Wild Magic House Rule: Whenever you cast a spell, you roll a D20 to see if there is a Wild Magic result. If you roll the level of the spell or lower, a WM result appears. Cantrips cannot produce a result, but the higher the power of the spell, the more likely to have an effect.
Wild Magic House Rule: Whenever you cast a spell, you roll a D20 to see if there is a Wild Magic result. If you roll the level of the spell or lower, a WM result appears. Cantrips cannot produce a result, but the higher the power of the spell, the more likely to have an effect.
Is that for any spell, from any spellcaster? Yikes! :) Is there something about your world that makes that happen? Just curious.
Wild Magic House Rule: Whenever you cast a spell, you roll a D20 to see if there is a Wild Magic result. If you roll the level of the spell or lower, a WM result appears. Cantrips cannot produce a result, but the higher the power of the spell, the more likely to have an effect.
Is that for any spell, from any spellcaster? Yikes! :) Is there something about your world that makes that happen? Just curious.
Only for Wild Magic Sorcerer. Sorry I didn't make that clear. With the way the rules are written, the DM can choose to have you roll a d20 after casting a spell, and it only has an effect if you roll a 1. With this rule, you just make the roll everytime you cast a spell and the more powerful the spell, the more likely something Wild will happen. If the character revels in the chaos, they will be constantly trying to make something wild happen. If, however, they are more reticent, they will use their spells sparingly.
I have a Sorcerer who with his first spell cast, Color Spray, he got a Wild Magic result that youthened him by 9 years, so he went from a 23 year old to a 14 year old. So he is very hesitant to use his magic because he doesn't want to become any younger.
Wild Magic House Rule: Whenever you cast a spell, you roll a D20 to see if there is a Wild Magic result. If you roll the level of the spell or lower, a WM result appears. Cantrips cannot produce a result, but the higher the power of the spell, the more likely to have an effect.
Is that for any spell, from any spellcaster? Yikes! :) Is there something about your world that makes that happen? Just curious.
Only for Wild Magic Sorcerer. Sorry I didn't make that clear. With the way the rules are written, the DM can choose to have you roll a d20 after casting a spell, and it only has an effect if you roll a 1. With this rule, you just make the roll everytime you cast a spell and the more powerful the spell, the more likely something Wild will happen. If the character revels in the chaos, they will be constantly trying to make something wild happen. If, however, they are more reticent, they will use their spells sparingly.
I have a Sorcerer who with his first spell cast, Color Spray, he got a Wild Magic result that youthened him by 9 years, so he went from a 23 year old to a 14 year old. So he is very hesitant to use his magic because he doesn't want to become any younger.
Gotcha. I was thinking for a second that maybe you'd built a world where magic went crazy overall. Would be kinda neat, but definitely drastic :)
I use a stat array of 18, 16, 14, 12, 10, 8. My players enjoy taking feats and this allows them to take feats more often and not worry about their ABS if they so choose. The game is about having fun right?
In a round I allow a second spell of 2nd level or lower if you can cast a spell as a bonus action instead of a cantrip. This makes characters more powerful in short bursts but can also seriously handicap them in a day where they have many encounters. I'm not a huge fan of it myself but my players enjoy the more "heroic" feeling.
I don't track encumbrance to a reasonable degree and a bag of holding isn't micro-managed but I won't allow for a ridiculous amount to be held either.
I made a Primordial Patron Warlock Subclass that is being used in my game, I would share it on dndbeyond but the site won't let me.
I ruled that magic item properties can only be identified by the identify spell, to make the spell more impactful. I didn't enjoy the "sit with it for a short rest" rule.
I give "advantage" on hit die rolls when leveling up
Players can use half their hit dice on a short rest but all recharge after a long rest.
I know i have more but that's all I can think of off the top of my head
I don't track encumbrance to a reasonable degree and a bag of holding isn't micro-managed but I won't allow for a ridiculous amount to be held either.
I made a Primordial Patron Warlock Subclass that is being used in my game, I would share it on dndbeyond but the site won't let me.
I ruled that magic item properties can only be identified by the identify spell, to make the spell more impactful. I didn't enjoy the "sit with it for a short rest" rule.
