Mmmmmmmmm, seems like I'd be taking the thunder out of a couple of existing perks if parry could be used to cover others. I DO like the idea of repositioning to grant another character partial cover, though. It's a very 'real world' example of tactics.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM, professional illustrator and comic artist, suffering from severe spinal stenosis, married, middle aged, and nerdy.
Here are the battle maneuvers from Tasha’s. See Bait and Switch which does essentially what you’re thinking about.
Ambush
When you make a Dexterity (Stealth) check or an initiative roll, you can expend one superiority die and add the die to the roll, provided you aren’t incapacitated.
Bait and Switch
When you’re within 5 feet of a creature on your turn, you can expend one superiority die and switch places with that creature, provided you spend at least 5 feet of movement and the creature is willing and isn’t incapacitated. This movement doesn’t provoke opportunity attacks.
Roll the superiority die. Until the start of your next turn, you or the other creature (your choice) gains a bonus to AC equal to the number rolled.
Brace
When a creature you can see moves into the reach you have with the melee weapon you’re wielding, you can use your reaction to expend one superiority die and make one attack against the creature, using that weapon. If the attack hits, add the superiority die to the weapon’s damage roll.
Commanding Presence
When you make a Charisma (Intimidation), a Charisma (Performance), or a Charisma (Persuasion) check, you can expend one superiority die and add the superiority die to the ability check.
Grappling Strike
Immediately after you hit a creature with a melee attack on your turn, you can expend one superiority die and then try to grapple the target as a bonus action (see the Player’s Handbook for rules on grappling). Add the superiority die to your Strength (Athletics) check.
Quick Toss
As a bonus action, you can expend one superiority die and make a ranged attack with a weapon that has the thrown property. You can draw the weapon as part of making this attack. If you hit, add the superiority die to the weapon’s damage roll.
Tactical Assessment
When you make an Intelligence (Investigation), an Intelligence (History), or a Wisdom (Insight) check, you can expend one superiority die and add the superiority die to the ability check.
This post has potentially manipulated dice roll results.
There's another concept I'd like some input on as well: High advantage.
The reasoning: The dice can be pretty stupid sometimes. I've seen a whole lot of 1's being rolled using the dice roller here. A lot more than really should be popping up if you were actually rolling dice. As such, I'm thinking of introducing a 'high advantage' rule where there's even LESS chance of failing a roll, or if your character has been double-buffed by different, stacking effects. If you or an opponent has an obvious clear shot to make and there's very little chance of mucking it up, rather than just a regular advantage roll, you roll 3D20 and drop lowest 2 instead. 3D20dl2 is the code you'd use. 16
This is mostly to expedite the rolling process for what should be easy challenges rather than give mulligans or having to roll again due to a critical failure.
That works but as DM you could also lower the DC or AC (if it is an attack) and rule that, in this case, a 1 is not an automatic failure. Other options, not mutually exclusive, include doubling someone's bonus on the roll or (in our case) allowing them to add their bonus even if not proficient The dice should not rule all. I prefer that method, personally.
If multiple situations affect a roll and each one grants advantage or imposes disadvantage on it, you don't roll more than one additional d20. If two favorable situations grant advantage, for example, you still roll only one additional d20.
But regardless, can you give a situation where that kind of "High Advantage" is applied? Also, personally, I think it is not a good idea. Here's why:
On Ability Checks - if it should be that easy, just make it an automated success. Maybe there's no check required for picking a fork up from the table. Okay, something less silly? A character tries to break a door open while raging as a barbarian, using a crowbar. Should have an advantage twice, but only gets it once. Why? Because mechanical advantage means you don't need to be very strong in order to break the door. That's what a crowbar was invented for. If you think the extra strength matters beyond just the modifier, maybe just give an automated pass? I mean, at this point, failing the check would make no sense anymore and would just make it a silly occasion. Sure, it happens in real life that the crowbar might slip and you bash your forehead into the door but, if anything, that's more likely to happen while raging, and thus should be rolled as 2d20 and not 3d20. On Saving Throws (was difficult finding an example for double advantage here) - you're an Elf, it's hard to impress and charm your cocky mind. The bard using Countercharm doesn't really matter, and his music is actually a little annoying because that A note was 440.1 Hz and not 440. Anyway, you don't need their performance to resist the Charm Person spell, you're already resisting it anyway. Maybe that cocky attitude made you complacent and you suddenly find yourself in love with that mage. If only that bard didn't distract you with that A note... Or maybe, that A note was so distracting you didn't even have to try to resist. Instant success. That mage should really study his magic better to make it harder for people to resist. Do they really think that DC 13 is something you can fail at? On Attack Rolls - Your opponent is Unconscious and Prone. Two different conditions granting advantage, right? But your weapon might still bounce off their armour.
This is especially notable in the attack roll example. Why do you get an advantage there? Because it's harder to avoid, block or parry an attack while you're lying on your back and your opponent is right above you. All the more if you're unconscious. Why advantage though? If we really wanted it to make sense, the only thing that should go down is your added Dex modifier. But, as we know, not all armour adds dex, and that would make heavy armour significantly more powerful, to the point it's truly a must-have. So they gave an advantage. Double advantage? Just give a guaranteed hit. I mean, if they wear no armour, how can you miss it?
Two more reasons:
Prerequisite: Elf, Half-elf
The accuracy of elves is legendary, especially that of elf archers and spellcasters. You have uncanny aim with attacks that rely on precision rather than brute force. You gain the following benefits:
Increase your Dexterity, Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma score by 1, to a maximum of 20.
Whenever you have advantage on an attack roll using Dexterity, Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma, you can reroll one of the dice once.
So yeah... some might get a sort of "High Advantage". It is different though, beyond just mechanically, as it relies on the character's skill (thematically) and not the fact that multiple effects are taking place at the same time. Basically, an easy shot is made really easy for them, but that's only for a specific case. Imagine Legolas from LotR kind of accuracy - that's it. It doesn't mean he'll be as good when taking a flail and swinging it just because he has "High Advantage". Also, it makes this feat more or less redundant.
