Hey if you want to join our community come here discord.gg/Et5jfKfd We often stream homebrew creation, D&D review, and Map/worldbuilding! Hope to see you there
In my groups we have it where drinking a potion is a bonus action and you roll for healing, a action and you get the full amount so drinking them outside of combat gives more then a rushed swig, handing one to someone else that's conscious is a bonus action (they don't heal they just physically have it), and giving to a downed person is a action.
@@simonburling3762 I have seen that rule recently and I am a huge fan, players can buy a potion belt and even look to upgrade it later on for more slots. That being said it also helps make sense when they have an excess amount of potions that they can't drink anything at a moments notice.
One that I always used when running games and has worked well is that any action that takes a bonus action can be done as an action if a player wishes, but not vice versa. It's rare to come up but sometimes you might want to use two bonus actions on a turn instead of an action and bonus action, for instance a bard handing out two bardic inspirations, or wanting to use bardic inspiration and cast healing word in the same turn. This also buffs monks a bit in low levels, letting them burn through ki points for double flurry of blows or flurry + patient defense if they choose.
Nice video. I like how these changes focus on making things feel better for the players. Getting a crit and then just doing average damage happens often and makes the 20 feel like it didn't really matter.
I have a slight variation of the health potion rule, as an action you drink the potion with care giving you the max amount healed, or you can use a bonus action possibly spilling some in your rush, and you heal the rolled amount.
@@MidknightCoffeesame, my players really like it too, it gives them the choice to just top up when there's no other real opportunity to use a bonus action, or to make that conscious choice to dive for cover and really get the most out of that healing in dire situations. Critical hits, I'm going to trial a rule in my upcoming game, where if you crit, you get another action, no restrictions. So slash at them again, cast another spell, dash, whatever you want, and if you crit again, go again.
There's some overlap. 1) Potions - 1 maximize the value, no roll, but using one takes an action. 2) Crits - instead of doubling weapon dice, we use the max value for the weapon dice and roll on top of that (similar to how you do it) but we do not maximize spells, sneak attacks, smites, or other additive effects - those are all rolled (double dice for the crit). 3) Inspiration - I borrowed an idea from the 1DD/5.5E playtest. We call it Karma, and you get one whenever you roll a one and stick with that roll (so if you have something that allows a reroll, you don't get a Karma). Baseline maximum is 1 Karma, 2 for Humans, and any player who filled out their character's Traits/Bonds/Ideals/Flaws has +1 max. If you're at max and get a Karma, you can pass it to another character not at max. 4) Feats - I experimented with giving a feat (but not ASI) at divisible by 4 character levels (they get the normal class ones as well). In my current campaign, I have a list of half-feats (no attribute increases) they can choose from at those quad levels.
The maximizing weapon damage seems like a solid idea. That way paladins and rogues can still double their additional rolled damage, but it doesn't make them significantly stronger than other classes with that rule.
Hey great video my table plays the "full crit damage rules" and can't imagine it any other way. We made a rule you MUST declare Smite before the attack but it doesn't trigger until a hit. This solves the crit issue. If a player "forgets" to smite and they crit they do NOT get crit damage off smite. This has come up exactly 0 times because they learn quick how to use smite. It's a subtle difference but solves the problem and makes the player say "I almost didn't smite but then had a feeling" every time they crit. #worthit
Really enjoyable video. Soft voice with piano makes for a good time. I like the marble idea, it's really charming. I think I could even make old reroll inspiration work as a reward to those unfortunate enough to roll 1s and 5s as a way to tell them that's it's not gonna rain forever. (my friends dice are cursed)
Absolute 20 shouldn't need to be a rule, I think. If a natural 20 was insufficient to succeed, they shouldn't have been rolling to begin with. If you don't happen to know the character's modifier, and need to be reminded in order to properly estimate then you're going to have to ask for their modifiers anyway. Dodging resistances... sure. I do like the idea of the free feats. However, I think it might be a consideration to amend it a bit. Being at perhaps a different set of levels to allow choosing a feat minus from a list of very common feats. This pushes it more in the direction of personalization and less in the vein of players grabbing certain combinations of feats over and over again. It isn't like I mind them getting these things but I think there may be a bit of gravitation towards a select few of these which may feel more like a generic power jump than character individuality. Removing some of those go to combat feats allows from the free list breaks up the very possible monotony a bit. As for what levels I'd put them on, maybe 2, 7, 10, 13, 20 with the last one having no restriction? I chose these numbers to try to go with levels where there were less going on. ASIs are usually petty impactful levels for a character so it seemed not a bad idea to separate these extras from those levels to make the growth feel more smooth and less jumpy.
After seeing multiple people suggest it I do think its better to grant the free feats seperate from ASI levels. That way each level feels like the players are getting something instead of as you put it jumpy.
I found Feats to be an extremely satisfying addition to the leveling-up process or shaping of the character during or even before the adventure (variant human / custom lineage). Even the limited amount of classes and subclasses are most of the time enough for a unique character creation but add Feats on top of that and you can become even more creative. Most of the time ASI is just way better so half-feats are my favorites.
Crazy Crits sounds fun for a limited campaign. I think it might even be better as the power provided by a plot-relevant artifact needed to slay a god of some kind. The Marble System sounds amazing and inspired!
You have some very interesting ideas. I liked most of them. My favorite, [I am a DM], is the Rule 5, the marble system. Although I would use something else, I really like it. I play primarily on VTT's so I have to be a little creative with this. I agree with your assessment that crits should be maxed otherwise they arent really crits. I use pathfinder 1e, if your going to take the time to confirm it, make it count. I also like the idea of healing potions having a set amount, it makes them special from spells which can vary. Very good video. Options; exploding die on a critical might be alternative.
Here's what I use in my games. I'm a DM and player, and I'm into optimization, so I use it as a tool for balancing things surgically and keeping everything fun, thematic, and smooth without hampering player options unfairly. By the way, a nat 1 on an attack roll always misses and a nat 20 on an attack roll always hits. That's in the rules. It's also VERY IMPORTANT for a great many reasons that this is NOT the case with skill checks. It just encourages wacky meta-play. 1: Drink or administer a HEALING potion as a bonus action, and roll the dice, or use a full action for the maximum possible roll. 2: If your class or subclass grants the Extra Attack feature, you may... don or doff a shield at the start of each turn for free, stow a wielded weapon and draw a weapon each time you make a weapon attack, and declare a power attack on any melee weapon attack, taking a -5 penalty to hit and gaining a +10 bonus to damage on the attack roll (see: Great Weapon Master, which I add a +1 to your choice of stat to.) 3: Take a free feat at level 1, at the cost of not being allowed to take any race/species or background which grants a feat. 4: No flight speed from your species at level 1. Limited flight options at level 5+ are fine. If a player wants a growth arc where they can later fly, I'll let them take a flying race but without flight, and we can work together to determine an appropriate level for them to work toward regaining flight by. 5: Better crits. This one is my own, and I've discussed it with a math major and wrote a script to test millions of examples. It's the best solution I've seen yet and I call it the Crit Floor method. Add the maximum possible roll to the minimum possible roll, then add any modifiers. That's your Crit Floor, or the lowest you can get on a crit. Then roll double the dice like normal, and add your modifiers just like you would rules-as-written. If the result is lower than the Crit Floor, use the Crit Floor instead. Easy example: a 1d10 fire bolt crits. Normally it's 2d10. Instead, our Crit Floor is 11. We roll 2d10, but then if it's less than 11, we deal 11 damage instead. More complex example, a paladin crits with a great sword and divine smite with a +3 modifier. That's normally 2d6+2d8+3. We take (6+6+8+8)+(1+1+1+1)+3 to get our Crit Floor of 35. Then we roll 4d6+4d8+3, and if it's less than 35, we ignore the result and deal 35 damage instead. This only bumps the average up from 35 to 38.2 instead of a wild 47 like the max+roll version the video suggests. This way, crits always deal more than a normal hit, but the average damage BARELY increases from the stock method, meaning your monsters won't have a 5% chance to just guaranteed obliterate your players. Consider, a CR1 Giant Toad with this video's method crits for an average of 33 damage with its bite. Mine gets it down to 27.3. They're really simple house rules, and most are extremely popular, but each of them fixes at least one or more problems, and improves the game play experience overall.
I usually only give the players the reworked Crit effect as to not make enemies one-shot them, however your Crit Floor rule is actually a pretty good tool to use for NPCs. I typically don't roll monster health and just take the average damage so combat goes quicker. That being said using the Crit Floor as the standard number is actually cool.
something i do for health potions is essentially "reroll the bottom half." for example, instead of rolling a d8, i have them roll a d4+4 for a mnimum of 5 points of healing. i also do the same thing with hit points on level up. nobody enjoys gaining a single hit point when they level.
Dont remember where our DM got this idea but we use the system where you can drink a potion as a Bonus Action, but drinking it as an Action automatically confers the maximum potential healing and skips the roll, and we all really like it Also our group uses varying methods of calculating critical hits depending on how intense the stakes are supposed to be for that campaign. We generally categorize them as follows: Standard Crits: Roll Double Dice like RaW, but as a compensation crits apply to any and all forms of added damage dice like sneak attacks and smites (least commonly used but is good for high risk high stakes campaigns, we used it for Curse of Strahd) Optimal Crits: The attack simply deals the automatic maximum without needing to roll. Good system for most games and prevents a single critical from utterly swinging combat (but honestly as a DM you should be able to roll with that kind of thing in spite of "big number"). Were currently using this in Tomb of Annihilation Crunchy Crits: as you described here, crit deals maximum possible damage ON TOP of the dice roll. Great for games where youre okay with letting your players go on a bit of a wild power fantasy which theyll usually appreciate. Another player in my group uses that for his game that he wrote
I heard of this potion rule and it does sound pretty good overall. I do like actually how you set up different Crit rules then the table can essentially choose what's appropriate for the current campaign! Solid idea
Hey, I'm running ToA for my players, too! We just had our first player death at Firefinger. I use something right between standard and optimal crits, that I like to call "crit floor". Basically, just take an optimal crit and add the number of dice being rolled. (Or think of it like one normal roll at max damage + one normal roll that's all 1's, and then add modifiers.)That's your minimum possible damage or crit floor. Then roll a standard crit, and if it's below the crit floor, you take the crit floor instead. That way, you get to roll the biggest number of dice (dice goblins rejoice), and you have a chance to hit bigger numbers, but while you'll always do more damage than a standard hit, the average damage barely budges from standard. So, lethality stays close to the design and experience of RAW, but your attack roll win never turns into a damage roll sin.
If you follow the logic that "don't let your players roll if they never even had a chance" then Absolute 20 makes perfect sense. You already decided that the highest roll would be a success (after adding modifiers). Therefore, you don't need to ask for their modifiers. Of course, I'd still have them add the modifiers, even if it's just a formality at that point. I like consistency in the rules. And hey, if that was going to backfire, it's not like I told them the DC beforehand. If I want them to succeed regardless, I'll just quietly lower the DC so they made it.
Thanks for sharing your house rules. Re: Rule 1. If you drink a potion, it has to hit your gut first, right. Then what? Your body has to metabolize it. I also don't think you can draw an object and sip a bunch of liquid in an instant. As a GM and as a Player, I don't like anything that trivializes HP or messes with verisimilitude. Re: Rule 4. I think with crit damage, the easiest rule to remember is the best. Every GM does crits different, and I always have to ask. I hate having to ask. Re: Rule 5. Bro, too complex. Just give me points I can spend on a roll or something. Award 2 to 4 points per individual instance of awarding inspiration with a cap of 10.
It's definitely more complex but overall I have seen positive feedback from my players. They enjoy the moments they can spend the marbles to make significant changes. I'm very open in my game to granting advantage or bonus to rolls when a player does something creatively or tactically, so I wanted an inspiration system separate from rolls. Potions can be a little magical which is always a great explanation. That being said I started having potion belts in my game. Pretty much if your belt has 3 slots, then you can only have 3 potions at the ready to drink as a bonus action, any other potion is in your backpack and you need to spend a full action to search through it and retrieve it. Happy to see you respond tho! appreciate it!
For number 3, what I do is something called "milestone ASI" so when the party reaches certain points in the story(i.e. the end of a module chapter) or when they come up with a really clever way to overcome a puzzle placed before them, or even just a really epic RP moment, I'll tell the players to give themselves a +1 to a stat of their choice. On the flipside, ASI levels can only be used for feats.
For a 5e game I am going to be running I'm doing my own variation on the feats rule, neat to see it elsewhere. For my game I'm doing free feats at levels 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18 while the normal ABI or a feat can be taken at their normal levels. Mainly due to the fact that it feels more or less that odd number levels are the 'fun' ones so this is to round things out. Also unless you have spells you get basically no character customization until the ABI so these free feets help alter that a bit. Though i'll see how it goes.
a couple of homebrew things I do is stacking advantage/disadvantage, flanking, and super crits. Both monsters and players can do all 3, so with stacking adv/disadv you add a d20 on top of your advantage rolls and flanking just adds advantage if an a player is on opposing sides of an enemy in melee range. For super crits i might start changing critical hits to maximum values like you do but originally for my rule, if you roll a critical hit you can reroll the d20 to see if you super crit. if you do you roll your crit damage as normal and then double the number you roll. So for instance if you put them all together, if a monster is prone, paralyzed, flanked, and the barbarian uses reckless attack, the player would roll 5 d20's if one of them rolls a 20 it would count as a super crit since paralyzed targets auto crit. so all of that combined can make for some really interesting strategy from a player and DM standpoint.