I give "advantage" on hit die rolls when leveling up
Players can use half their hit dice on a short rest but all recharge after a long rest.
I know i have more but that's all I can think of off the top of my head
I'm with you on the ones I'm quoting here. In particular, I like my magic more mysterious than just what anyone can figure out by playing with an item for an hour. The short rest identify makes me feel like magic is very Walmart-y. "Oh, now I know what this is! It's your standard garden variety Rod of Lordly Might! You can see the 'Made in Waterdeep' stamped on the bottom." I much prefer the idea that these things are dusty old items found in tombs and you have never seen one before in your life. You can put that ring on...if you want to...
Why won't the site let you share the Patron? I've published a couple--the big thing is that you have to have the 4 features at the right levels, and you have to add them specifically as Features, not just in the main text of the patron.
Why won't the site let you share the Patron? I've published a couple--the big thing is that you have to have the 4 features at the right levels, and you have to add them specifically as Features, not just in the main text of the patron.
It always says that I can't post because I have paid content linked to it
Why won't the site let you share the Patron? I've published a couple--the big thing is that you have to have the 4 features at the right levels, and you have to add them specifically as Features, not just in the main text of the patron.
It always says that I can't post because I have paid content linked to it
Ah, yep. So if you've added patron spells in the proper place for adding additional spells (bottom of the main description), you have likely added one that does not come free with the site. My solution there is just to add the Patron Spells list to the general description, list the ones I can in the 'Additional Spells' list at the bottom, but remove the ones that are paid only. It makes it a little less easy to use on the site--people would have to manually add the spells. But if that's the issue, you'd be able to publish.
I use a stat array of 18, 16, 14, 12, 10, 8. My players enjoy taking feats and this allows them to take feats more often and not worry about their ABS if they so choose. The game is about having fun right?
In a round I allow a second spell of 2nd level or lower if you can cast a spell as a bonus action instead of a cantrip. This makes characters more powerful in short bursts but can also seriously handicap them in a day where they have many encounters. I'm not a huge fan of it myself but my players enjoy the more "heroic" feeling.
I don't track encumbrance to a reasonable degree and a bag of holding isn't micro-managed but I won't allow for a ridiculous amount to be held either.
I made a Primordial Patron Warlock Subclass that is being used in my game, I would share it on dndbeyond but the site won't let me.
I ruled that magic item properties can only be identified by the identify spell, to make the spell more impactful. I didn't enjoy the "sit with it for a short rest" rule.
I give "advantage" on hit die rolls when leveling up
Players can use half their hit dice on a short rest but all recharge after a long rest.
I know i have more but that's all I can think of off the top of my head
I like the players to roll for stats, standard 4d6 keep highest 3, but if it their highest is lower than a 16 before modifiers they can up it to 16, and if their second highest is lower than a 15 before modifiers than they up it to 15, they also get a free feat at level 1.
This came up in another thread (not my idea) and I really like it. Allowing players to use their reaction to play dead or at least play unconscious immediately after taking damage from an enemy. They would make a deception check against the target's passive insight. I might even give them advantage on the roll if it was immediately after a critical hit because that would be more convincing. I like this house rule because the player has to take a gamble by having the character fall prone and play dead. If the ruse fails, then the character is prone and the next attack(s) will very likely have advantage against the character. I like encouraging my players to take risks in order to make combat less predictable.
I use a stat array of 18, 16, 14, 12, 10, 8. My players enjoy taking feats and this allows them to take feats more often and not worry about their ABS if they so choose. The game is about having fun right?
In a round I allow a second spell of 2nd level or lower if you can cast a spell as a bonus action instead of a cantrip. This makes characters more powerful in short bursts but can also seriously handicap them in a day where they have many encounters. I'm not a huge fan of it myself but my players enjoy the more "heroic" feeling.
I don't track encumbrance to a reasonable degree and a bag of holding isn't micro-managed but I won't allow for a ridiculous amount to be held either.
I made a Primordial Patron Warlock Subclass that is being used in my game, I would share it on dndbeyond but the site won't let me.
I ruled that magic item properties can only be identified by the identify spell, to make the spell more impactful. I didn't enjoy the "sit with it for a short rest" rule.
I give "advantage" on hit die rolls when leveling up
Players can use half their hit dice on a short rest but all recharge after a long rest.
