I’ll be DMing some more 5e soon and I want to take the opportunity to try some different ways of playing (I’ll post my own suggestions as comments so they can start their own discussion threads). What alternate rules have you tried that you thought worked well? They can be larger changes to the game or little QoL tweaks (though if you can respond to the suggestion with “at this point just play [different game] instead” then that’s probably more than what I’m looking for!)
This one’s short and sweet. At level 4 PCs get the Score Improvement AND to pick a Feat. This has propagated throughout my whole group, but the original DM that started it reasoned "I think a lot of Feats are really cool, but a lot of people aren’t comfortable passing on their first Score Improvement to pick up something situational. So they get a freebie, because I want to see what uses they come up with.
This reminds me, I do something kinda similar. At ASI levels I give out a +1 and a feat, instead of the usual +2 or a feat. I agree that it’s more fun to let people take feats instead of feeling obligated to pick the ASI!
I’ve seen a variant of this where everyone gets a free feat at level 1
As PC’s progress, falling to 0HP in combat gets less and less meaningful. So I have used a rule that whenever a PC is at 0HP at the end of their turn, OR fail a death save, they take a level of exhaustion. It makes the 0HP yo-yo more dangerous, and makes it so “death” has some longer term consequences.
I tried this for a bit and everyone hated it. We were only like 6th level though.
A variant I considered but didn’t try was to track how far into the negative you go. So if you get slammed by a dragon for 40 damage and you had 10/60 HP, now you’re at -30. A basic healing word isn’t going to wake you up.
My group uses this, but with a separate temporary exhaustion (we call it Trauma) that goes away on a short rest. Still handily serves the purpose of discouraging yoyoing without being too punitive.
Does this end up overly punishing for the tank and largely irrelevant for the ranged attackers? Exhaustion can take a while to get rid of so I wouldn’t want to be too harsh on the front-liners just for doing their job!
I have been using the bonus action to drink a potion optional rule. As a bonus action you get to roll but as an action you get the maximum from the potion. Its been pretty easy to implement and is only rarely used in my campaign.
Variant: “Gritty Realism” a.k.a. the “Adventuring Week”
I’d like to try having an “adventuring week” rather than an “adventuring day”, i.e. have X encounters per in-game week rather than the same number per in-game day. The Gritty Realism variant rules basically provide this though I think the name really puts people off; I’m not trying to add realism, just make it so you can have actual meaningful resource-draining encounters as part of something like a week-long travel (currently I’d need to throw in so many encounters that it becomes tedious, or have one-encounter days which we all know the problems with!)
Has anyone tried Gritty Realism before, and if so how did you implement it and how did you find it? My main question would be:
- How many days did you have per long rest?
- How long were your long rests and did they need to be in a “safe haven”?
- How did you adjust spell times?
This might be in the 5e DMG and I’m just forgetting, but I’m a big fan of the 10 minute exploration turn while the party goes through dungeons. I find that it helps things move faster and helps players feel like they’re getting enough time in the spotlight during the exploration phase. Rather than figuring out how far they can move in 10 minutes, I just allow characters either to move into an adjacent room (provided there is an unblocked passage to do so) or an action inside of the room. Actions in the room take the whole 10 minutes, but I usually let it slide if a player wants to perform a short sequence of actions to achieve a single result, the whole sequence getting represented by one roll if necessary.
To streamline combat, I have ported over minions from 4e (Matt Colville and I actually converged on this, I had been doing it since I switched to 5e and didn’t find his video on it for years) and a modified version of the coup de grace rules. Minions are monsters with full stats and attacks but they die in a single hit, no matter how much damage they were dealt. For the modified coup de grace, if a player character deals half or more of a monsters HP in a single hit, even during normal combat, that monster dies immediately. Anything that gets the monsters off the field before they get boring really, since it allows me to throw out large waves of enemies that only take a few minutes to fight since many of them go down in one hit. I run a fairly heroic game of d&d so letting the players plow through enemies helps create the vibe I want during the game.
Do you use CR calculations to build your encounters, and if so how much is a minion worth?
I do not use CR to build encounters, and I use milestone experience, but in 4e, a minion was usually worth 1/4 to 1/2 the experience of a monster with equivalent stats.
Cheers, the actual XP is less of a concern, I’m more concerned that I throw the right number of them at the players to be challenging without being fatal!
I found long ago that trying to balance my 5E encounters in any way, shape, or form is just a hopeless endeavor.
I just throw things at my party and kind of let 'er rip. Some end up hard, some end up easy, after a while you get a general gist for what they tend to be able to handle.
Fair enough, I know everyone likes to shit on the encounter builder but I’ve never had a problem with the results!
I’ve found that the encounter builder is usually fine, but I would spend lots of extra time setting up encounters using it only to find that the things I plucked haphazardly were only about, say, 20% less balanced on average.
At the end of the day it became a question on if it was worth it to run every encounter through that for being only marginally better than just grabbing and going. For some, they have the time to spare and it is worth it, and that’s perfectly great! For myself I found that the extra variance just made things interesting and that 20% extra imbalance could be made up by the odd sneaky adjustment on the fly if I was ridiculously off base in where I expected the fight to end up in difficulty.