I think rules 3 and 5 can be combined by allowing feats to be gained in exchange for a sufficient number of inspirations being spent on them. Allow your PCs to accumulate up to three inspirations rather than just having inspiration or not, with benefits coming from spending more than one (2 inspirations: re-roll a D20 after learning that it wasn't a high enough roll; 3 inspirations: take a natural 20), but when they gain a fourth they either have to give it away immediately or convert three inspirations into one feat point. Once they've accumulated three feat points (or four or more after a certain level, if you think the game risks becoming unbalanced) they get their feat. This lets you be more generous with handing out inspirations, or even at the end of a session where you didn't award an inspiration let your players vote on which PC they think did something worthy of earning one (which you don't have to be bound by, of course -- you want to use this opportunity for gain to encourage better roleplaying). If you require all players to state beforehand which two feats they most want their PCs to work towards gaining next, you can encourage roleplaying in support of that, regardless of whether a feat eventually comes from feat points or an ASI. It also lets you build something like the acquisition of Fey-Touched or Shadow-Touched into the storyline, or even to deny it to a party if it would mess with your plans, since you can lay down that exception well in advance and not disappoint the player in what they thought would be their moment of achievement.
I absolutely love this idea. I have seen a lot of players hold onto their inspiration for the perfect moment but this allows them to earn a feat instead. Definitely will implement it from now on
@@MidknightCoffeeThanks, it's kind of you to say that. One thing to be aware of is that players may hoard their three inspirations and keep on handing a fourth to one specific PC, in order for that character to get a feat the party think will benefit them all. But this won't necessarily be a bad thing, as long as it makes sense in the context of the game and contributes to good strategy and good roleplaying. "OK, folks, gather round. We've completed our research and it's clear that the tomb complex is rightly reputed to be trap-heavy, amongst other things. We're definitely going to need Grokk The Rogue to complete his Dungeon Delver training before we face this. We've all been supporting him so far, making time for him to spend with his trainer every instance we've found ourselves back in the city, but I reckon we now need to bung his teacher an extra 200gp out of the party coffers to put in some overtime, because if we can complete our preparations by the end of next week then we'll much improve our chances of clearing the tomb safely and getting back out of the mountains before winter shuts us in."
@@MidknightCoffeeHeh. And did the goblin survive the first arrow trap? How often did the party have to go back to the goblin village and kidnap a new trap detector? Did they realise that they were more likely to grab a goblin with a low Perception and DEX than one with a high Perception and DEX?
The Marbles system sounds pretty cool. It sort of reminds me of Bennies from Savage Worlds, but sounds like a lot more fun (since Bennies are tied not only to fun stuff, but also damage absorption in SW). I love hearing different people's homebrew rules.
Currently designing my own system, and here are my insights on all of these rules: 1: I opted for Action Points, rather than having a set Action, Bonus Action, Movement system that D&D 5e did, or the 3 Actions that Pathfinder did. In my system, Bonus Action = 1 Action Point (a Brief Action), Action = 2 Action Points (a Standard Action), and I added in a third option for unique abilities/spells called an Extended Action, which costs 3 Action Points. Drinking a Potion is a Brief Action, but feeding a potion to someone else is a Standard Action unless they use a Reaction to drink it. None of my players have complained about this system so far, so I'm just going to assume it works and try not to ruin it. 1a: I changed Potions completely, because I hate 5e potion mechanics. I think potions should be 2 dice + a flat value depending on the strength of the potion. 2d4+12, 2d6+13, 2d8+14, 2d10+15, and 2d12+16. I prefer rolling, just not so many dice that it's completely unreasonable. 2: I don't think the natural 20 is necessarily a reason to celebrate *every time it shows up,* so I kind of disagree here. I respect why you have it here, but I personally don't value it very much. 3: I actually did this in my system as well. I think that choosing between Feats (in my system they're called Perks) and Ability Increases is, quite frankly, ridiculous, so one of the first things I did was make sure that Perks weren't optional, and they didn't come at the cost of a stat boost. But, as a consequence, none of my Perks offer an increase to a Character's Ability Score. But, I also made different classes get Ability Increases at different levels. I have 3 TYPES of Classes in my system: Adept, Martial, and Caster, all of which scale up to Level 50, and Adept Classes get 12 ASIs up to level 50, Martial Classes get 11 ASIs, and Casters get 10 ASIs. I also have scaling Ability Maximums which get higher with level thresholds, I don't really enjoy 5e's hard restriction of 20 as maximum for everything, so it isn't just a race to see who gets every Ability to 20 the fastest. 4: The way I reworked Crits in my system is pretty similar to that initial calculation. I gave Weapon Attacks a Base Damage Value depending on the weapon type, which is supposed to generally represent how reliable that weapon is at dealing strong damage. For example, Spears are an incredibly reliable weapon, so I gave them a d4 Damage Die, but they gain a flat Damage Bonus of 7, because of how easy it is to deal good damage with a spear. On the other end of the spectrum, Battleaxes are exceptionally powerful, but hard to get excellent damage, so they get a 1d10 Damage Die, but a Flat Damage of 2. The way I worked Critical Hits in is that a Critical Hit gains bonus damage equal to the Maximum Value of the Damage Die. Therefore, when a Spear gets a Crit, that's 1d4+11 damage, which isn't super impressive, but still better than a normal hit, while a Battleaxe deals 1d12+14, which is a major boost in potential. This way, I've geared certain builds towards certain weapons depending on their Damage Die that I've given them. Personally, I enjoy this damage system, especially since it means combat has the potential to be significantly more deadly, and as a consequence, it moves much faster than the ones I've run in 5e. That being said, I don't think I'm too big a fan of the Crazy Crits mechanic. Seems like it could end up getting pretty hefty math in some situations. 5: I honestly just don't have inspiration in my system. I don't like rewarding players for having cool _moments,_ but cool _ideas,_ which is what I think is more valuable. For that, I tend to give them bonus dice to roll depending on how in-character the action is, how creative the idea was, and most importantly, how much they thought through the consequences of this idea for the rest of the party. If anyone took the time to read this, I'm not apologizing for how much I write, or how eager I am to talk about my system. But thank you for your time.