I know i have more but that's all I can think of off the top of my head
I like the players to roll for stats, standard 4d6 keep highest 3, but if it their highest is lower than a 16 before modifiers they can up it to 16, and if their second highest is lower than a 15 before modifiers than they up it to 15, they also get a free feat at level 1.
Pretty much in the same boat here...
basically, if the players have two stats at 15 or higher, then i let the stats as is. the ideal to me is... 2 stats at 15 and higher, 2 stats between 10 and 14 and two stats below 10. in this scenario you have a balanced character who is good at two stats, average in two and weak in the last two. so what i do i generally change a stat to a 15 or 16 depending on the other stats, but i reduce a stats in exchange. in order to get to the balanced stats.
Exemple, my player arrives with these stats, 14, 15, 12, 11, 8 and 10. i would lower the 10 to an 8 and up the 14 to a 16. and i would be done with it.
Exemple, another player arrives with these stats, 8, 5, 10, 13, 9 and 12. this is ridiculously low. so i would change the 9 to a 16 and then change the 13 to a 15. then i'd be done with it.
in these exemples, i balance out the character. and when the player ends up with a glorious bastard with nothing below 15, then good for him. after all, i require them to be rolling dice in front of me. so its fine for me.
@drewshebag I also removed the identification by short rest, but i do allow them to attune to an item and attunement does give out the identification. unless the object cannot be attuned to. int hat case they usually feel like its a sub par item and will usually search for keywords and all. which i do think they are doing when doing that short rest. so basically, i'm making identification harder on major items while leaving it easy on more common items.
exemple: a simple arcana check may reveal a keyword in a language on a wand of magic missile. while the identify spell will gives out many details about the item themselves. but only a legend lore spell can reveal artefact levels of powers. i would reveal the small artefact magics but not the biggest ones.
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
Why won't the site let you share the Patron? I've published a couple--the big thing is that you have to have the 4 features at the right levels, and you have to add them specifically as Features, not just in the main text of the patron.
It always says that I can't post because I have paid content linked to it
yeah hapenned to me a lot, thats because you added links to the paid content in your descriptions, removes all the links, you know the [ spell ] tags or the URL linking. that should solve your problem. if it doesn't then remove them from the mechanical spell adding to the character. thats what i did and everything wroks. basically you can talk about them, but people cannot see them if their content is not listed because normally we can only homebrew with the SRD. and everything not in the PHB is not in the SRD. thus we can't link to it in any way.
i have a primordial patron that i created for a friend playing in one of my games. she likes it a lot. its mostly a damage dealer though. adding points that she can spend to add elemental damage or to transform into elementals at higher levels. she is level 4 now, can't wait to see what she'll do later on.
oh and... to top that off, she decided that her resistance which can change every short rest, actually affects her mood... so she's quadro-polar ! its ridiculous how she plays that. every short rest or long rest she rolls a d4 to know which emotion she is at. fire is raging, water is shy a lot, wind is gammy and earth is chill. it is so funny to watch her role play those things.
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
@themakokid its not derailing at all. Im just trying to understand your ruling in case i want to use it in my games to better have fun. Thats entirely what this thread was all about from the beginning.
Just to be clear... Player agency is players choice and decisions that are theirs and not forced onto them. Exemple... The player has a choice of corridor. He chooses to go back instead. His choice, his decision.
Now charm person, dominate monster, hold person, and basically all enchantment spells removes player agency by strickly changing a player style of play. Why, because they literally force players into playing wrong choices. The same is true for any plot that involves you capturing them. Players will mostly fight till death if you capture them. Because they dont wanna be locked up and lose their player agency. Aka losing freedom of actions.
Spells like charm person, dominate monster, hold person do not remove a players agency. These are spells that Players have the capability of utilizing, just as much as a Barbarian with a Greatsword. They are tools of the trade, and used to create interesting stories and narratives together. Just last night, I used the "Dominate Monster" spell on one of my players, and Role-Played it much like Critical Role did... Suddenly their party members started to give them strange hateful looks, and everything inside of them screamed to kill each party member with all they had. When I told the Player this, she played the part with full agency. At NO point did I take her character sheet away and then narrate what she did. The player decided how the character would act under the effects of the "Dominate Monster" spell. **** the rules, It's all about that narrative, baby.