The second reason is that it also brings the question of "realistic kills" into play. The Archdruid is an 18th level Druid with CR 12, but just 132 hit points. It also has a +1 to Con saves. My point? Any 3rd level Warlock with Pact of the Chain and Investment of the Chain Master invocation can use a bonus action to force the Archdruid to make a Con save, DC 13 we'll say (using the Pseudodragon as familiar). If the Archdruid rolls 7 or lower, which is 35%, it falls unconscious. Usually, it would mean an advantage and a critical hit for any creature within 5 ft. of the Archmage. Even if the level 3 Warlock uses Inflict Wounds (which it gets from the Shadow Touched feat, and I'm really stretching things here), it can deal 6d10 damage and wakes the Archdruid up. Maximum 60 damage is less than half the Archdruid's HP. Is it insane for the level-to-CR ratio? Yes, but he'll still die the next turn. Realistically? Cut the Archmage's throat or break his neck and the fight is over.
Also, I would definitely not be opposed to bringing back the 'coup de grace' rule from 2nd ed. If an enemy is unconscious, paralyzed, or otherwise helpless, that's it, an attack on them is instantly fatal or cause for rolling death saving throws. Unless you're fighting a giant monster, there really is no reasonable way to explain why a character can't just finish a helpless opponent instantly if they're unable to move and avoid their fate.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM, professional illustrator and comic artist, suffering from severe spinal stenosis, married, middle aged, and nerdy.
Sounds abuseable, which is probably why it's not part of the core rules. Just see my above post...
On the other hand, if you think it is not a probelm, that's your choice. I just wanted to make sure you're aware about how easy it is to apply those conditions.
Had the same conversation about cooking a few months ago. Is it a skill tied to an ability (like intelligence or wisdom)? or is it proficiency with a set of tools (cooking utensils) that you use your proficiency bonus on and whatever modifier for the task. Butchering an ox would be Str, remembering a recipe intelligence, choosing the right ingredients wisdom, etc etc. we couldn’t agree and after 25 minutes of debate between two players I just tied it to wisdom. :) lazy DM’ing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Fleabag Fleabane-Tabaxi Ranger | Lenny Coggins- Halfling Barbarian | Sid Shatterbuckle- Dwarf Fighter/Rogue| Lazlo - Satyr Bard in Training
Had the same conversation about cooking a few months ago. Is it a skill tied to an ability (like intelligence or wisdom)? or is it proficiency with a set of tools (cooking utensils) that you use your proficiency bonus on and whatever modifier for the task. Butchering an ox would be Str, remembering a recipe intelligence, choosing the right ingredients wisdom, etc etc. we couldn’t agree and after 25 minutes of debate between two players I just tied it to wisdom. :) lazy DM’ing.
Your mistake is simply saying cooking, while it is such a broad subject. I'll put myself as an example.
When making soup, I won't use a recipe. I'll use my intuition and my knowledge of what I and others like and will use that to make it work. The same will go for making a salad or an omelette. I don't measure things when I cook these kinds of foods and just go by feeling. For this kind of cooking, I'd use Wis. When baking cakes, I'll follow a recipe. I'll measure every ingredient as written in the recipe and do everything as written. Especially in my case, I'll even make sure I wait not a minute less than 24 hours for a cheesecake that needs to stay 24 hours in the fridge. Does it mean 23 hours will make it worse? Probably not, but when I bake cakes (or make any dessert other than a fruit salad really) or cook a complicated dish, that's how I do it. Sticking to the instructions had helped me succeed in many 'difficult' creations. The case in which I'd consider proficiency with cooking utensils a thing that matters is when there is a need to use a rolling pin. Depending on the dough you're using it on and the thinness you want to reach, it might be a really difficult task. I'd consider adding dex, if anything, to this check.
Your points agree with mine. In the game I was running I wanted my players to use cooking as a tool proficiency that implies a broad range of knowledge (changing the ability modifier to suit the task). My players on the other hand...
I was a lazy dm and folded- not the hill I wanted to die on and the dialogue was slowing gameplay down to a crawl.
when I run a rogue using thieves tools I ask them to use perception to spot the trap, intelligence/investigation to see if they can recall how to disarm it, then last a thieves tool check.
either way to me it’s all pretend. No real wrong way to do it. Lol once when I knew my game would have something hidden I stashed something in my yard and my players had to find it (a toy dinosaur). Not rules as written- but they had fun.
I mostly thought of INT for cooking in the more broad sense of it. Like, cooking to make a palatable meal is different than cooking in a competitive sense or to impress critics. I mean, unless you want a D&D Shokugeki no Soma campaign, I don't think any PC is going to become a world-class chef... I mean, not that you CAN'T, certainly I'm open to the idea, of course, but as far as the general use of the cooking skill is concerned, I would think that it would, by and large, be dependent on INT because you have to remember a recipe and measurements, cooking times, keep track of multiple dishes and the order they have to be prepared in to finish at the same time.
Now, if cooking were to become a key part of the storyline for one reason or another, then I'd be inclined to add in new custom rules as cooking would then become like an encounter. A true cooking battle... which, now that I'm thinking about it, I can't STOP thinking about it and writing ridiculous reactions from tasters as their clothing explodes off their bodies.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM, professional illustrator and comic artist, suffering from severe spinal stenosis, married, middle aged, and nerdy.
After doing some thinking, I think one of the major problems I have with the HP system is that really, there is no functioning mechanic to tell when your character has actually taken significant damage without just totally going down. Like, I LIKE the idea that your HP represents the damage that your character can completely shrug off; bruises, flesh wounds, etc, stuff that hurts but isn't life threatening, and that as HP increases, that basically is a representation of your character getting better at evading SERIOUS damage because mechanically, there is no difference between a character at 56 HP and one at 3. They can both fight and move at full strength without issue.