We are using a different flanking rule so flanking doesn't take away for features that give advantage. When you attack an enemy you get a +1 for every creature that is hostile to the target, that stand within 5 ft. of it from different direction than you. That naturally caps out at x3, because there are only 3 directions other than the one you are attacking from. Ranged attackers can profit from having melee attackers near the target, but they don't add to the bonus for others, since they are not within 5 ft of it.
I do the potion bonus action thing but if the players choose to use an action they get the max HP healed from the potion. Gives a choice. Do it fast or do it well.
That's actually a really good system to build tension. Definitely sounds like a better option in more difficult campaigns. I also recently saw someone talk about potion belts, pretty much you place a number of potions on the belt and those ones can be used as a bonus action, all others need to be an action as you search your bag
I have bonus action potions you roll for HP, because you're rushing. Action potion drinking gets you max. Makes potions out of combat a bit more effective.
1:33 i have the optional rule that if a player cant succeed in a roll, they do not roll. i takes some memorization on my part, but i have both meaning 20s, but not automatic successes.
Agreed, if a 20 does not succeed I will tell the player what they do results in an automatic fail, since its beyond the realm of possibility. Personally for me if I was a player and a 20 didn't succeed I would feel that the whole roll was just an act, with the DM hoping I get anything other than 20 so they can say this is why it failed.
I'm fond of variable potion drinking. Full action? congrats, you get full usage, automatic max roll on the healing. Bonus action? You chug it and it's gross, you dribble/spill some, roll the dice Using a full action to administer to a friend within range? Roll the dice. Yeeting the flask at someone across the battlefield? Roll to hit, breaking the flask deals 2 damage, automatic minimum roll for healing.
someone said they don't do incapacitated at 0 hp, you are still active while making death saves, but it's a risk to stay in the fight. Another had people make up story elements for their character for things they regret or wish they could have done on each death save. Not sure if he gave a bonus to the save based on how good the story bit was... but I would.
I think a potential fix for crunchy crit is just to only maximize the weapon's damage and not damage from other sources (sneak attack and divine smite, for example).
I believe that adventurers are HEROIC. They are beyond the norm. As such, I allow them to elevate all stats to a minimum of 10 when starting a level 1 character, if they want. My players know the option is there, and some choose not to elevate one or more stats this way to fit their character.
I always give a free *flavor feat at character creation for the exact same reason (I don’t allow anything that would be too busted at level 2 and they need to justify the feat to me basically to help prompt their backstory). Then I’m always torn between free ASI feats or feats as occasional quest rewards. The ASI one is easier to keep track of and for the players to look forward to. But also if there is a fighter I’m not always sure if I should scale it back to just a feat on their extra ones or their stats might get a little weird; especially with half feats.
I found at least in my experience that players would take feats for story reasons to to sharpen a specialty they want to do. For example I had two fighters, one wanted to be a king so looked to take linguist so they can communicate to other kingdoms, and the other took the cook feat and loved the idea of cooking meals for the party and being a dad figure. Pretty much I saw that combat focused classes tended to take roleplay feats and vice versa.
I agree with the free starting feat. If you require that it be a racial feat or one which can quite reasonably come from the character's background (eg Alert, Durable or Skulker for urchins) then you can hold back the more powerful ones (like Magic Initiate, Telekinetic and War Caster) for later levels without too much risk of disagreement.
Your game your rules but ASI and a feat is pretty nuts. Especially in experienced parties who know the meta Feats to grab I'd also argue that it further dilutes the character since everyone's just going to give themselves a 20 in their main stat no matter what. Then everyone boosts CON unless they have a specific multi-class they're building up for. EDIT: also I don't know why you would implement this rule due to a game where everyone played the same class. If the idea is that the characters were too samey, that might be because... they all chose the same class lol. Now if you're running a campaign where the intent is everyone is to have the same class then I can see this rule adding something interesting. Since the party is going to be missing a lot of key elements of a normal balanced party
You bring up a good point. It's definitely a feat that gives more power to players. I do caution other DM's that it could very well warrant enough of a problem that its not worth adding in if you don't want to. In my experience players have used this to take feats that open up a specific playstyle or a roleplay flavor. For example a fighter took the linguist feat and wanted to act like a diplomat between kingdoms. Overall all these rules are homebrew and made at the table, so I understand that in some tables the rules don't work as well. In a group of min/maxers I probably wouldn't implement the rule
I have crits against players just be full damage + rolled or average damage. This way combat moves faster from my end. That being said I do have my "BBEG"s follow the crazy crit rule to also increase the intensity of the important fights.
We have a homebrew rule for rogues...they don't "hide" they "steady aim". Steady aim grants Advantage on next strike and sneak attack. However rogue can be attacked like any other creature. If hidden you get a surprise round but you can't hide in combat. This solved " I have a 28 stealth this round he can't hit me...Lincoln you shot a man at a dinner party in front of 13 guests and are hiding in the corner of a well lit room...yea I know and with 28 stealth." TLDR I don't like stealth in combat RAW
oohhh. crazy crits would make players feel powerful ( and be thematic ) in fights against hordes of mobs. the more normal way you do crits is perfectly acceptable always.
Max damage means grab the highest possible number it could be, and the rolled damage is where they still roll the dice and get the value. For example 2D8+5 for an attack would be a max of 21, and lets say they rolled 15, their total damage would be 36. Then the Crazy Crits is an optional additional system that makes repeating crits in a single fight scale up in damage.
I have to defend not letting a crit always be a success. That is a 5% chance always. So the rogue goes to pick the lock and gets a 19, nope it was very difficult and he would have succeeded, but not this time... But the barbarian says, let me try. He gets a 20 and even though he has a -5 on his dexterity he succeeds?
I personally describe that as moments of luck or insane odds, however I do also keep in mind what would be possible and probable. If I believe what they are trying do is way beyond the scope of their characters abilities, then I declare it so and don't have them roll in the first place. For example if the barbarian tries to open an arcane circle without holding any magic themselves, I would not have them roll but rather say there is no spark no matter what you try. So in a way crits are always a success when I ask for the roll, but if even a 20 wont succeed then I wont ask for the roll and showcase in-game how it does not work
In-Character, they crush the marble in whatever way they want. Some players like to say they crush it, eat it, or drop it and crush it with their foot. Out-of-character they hand me the marble and I place it back in the box of marbles.
And the 6th rule I use myself: I fudge most of the monster rolls to make the game more fun for my players. I make the fights close calls when they need to be, and stomps when the party needs to feel strong.