When it comes to Players charming Players, this can get a little dicey. I've seen Homebrew rules that straight-up do not allow PvP Charms. I've also played in groups where the backstory for one character was that he was charmed by one of the party members to do their bidding, and that was the whole reason they were with the party.
I have found that IF IT COMES UP, it's best to have already had a Table-Conversation with everyone regarding PVP Charms, which will help alleviate a lot of tension in these situations. Also, playing with people that you trust, and making efforts to not be a "wang-rod," as Matt Colville calls them, will go a long way to making sure your game and table stay kosher.
Spells like charm person, dominate monster, hold person do not remove a players agency. ... When I told the Player this, she played the part with full agency.
The only reason she had "full agency" is because she was willing to go along with your narrative. That's cool if it works for your group, but I can imagine situations where a player wouldn't want to go along with what the villains are trying to make them do.
I'm considering a critical hit system for injuries in combat. Basically if an enemy strikes a character with a critical hit roll d20.
On a natural 20 apply one random condition (e.g. stunned) permanently to the character, narrating it as a tremendous blow to the head that has addled their brains. Can be healed with appropriate spell e.g. restoration or by rest over time.
On an even score apply one random condition to a character. Allow saves per turn for the appropriate stat.
On an odd score treat as anormal critical hit.
===
I have more I want to try (alternate AC, inventory management, stat generation, character appearance/social acceptance, character background/history, slow healing, alternate experience) but have no time to write them out now.
The only reason she had "full agency" is because she was willing to go along with your narrative. That's cool if it works for your group, but I can imagine situations where a player wouldn't want to go along with what the villains are trying to make them do.
Kobold Press suggested a house rule a while back concerning a stunned or controlled character where the DM might offer the player the chance to "push through" the effects of a spell or condition and still be allowed some level of interaction on their turn at the cost of taking some psychic damage. The idea is that it sucks to have nothing to do while everyone else at the table is playing. The flipside is that this house rule considerably powers down control spells so it's a judgment call on whether it's appropriate for a particular table.
Spells like charm person, dominate monster, hold person do not remove a players agency. ... When I told the Player this, she played the part with full agency.
The only reason she had "full agency" is because she was willing to go along with your narrative. That's cool if it works for your group, but I can imagine situations where a player wouldn't want to go along with what the villains are trying to make them do.
The only reason she had "full agency" is because she was willing to go along with your narrative. That's cool if it works for your group, but I can imagine situations where a player wouldn't want to go along with what the villains are trying to make them do.
Kobold Press suggested a house rule a while back concerning a stunned or controlled character where the DM might offer the player the chance to "push through" the effects of a spell or condition and still be allowed some level of interaction on their turn at the cost of taking some psychic damage. The idea is that it sucks to have nothing to do while everyone else at the table is playing. The flipside is that this house rule considerably powers down control spells so it's a judgment call on whether it's appropriate for a particular table.
I'm very sympathetic to what InquisitiveCoder is saying here. Whenever I've had to charm/dominate/control PCs, I've just sort of hoped that the player would go along with it. And usually they do. But it still is true that, even if the player then gets to act "how the player wants" during that time, it's still how the player wants within very strict parameters. "You can do anything you want, as long as it includes tricking your party into giving away the secret plans."
It's a bit like telling the prisoner he can go anywhere he wants, as long as it's inside his cell. :)
I'm not opposed to having these things happen to characters. But some players will have problems with it--both with the idea of it happening, and with being able to pull it off. I write one-off LARPs, and one of the questions we always have to ask is how to pull off a charm spell in that setting. Do we tell one player "Okay, so...you have to go over to that other player and poison them." When everyone is playing in character, that can be very difficult. If your character actually loves that other character, does the player purposefully try to be super-obvious about the poisoning? Because they really don't want the other character to die? Or do they jump in and do their best?
I've never found a good general solution, other than talking to the player case-by-case. One possible way to help is, if the player gets upset, tell them that it's perfectly fine for their character to be furious about this--it does suck! Maybe help them see that sometimes bad things happen to good PCs :)
I'm considering a critical hit system for injuries in combat. Basically if an enemy strikes a character with a critical hit roll d20.
