbow from W:DH, and its Dex to hit and Str for damage could work for a few different weapons as well.)
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
In what way is a Heavy Crossbow STR based?
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
The game is part role-playing, but it is heavily game mechanics based. Virtually every spell, every weapon, every action, has a distance attached to it. You want to play a game where stuff is hand-waved, theatre of he mind....good luck with that.
I have described the location where I play as having 3-5 games operating simultaneously, each by a DM with their own level of adherence to RAW. I am the most strict. There is one fellow, a player, who is virtually blind. We have all tried to make accommodations for him, but he is by far, the worst player any of us have had to deal with. He is now with his 3rd DM and that DM is tearing his hair out, because the player always wants to step outside the rules and do something so off the wall that it totally disrupts the game. This is not just because of his disability. Other players describe to him what the set up is, then the player goes off on some non-rules based tangent that always starts with "OK, I want to....", which then totally stops the game as each DM tries to grasp what he wants to do, then realizes it is impossible not only for that particular class the player is running, but ANY char, to do that, within the confines of 5e. The word for that is called "chaos".
You want to play a rules light game, play Dungeon World. But those that play 5e , or virtually any version of D&D, realize that the rules are in place because the game was designed that way. And yes, there is no "Rule of Cool" at my table. There is to varying degrees at the other tables, but every single one of the other DM's does adhere to the vast majority of the rules.
You can call it bad DM'ing, but when the DM has to adjudicate every single action a player wants to make, that is exhausting to the DM, and detracts from the story, and slows the game down. Let alone when some player says "You let player X do action Y, but you won't let me do action Z, and is almost the same thing." Sorry, just no.
Warning: Potentially controversial opinions below.
I find that the more you attempt to play DnD like a math-game, the more disappointing it is. It's like trying to get satisfaction out of life by spending all your time reading other people's experiences of life on the internet. It's always going to be a ghost of the real thing.
"The Dungeons & Dragons roleplaying game is about storytelling in worlds of swords and sorcery. It shares elements with childhood games of make-believe. Like those games, D&D is driven by imagination. It’s about picturing the towering castle beneath the stormy night sky and imagining how a fantasy adventurer might react to the challenges that scene presents."
Literally the first paragraph in the Basic Rules. If I was to change one thing in 5e, it would be to emphasize this, over, and over, and over again. After every chapter, after every table. D&D does not function well as a math game, if you want to do that, video games beat it out. Video games are flashier, faster, and many of the fantasy based ones out-class D&D in its own genre. As a math-game.
As a social activity, as a storytelling game, as something driven by imagination and the social bond between players, D&D outclasses everything else. It is a game for friends. It is a game for fun. The understanding of this philosophy is what separates the people endlessly griping about how D&D mechanics are insufficient, and the people actually having fun playing the game. Is the game perfect? No, it was made by humans, and we're not capable of perfection. But I believe the vast majority of the game-ruining errors experienced with this game are errors found between the chair and the character sheet.
I fail to see what you are directly talking about, but math is an important part of D&D. D&D 5e is one of the editions that is the least in-depth. We no longer have monsters that are 95% immune to magic, or giant number bonuses like 3e, and have organized all of the monsters into challenge ratings that give the same amount of XP each time for the same CR. Math is less prevalent in this edition than many previous editions, but it is still important to the game.
Without math, this game would just be the "make-believe" games we played as children. It needs math and rules and numbers to be a "role-playing game" instead of just "role-playing." The game needs numbers, and in any edition there will be people trying to get the highest numbers, which is not bad. It's a core part of our hobby.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Original DnD was basically math game. Crunch is part of it's bones. You remove that you have a different system. There are several systems that already exist and are better suited if you want that style.
I posted in another thread but was told this would be a better place to post my initial thoughts.
Things id like to see in either a new edition or in a future rulebook
1. options for a disabled character, ie: rules to play a blind character or an amputee. I mean id like to play a blind swordsman like Zatoichi or the lone wolf from Sekiro. I do know that there was an UA for magical prosthetic limbs but who knows if that will ever be official but if it ever is, its a magic item that requires attunement and is something that wouldnt be readily available to a starting low level character ie a lvl 1 adventurer
2. weapons or feats that bolster unarmed strike or natural weapons. I mean come on brass knuckles are an actual thing and i for the life of me can not fathom the reason that either of these options are not able to have the finesse weapon option
3. rules for monk flurry of blows using monk weapons instead of unarmed strikes. I have watched enough anime and martial arts movies to see monks/other martial artists attacking in a flurry of blows using a sword, spear or other weapons.
4. rules for an actual spell less ranger or new ranger spells for a melee ranger.
I would bring back psionics in all of its 1E/2E glory.
No special class, just roll a 00 on a d100, and you got it.
No. Just, no. If that were to be brought back, it would not be fair.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Back then, if you rolled that you got less than the equivalent of the Magic Initiate feat. There really was a special class called the Psionicist. The complete Psionics handbook came out in 1e and was still compatible for 2e. It just required you to roll that to make the class eligible. But most DMs I knew handwaved a lot of that.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting