One challenge for DMs is thinking on their feet when the players invariably try to do something that would be cool and make sense thematically but might not be covered by the rules. We've all had to make decisions on the fly but if they work well the first time, they might remain in the game. Here are a few of my examples:
1) A light cloak will grant +1 to AC if the character is wearing light armor and not using a shield or off-hand weapon.
2) A heavy cloak will add +2 to AC with the same restrictions as above, as well as requiring Proficiency to use it properly.
3) A stout table can be flipped as a Bonus Action to add partial cover for people standing behind it or half cover for anyone kneeling behind it.
4) You cannot destroy a door with non-magical arrows or bolts no matter how much damage you do. The same goes for thrown piercing weapons like daggers.
5) Brandishing a weapon grants a bonus to Intimidation from 1-3 depending on the relative size of the character and the weapon.
6) Bribe money can do the same for Persuasion.
7) The Help Action has to be explained. If you need Help picking a pocket, then an ally might bump the target as a distraction. Unless you are using a special character trait that grants the Help Action, then doing so has to make sense.
A bunch of skills can be used with different ability scores. That's not a house rule per se, but an infrequently used feature. Many folks allow bonus actions to be used for potions.
One challenge for DMs is thinking on their feet when the players invariably try to do something that would be cool and make sense thematically but might not be covered by the rules. We've all had to make decisions on the fly but if they work well the first time, they might remain in the game. Here are a few of my examples:
1) A light cloak will grant +1 to AC if the character is wearing light armor and not using a shield or off-hand weapon.
2) A heavy cloak will add +2 to AC with the same restrictions as above, as well as requiring Proficiency to use it properly.
3) A stout table can be flipped as a Bonus Action to add partial cover for people standing behind it or half cover for anyone kneeling behind it.
4) You cannot destroy a door with non-magical arrows or bolts no matter how much damage you do. The same goes for thrown piercing weapons like daggers.
5) Brandishing a weapon grants a bonus to Intimidation from 1-3 depending on the relative size of the character and the weapon.
6) Bribe money can do the same for Persuasion.
7) The Help Action has to be explained. If you need Help picking a pocket, then an ally might bump the target as a distraction. Unless you are using a special character trait that grants the Help Action, then doing so has to make sense.
What are some of the things you've come up with?
I run things almost entirely RAW so there have been very few that come up.
However :)
1) In my home game, when resolving crits, I use the maximum for the base weapon die, not extra damage like sneak attack/smite, just the base weapon die. This means that the damage from the weapon will be strictly greater than a non-crit since I find it a bit lackluster when a longsword hits for 8+stat rolled normally and then on the crit, on the same turn, the roll is (2+3)+stat and the crit does less damage. With this house rule, the crit damage in the example would have been (8+3)+stat.
2) When a druid wildshapes, I allow worn items that do not transform to be automatically worn by the wildshape when it makes sense and the item could easily fit the new form (they don't fall to the ground).
3) Depending on how an encounter starts, especially in a case where one side is hidden or where there could be no reasonable or sensible assumption that the actions precipitating the encounter could be foreseen or telegraphed, then I will start the encounter at the initiative of the creature taking the action that starts everything off. This can be done rules wise in several ways: an implicit ruling that anyone with initiative before the creature taking the action to start the encounter is automatically surprised, or place the creature taking the initiating action at the top of the initiative order since the action taken starts the events in motion.
4) The help action can only be taken when help makes sense. This is similar to requesting an explanation of how a character is helping except that I don't necessarily require the player to be creative and come up with an explanation. Some players can find it very challenging to think of things in the moment. I simply rule whether I would allow the help action for a specific task or circumstance and if the player disagrees then I'd give them a chance to explain how the help action would be effective in the circumstances and then allow it if it makes sense. Requiring players to justify the help action every time it is used just seems to take up time rather than add anything very useful especially since 90% of the uses of the help action are pretty easy to explain. On the other hand, I'd rule that skill checks like stealth can't be assisted.
e.g. Owl fly by to distract a target help action, two sets of senses are better than one to justify the help action on perception checks, two minds thinking about a situation or looking at the details is better than one to justify the help action on an investigation check, two people looking at a lock and assessing how to open it would justify the help action for a thieves tools check (though I would require both to be proficient) ... etc.
5) Some skill checks will require proficiency. Proficiency in my game indicates some study or training in a specific area. Some knowledge and some tasks won't be possible without training, thieves tools is one example, but most artisan's tools would be the same. Similarly, most of the knowledge skills are rarely perception or investigation might have cases where some specific training or knowledge would be needed to be successful at a task. This information or ability would only be something the character could do if trained. However, most skill checks are not gated behind proficiency, just occasional ones.
6) It is possible to crouch without being prone. Crouching may allow a character to take greater advantage of cover but it may also interfere with use of weapons which would be resolved on a case by case basis (eg using a long bow or greatsword while crouching down might be challenging).
7) Using alternate stats for some skills. One common example would be an Intimidation (strength) or Intimidation (wisdom/intelligence) check rather than charisma. A big barbarian or fighter can be very intimidating. Similarly, knowing exactly what to say (int) or how to say it (wis) could also make intimidation more effective. Persuasion or deception might usually involve the character's charisma but often intimidation is more appropriate with a different skill depending on what the character is doing to cause the intimidation. However, in the case of a character trying to reason with a creature to persuade them to a course of action I might allow a choice of persuasion with int or cha.
----------
I also thought your house rules were interesting but not ones I would typically use.
1,2)
- allowing +1 AC for cloaks is essentially the same as giving them a 1/2 a cloak of protection for free.
- allowing a +2 AC for a cloak is the same as giving every character an animated shield for free without the time limit or activation cost.
So I wouldn't use either of those personally.
3) Flipping a table might be an object interaction, a bonus action or an action depending on the character, the situation, how heavy the table is, and how strong the character is. A bonus action would be fine for sturdy table in a bar with a strong character or one proficient with athletics, but too much time for a light table and too little for a stone table. So, I would decide this one on a case by case basis rather than house rules.
4) I agree :) ... I wouldn't allow arrows/bolts/light thrown weapons to break down a sturdy door. On the other hand, they might be effective over time against a thin or weak door. They'd never do anything to a stone or metal door. Stone and metal doors would usually need to be breached at the lock or hinges.
5,6) I would tend to use advantage rather than a "+" modifier for resolving these situations. In addition, brandishing a weapon, would have no effect on some creatures and might be particularly intimidating for others. Effectively bribing a creature would likely eliminate the need for a persuasion check at all depending on the circumstances. The bribe has already bought the desired cooperation - not much point in giving a bribe when the bribed creature can still say no.
DM Granted Inspiration can be used to re-roll a result instead of giving advantage whne called prior to a roll.
The very simple reason for this is that players tend to want to hold onto inspiration until that vital moment it'll come in clutch. Sadly, that often means that it goes unused.
I further encourage it's use by making clear that Inspiration wears off either after a full day or a long rest.
This does require some extra work for the DM in that they do need to be a bit more free in granting Inspiration but I've found that my players consistantly utilise the inspiration that I grant and often they are leaning more into their role-play aspects because of it. You do eventually get into the swing of reacting to those great roleplay moments, or the moments that makes everyone laugh by saying 'take some inspiration for that'.
Martin's Inspiration House Rule - DM will award inspiration for particularly good role playing moments (not just in line with character traits, but inventive solutions, or difficult persuasions to avoid fights that kind of thing). - Inspiration granted by DM may be used to reroll any dice roll. By rerolling the inspiration is spent/used. [This is instead of giving advantage] - Inspiration granted by DM does not stack. - Inspiration granted by DM cannot be given to other players. [Standard rules allow for it to be passed on, but many suggest this does not work well] - Inspiration granted by DM expires after a long break, or 24 hour period. [This I think leans into the roleplay aspects and allows for people to be rewarded even if they didn't use a previous session's inspiration]
I feel like the most common sense house-rules are the ones that streamline mechanics for greater consistency and balance.
A "weapon attack" and an "attack with a weapon" are now the same thing. The two phrases grammatically mean the same thing, and nothing is added to the game by using these to mean different things, it just introduces confusion and imposes limitations that aren't required for game balance.