On a natural 20 apply one random condition (e.g. stunned) permanently to the character, narrating it as a tremendous blow to the head that has addled their brains. Can be healed with appropriate spell e.g. restoration or by rest over time.
Have you seen the rules in the DMG for lingering injuries and massive damage? It's basically what you're describing.
Kobold Press suggested a house rule a while back concerning a stunned or controlled character where the DM might offer the player the chance to "push through" the effects of a spell or condition and still be allowed some level of interaction on their turn at the cost of taking some psychic damage. The idea is that it sucks to have nothing to do while everyone else at the table is playing. The flipside is that this house rule considerably powers down control spells so it's a judgment call on whether it's appropriate for a particular table.
Yeah, there's no perfect solution other than to have a clear understanding that D&D gameplay isn't symmetrical and some mechanics usually suck when used against the player; that's why few creatures have those kinds of effects unless they're iconic for them, and why so few spellcaster stat blocks have counterspell.
It's a lot easier to allow a house rule like that during a really dramatic moment than to make it a blanket rule, because that raises the question of why the monsters can't do it too.
I'm going to move the Thieves' Cant ability from the Rogue class to the Criminal background. Rogue does not mean thief or criminal, so automatically knowing it makes zero sense.
Well, on my end, when it comes to control spells or abilities, i just tell the player and let him play his part.
the problem comes not from the "it sucks doing nothing" part... it comes from the "i am controlled but yet i still just want to kill that creature by twisting all of its words and plays" meaning that the player at that point is willing to metagame the shit out of the situation to get out of it. as if it was a matter of life and death. as if being controlled was the end of its character. the same way a gang of players will usually fight till only 1 is left before even thinking of running away. even if you as a DM calls them out the fact they will get wrecked, they will try it still thinking there is a way. and even if you give them 5 warnings at different stages, they still see it as... "we still have time to do this."
all in all, the problem has never been into the mechanics or the fun factor, but in the fact that players love controlling others, but dislikes being on the receiving end.
as for kobold press solution of "giving them free will, for some psychic damage". that solution is bullshit, because everyone will always take the psychic damage and never get controlled. so it renders control spells, useless and becomes only psychic damage dealer spells.
@foxfireinferno depend son your vision of what a rogue is. to me it always was an Assassin / Thief. both of those have organisations backing them up. so it make sense that rogues would have a special way to contact their own organisation. what doesn't make sense is that everyone uses the same codes. so what i did was separate the thieves cant into faction can't ! and now each rogues has their own faction can'tthat cannot be used except to comunicate with their own faction.
Exemple: my wizard friend has the thieves can't because he's been in prison and his sons are there too. so its thieves can't has became "Thieves can't : Prison Can't" now he can communicate with prisonners in letters because he knows how to get it to them. and for now the rpison has been a source of information for them.
another exemple: my rogue firend is an assassin working for an organisation. all assassins have their work from someone or some groups. he works for a big underground group. an assassin for hire during the day, but an assassin for that organisation during the night. his thieves can't is now... "thieves can't : whatevername" because they have their own.
makes much more senses to have different variations tot he same language then having the language be part of the background. same for druidic. its ridiculous to think nobody has learned that language since then. its better to think each druid factions have their own version of it.
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Wild Magic House Rule: Whenever you cast a spell, you roll a D20 to see if there is a Wild Magic result. If you roll the level of the spell or lower, a WM result appears. Cantrips cannot produce a result, but the higher the power of the spell, the more likely to have an effect.
If you're gonna be a bear...be a Grizzly.
Is that for any spell, from any spellcaster? Yikes! :) Is there something about your world that makes that happen? Just curious.
Looking for new subclasses, spells, magic items, feats, and races? Opinions welcome :)
Only for Wild Magic Sorcerer. Sorry I didn't make that clear. With the way the rules are written, the DM can choose to have you roll a d20 after casting a spell, and it only has an effect if you roll a 1. With this rule, you just make the roll everytime you cast a spell and the more powerful the spell, the more likely something Wild will happen. If the character revels in the chaos, they will be constantly trying to make something wild happen. If, however, they are more reticent, they will use their spells sparingly.