And, I don't want to change this.
It makes SENSE for your HP to be superficial damage, it's why you can restore quite a lot of it with just simple resting and some bandages in a single night.
I think I've come up with some thematic rules that will assist in creating RP that makes sense on a mechanical AND roleplay level without them being overbearing, and I'd like some opinions. I think these are WAY simpler to understand and don't take away from any class mechanics.
Firstly, as before, reaching 0 HP doesn't mean your character has fallen unconscious. Any damage that would normally put you into negative HP essentially temporarily reduces your CON. You need to roll UNDER your current CON score to save. If you have any feats that allow you to stay standing after reaching 0 HP, they take priority until the effect ends, so those with a 'second wind' style feat don't need to save and don't get their CON reduced until that feat is consumed for the day. You only need to roll to save once, as frankly, very few characters will have enough CON to take more than 1 or 2 hits after depleting their HP.
Should you succeed your saving throw, your character has now taken a serious wound that has only partially disabled them. You lose ability score bonuses only (proficiency bonuses remain) to action rolls (except to dodging, so DEX bonuses can still apply), but any effects that would normally give you advantage still give you advantage. You still retain full movement speed and actions. If you roll a nat 20 OR 1 for your save, your character goes into an adrenaline surge and their next 1D6 actions gain automatic advantage as their will to live kicks into overdrive and they get one last swell of strength.
Should you fail your saving throw, your character has been seriously debilitated from their wound. Your character will go into shock and collapse in 2D6(plus CON bonuses) turns. If they take no additional damageduring this time, their death saving throws can be made with advantage. Movement speed is halved, and they automatically get disadvantage and lose ability score bonuses (But not proficiency bonuses) for all actions (except for dodging) unless they're currently buffed by another effect that would normally give them advantage, in which case, they just roll normally. The injury and the buff cancel each other out. Spell strength is reduced by half, and spells that don't do direct damage automatically give the victim advantage to save. You're not doing well, but at LEAST you're still in the fight.
Essentially, being at 0 or negative HP, rather than complete incapacitation, is instead treated like a status ailment. Your CON basically acts as the measure of serious wounds your character can sustain and not be totally incapacitated. When your CON reaches 0, that's when your character falls unconscious instantly and needs to make death saving throws. Healing a major injury can only be done with potions or magic in combat; a character with medicine skills and a healer's kit needs sufficient cover to work on the wounded (restoring the wounded character's CON and healing them back up to 1 HP takes 1D6 or 4 turns--24 seconds or so.). To get back to full strength, a character must first fully restore their CON (Heal all negative damage) and have at least 1 HP.
If your character collapsed or reached 0 CON, they will have a long-term injury that will take 3D4 long rests to heal (not necessarily consecutively) or a spell of restoration or other powerful healing ability. A character with the medicine skill can half the time needed to heal if they have the shelter, facilities, and time to perform field surgery for 4 hours and pass the DC that the DM assigns the injury. The injury will give a -2 penalty to actions relevant to the location of the injury until it is healed. Should they fall in combat again, they will get an additional long-term injury to contend with, offering more roleplay possibilities. Take care of yourself.
Unless a character has taken damage that would completely destroy a character's body, such as acid, fire, disintegration and other powerful magic, there will ALWAYS be a chance to save them, even if they take more than their max HP in negative damage, death saving throws will always be a thing unless they are hit with a finishing blow while unconscious or otherwise completely helpless (the coup de grace rule from 2nd ed).
Most of this sound like the Vitality rules found here, with a few modifications. I must say, however, that I prefer the vitality rules more. Here's why:
1. It is simpler. 2. If you fail your saving throw, by your method, creatures with low Con actually have a better chance to survive than creatures with high Con. Why? Say we have character A with -2 in Con and character B with +2 in Con. Both find themselves making the save and both fail. Now, they roll the 2d6. Say both of them rolled 1-1, so 2. Character A has 0 turns to make, so they instantly fall unconscious. On the other hand, they didn't take any damage, so they make their saves with advantage. Meanwhile, character B has 4 turns in which they're more or less useless anyhow, and if they take even the slightest amount of damage, their death saves will be normal rolls. 4 turns gives their enemies plenty of time to deal at least 1 damage. In other words, having -2 in Con is safer than +2 in Con. 3. The Vitality system is one I like regardless. Even if the HP system is mostly superficial, characters don't only get badly hurt when their HP drops to 0. A strong blow or a hit to your vital parts can be devastating even if you felt completely fine just a moment ago. Moreover, it takes time to heal these kinds of injuries, unlike a bruise that you might forget about after a day or two. Lastly, it gives meaning to healing a character who isn't unconscious, unlike usually. Since healing a character with full HP can raise their Vitality up, it is often a better use of the spell slot than bringing back someone who fell unconscious. Also, by the way, since healing doesn't restore Vitality unless you have full HP, and a creature with Vitality 0 also immediately drops to 0 HP, healing a downed creature doesn't mean anything, and that gives some worth to Medicine checks, Healer's Kits and the Spare the Dying cantrip. These three things are often useless the moment you have a Cleric or a Druid in your group, or even worse if it's a Paladin that can bring you back 5 times (though it takes 5 actions, but still) only at level 1, and a hundred times at level 20, without even using their spell slots or other features. This is negated by Vitality. Care for the living, it is more realistic IMO.
I don't see how the vitality system is simpler. Like, at all. It seems like a lot MORE to keep track of, plus, how does it scale with leveling up? You just gain vitality from levels instead? I don't see that detailed in the rules there. By the variant rules, your vitality is largely determined by your CON, which barely changes as you level up, and given that damage is largely mitigated by having high HP in the later levels, wouldn't that mean that you'd end up with far more fragile high-level characters?