Well if modifiers don't matter what's the point?!?! 20s auto hit/crit I'm combat but for skill checks that's lame. You have a -9 to persuasion but because you rolled a 20 you persuaded the king to give you his crown and kingdom. Amazing. Doesn't matter you have a 6cha score not perfeicient and you have that curse of words nope you rolled a 20 so the world is yours.
So the idea is that if a 20 doesn't succeed for them then I won't have them roll in the first place and will say it results in failure. I would rather keep the integrity of dice rolling than deceive players into thinking they should roll for an ability only to still say no when they get the highest number. Overall what I'm saying is that if a 20 doesn't succeed then don't make them roll, and if you make them roll then you should have it in mind that a 20 does something based on the characters ability to make something happen
@MidknightCoffee but you don't know if a 20 would be a success or not. Things like guidance pass without a trace bardic inspiration . Maybe they explain what they are doing lowers DC because it was very clever. Magic items that give bonuses to skills. All sorts of things and the DM probably won't have every players skills memorized. Might have a rough idea okay this player is this so probably good at that but you don't know the exact number. Also there are degrees of success and failure. For example a player made a horrible choice of trying to persuade a King to give him his kingdom so on a 1 they get thrown in the stockade for 2 hrs being pelted by vegetables , on a 5. Maybe all future interactions with king get -5 to skill check. On s 10 the King kicks them out of his keep. On a 15 the king gets annoyed but still listens on a 20 the King laughs and takes it as a joke. On a 25 the king finds this most amusing and wants the player to serve him as a member of his court on a 30 the king is most amused and wants the player to court his daughter.
@@bernieseth5115 I know a 20 would be a success, because I set it in my mind that a 20 will succeed if its rolled when I ask them to roll. Overall my thinking is what's fun for the players and the game, and I always want my players to get excited if they see a 20.
@MidknightCoffee if that works for you, that's great. The most important part of the game is that everyone is having fun. Every dm does things differently, and rules are just guidelines.
I think the idea is that with rolling the nat 20, it is an automatic success, but since the character only has 6 CHA, (using your example), then that level of success only reaches to the level of that character's skills/abilities. So, instead of handing the crown over per say, maybe the level of success was maybe something was said that might have planted an idea in the kings head that could have an end result of the character becoming king, or being made into a lord with lands. The success doesn't always have to be an extreme. It could just mean that the king now "trusts" the character that much more getting them closer to whatever their end goal is.
When I get recommended a new channel I always ask if they bring me something new to my knowledge, and this one didn't, but it also failed me as it actually focuses on the "most popular" game on the market.
@@MidknightCoffee Fair, I just always have the gut reaction to when people claim to prefer a game that heavily relies on homebrews to fix things. If a car company needed you to fix as much as DnD does, and goes about as smooth ("45 minutes of fun in a 3 hour period of time") then thatc ar company would have crashed and burned.
@@gendor5199 haha good analogy. I think D&D providing a skeleton structure for the game is actually a really good thing, since it allows DM's to customize the game based on the parties interest. For example sometimes I have a group of players that like dark fantasy like Witcher or Dark Souls, and others that love fantasy adventure like lord of the rings. As such I run different rules for both campaigns to fit the theme better. You are correct in the fact that there is a ton of work the DM needs to do. I do tell people all the time that its perfectly okay to love dnd as a player and not a DM for that reason.
@@MidknightCoffee that is the worst excuse. "This car can do anything, it can be used to drive your kids to school, it can be used to carry your office with you, it can be used to race against go-karts and F1 races, You just need to customize it" Wawnt to play The Witcher? There is an RPG for that. Dark souls? There is an RPG for that. LotR? There is at least 3 RPGs for that. DnD is not even user friendly. I started playing Cogent and Symbaroum, two very simple systems from very different gameplay styles, and then when I got to try 5th edition I kept stumbling onto problems, "When do I use this? Oh, never? Okay, when do I add this number? Oh, sometimes? (Just to add onto this: I always had to ask, "I rolled X" and the GM said it was a fail, followed by ANOTHER player asking "Did you add X?" and THEN it was a success)" In the end they always used the same excuse: IT WILL BE EASIER WHEN YOU GET USED TO IT. That can be used for everything. "Oh you'll be a better body cleaner when you get used to the smell", "You become a better prostitute when you get used to it", "You will be a better fraud when you get used to it", this is a shit excuse to excuse a shit game system. If a game is good, it should be quick and easy to pick up and play, but a while back there was some magical "GM SHORTAGE" in a market ruled by a specific game system of some kind? DnD has been ripped so far apart the only people who support it are the people who Have to because they have the fear of learning something new, or a game group that suffer from the same fear. "Oh, I was really bad at DnD for several MONTHS! I don't want to feel bad ever again!" shit, DnD is the only system I actually played that made me feel like an idiot, and I've played a total of 5 different systems.
#2 Jump with excitement for natural 20. Guys, it's 5%, lmao relax. It happens way too regularly to garner such extreme enthusiasm for it. If you were playing 1d100 system and you gave that power for 1% then I could get it, since it's not like you're bound to hit it during a session, but 20s aren't special. Also, as much as it can be detrimental to hear "add modifiers to 20" it can be the opposite too. It feels way rewarding when you add bunch of modifiers and cross DC30 line than it beings DCX doesn't matter you always have 5% chance to succeed. D20 is rolled way too much for it to be special, unless you're rolling way less than an average game experience. Now 20 into 20, that deserves an excitement, because it's probably only happening once in 3 sessions. I've even seen 3 consecutive 20s into 3 consecutive 1s. Absolute 20s rule really seems like an artificial way to boost normie enjoyment of the game. It's already automatic hit on anything and a crit, what more can a 5%ter ask for. #5 Honestly, this just feels like you've been playing with people that don't play certain classes. A lot of these marbles are sort of core identity of some subclasses. Why take utility divination spells when you can simply choose yellow marble? Why have a second wind feel like a distinct heal when anyone can have red marble? Why play wildmagic Barbarian when every spellcaster can have access to blue marble? Why take precision strike maneuver when anyone can take solid marble? By allowing everyone to access anything, you strip identities of niche mechanics. It also transfers to world too, for anything that PCs can, NPCs ought to be capable of too, and now you have to juggle marbles for NPCs too. There's also issue with physicality, since something physical is capable of being stolen, which is bound to feel bad for PCs. And before you say "just don't steal it from them then" it's the same issue with "just don't use counterspell" and the answer is no. If they have mechanic that NPCs don't, it's unimersive, but at the same time if marbles are physical, good luck trying to convince your rogue to not go on a treasure hunt of pickpocketing. But if rogue can steal it, it can be stolen too. Similarly to counterspell issue, like sorry, I don't care how "bad it feels" for PC to get their spell counterspelled, it feels even worse to have a BBEG Lich that's supposed to be a scheming mastermind and then NOT have the most useful tool in the arsenal of mage duels. #3 Really comes down to tendency to multiclass in your group. I prefer to encourage thematic multiclassing so I use feats on levels too, instead of class levels. Player making a pact with X and dipping 1-3 levels into Warlock just to then feel compelled to push to level 4 to not lose feat seems rather stupid. I generally also often buff certain feats to become half ASIs, so people don't feel forced to pick most meta stuff and feel good with feats like linguist. Many underwhelming feats suddenly feel good if they also give +1 on a stat, and that way someone can take 2 interesting feats who become half ASIs without feeling they're losing progression in terms of stats. Personally, full ASI on every feat opportunity feels like it makes most boring characters. #4 I really like this one, I agree that it's pretty much ass to roll 5% just to double 1 or 2 damage. I might not like absolute 20s because I dislike idea of automatic success in non combat situations, but when you do get that 5% in the combat, it should feel rewarding.