I have a Sorcerer who with his first spell cast, Color Spray, he got a Wild Magic result that youthened him by 9 years, so he went from a 23 year old to a 14 year old. So he is very hesitant to use his magic because he doesn't want to become any younger.
If you're gonna be a bear...be a Grizzly.
Gotcha. I was thinking for a second that maybe you'd built a world where magic went crazy overall. Would be kinda neat, but definitely drastic :)
Looking for new subclasses, spells, magic items, feats, and races? Opinions welcome :)
I use a stat array of 18, 16, 14, 12, 10, 8. My players enjoy taking feats and this allows them to take feats more often and not worry about their ABS if they so choose. The game is about having fun right?
In a round I allow a second spell of 2nd level or lower if you can cast a spell as a bonus action instead of a cantrip. This makes characters more powerful in short bursts but can also seriously handicap them in a day where they have many encounters. I'm not a huge fan of it myself but my players enjoy the more "heroic" feeling.
I don't track encumbrance to a reasonable degree and a bag of holding isn't micro-managed but I won't allow for a ridiculous amount to be held either.
I made a Primordial Patron Warlock Subclass that is being used in my game, I would share it on dndbeyond but the site won't let me.
I ruled that magic item properties can only be identified by the identify spell, to make the spell more impactful. I didn't enjoy the "sit with it for a short rest" rule.
I give "advantage" on hit die rolls when leveling up
Players can use half their hit dice on a short rest but all recharge after a long rest.
I know i have more but that's all I can think of off the top of my head
DM of Amnian Nights: The Blackmore Saga
Homebrew Listings: A Fine Mustache (Magic Item), Icicle (magic item), Malice (magic item), Restore Undead (spell), Hex Bolt (spell), Healing Salve (consumable)
I'm with you on the ones I'm quoting here. In particular, I like my magic more mysterious than just what anyone can figure out by playing with an item for an hour. The short rest identify makes me feel like magic is very Walmart-y. "Oh, now I know what this is! It's your standard garden variety Rod of Lordly Might! You can see the 'Made in Waterdeep' stamped on the bottom." I much prefer the idea that these things are dusty old items found in tombs and you have never seen one before in your life. You can put that ring on...if you want to...
Why won't the site let you share the Patron? I've published a couple--the big thing is that you have to have the 4 features at the right levels, and you have to add them specifically as Features, not just in the main text of the patron.
Looking for new subclasses, spells, magic items, feats, and races? Opinions welcome :)
It always says that I can't post because I have paid content linked to it
DM of Amnian Nights: The Blackmore Saga
Homebrew Listings: A Fine Mustache (Magic Item), Icicle (magic item), Malice (magic item), Restore Undead (spell), Hex Bolt (spell), Healing Salve (consumable)
Ah, yep. So if you've added patron spells in the proper place for adding additional spells (bottom of the main description), you have likely added one that does not come free with the site. My solution there is just to add the Patron Spells list to the general description, list the ones I can in the 'Additional Spells' list at the bottom, but remove the ones that are paid only. It makes it a little less easy to use on the site--people would have to manually add the spells. But if that's the issue, you'd be able to publish.
Looking for new subclasses, spells, magic items, feats, and races? Opinions welcome :)
I like the players to roll for stats, standard 4d6 keep highest 3, but if it their highest is lower than a 16 before modifiers they can up it to 16, and if their second highest is lower than a 15 before modifiers than they up it to 15, they also get a free feat at level 1.
This came up in another thread (not my idea) and I really like it. Allowing players to use their reaction to play dead or at least play unconscious immediately after taking damage from an enemy. They would make a deception check against the target's passive insight. I might even give them advantage on the roll if it was immediately after a critical hit because that would be more convincing. I like this house rule because the player has to take a gamble by having the character fall prone and play dead. If the ruse fails, then the character is prone and the next attack(s) will very likely have advantage against the character. I like encouraging my players to take risks in order to make combat less predictable.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Pretty much in the same boat here...
basically, if the players have two stats at 15 or higher, then i let the stats as is.
the ideal to me is... 2 stats at 15 and higher, 2 stats between 10 and 14 and two stats below 10.
in this scenario you have a balanced character who is good at two stats, average in two and weak in the last two.
so what i do i generally change a stat to a 15 or 16 depending on the other stats, but i reduce a stats in exchange. in order to get to the balanced stats.