Also, I suppose I should have said '2D6 plus any applicable CON bonus' so, characters with low CON just don't get any bonuses at all to add to the number of turns they get to stay standing, so they at minimum stay standing for 2 more turns. Plus, if the character collapses, then they will have to contend with the long-term injury after they're stabilized and brought back to consciousness, so it's far better to stay standing and prevent yourself from succumbing to your injuries entirely than having a near-death experience.
I really don't understand how the vitality system is supposed to work or scale in all honesty, because I don't see an appreciable difference between a character with full vitality and one with nearly no vitality left. Is there a difference? I didn't see it if it was detailed.
Like, that'sthe part I don't like about the 'all or nothing' state of HP. There needs to be a stage where your character is still standing but isn't ok, because from a roleplay standpoint, that's where it trips up for me. Like, do I react to my character taking 23 damage when they have a total of 36 HP as a major blow? Because my character isn't penalized in any way afterwards besides being lower on HP, and then I get bitten by a couple of dogs and THAT takes me down and unconscious immediately. It's really awkward for roleplay purposes. With a system that at least takes into account major but not immediately fatal wounds, it at least makes a little more sense from a roleplay perspective. A minion got lucky and stabbed my character in a vital place. It's not a fatal wound but NOW my character is hurt after being softened up by non-fatal battering, and I can play them as BEING hurt and at least stand a CHANCE of defending myself rather than just keeling over and being made to wait while the battle concludes. There's an appreciable differencebetween a character riding on their CON and those who have HP left.
The injury system too adds a little more consequence to repeated brushes with death, which, fair enough, probably wouldn't happen all that frequently because you could go to a temple and get treated without having to rest the injury away, but if your campaign is taking place in the wilderness or the group is skulking around an enemy stronghold, that ramps up the tension because now you know you have to contend with a new weakness.
I'm mostly thinking about this in roleplay terms. It feels more like a story if your character, after nearly dying in battle, has to nurse an injured arm or leg or has difficulty concentrating from suffering a concussion.
So yeah, since you know and understand the vitality system better than I do, are those sorts of things covered? Cause it might be worth puzzling my way through to understand if they are. I just don't quite get it.
It's less about realism and more about roleplay. Like I said, it's awkward for me to try and roleplay out exactly HOW hurt my character actually is if there's no appreciable difference between being at full HP and being at 4, I can still pull out a big spectacular move despite having fewer HP than your average green midget the size of a child. Having a system in place where there is a clear distinction between a character who's beaten up but still able to fight and one who is just barely hanging on gives a clearer roleplay direction.
Like, say you had 12 HP left and you got hit for 12 on a character with 17 CON, so making the save isn't the big concern; more importantly, now you can play your character knowing he's really in trouble. Not only can he not muster his full strength anymore but every point of damage from then on is a big deal because you don't want to go down and suffer a long-term injury even if you DO make all 3 death saving throws.
I've seen some people say how infrequently death actually happens with the saving throws, and yeah, fair enough, but having consequence to recklessness that isn't just DEATH offers more roleplay direction. You as a player will remember 'oh yeah, my character's insides are still messed up from when he got impaled on that spear, I'll be more cautious for now.', and it makes sense for your character as well, who experienced that. The penalty isn't HUGE, but IS a reminder.
It may only be me who feels this way, but I think it would enrich the roleplay a bit having that little extra buffer zone to continue roleplaying even when your HP is gone but not too MUCH below 0, like say, tanking a fireball for the entire party and you only went -2 HP. With no 'injured state', you'd just drop unconscious. A heroic sacrifice, yes, but you'd still end up out of play even though you'd probably easily make all your death saving throws.
With an injured state though, you'd stand a good chance of making your saving throw and spit defiance with your last reserves of strength or even make a huge comeback and turn the tide with a few assists.
If I cared about all that in a game not designed for it, your method. But the D&D system is specifically not designed for that and I think it works just fine. Besides, I can still get plenty of role-playing with the rules as is, if I want. For me, it's a question of imaginations. I don't need rules in place to assist me with playing characters near death. Also, the game system isn't setup to deal with injuries like that. To me, and again, this is just my perspective, but this is a solution in search of problem.
I guess. I dunno, I just find myself being taken out of the moment when I realize that really, my character is only ACTING hurt but according to the rules, apparently is still at full strength.
Like I said, maybe it's just me who cares about this sort of thing. Also, I did kind of steal the injury thing from Grim Hollow, which admittedly is a bit too concerned with gritty realism.
Again, I'm not going to just implement this or any of the 'survivability' rules unless there's call for it because D&DB's dice are being ********. It was just something that was knocking about in my head for a while.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM, professional illustrator and comic artist, suffering from severe spinal stenosis, married, middle aged, and nerdy.
I don't see how the vitality system is simpler. Like, at all. It seems like a lot MORE to keep track of, plus, how does it scale with leveling up? You just gain vitality from levels instead? I don't see that detailed in the rules there. By the variant rules, your vitality is largely determined by your CON, which barely changes as you level up, and given that damage is largely mitigated by having high HP in the later levels, wouldn't that mean that you'd end up with far more fragile high-level characters?
You track a score that is equal to Con. This way, you don't mess with Con while having the same thing. I wouldn't call it more to keep track of. Got a Con 17? You have vitality 17. Con 8? Vitality 8. Does it scale with levelling? No. Does your method? If I didn't miss something, no, unless you have any way to give a bonus to the save, such as proficiency/some feature. Also, like the 2nd e rule, it just means you're Human (or Eld, Dwarf etc.) and not a god. Being level 20 means a lot, but it doesn't mean your head being chopped off doesn't affect you. Avoiding hits as a 20th level compared to a 1st level is easier. Once you lost your life though? A body is a body.
I really don't understand how the vitality system is supposed to work or scale in all honesty, because I don't see an appreciable difference between a character with full vitality and one with nearly no vitality left. Is there a difference? I didn't see it if it was detailed.