Harengon can as a reaction negate fall damage on themselves. As written at first level a Harengon can high-jump far enough to die from the fall damage... which is absurd, and the ability to negate fall damage with a reaction similar to the Hadozee's feature solves this problem.
Features that are usable once per short rest can instead be used proficiency modifier number of times per long rest, but once per turn. This is how newer features are used. Disconnecting more features from Short Rests removes much of the drive for parties to want to sit down for an hour after every combat. And it encourages the players to use such abilities, because if you have another use of it you can save to get out of a tight situation, you can use the other(s) to do something cool (The Eladrin's Fey Step, for example, which was updated in its latest official iteration). This doesn't unbalance combat, even when you factor in applying this to Action Surge or Second Wind, provided they're limited to one use per turn. In late game when the Proficiency Bonus is +4 or higher, the characters are practically demigods, so the use of these features doesn't imbalance the game any more than it already is at those levels.
True Strike can be cast as a bonus action, and its effect is to instead give you advantage on your next attack roll you make before the end of your next turn. (As it is in the book, True Strike is less than worthless, being worse than not using it and just attacking twice. This gives it solid value, giving characters (especially martials) a really good use for it)
The associated saving throw for spells that deal Lightning or Thunder damage is Constitution, not Dexterity. (No being is fast enough to dodge lightning or an attack that's literally the speed of sound, so it should be the ability of their bodies to resist the damage. This also prevents certain classes from being able to negate all damage from a successful Dexterity Save against a bomb right next to the character)
Explosives deal Thunder damage instead of Fire. (The fire in explosions is incidental, the sonic wave is what actually causes the damage. This simple change to Thunder Damage makes explosives more effective against a lot of enemies, without messing with the number of dice in its damage).
For the Feats that give you the ability to cast a spell once per day without using a spell slot, but don't specify that you know the spell and can cast it with any spell slots of the appropriate level you have, you can cast said spell with spell slots of the appropriate level, in addition to the once per day casting without expending a spell slot. (This brings the earlier feats in line with later feats that do have that addendum)
- Bonus Action to drink a potion, but healing potions will restore their full HP if you use an action
- Fall damage is more complex, but is related to skills or con depending on how you fall, so dropping 10ft in a controlled manner doesn't still mean you get hurt
- spell slots aren't a hard limit - they're a safe limit. Overcasting is a dangerous option.
- Humans don't exist, they're Cornerlings, because their blood comes from the four corners of the world. As a mix of everything, they aren't the default setting for the world.
- If you want to use a spell in a novel way, with an Arcana check, you may create a new spell, EG using Firebolt to cook something. Or it might go wrong - your mileage may vary!
- If a spell says you have to target a creature, you can still fire it in directions and at things if it makes sense, EG firebolt upwards as a flare.
Opposed Check: Contest involving Dexterity (Stealth) or Charisma (Deception) check are made only when the contest occur. For exemple, if a player character attempt to disguise or hide, no check is actually made until another creature can spot it somehow and contest the check.
Familiars, summoned creatures, etc. all take their turn immediately after their summoner.
All magic items with the thrown keyword return to the user’s hand immediately after being used in an attack.
If your extra damage from a critical hit is less than your proficiency bonus, you may reroll the extra damage.
All classes have access to Power Attack - once per turn, you can take a -5 to hit in order to deal extra damage equal to twice your proficiency bonus. For cantrips, this is called Overcasting - those with a saving throw can grant the target advantage on the save in order to get the extra damage.
Potions that restore hit points can be used as written as a bonus action. When you take a full action to use them, you gain the maximum amount of hit points possible instead of rolling.
- Casting a spell with a casting time longer than "Instantaneous" while in melee range provokes an attack of oppurtunity.
I'm not sure I understand that one. Is there even such a thing as an instantaneous spell? I'm not fully up to speed on 5e but every spell I've seen is an action, bonus action, reaction, or specific length of time. With that caveat, it seems like a major penalty to spellcasting classes and a nerf to a lot of specific spells. For example, shield could be counterproductive if it draws another attack and misty step would become really niche.
Features that are usable once per short rest can instead be used proficiency modifier number of times per long rest. (bringing these earlier features from race, class, etc. in line with the features of later releases)
Just curious - does this mean that fighters could use action surge 2/long rest at level 1? Or a battlemaster could use maneuvers 8/long rest at level 3 and 12/long rest at level 5 24/long rest at level 17? A level 5 monk then has 15 ki/long rest? A level 10 monk has 40 ki/long rest? A level 20 monk has 120 ki/long rest? A level 5 warlock would have 6 level 3 spells/long rest? A level 9 warlock would be 8 level 5 spell slots?
The main reason I am asking is that the short rest limits seem to be intended to help prevent these classes dumping resources into 1 or 2 fights a day while switching it all to proficiency bonus times/long rest seems to go a bit overboard - especially for monk ki for example. I would think it would also encourage the one fight/day approach that you run into with some of the long rest classes since they use a lot of resources on the first fight and then decide to rest for the next day. Sometimes the narrative or time pressures prevent that but often it does not.
How does this work in practice in tier 2-4? Tier 1 is probably not much different since the proficieny time/day is much like assuming 2 short rests but when you get up to proficiency 4,5,6 it essentially gives all the resources from 4,5, or 6 short rests up front for the entire day.
Instantaneous is not a spell casting time but a spell's duration once cast but i understand where Riderstrong is going with this.
I guess I don't. Giving opportunity attacks based on a spell's duration seems even more capricious than doing it based on casting time. In either case, it still seems like a penalty for playing spellcasters. You could just as easily say that using the attack action with non-light weapons provokes an opportunity attack - it would be just as logical and just as fair.
It's definitely a penalty for spellcasters but it's the goal here i guess. I personally enjoyed when editions got away from 3E's model where a bunch of actions provoked Opprotunity Attacks. I understand the tactical aspect but it always seemed like a punishment to do some action while threatened pushing you to think twice but it often was leading to catch-22 situations where you were damned if you do, damned if you don't.
I may instigate something that is "if you make an attack action and don't attack a creature in 5ft, they can make an opportunity attack"
Not only does it make hordes actually scary, but it stops you standing next to someone and shooting an arrow at someone else whilst they wait patiently
Not only does it make hordes actually scary, but it stops you standing next to someone and shooting an arrow at someone else whilst they wait patiently
That last example is already represented by disadvantage on the attack (any hostile in melee range causes all ranged weapon attacks to be made at disadvantage). Doesn't seem ideal to double up on penalties.
Not only does it make hordes actually scary, but it stops you standing next to someone and shooting an arrow at someone else whilst they wait patiently
That last example is already represented by disadvantage on the attack (any hostile in melee range causes all ranged weapon attacks to be made at disadvantage). Doesn't seem ideal to double up on penalties.
Honestly, I might swap it out that ranged attacks have disadvantage if fired at a target within 5ft, and that if you do finish your turn without attacking a creature within 5ft. of you, it gets an opportunity attack.
Makes a swarm of kobolds actually threatening if you get swarmed, like it should!
One challenge for DMs is thinking on their feet when the players invariably try to do something that would be cool and make sense thematically but might not be covered by the rules. We've all had to make decisions on the fly but if they work well the first time, they might remain in the game. Here are a few of my examples:
1) A light cloak will grant +1 to AC if the character is wearing light armor and not using a shield or off-hand weapon.
2) A heavy cloak will add +2 to AC with the same restrictions as above, as well as requiring Proficiency to use it properly.
3) A stout table can be flipped as a Bonus Action to add partial cover for people standing behind it or half cover for anyone kneeling behind it.
4) You cannot destroy a door with non-magical arrows or bolts no matter how much damage you do. The same goes for thrown piercing weapons like daggers.
5) Brandishing a weapon grants a bonus to Intimidation from 1-3 depending on the relative size of the character and the weapon.
6) Bribe money can do the same for Persuasion.
7) The Help Action has to be explained. If you need Help picking a pocket, then an ally might bump the target as a distraction. Unless you are using a special character trait that grants the Help Action, then doing so has to make sense.