I use the 10 minute exploration turn. I use 120 feet as the travel distance of new terrain they can travel. This is based on some older rules that specify for standard movement take the combat travel speed x4. You can also travel back over previous traveled terrain at 10x speed. You can move forward faster as well by sacrificing stealth
I try to keep house rules to a minimum. My biggest one is a change to inspiration. Inspiration is a reroll and you need to keep the new result. You can have multiple inspirations (max 3) and you start each session with one for free. If you end the session with more than one, then you can take one extra inspiration with you to the next session
The lack of knowing when the next inspiration will come definitely encourages you to save them like potions in a video game, do you find this makes players use them way more often?
Definitely. In any given session, at least half my players have used that free inspiration by the end of it
The only reason this is a “house rule/variant” is because everybody allows the optional rules by default and doesn’t understand what “optional” or “check with your DM first” means.
I don’t allow multi-classing. Subclasses do it better and are actually balanced. When I don’t disallows multi-classing I get 1-3 hexblade dips every group because of how OP the dip is.
I’ve had a ton of Paladin/hexblades, more than a few Wizard (Bladesinger)/hexblades, and even a rogue/hexblade with a fucking double-scimitar.
I’m sick to death of hexblades.
Fuck hexblades. No more multiclassing in my games. Assholes abused it so much it’s no longer an option because I like my hair where it is, and the alternative is for me to quit DMing altogether.
…and nobody else seems willing to run the fucking game…
Seems a bit overkill to ban all multiclassing when all you really want to ban is hexblade dips! I think you really just need to ban munchkins from your table ;)
Why not try a different system?
Spell points instead of slots for sorcerers. Makes em feel more distinctive, works better with the limited spells known, and they need the flexibility to compete with other casters.
I’ve never played with spell points but I often thought they might simplify the whole concept of caster levels vs spell levels for me players
Knockouts. It’s a very simple rule. If you successfully sneak up on a creature and successfully hit them with an attack that deals bludgeoning damage, they need to pass a con save with a DC equal to 10 or half the damage dealt (whichever is higher) or they immediately fall unconscious. I feel like 5e doesn’t really encourage stealth enough otherwise, and this way players have a decent way to pick off sentries and such before raiding a camp.
In theory you could do assassinations with a similar rule, but I haven’t tried it out in a campaign.
This is a good one, means a stealth mission doesn’t have to immediately devolve into a loud and/or fatal combat
Some bonus actions can be taken if you want to sacrifice your whole action.
Potions have a straight hp gain instead of rolling, i.e. superior healing gives 20 hit points back.
Bonus action using your action sounds fine, I guess I’d have to ask players if they’re planning on using it for some exploit every round!
For the potions did you mean that you can take the average value instead of rolling?
For the potions, it’s a step for each rarity, Normal is 10hp, greater is 20hp superior is 30hp. Makes sense because it’s the same potion, why should it’s effects vary from use to use.
I have allowed our bard to use its action to replace it as a bonus action a few times. Its usually used to grant inspiration and do his bonus action shove from telekinesis or use a bonus action spell with inspiration. It was common at the lower levels but stopped at higher levels since he has more options.
Seems fair enough
Isn’t trading down actions RAW? A Full Action can be used to perform an extra Bonus Action, a Reaction (out of turn action with triggering condition expressed to the DM), or a movement action.
Don’t think so
QoL: PCs can choose to permanently drop down the initiative order
I believe this was just a thing you could do in older editions but there are no rules for it in 5e. Sometimes going first doesn’t work well for teamwork (e.g. your Shield Master going directly before the enemy so they get up after each shove before anyone can attack them while they’re prone), so letting you drop down the order can help without giving you a freebie (i.e. the enemy might get an extra go against you). I’ve not encountered any problems with this yet!
I agree with this but it only works in the first round. You can drop once into any slot you want but only at the first round. This stops any shenanigans about extending a powerful spell for longer
That’s a good idea. I tried doing something like this in a one shot once as a test : Any PC or monster could voluntarily delay their initiative to anything lower than it currently is. It was a disaster. Very hard to keep track of and exploitable with spells, like you mention.
But restricting it to the first round and making it permanent…that might work.
It makes thematic in game sense as well. You are quick enough to notice that you are quicker than before Xanador the Magnificent so you wait a beat. After that that first second everyone is moving as quick as possible
I counter that by counting both the original turn and the delayed turn against spell duration. It lets people continue delaying (I’ll even let them go back to the top of initiative order in the following round if they want) without breaking spell duration too much.
For example:
- I roll 20 on initiative and cast Faerie Fire during round 1, it will last for 10 rounds (1 minute). At the end of this turn, Faerie Fire has 9 rounds left.
- At initiative count 20 on the second round, I decide to delay my turn until initiative count 10. Faerie Fire has 8 rounds left.
- At initiative count 10 on the second round, I take my turn as normal. Faerie Fire has 7 rounds left.