Sorry didn't realize your comment until now I can definitely agree with a lot of your points, for me the absolute 20 is more important for the meaning on anything is possible rather than the DM has complete control with DC checks. I don't believe in changing reality, but changing fate. A natural 20 in the right moment can completely define a character. The marbles have been received pretty well so far from my players. I do understand that it can take away from special abilities, but they are handed out in moments of amazing roleplay or creative decisions, as such the players are gaining a much more immersive experience that they are happy to pay the price. As far as the marbles themselves, I run it where they are granted by Fate and as such are binding to the character. That way while it is a physical object in the game, it simply teleports back to the owner if ever parted. Running feats as an overall level is actually a really good idea, I love what you said there. Glad to see you respond, hope your campaigns are going well!
@@MidknightCoffee It totally isn't, haven't played in 2 months because some people got different jobs and one went back to school. Been drowning my DnD itch by making cardboard terrain I've seen from Crooked Staff Terrain. Honestly, a month later, I might even say I'd go back a bit on my comment about marbles. They seem okay if you have to cycle through every single one before you're capable of gaining the previous one. So it doesn't really cancel out any subclass mechanics if the player gets that one opportunity to feel like that class. I'd definitely have the issue of hoarding them, as would my players. Hell, I've had a shady but super cheap village vendor sell them cursed fungus helmet that gives night vision but when taking damage you throw WIS saving throw or gain minor temporary insanity. Only player who didn't have night vision absolutely refused to put it on himself knowing there's some catch. And yet they still bought 3 healing potions from the same guy, for 5th of a price, ignoring the possibility that they might be cursed too. I've been waiting for 2 sessions and 3.5 months for them to chug it, so I can laugh. I still stand behind my hate for 20s, probably precisely because of what you've said. "Anything possible" gives me shudders down my spine. I prefer grittier, more grim darker settings, Curse of Strahd, Dark Sun, Witcher, WarHammer Fantasy etc. Even when playing regular DnD I tone down all the cutesy elements like fairies while amping up fey similar to redcaps and hags. If that works for your group, it works, but among my cynical people, we kind of agree that we hate vanilla heroism you see in the books. We're far more likely to play something akin to JRR Martin, Abercrombie or Sanderson settings, where goodie two-shoes characters often die ungloriously quickly.
@@MrMrtvozornik I definitely run different rules and themes based on my groups and I love anyone who does the same. One set of rules don't always transfer to another table sometimes not even a new campaign. Curating the experience based on the theme proposed, discussed, and loved by the players will never have anyone go wrong. Hope your dnd fix comes soon haha
Absolute 20's make no sense. You say a PC succeeds to the best of their abilities. What should mean within their modefiers, otherwise the PC would accomplish something that is bejond their best. A 0 skill barbarian should even at its best be incapable to pick a master class lock.
I definitely agree with skills above their means, which is why in those situations I don't have them roll and let them know it automatically fails. If rolling a natural 20 for that character isn't enough to make them succeed then there is no point to have them roll in the first place, its already decided they won't pass.
Hey man! Super impressive that youre making this high quality of videos for having 32 subs at time of writing. These ideas are good. I do like the set healing from potions, I'm gonna use that. Absolute 20's I already use that. I like the asi and feat on everything. I'll use bigger mojsters aswellmsince they'll be stronger. Rule 4 is great. I love it. It's mine now. 🫴 Give give. Pay up. I already use a varient of 4.2 (crazy crits) but that's a good multicrit system aswell. The marble system is super cool, and yet again... Mine. Give it here you rascal! But fr I'm taking that because I have a God that would be perfect for that. He's the human form of a goat demon :). Loved this, but I have stuff to do so I can't bingewatch more right now. I will be back good sir!
Hey if you want to join our community come here
discord.gg/Et5jfKfd
We often stream homebrew creation, D&D review, and Map/worldbuilding! Hope to see you there
In my groups we have it where drinking a potion is a bonus action and you roll for healing, a action and you get the full amount so drinking them outside of combat gives more then a rushed swig, handing one to someone else that's conscious is a bonus action (they don't heal they just physically have it), and giving to a downed person is a action.
@@shadowhell8378 Perfect way to run it, I am a huge fan!
@@MidknightCoffee thanks
If combat didn't take hours, it wouldn't be a big deal to take a whole six seconds to drink a tasty beverage.
The absolute truth lol
Depends upon where the potion is stored. BA if in a pouch on your belt, if elsewhere then an Action.
@@simonburling3762 I have seen that rule recently and I am a huge fan, players can buy a potion belt and even look to upgrade it later on for more slots. That being said it also helps make sense when they have an excess amount of potions that they can't drink anything at a moments notice.
There is a 3rd party produced item, that can store one potion and enable you to have it administered as a free action.
One that I always used when running games and has worked well is that any action that takes a bonus action can be done as an action if a player wishes, but not vice versa. It's rare to come up but sometimes you might want to use two bonus actions on a turn instead of an action and bonus action, for instance a bard handing out two bardic inspirations, or wanting to use bardic inspiration and cast healing word in the same turn. This also buffs monks a bit in low levels, letting them burn through ki points for double flurry of blows or flurry + patient defense if they choose.
Excellent rule! I have seen that worked really well for bards and clerics!
I really like that, but I tend to lean 'rule of cool.' I really think this would help the feeling of powerlessness at lower levels. Great rule!
Nice video. I like how these changes focus on making things feel better for the players. Getting a crit and then just doing average damage happens often and makes the 20 feel like it didn't really matter.