Lower Vitality = lower HP. Or, to be more precise, lower HP max. It wouldn't matter in a normal fight, but would over time. Because you only heal 1+Con Vitality score per long rest, your injuries last, even if it isn't a lost limb. A character that usually has 20 Con, reduced to 1 Vitality, will have -(5*level) HP, rather than +(5*level) HP. For a 20th level character, that's -100 instead of +100. 200 HP difference on their max HP.
Like, that'sthe part I don't like about the 'all or nothing' state of HP. There needs to be a stage where your character is still standing but isn't ok, because from a roleplay standpoint, that's where it trips up for me. Like, do I react to my character taking 23 damage when they have a total of 36 HP as a major blow? Because my character isn't penalized in any way afterwards besides being lower on HP, and then I get bitten by a couple of dogs and THAT takes me down and unconscious immediately. It's really awkward for roleplay purposes. With a system that at least takes into account major but not immediately fatal wounds, it at least makes a little more sense from a roleplay perspective. A minion got lucky and stabbed my character in a vital place. It's not a fatal wound but NOW my character is hurt after being softened up by non-fatal battering, and I can play them as BEING hurt and at least stand a CHANCE of defending myself rather than just keeling over and being made to wait while the battle concludes. There's an appreciable differencebetween a character riding on their CON and those who have HP left.
Okay, but at the same time, if you get stabbed in the back by a dagger and receive a massive 150 damage, and have 1 remaining, but don't take any damage until you complete a long rest, the next day that lethal stab is healed and nothing ever happened. Fell from a cliff and only barely survived? Sleep the night and your body is healed. In the Vitality system, those injuries take time to heal. The 150 damage equals -15 in Vitality, or -30 if it was a critical hit. Your Vitality is likely to drop to 0 and you will fall unconscious. Makes sense considering you were stabbed in the back with a dagger. Most people die from such an injury. Also, speaking of critical hits, it makes a critical hit that deals minimum damage still matter. A critical hit with a greatsword that ends up dealing only 7 damage (4d6+3, minimised) is incredibly disappointing. In Vitality, at least you lowered their Vitality by 1.
Mmmmmmmmm, seems like I'd be taking the thunder out of a couple of existing perks if parry could be used to cover others. I DO like the idea of repositioning to grant another character partial cover, though. It's a very 'real world' example of tactics.
DM, professional illustrator and comic artist, suffering from severe spinal stenosis, married, middle aged, and nerdy.
Here are the battle maneuvers from Tasha’s. See Bait and Switch which does essentially what you’re thinking about.
Ambush
When you make a Dexterity (Stealth) check or an initiative roll, you can expend one superiority die and add the die to the roll, provided you aren’t incapacitated.
Bait and Switch
When you’re within 5 feet of a creature on your turn, you can expend one superiority die and switch places with that creature, provided you spend at least 5 feet of movement and the creature is willing and isn’t incapacitated. This movement doesn’t provoke opportunity attacks.
Roll the superiority die. Until the start of your next turn, you or the other creature (your choice) gains a bonus to AC equal to the number rolled.
Brace
When a creature you can see moves into the reach you have with the melee weapon you’re wielding, you can use your reaction to expend one superiority die and make one attack against the creature, using that weapon. If the attack hits, add the superiority die to the weapon’s damage roll.
Commanding Presence
When you make a Charisma (Intimidation), a Charisma (Performance), or a Charisma (Persuasion) check, you can expend one superiority die and add the superiority die to the ability check.
Grappling Strike
Immediately after you hit a creature with a melee attack on your turn, you can expend one superiority die and then try to grapple the target as a bonus action (see the Player’s Handbook for rules on grappling). Add the superiority die to your Strength (Athletics) check.
Quick Toss
As a bonus action, you can expend one superiority die and make a ranged attack with a weapon that has the thrown property. You can draw the weapon as part of making this attack. If you hit, add the superiority die to the weapon’s damage roll.
Tactical Assessment
When you make an Intelligence (Investigation), an Intelligence (History), or a Wisdom (Insight) check, you can expend one superiority die and add the superiority die to the ability check.
Tandor the White, Human Life Cleric
There's another concept I'd like some input on as well: High advantage.
The reasoning: The dice can be pretty stupid sometimes. I've seen a whole lot of 1's being rolled using the dice roller here. A lot more than really should be popping up if you were actually rolling dice. As such, I'm thinking of introducing a 'high advantage' rule where there's even LESS chance of failing a roll, or if your character has been double-buffed by different, stacking effects. If you or an opponent has an obvious clear shot to make and there's very little chance of mucking it up, rather than just a regular advantage roll, you roll 3D20 and drop lowest 2 instead. 3D20dl2 is the code you'd use. 16
This is mostly to expedite the rolling process for what should be easy challenges rather than give mulligans or having to roll again due to a critical failure.
DM, professional illustrator and comic artist, suffering from severe spinal stenosis, married, middle aged, and nerdy.
That works but as DM you could also lower the DC or AC (if it is an attack) and rule that, in this case, a 1 is not an automatic failure. Other options, not mutually exclusive, include doubling someone's bonus on the roll or (in our case) allowing them to add their bonus even if not proficient The dice should not rule all. I prefer that method, personally.
Tandor the White, Human Life Cleric
But regardless, can you give a situation where that kind of "High Advantage" is applied?
Also, personally, I think it is not a good idea. Here's why:
On Ability Checks - if it should be that easy, just make it an automated success. Maybe there's no check required for picking a fork up from the table. Okay, something less silly? A character tries to break a door open while raging as a barbarian, using a crowbar. Should have an advantage twice, but only gets it once. Why? Because mechanical advantage means you don't need to be very strong in order to break the door. That's what a crowbar was invented for. If you think the extra strength matters beyond just the modifier, maybe just give an automated pass? I mean, at this point, failing the check would make no sense anymore and would just make it a silly occasion. Sure, it happens in real life that the crowbar might slip and you bash your forehead into the door but, if anything, that's more likely to happen while raging, and thus should be rolled as 2d20 and not 3d20.