Exemple, my player arrives with these stats, 14, 15, 12, 11, 8 and 10. i would lower the 10 to an 8 and up the 14 to a 16. and i would be done with it.
Exemple, another player arrives with these stats, 8, 5, 10, 13, 9 and 12. this is ridiculously low. so i would change the 9 to a 16 and then change the 13 to a 15. then i'd be done with it.
in these exemples, i balance out the character. and when the player ends up with a glorious bastard with nothing below 15, then good for him. after all, i require them to be rolling dice in front of me. so its fine for me.
@drewshebag I also removed the identification by short rest, but i do allow them to attune to an item and attunement does give out the identification. unless the object cannot be attuned to. int hat case they usually feel like its a sub par item and will usually search for keywords and all. which i do think they are doing when doing that short rest. so basically, i'm making identification harder on major items while leaving it easy on more common items.
exemple: a simple arcana check may reveal a keyword in a language on a wand of magic missile. while the identify spell will gives out many details about the item themselves. but only a legend lore spell can reveal artefact levels of powers. i would reveal the small artefact magics but not the biggest ones.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
yeah hapenned to me a lot, thats because you added links to the paid content in your descriptions, removes all the links, you know the [ spell ] tags or the URL linking. that should solve your problem. if it doesn't then remove them from the mechanical spell adding to the character. thats what i did and everything wroks. basically you can talk about them, but people cannot see them if their content is not listed because normally we can only homebrew with the SRD. and everything not in the PHB is not in the SRD. thus we can't link to it in any way.
i have a primordial patron that i created for a friend playing in one of my games. she likes it a lot. its mostly a damage dealer though. adding points that she can spend to add elemental damage or to transform into elementals at higher levels. she is level 4 now, can't wait to see what she'll do later on.
oh and... to top that off, she decided that her resistance which can change every short rest, actually affects her mood... so she's quadro-polar ! its ridiculous how she plays that. every short rest or long rest she rolls a d4 to know which emotion she is at. fire is raging, water is shy a lot, wind is gammy and earth is chill. it is so funny to watch her role play those things.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
Spells like charm person, dominate monster, hold person do not remove a players agency. These are spells that Players have the capability of utilizing, just as much as a Barbarian with a Greatsword. They are tools of the trade, and used to create interesting stories and narratives together. Just last night, I used the "Dominate Monster" spell on one of my players, and Role-Played it much like Critical Role did... Suddenly their party members started to give them strange hateful looks, and everything inside of them screamed to kill each party member with all they had. When I told the Player this, she played the part with full agency. At NO point did I take her character sheet away and then narrate what she did. The player decided how the character would act under the effects of the "Dominate Monster" spell. **** the rules, It's all about that narrative, baby.
When it comes to Players charming Players, this can get a little dicey. I've seen Homebrew rules that straight-up do not allow PvP Charms. I've also played in groups where the backstory for one character was that he was charmed by one of the party members to do their bidding, and that was the whole reason they were with the party.
I have found that IF IT COMES UP, it's best to have already had a Table-Conversation with everyone regarding PVP Charms, which will help alleviate a lot of tension in these situations. Also, playing with people that you trust, and making efforts to not be a "wang-rod," as Matt Colville calls them, will go a long way to making sure your game and table stay kosher.
The only reason she had "full agency" is because she was willing to go along with your narrative. That's cool if it works for your group, but I can imagine situations where a player wouldn't want to go along with what the villains are trying to make them do.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
I'm considering a critical hit system for injuries in combat. Basically if an enemy strikes a character with a critical hit roll d20.
On a natural 20 apply one random condition (e.g. stunned) permanently to the character, narrating it as a tremendous blow to the head that has addled their brains. Can be healed with appropriate spell e.g. restoration or by rest over time.
On an even score apply one random condition to a character. Allow saves per turn for the appropriate stat.
On an odd score treat as anormal critical hit.
===
I have more I want to try (alternate AC, inventory management, stat generation, character appearance/social acceptance, character background/history, slow healing, alternate experience) but have no time to write them out now.