Sounds like a lot of tracking to me. But whatever works for you
I track how long spells or conditions last by just scribbling down the condition and a duration on my initiative sheet.
For example if the Barbarian rages I’ll just write “Rage - 10” and each round I add a tally, when we hit 10 it’s over. So there’s no “extra” tracking, if someone delays their turn I just add a tally mark.
It might be a bit harder on digital tabletops if you have to go in and edit things.
Good point, I’ve not encountered anyone trying that exploit but I’ll definitely nick that caveat!
I have a bunch of houserules in my game, but here are some of my favorite and least complex:
Sprint: If you do not do anything else on your turn and you are not in difficult terrain, you can move up to 5x your speed (150ft typically). Attacks of opportunity against you are made at advantage. This is mainly to allow characters to catch up to combat without waiting 10 rounds.
Fight or Flight: Replaces the frightened condition. You can choose to flee or fight. Fleeing is unambiguous, fighting entails doing everything you can to kill the source of your fear – no healing, no hiding, no stabilizing, no keeping your smite slots for later. Failing a save by 5 or more forces you to flee. (Taken from an XP to Level 3 video.)
Death saves are rolled in secret.
Light weapon property: we use the OneD&D version.
Critical hits: If you kill a target with one, the damage spills over to an enemy of your choice if I deem it to be within range of that attack. The damage keeps spilling over as long as you kill enemies. For instance, a critical hit with a bow worth 35 points of damage could kill up to five 7HP goblins if they are conga-lining in your direction.
I really like the idea of secret death saves, definitely feels like it would up the tension a lot when someone drops
It really gets everyone scrambling to help, and it makes more sense for PCs not to know. It’s one of my favorite changes, and it’s so simple, it’s really good.
Maybe let them know the results if they use their action to make a medicine check to try and stabilise, though tbh the only time I’ve seen anyone actually do that is at level 1 when nobody’s got magical healing yet!
I’ve run and played in games with no magical healing, and even in games with healers, I find stabilization checks to be relatively common, especially in parties of 2 or 3 where your healer is typically also your front liner (paladin or cleric) and can go down. I don’t tend to tell them the number of successes and failures, but I do tell them whether they succeeded or failed in stabilizing and how close their teammate is to death. Something like “while you fail to stop the bleeding, her injuries don’t seem life-threatening yet” or “he’s still alive, but every breath he draws grows weaker, and you fear the next may be his last”. I prefer to stick to natural language when I can.
I do something similar to Sprint, basically, you can move at double your speed for a round (so 4x total, dashing) but have to roll a Con save or take a level of Exhaustion. Each time you use this ability without resting, the DC goes up by 5. (Starts at 10.) Which feels about right, IMO. Lets a max-level Monk/Barbarian match (or exceed, with certain feats/races/subclasses) Usain Bolt for speed, but only for a short duration, even if they have a superhuman constitution.
150ft/round is approx 13.2 sec per 100m which is very achievable for someone who’s athletic. I’m not worried about max level barbarians, monks, or tabaxi being significantly faster than is plausible in reality: it’s fantasy. Sure, imposing some kind of exhaustion penalty makes sense, but 5e rules for exhaustion are pretty severe, and the point is to not sideline characters who happen to be a bit farther away when combat starts. IMO giving exhaustion would just be another barrier to my players having fun, it would defeat the point of what I’m trying to achieve at my table. But if it works for you, that’s great! I’m sure tables that want a crunchier and more realistic game would appreciate your version
I’ve adopted the “you get Inspiration whenever you roll a nat 1” idea that the playtest floated for a while and it’s turned out well.
I think that the “official” way of granting inspiration (grant when players play well into their PC’s character traits) is a horrible design that both fails to achieve what it sets out to do and is both highly subjective & continuously forgotten.
The nat 1 approach doesn’t break any other system, reliably hands out a small trickle of Inspiration just the way the original was supposed to do and requires little to no work.
I’m somewhat tempted to introduce QoL features like “you can hold two” or “you can use them to reroll”, but part of me likes how it’s a limited tactical resource rather than a safety net.
My concern with that UA was that powergamers would try to keep doing mundane actions to generate more inspiration, though to be fair I don’t think anyone I play with would try that!
As a DM, I decide when an action warrants a roll.
Actions that don’t actually carry a risk when failing don’t fall into this category.
So no, trying to pick your training padlock won’t net you a roll. Trying to pickpocket in the marketplace will, but there’s some definitive consequences attached to failure.
Fortunately, I’ve got a table of rather mature players, so this isn’t a problem to begin with.
Drinking a potion of healing is a bonus action. Administering it to someone else is an action.
Or you can use an action to drink it, and it restores the max roll (ie: 2d4+4 -> 12)Flanking is +2 to hit, instead of advantage. Like reverse-cover.
I use an inspiration variant, allow free switching of weapons, and don’t track encumbrance (the line is narrative ridiculousness basically.) So far I’ve seen players use inspiration more but I’m always looking to encourage it. We’ve tried a couple of variants.