On Saving Throws (was difficult finding an example for double advantage here) - you're an Elf, it's hard to impress and charm your cocky mind. The bard using Countercharm doesn't really matter, and his music is actually a little annoying because that A note was 440.1 Hz and not 440. Anyway, you don't need their performance to resist the Charm Person spell, you're already resisting it anyway. Maybe that cocky attitude made you complacent and you suddenly find yourself in love with that mage. If only that bard didn't distract you with that A note... Or maybe, that A note was so distracting you didn't even have to try to resist. Instant success. That mage should really study his magic better to make it harder for people to resist. Do they really think that DC 13 is something you can fail at?
On Attack Rolls - Your opponent is Unconscious and Prone. Two different conditions granting advantage, right? But your weapon might still bounce off their armour.
This is especially notable in the attack roll example. Why do you get an advantage there? Because it's harder to avoid, block or parry an attack while you're lying on your back and your opponent is right above you. All the more if you're unconscious. Why advantage though? If we really wanted it to make sense, the only thing that should go down is your added Dex modifier. But, as we know, not all armour adds dex, and that would make heavy armour significantly more powerful, to the point it's truly a must-have. So they gave an advantage. Double advantage? Just give a guaranteed hit. I mean, if they wear no armour, how can you miss it?
Two more reasons:
So yeah... some might get a sort of "High Advantage". It is different though, beyond just mechanically, as it relies on the character's skill (thematically) and not the fact that multiple effects are taking place at the same time. Basically, an easy shot is made really easy for them, but that's only for a specific case. Imagine Legolas from LotR kind of accuracy - that's it. It doesn't mean he'll be as good when taking a flail and swinging it just because he has "High Advantage". Also, it makes this feat more or less redundant.
The second reason is that it also brings the question of "realistic kills" into play. The Archdruid is an 18th level Druid with CR 12, but just 132 hit points. It also has a +1 to Con saves. My point? Any 3rd level Warlock with Pact of the Chain and Investment of the Chain Master invocation can use a bonus action to force the Archdruid to make a Con save, DC 13 we'll say (using the Pseudodragon as familiar). If the Archdruid rolls 7 or lower, which is 35%, it falls unconscious. Usually, it would mean an advantage and a critical hit for any creature within 5 ft. of the Archmage. Even if the level 3 Warlock uses Inflict Wounds (which it gets from the Shadow Touched feat, and I'm really stretching things here), it can deal 6d10 damage and wakes the Archdruid up. Maximum 60 damage is less than half the Archdruid's HP. Is it insane for the level-to-CR ratio? Yes, but he'll still die the next turn. Realistically? Cut the Archmage's throat or break his neck and the fight is over.
Varielky
Yeh, good points. Nevermind then!
Also, I would definitely not be opposed to bringing back the 'coup de grace' rule from 2nd ed. If an enemy is unconscious, paralyzed, or otherwise helpless, that's it, an attack on them is instantly fatal or cause for rolling death saving throws. Unless you're fighting a giant monster, there really is no reasonable way to explain why a character can't just finish a helpless opponent instantly if they're unable to move and avoid their fate.
DM, professional illustrator and comic artist, suffering from severe spinal stenosis, married, middle aged, and nerdy.
Sounds abuseable, which is probably why it's not part of the core rules. Just see my above post...
On the other hand, if you think it is not a probelm, that's your choice. I just wanted to make sure you're aware about how easy it is to apply those conditions.
Varielky
Had the same conversation about cooking a few months ago. Is it a skill tied to an ability (like intelligence or wisdom)? or is it proficiency with a set of tools (cooking utensils) that you use your proficiency bonus on and whatever modifier for the task. Butchering an ox would be Str, remembering a recipe intelligence, choosing the right ingredients wisdom, etc etc. we couldn’t agree and after 25 minutes of debate between two players I just tied it to wisdom. :) lazy DM’ing.
Fleabag Fleabane -Tabaxi Ranger | Lenny Coggins- Halfling Barbarian | Sid Shatterbuckle- Dwarf Fighter/Rogue| Lazlo - Satyr Bard in Training
Your mistake is simply saying cooking, while it is such a broad subject. I'll put myself as an example.
When making soup, I won't use a recipe. I'll use my intuition and my knowledge of what I and others like and will use that to make it work. The same will go for making a salad or an omelette. I don't measure things when I cook these kinds of foods and just go by feeling. For this kind of cooking, I'd use Wis.
When baking cakes, I'll follow a recipe. I'll measure every ingredient as written in the recipe and do everything as written. Especially in my case, I'll even make sure I wait not a minute less than 24 hours for a cheesecake that needs to stay 24 hours in the fridge. Does it mean 23 hours will make it worse? Probably not, but when I bake cakes (or make any dessert other than a fruit salad really) or cook a complicated dish, that's how I do it. Sticking to the instructions had helped me succeed in many 'difficult' creations.
The case in which I'd consider proficiency with cooking utensils a thing that matters is when there is a need to use a rolling pin. Depending on the dough you're using it on and the thinness you want to reach, it might be a really difficult task. I'd consider adding dex, if anything, to this check.
Varielky
Your points agree with mine. In the game I was running I wanted my players to use cooking as a tool proficiency that implies a broad range of knowledge (changing the ability modifier to suit the task). My players on the other hand...
I was a lazy dm and folded- not the hill I wanted to die on and the dialogue was slowing gameplay down to a crawl.
when I run a rogue using thieves tools I ask them to use perception to spot the trap, intelligence/investigation to see if they can recall how to disarm it, then last a thieves tool check.
either way to me it’s all pretend. No real wrong way to do it. Lol once when I knew my game would have something hidden I stashed something in my yard and my players had to find it (a toy dinosaur). Not rules as written- but they had fun.