Exactly! Allows for special moments to give satisfaction
I have a slight variation of the health potion rule, as an action you drink the potion with care giving you the max amount healed, or you can use a bonus action possibly spilling some in your rush, and you heal the rolled amount.
Huge fan of that rule!
@@MidknightCoffeesame, my players really like it too, it gives them the choice to just top up when there's no other real opportunity to use a bonus action, or to make that conscious choice to dive for cover and really get the most out of that healing in dire situations.
Critical hits, I'm going to trial a rule in my upcoming game, where if you crit, you get another action, no restrictions. So slash at them again, cast another spell, dash, whatever you want, and if you crit again, go again.
Yeah I do this also. I know several DMs that do the same.
We use the same rule at our table. As for criticals, we still roll the attack damage as normal, but maximize the extra crit dice.
There's some overlap.
1) Potions - 1 maximize the value, no roll, but using one takes an action.
2) Crits - instead of doubling weapon dice, we use the max value for the weapon dice and roll on top of that (similar to how you do it) but we do not maximize spells, sneak attacks, smites, or other additive effects - those are all rolled (double dice for the crit).
3) Inspiration - I borrowed an idea from the 1DD/5.5E playtest. We call it Karma, and you get one whenever you roll a one and stick with that roll (so if you have something that allows a reroll, you don't get a Karma). Baseline maximum is 1 Karma, 2 for Humans, and any player who filled out their character's Traits/Bonds/Ideals/Flaws has +1 max. If you're at max and get a Karma, you can pass it to another character not at max.
4) Feats - I experimented with giving a feat (but not ASI) at divisible by 4 character levels (they get the normal class ones as well). In my current campaign, I have a list of half-feats (no attribute increases) they can choose from at those quad levels.
The maximizing weapon damage seems like a solid idea. That way paladins and rogues can still double their additional rolled damage, but it doesn't make them significantly stronger than other classes with that rule.
I like this layout
Hey great video my table plays the "full crit damage rules" and can't imagine it any other way. We made a rule you MUST declare Smite before the attack but it doesn't trigger until a hit. This solves the crit issue. If a player "forgets" to smite and they crit they do NOT get crit damage off smite. This has come up exactly 0 times because they learn quick how to use smite. It's a subtle difference but solves the problem and makes the player say "I almost didn't smite but then had a feeling" every time they crit. #worthit
Glad you use it! I see players feel satisfied every time haha
Really enjoyable video. Soft voice with piano makes for a good time. I like the marble idea, it's really charming. I think I could even make old reroll inspiration work as a reward to those unfortunate enough to roll 1s and 5s as a way to tell them that's it's not gonna rain forever. (my friends dice are cursed)
Appreciate it! Haha I love using cursed dice
Absolute 20 shouldn't need to be a rule, I think. If a natural 20 was insufficient to succeed, they shouldn't have been rolling to begin with. If you don't happen to know the character's modifier, and need to be reminded in order to properly estimate then you're going to have to ask for their modifiers anyway. Dodging resistances... sure.
I do like the idea of the free feats. However, I think it might be a consideration to amend it a bit. Being at perhaps a different set of levels to allow choosing a feat minus from a list of very common feats. This pushes it more in the direction of personalization and less in the vein of players grabbing certain combinations of feats over and over again. It isn't like I mind them getting these things but I think there may be a bit of gravitation towards a select few of these which may feel more like a generic power jump than character individuality. Removing some of those go to combat feats allows from the free list breaks up the very possible monotony a bit. As for what levels I'd put them on, maybe 2, 7, 10, 13, 20 with the last one having no restriction? I chose these numbers to try to go with levels where there were less going on. ASIs are usually petty impactful levels for a character so it seemed not a bad idea to separate these extras from those levels to make the growth feel more smooth and less jumpy.
After seeing multiple people suggest it I do think its better to grant the free feats seperate from ASI levels. That way each level feels like the players are getting something instead of as you put it jumpy.
I found Feats to be an extremely satisfying addition to the leveling-up process or shaping of the character during or even before the adventure (variant human / custom lineage). Even the limited amount of classes and subclasses are most of the time enough for a unique character creation but add Feats on top of that and you can become even more creative. Most of the time ASI is just way better so half-feats are my favorites.
Crazy Crits sounds fun for a limited campaign. I think it might even be better as the power provided by a plot-relevant artifact needed to slay a god of some kind.
The Marble System sounds amazing and inspired!
Glad you like them! Try them out and let me know how it ran in your campaigns
You have some very interesting ideas. I liked most of them. My favorite, [I am a DM], is the Rule 5, the marble system. Although I would use something else, I really like it. I play primarily on VTT's so I have to be a little creative with this. I agree with your assessment that crits should be maxed otherwise they arent really crits. I use pathfinder 1e, if your going to take the time to confirm it, make it count. I also like the idea of healing potions having a set amount, it makes them special from spells which can vary. Very good video. Options; exploding die on a critical might be alternative.
Glad you enjoyed them!
Thank you so much for putting the stuff in the thumbnail, and not doing the "rule 1, rule 2" chapters to game the algorithm.
Here's what I use in my games. I'm a DM and player, and I'm into optimization, so I use it as a tool for balancing things surgically and keeping everything fun, thematic, and smooth without hampering player options unfairly. By the way, a nat 1 on an attack roll always misses and a nat 20 on an attack roll always hits. That's in the rules. It's also VERY IMPORTANT for a great many reasons that this is NOT the case with skill checks. It just encourages wacky meta-play.
1: Drink or administer a HEALING potion as a bonus action, and roll the dice, or use a full action for the maximum possible roll.
2: If your class or subclass grants the Extra Attack feature, you may... don or doff a shield at the start of each turn for free, stow a wielded weapon and draw a weapon each time you make a weapon attack, and declare a power attack on any melee weapon attack, taking a -5 penalty to hit and gaining a +10 bonus to damage on the attack roll (see: Great Weapon Master, which I add a +1 to your choice of stat to.)
3: Take a free feat at level 1, at the cost of not being allowed to take any race/species or background which grants a feat.
4: No flight speed from your species at level 1. Limited flight options at level 5+ are fine. If a player wants a growth arc where they can later fly, I'll let them take a flying race but without flight, and we can work together to determine an appropriate level for them to work toward regaining flight by.