What are some of the things you've come up with?
A bunch of skills can be used with different ability scores. That's not a house rule per se, but an infrequently used feature. Many folks allow bonus actions to be used for potions.
(Just commenting so I get notified when people message on here :)
I run things almost entirely RAW so there have been very few that come up.
However :)
1) In my home game, when resolving crits, I use the maximum for the base weapon die, not extra damage like sneak attack/smite, just the base weapon die. This means that the damage from the weapon will be strictly greater than a non-crit since I find it a bit lackluster when a longsword hits for 8+stat rolled normally and then on the crit, on the same turn, the roll is (2+3)+stat and the crit does less damage. With this house rule, the crit damage in the example would have been (8+3)+stat.
2) When a druid wildshapes, I allow worn items that do not transform to be automatically worn by the wildshape when it makes sense and the item could easily fit the new form (they don't fall to the ground).
3) Depending on how an encounter starts, especially in a case where one side is hidden or where there could be no reasonable or sensible assumption that the actions precipitating the encounter could be foreseen or telegraphed, then I will start the encounter at the initiative of the creature taking the action that starts everything off. This can be done rules wise in several ways: an implicit ruling that anyone with initiative before the creature taking the action to start the encounter is automatically surprised, or place the creature taking the initiating action at the top of the initiative order since the action taken starts the events in motion.
4) The help action can only be taken when help makes sense. This is similar to requesting an explanation of how a character is helping except that I don't necessarily require the player to be creative and come up with an explanation. Some players can find it very challenging to think of things in the moment. I simply rule whether I would allow the help action for a specific task or circumstance and if the player disagrees then I'd give them a chance to explain how the help action would be effective in the circumstances and then allow it if it makes sense. Requiring players to justify the help action every time it is used just seems to take up time rather than add anything very useful especially since 90% of the uses of the help action are pretty easy to explain. On the other hand, I'd rule that skill checks like stealth can't be assisted.
e.g. Owl fly by to distract a target help action, two sets of senses are better than one to justify the help action on perception checks, two minds thinking about a situation or looking at the details is better than one to justify the help action on an investigation check, two people looking at a lock and assessing how to open it would justify the help action for a thieves tools check (though I would require both to be proficient) ... etc.
5) Some skill checks will require proficiency. Proficiency in my game indicates some study or training in a specific area. Some knowledge and some tasks won't be possible without training, thieves tools is one example, but most artisan's tools would be the same. Similarly, most of the knowledge skills are rarely perception or investigation might have cases where some specific training or knowledge would be needed to be successful at a task. This information or ability would only be something the character could do if trained. However, most skill checks are not gated behind proficiency, just occasional ones.
6) It is possible to crouch without being prone. Crouching may allow a character to take greater advantage of cover but it may also interfere with use of weapons which would be resolved on a case by case basis (eg using a long bow or greatsword while crouching down might be challenging).
7) Using alternate stats for some skills. One common example would be an Intimidation (strength) or Intimidation (wisdom/intelligence) check rather than charisma. A big barbarian or fighter can be very intimidating. Similarly, knowing exactly what to say (int) or how to say it (wis) could also make intimidation more effective. Persuasion or deception might usually involve the character's charisma but often intimidation is more appropriate with a different skill depending on what the character is doing to cause the intimidation. However, in the case of a character trying to reason with a creature to persuade them to a course of action I might allow a choice of persuasion with int or cha.
----------
I also thought your house rules were interesting but not ones I would typically use.
1,2)
- allowing +1 AC for cloaks is essentially the same as giving them a 1/2 a cloak of protection for free.
- allowing a +2 AC for a cloak is the same as giving every character an animated shield for free without the time limit or activation cost.
So I wouldn't use either of those personally.
3) Flipping a table might be an object interaction, a bonus action or an action depending on the character, the situation, how heavy the table is, and how strong the character is. A bonus action would be fine for sturdy table in a bar with a strong character or one proficient with athletics, but too much time for a light table and too little for a stone table. So, I would decide this one on a case by case basis rather than house rules.