Fleabag Fleabane -Tabaxi Ranger | Lenny Coggins- Halfling Barbarian | Sid Shatterbuckle- Dwarf Fighter/Rogue| Lazlo - Satyr Bard in Training
I mostly thought of INT for cooking in the more broad sense of it. Like, cooking to make a palatable meal is different than cooking in a competitive sense or to impress critics. I mean, unless you want a D&D Shokugeki no Soma campaign, I don't think any PC is going to become a world-class chef... I mean, not that you CAN'T, certainly I'm open to the idea, of course, but as far as the general use of the cooking skill is concerned, I would think that it would, by and large, be dependent on INT because you have to remember a recipe and measurements, cooking times, keep track of multiple dishes and the order they have to be prepared in to finish at the same time.
Now, if cooking were to become a key part of the storyline for one reason or another, then I'd be inclined to add in new custom rules as cooking would then become like an encounter. A true cooking battle... which, now that I'm thinking about it, I can't STOP thinking about it and writing ridiculous reactions from tasters as their clothing explodes off their bodies.
DM, professional illustrator and comic artist, suffering from severe spinal stenosis, married, middle aged, and nerdy.
No no no! Forget I said anything! Oh man- I’ve always had a hard time keeping my mouth shut.
Fleabag Fleabane -Tabaxi Ranger | Lenny Coggins- Halfling Barbarian | Sid Shatterbuckle- Dwarf Fighter/Rogue| Lazlo - Satyr Bard in Training
After doing some thinking, I think one of the major problems I have with the HP system is that really, there is no functioning mechanic to tell when your character has actually taken significant damage without just totally going down. Like, I LIKE the idea that your HP represents the damage that your character can completely shrug off; bruises, flesh wounds, etc, stuff that hurts but isn't life threatening, and that as HP increases, that basically is a representation of your character getting better at evading SERIOUS damage because mechanically, there is no difference between a character at 56 HP and one at 3. They can both fight and move at full strength without issue.
And, I don't want to change this.
It makes SENSE for your HP to be superficial damage, it's why you can restore quite a lot of it with just simple resting and some bandages in a single night.
I think I've come up with some thematic rules that will assist in creating RP that makes sense on a mechanical AND roleplay level without them being overbearing, and I'd like some opinions. I think these are WAY simpler to understand and don't take away from any class mechanics.
DM, professional illustrator and comic artist, suffering from severe spinal stenosis, married, middle aged, and nerdy.
Most of this sound like the Vitality rules found here, with a few modifications. I must say, however, that I prefer the vitality rules more. Here's why:
1. It is simpler.
2. If you fail your saving throw, by your method, creatures with low Con actually have a better chance to survive than creatures with high Con. Why? Say we have character A with -2 in Con and character B with +2 in Con. Both find themselves making the save and both fail. Now, they roll the 2d6. Say both of them rolled 1-1, so 2. Character A has 0 turns to make, so they instantly fall unconscious. On the other hand, they didn't take any damage, so they make their saves with advantage. Meanwhile, character B has 4 turns in which they're more or less useless anyhow, and if they take even the slightest amount of damage, their death saves will be normal rolls. 4 turns gives their enemies plenty of time to deal at least 1 damage. In other words, having -2 in Con is safer than +2 in Con.
3. The Vitality system is one I like regardless. Even if the HP system is mostly superficial, characters don't only get badly hurt when their HP drops to 0. A strong blow or a hit to your vital parts can be devastating even if you felt completely fine just a moment ago. Moreover, it takes time to heal these kinds of injuries, unlike a bruise that you might forget about after a day or two. Lastly, it gives meaning to healing a character who isn't unconscious, unlike usually. Since healing a character with full HP can raise their Vitality up, it is often a better use of the spell slot than bringing back someone who fell unconscious. Also, by the way, since healing doesn't restore Vitality unless you have full HP, and a creature with Vitality 0 also immediately drops to 0 HP, healing a downed creature doesn't mean anything, and that gives some worth to Medicine checks, Healer's Kits and the Spare the Dying cantrip. These three things are often useless the moment you have a Cleric or a Druid in your group, or even worse if it's a Paladin that can bring you back 5 times (though it takes 5 actions, but still) only at level 1, and a hundred times at level 20, without even using their spell slots or other features. This is negated by Vitality. Care for the living, it is more realistic IMO.
Varielky
I don't see how the vitality system is simpler. Like, at all. It seems like a lot MORE to keep track of, plus, how does it scale with leveling up? You just gain vitality from levels instead? I don't see that detailed in the rules there. By the variant rules, your vitality is largely determined by your CON, which barely changes as you level up, and given that damage is largely mitigated by having high HP in the later levels, wouldn't that mean that you'd end up with far more fragile high-level characters?
Also, I suppose I should have said '2D6 plus any applicable CON bonus' so, characters with low CON just don't get any bonuses at all to add to the number of turns they get to stay standing, so they at minimum stay standing for 2 more turns. Plus, if the character collapses, then they will have to contend with the long-term injury after they're stabilized and brought back to consciousness, so it's far better to stay standing and prevent yourself from succumbing to your injuries entirely than having a near-death experience.
I really don't understand how the vitality system is supposed to work or scale in all honesty, because I don't see an appreciable difference between a character with full vitality and one with nearly no vitality left. Is there a difference? I didn't see it if it was detailed.
Like, that's the part I don't like about the 'all or nothing' state of HP. There needs to be a stage where your character is still standing but isn't ok, because from a roleplay standpoint, that's where it trips up for me. Like, do I react to my character taking 23 damage when they have a total of 36 HP as a major blow? Because my character isn't penalized in any way afterwards besides being lower on HP, and then I get bitten by a couple of dogs and THAT takes me down and unconscious immediately. It's really awkward for roleplay purposes. With a system that at least takes into account major but not immediately fatal wounds, it at least makes a little more sense from a roleplay perspective. A minion got lucky and stabbed my character in a vital place. It's not a fatal wound but NOW my character is hurt after being softened up by non-fatal battering, and I can play them as BEING hurt and at least stand a CHANCE of defending myself rather than just keeling over and being made to wait while the battle concludes. There's an appreciable difference between a character riding on their CON and those who have HP left.