Kobold Press suggested a house rule a while back concerning a stunned or controlled character where the DM might offer the player the chance to "push through" the effects of a spell or condition and still be allowed some level of interaction on their turn at the cost of taking some psychic damage. The idea is that it sucks to have nothing to do while everyone else at the table is playing. The flipside is that this house rule considerably powers down control spells so it's a judgment call on whether it's appropriate for a particular table.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I'm very sympathetic to what InquisitiveCoder is saying here. Whenever I've had to charm/dominate/control PCs, I've just sort of hoped that the player would go along with it. And usually they do. But it still is true that, even if the player then gets to act "how the player wants" during that time, it's still how the player wants within very strict parameters. "You can do anything you want, as long as it includes tricking your party into giving away the secret plans."
It's a bit like telling the prisoner he can go anywhere he wants, as long as it's inside his cell. :)
I'm not opposed to having these things happen to characters. But some players will have problems with it--both with the idea of it happening, and with being able to pull it off. I write one-off LARPs, and one of the questions we always have to ask is how to pull off a charm spell in that setting. Do we tell one player "Okay, so...you have to go over to that other player and poison them." When everyone is playing in character, that can be very difficult. If your character actually loves that other character, does the player purposefully try to be super-obvious about the poisoning? Because they really don't want the other character to die? Or do they jump in and do their best?
I've never found a good general solution, other than talking to the player case-by-case. One possible way to help is, if the player gets upset, tell them that it's perfectly fine for their character to be furious about this--it does suck! Maybe help them see that sometimes bad things happen to good PCs :)
Looking for new subclasses, spells, magic items, feats, and races? Opinions welcome :)
Have you seen the rules in the DMG for lingering injuries and massive damage? It's basically what you're describing.
Yeah, there's no perfect solution other than to have a clear understanding that D&D gameplay isn't symmetrical and some mechanics usually suck when used against the player; that's why few creatures have those kinds of effects unless they're iconic for them, and why so few spellcaster stat blocks have counterspell.
It's a lot easier to allow a house rule like that during a really dramatic moment than to make it a blanket rule, because that raises the question of why the monsters can't do it too.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
I'm going to move the Thieves' Cant ability from the Rogue class to the Criminal background. Rogue does not mean thief or criminal, so automatically knowing it makes zero sense.
Well, on my end, when it comes to control spells or abilities, i just tell the player and let him play his part.
the problem comes not from the "it sucks doing nothing" part... it comes from the "i am controlled but yet i still just want to kill that creature by twisting all of its words and plays" meaning that the player at that point is willing to metagame the shit out of the situation to get out of it. as if it was a matter of life and death. as if being controlled was the end of its character. the same way a gang of players will usually fight till only 1 is left before even thinking of running away. even if you as a DM calls them out the fact they will get wrecked, they will try it still thinking there is a way. and even if you give them 5 warnings at different stages, they still see it as... "we still have time to do this."
all in all, the problem has never been into the mechanics or the fun factor, but in the fact that players love controlling others, but dislikes being on the receiving end.
as for kobold press solution of "giving them free will, for some psychic damage". that solution is bullshit, because everyone will always take the psychic damage and never get controlled. so it renders control spells, useless and becomes only psychic damage dealer spells.
@foxfireinferno depend son your vision of what a rogue is. to me it always was an Assassin / Thief. both of those have organisations backing them up. so it make sense that rogues would have a special way to contact their own organisation. what doesn't make sense is that everyone uses the same codes. so what i did was separate the thieves cant into faction can't ! and now each rogues has their own faction can'tthat cannot be used except to comunicate with their own faction.
Exemple: my wizard friend has the thieves can't because he's been in prison and his sons are there too. so its thieves can't has became "Thieves can't : Prison Can't" now he can communicate with prisonners in letters because he knows how to get it to them. and for now the rpison has been a source of information for them.
another exemple: my rogue firend is an assassin working for an organisation. all assassins have their work from someone or some groups. he works for a big underground group. an assassin for hire during the day, but an assassin for that organisation during the night. his thieves can't is now... "thieves can't : whatevername" because they have their own.
makes much more senses to have different variations tot he same language then having the language be part of the background.
same for druidic. its ridiculous to think nobody has learned that language since then. its better to think each druid factions have their own version of it.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)