4) I agree :) ... I wouldn't allow arrows/bolts/light thrown weapons to break down a sturdy door. On the other hand, they might be effective over time against a thin or weak door. They'd never do anything to a stone or metal door. Stone and metal doors would usually need to be breached at the lock or hinges.
5,6) I would tend to use advantage rather than a "+" modifier for resolving these situations. In addition, brandishing a weapon, would have no effect on some creatures and might be particularly intimidating for others. Effectively bribing a creature would likely eliminate the need for a persuasion check at all depending on the circumstances. The bribe has already bought the desired cooperation - not much point in giving a bribe when the bribed creature can still say no.
Bonus actions can be done as actions (but not vice versa obviously).
DM Granted Inspiration can be used to re-roll a result instead of giving advantage whne called prior to a roll.
The very simple reason for this is that players tend to want to hold onto inspiration until that vital moment it'll come in clutch. Sadly, that often means that it goes unused.
I further encourage it's use by making clear that Inspiration wears off either after a full day or a long rest.
This does require some extra work for the DM in that they do need to be a bit more free in granting Inspiration but I've found that my players consistantly utilise the inspiration that I grant and often they are leaning more into their role-play aspects because of it. You do eventually get into the swing of reacting to those great roleplay moments, or the moments that makes everyone laugh by saying 'take some inspiration for that'.
Martin's Inspiration House Rule
- DM will award inspiration for particularly good role playing moments (not just in line with character traits, but inventive solutions, or difficult persuasions to avoid fights that kind of thing).
- Inspiration granted by DM may be used to reroll any dice roll. By rerolling the inspiration is spent/used. [This is instead of giving advantage]
- Inspiration granted by DM does not stack.
- Inspiration granted by DM cannot be given to other players. [Standard rules allow for it to be passed on, but many suggest this does not work well]
- Inspiration granted by DM expires after a long break, or 24 hour period. [This I think leans into the roleplay aspects and allows for people to be rewarded even if they didn't use a previous session's inspiration]
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
I feel like the most common sense house-rules are the ones that streamline mechanics for greater consistency and balance.
A "weapon attack" and an "attack with a weapon" are now the same thing. The two phrases grammatically mean the same thing, and nothing is added to the game by using these to mean different things, it just introduces confusion and imposes limitations that aren't required for game balance.
Harengon can as a reaction negate fall damage on themselves. As written at first level a Harengon can high-jump far enough to die from the fall damage... which is absurd, and the ability to negate fall damage with a reaction similar to the Hadozee's feature solves this problem.
Features that are usable once per short rest can instead be used proficiency modifier number of times per long rest, but once per turn. This is how newer features are used. Disconnecting more features from Short Rests removes much of the drive for parties to want to sit down for an hour after every combat. And it encourages the players to use such abilities, because if you have another use of it you can save to get out of a tight situation, you can use the other(s) to do something cool (The Eladrin's Fey Step, for example, which was updated in its latest official iteration). This doesn't unbalance combat, even when you factor in applying this to Action Surge or Second Wind, provided they're limited to one use per turn. In late game when the Proficiency Bonus is +4 or higher, the characters are practically demigods, so the use of these features doesn't imbalance the game any more than it already is at those levels.
True Strike can be cast as a bonus action, and its effect is to instead give you advantage on your next attack roll you make before the end of your next turn. (As it is in the book, True Strike is less than worthless, being worse than not using it and just attacking twice. This gives it solid value, giving characters (especially martials) a really good use for it)
The associated saving throw for spells that deal Lightning or Thunder damage is Constitution, not Dexterity. (No being is fast enough to dodge lightning or an attack that's literally the speed of sound, so it should be the ability of their bodies to resist the damage. This also prevents certain classes from being able to negate all damage from a successful Dexterity Save against a bomb right next to the character)
Explosives deal Thunder damage instead of Fire. (The fire in explosions is incidental, the sonic wave is what actually causes the damage. This simple change to Thunder Damage makes explosives more effective against a lot of enemies, without messing with the number of dice in its damage).