The injury system too adds a little more consequence to repeated brushes with death, which, fair enough, probably wouldn't happen all that frequently because you could go to a temple and get treated without having to rest the injury away, but if your campaign is taking place in the wilderness or the group is skulking around an enemy stronghold, that ramps up the tension because now you know you have to contend with a new weakness.
I'm mostly thinking about this in roleplay terms. It feels more like a story if your character, after nearly dying in battle, has to nurse an injured arm or leg or has difficulty concentrating from suffering a concussion.
So yeah, since you know and understand the vitality system better than I do, are those sorts of things covered? Cause it might be worth puzzling my way through to understand if they are. I just don't quite get it.
DM, professional illustrator and comic artist, suffering from severe spinal stenosis, married, middle aged, and nerdy.
My question is why are we trying to inject more realism into a fantasy role-playing game? Just wondering...
Tandor the White, Human Life Cleric
It's less about realism and more about roleplay. Like I said, it's awkward for me to try and roleplay out exactly HOW hurt my character actually is if there's no appreciable difference between being at full HP and being at 4, I can still pull out a big spectacular move despite having fewer HP than your average green midget the size of a child. Having a system in place where there is a clear distinction between a character who's beaten up but still able to fight and one who is just barely hanging on gives a clearer roleplay direction.
Like, say you had 12 HP left and you got hit for 12 on a character with 17 CON, so making the save isn't the big concern; more importantly, now you can play your character knowing he's really in trouble. Not only can he not muster his full strength anymore but every point of damage from then on is a big deal because you don't want to go down and suffer a long-term injury even if you DO make all 3 death saving throws.
I've seen some people say how infrequently death actually happens with the saving throws, and yeah, fair enough, but having consequence to recklessness that isn't just DEATH offers more roleplay direction. You as a player will remember 'oh yeah, my character's insides are still messed up from when he got impaled on that spear, I'll be more cautious for now.', and it makes sense for your character as well, who experienced that. The penalty isn't HUGE, but IS a reminder.
It may only be me who feels this way, but I think it would enrich the roleplay a bit having that little extra buffer zone to continue roleplaying even when your HP is gone but not too MUCH below 0, like say, tanking a fireball for the entire party and you only went -2 HP. With no 'injured state', you'd just drop unconscious. A heroic sacrifice, yes, but you'd still end up out of play even though you'd probably easily make all your death saving throws.
With an injured state though, you'd stand a good chance of making your saving throw and spit defiance with your last reserves of strength or even make a huge comeback and turn the tide with a few assists.
Which sounds like more fun to play out?
DM, professional illustrator and comic artist, suffering from severe spinal stenosis, married, middle aged, and nerdy.
If I cared about all that in a game not designed for it, your method. But the D&D system is specifically not designed for that and I think it works just fine. Besides, I can still get plenty of role-playing with the rules as is, if I want. For me, it's a question of imaginations. I don't need rules in place to assist me with playing characters near death. Also, the game system isn't setup to deal with injuries like that. To me, and again, this is just my perspective, but this is a solution in search of problem.
Tandor the White, Human Life Cleric
I guess. I dunno, I just find myself being taken out of the moment when I realize that really, my character is only ACTING hurt but according to the rules, apparently is still at full strength.
Like I said, maybe it's just me who cares about this sort of thing. Also, I did kind of steal the injury thing from Grim Hollow, which admittedly is a bit too concerned with gritty realism.
Again, I'm not going to just implement this or any of the 'survivability' rules unless there's call for it because D&DB's dice are being ********. It was just something that was knocking about in my head for a while.
DM, professional illustrator and comic artist, suffering from severe spinal stenosis, married, middle aged, and nerdy.
Ah, let's see.
You track a score that is equal to Con. This way, you don't mess with Con while having the same thing. I wouldn't call it more to keep track of. Got a Con 17? You have vitality 17. Con 8? Vitality 8. Does it scale with levelling? No. Does your method? If I didn't miss something, no, unless you have any way to give a bonus to the save, such as proficiency/some feature. Also, like the 2nd e rule, it just means you're Human (or Eld, Dwarf etc.) and not a god. Being level 20 means a lot, but it doesn't mean your head being chopped off doesn't affect you. Avoiding hits as a 20th level compared to a 1st level is easier. Once you lost your life though? A body is a body.
Lower Vitality = lower HP. Or, to be more precise, lower HP max. It wouldn't matter in a normal fight, but would over time. Because you only heal 1+Con Vitality score per long rest, your injuries last, even if it isn't a lost limb. A character that usually has 20 Con, reduced to 1 Vitality, will have -(5*level) HP, rather than +(5*level) HP. For a 20th level character, that's -100 instead of +100. 200 HP difference on their max HP.
Okay, but at the same time, if you get stabbed in the back by a dagger and receive a massive 150 damage, and have 1 remaining, but don't take any damage until you complete a long rest, the next day that lethal stab is healed and nothing ever happened. Fell from a cliff and only barely survived? Sleep the night and your body is healed. In the Vitality system, those injuries take time to heal. The 150 damage equals -15 in Vitality, or -30 if it was a critical hit. Your Vitality is likely to drop to 0 and you will fall unconscious. Makes sense considering you were stabbed in the back with a dagger. Most people die from such an injury.
Also, speaking of critical hits, it makes a critical hit that deals minimum damage still matter. A critical hit with a greatsword that ends up dealing only 7 damage (4d6+3, minimised) is incredibly disappointing. In Vitality, at least you lowered their Vitality by 1.
Varielky