For the Feats that give you the ability to cast a spell once per day without using a spell slot, but don't specify that you know the spell and can cast it with any spell slots of the appropriate level you have, you can cast said spell with spell slots of the appropriate level, in addition to the once per day casting without expending a spell slot. (This brings the earlier feats in line with later feats that do have that addendum)
- Bonus Action to drink a potion, but healing potions will restore their full HP if you use an action
- Fall damage is more complex, but is related to skills or con depending on how you fall, so dropping 10ft in a controlled manner doesn't still mean you get hurt
- spell slots aren't a hard limit - they're a safe limit. Overcasting is a dangerous option.
- Humans don't exist, they're Cornerlings, because their blood comes from the four corners of the world. As a mix of everything, they aren't the default setting for the world.
- If you want to use a spell in a novel way, with an Arcana check, you may create a new spell, EG using Firebolt to cook something. Or it might go wrong - your mileage may vary!
- If a spell says you have to target a creature, you can still fire it in directions and at things if it makes sense, EG firebolt upwards as a flare.
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
- Casting a spell with a casting time longer than "Instantaneous" while in melee range provokes an attack of oppurtunity.
- When a PC is incapacitated by reachingn 0 hp, they gain a point of exhaustion upon resuscitation.
Here's some of the houserule i use
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I'm not sure I understand that one. Is there even such a thing as an instantaneous spell? I'm not fully up to speed on 5e but every spell I've seen is an action, bonus action, reaction, or specific length of time. With that caveat, it seems like a major penalty to spellcasting classes and a nerf to a lot of specific spells. For example, shield could be counterproductive if it draws another attack and misty step would become really niche.
Instantaneous is not a spell casting time but a spell's duration once cast but i understand where Riderstrong is going with this.
Just curious - does this mean that fighters could use action surge 2/long rest at level 1? Or a battlemaster could use maneuvers 8/long rest at level 3 and 12/long rest at level 5 24/long rest at level 17? A level 5 monk then has 15 ki/long rest? A level 10 monk has 40 ki/long rest? A level 20 monk has 120 ki/long rest? A level 5 warlock would have 6 level 3 spells/long rest? A level 9 warlock would be 8 level 5 spell slots?
The main reason I am asking is that the short rest limits seem to be intended to help prevent these classes dumping resources into 1 or 2 fights a day while switching it all to proficiency bonus times/long rest seems to go a bit overboard - especially for monk ki for example. I would think it would also encourage the one fight/day approach that you run into with some of the long rest classes since they use a lot of resources on the first fight and then decide to rest for the next day. Sometimes the narrative or time pressures prevent that but often it does not.
How does this work in practice in tier 2-4? Tier 1 is probably not much different since the proficieny time/day is much like assuming 2 short rests but when you get up to proficiency 4,5,6 it essentially gives all the resources from 4,5, or 6 short rests up front for the entire day.
I guess I don't. Giving opportunity attacks based on a spell's duration seems even more capricious than doing it based on casting time. In either case, it still seems like a penalty for playing spellcasters. You could just as easily say that using the attack action with non-light weapons provokes an opportunity attack - it would be just as logical and just as fair.
It's definitely a penalty for spellcasters but it's the goal here i guess. I personally enjoyed when editions got away from 3E's model where a bunch of actions provoked Opprotunity Attacks. I understand the tactical aspect but it always seemed like a punishment to do some action while threatened pushing you to think twice but it often was leading to catch-22 situations where you were damned if you do, damned if you don't.
I may instigate something that is "if you make an attack action and don't attack a creature in 5ft, they can make an opportunity attack"
Not only does it make hordes actually scary, but it stops you standing next to someone and shooting an arrow at someone else whilst they wait patiently
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
That last example is already represented by disadvantage on the attack (any hostile in melee range causes all ranged weapon attacks to be made at disadvantage). Doesn't seem ideal to double up on penalties.
Honestly, I might swap it out that ranged attacks have disadvantage if fired at a target within 5ft, and that if you do finish your turn without attacking a creature within 5ft. of you, it gets an opportunity attack.
Makes a swarm of kobolds actually threatening if you get swarmed, like it should!
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
I like this a lot! I’ll test it at my table!