5: Better crits. This one is my own, and I've discussed it with a math major and wrote a script to test millions of examples. It's the best solution I've seen yet and I call it the Crit Floor method. Add the maximum possible roll to the minimum possible roll, then add any modifiers. That's your Crit Floor, or the lowest you can get on a crit. Then roll double the dice like normal, and add your modifiers just like you would rules-as-written. If the result is lower than the Crit Floor, use the Crit Floor instead. Easy example: a 1d10 fire bolt crits. Normally it's 2d10. Instead, our Crit Floor is 11. We roll 2d10, but then if it's less than 11, we deal 11 damage instead. More complex example, a paladin crits with a great sword and divine smite with a +3 modifier. That's normally 2d6+2d8+3. We take (6+6+8+8)+(1+1+1+1)+3 to get our Crit Floor of 35. Then we roll 4d6+4d8+3, and if it's less than 35, we ignore the result and deal 35 damage instead. This only bumps the average up from 35 to 38.2 instead of a wild 47 like the max+roll version the video suggests. This way, crits always deal more than a normal hit, but the average damage BARELY increases from the stock method, meaning your monsters won't have a 5% chance to just guaranteed obliterate your players. Consider, a CR1 Giant Toad with this video's method crits for an average of 33 damage with its bite. Mine gets it down to 27.3.
They're really simple house rules, and most are extremely popular, but each of them fixes at least one or more problems, and improves the game play experience overall.
I usually only give the players the reworked Crit effect as to not make enemies one-shot them, however your Crit Floor rule is actually a pretty good tool to use for NPCs. I typically don't roll monster health and just take the average damage so combat goes quicker. That being said using the Crit Floor as the standard number is actually cool.
Fantastic video. If you're having fun you're doing it right.
Thank you! Always the golden rule lol
something i do for health potions is essentially "reroll the bottom half."
for example, instead of rolling a d8, i have them roll a d4+4 for a mnimum of 5 points of healing.
i also do the same thing with hit points on level up. nobody enjoys gaining a single hit point when they level.
A nice adjustment so they don't feel let down with how expensive potions can be. Good one!
I basically do the first four, and have been thinking about how to add something like the fifth before I even heard of this channel
Hope it sounds good! try and it out and lmk how it goes!
Dont remember where our DM got this idea but we use the system where you can drink a potion as a Bonus Action, but drinking it as an Action automatically confers the maximum potential healing and skips the roll, and we all really like it
Also our group uses varying methods of calculating critical hits depending on how intense the stakes are supposed to be for that campaign. We generally categorize them as follows:
Standard Crits: Roll Double Dice like RaW, but as a compensation crits apply to any and all forms of added damage dice like sneak attacks and smites (least commonly used but is good for high risk high stakes campaigns, we used it for Curse of Strahd)
Optimal Crits: The attack simply deals the automatic maximum without needing to roll. Good system for most games and prevents a single critical from utterly swinging combat (but honestly as a DM you should be able to roll with that kind of thing in spite of "big number"). Were currently using this in Tomb of Annihilation
Crunchy Crits: as you described here, crit deals maximum possible damage ON TOP of the dice roll. Great for games where youre okay with letting your players go on a bit of a wild power fantasy which theyll usually appreciate. Another player in my group uses that for his game that he wrote
I heard of this potion rule and it does sound pretty good overall. I do like actually how you set up different Crit rules then the table can essentially choose what's appropriate for the current campaign! Solid idea
Hey, I'm running ToA for my players, too! We just had our first player death at Firefinger. I use something right between standard and optimal crits, that I like to call "crit floor". Basically, just take an optimal crit and add the number of dice being rolled. (Or think of it like one normal roll at max damage + one normal roll that's all 1's, and then add modifiers.)That's your minimum possible damage or crit floor. Then roll a standard crit, and if it's below the crit floor, you take the crit floor instead. That way, you get to roll the biggest number of dice (dice goblins rejoice), and you have a chance to hit bigger numbers, but while you'll always do more damage than a standard hit, the average damage barely budges from standard. So, lethality stays close to the design and experience of RAW, but your attack roll win never turns into a damage roll sin.
Note on the 4th crit formula at 6:00
((Max)x2+(Rolled)x2)x2 is the same as ((Max)+(Rolled))x4
Very true, you could use that as a easier way to do the math! Going to change it from now on
Algebra class coming in handy with those factoring lessons
If you follow the logic that "don't let your players roll if they never even had a chance" then Absolute 20 makes perfect sense. You already decided that the highest roll would be a success (after adding modifiers). Therefore, you don't need to ask for their modifiers.
Of course, I'd still have them add the modifiers, even if it's just a formality at that point. I like consistency in the rules. And hey, if that was going to backfire, it's not like I told them the DC beforehand. If I want them to succeed regardless, I'll just quietly lower the DC so they made it.
haha, you have a great idea as well!
Thanks for sharing your house rules.
Re: Rule 1. If you drink a potion, it has to hit your gut first, right. Then what? Your body has to metabolize it. I also don't think you can draw an object and sip a bunch of liquid in an instant. As a GM and as a Player, I don't like anything that trivializes HP or messes with verisimilitude.
Re: Rule 4. I think with crit damage, the easiest rule to remember is the best. Every GM does crits different, and I always have to ask. I hate having to ask.
Re: Rule 5. Bro, too complex. Just give me points I can spend on a roll or something. Award 2 to 4 points per individual instance of awarding inspiration with a cap of 10.
It's definitely more complex but overall I have seen positive feedback from my players. They enjoy the moments they can spend the marbles to make significant changes. I'm very open in my game to granting advantage or bonus to rolls when a player does something creatively or tactically, so I wanted an inspiration system separate from rolls.
Potions can be a little magical which is always a great explanation. That being said I started having potion belts in my game. Pretty much if your belt has 3 slots, then you can only have 3 potions at the ready to drink as a bonus action, any other potion is in your backpack and you need to spend a full action to search through it and retrieve it.
Happy to see you respond tho! appreciate it!
These are fantastic homebrew ideas, and very well-presented! c: Gonna steal some of these and try to finagle them into my OD&D game.
Glad to hear it! Let me know how it goes
For number 3, what I do is something called "milestone ASI" so when the party reaches certain points in the story(i.e. the end of a module chapter) or when they come up with a really clever way to overcome a puzzle placed before them, or even just a really epic RP moment, I'll tell the players to give themselves a +1 to a stat of their choice. On the flipside, ASI levels can only be used for feats.
That is a nice reward to get them to immerse themselves in the game! I definitely think its a good one!
I've been doing it for two campaigns now. The table is starting to find some amusing builds now that they're on the second attempt.
Respect the Nat 20!
Love to see it rolled!
For a 5e game I am going to be running I'm doing my own variation on the feats rule, neat to see it elsewhere.
For my game I'm doing free feats at levels 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18 while the normal ABI or a feat can be taken at their normal levels. Mainly due to the fact that it feels more or less that odd number levels are the 'fun' ones so this is to round things out. Also unless you have spells you get basically no character customization until the ABI so these free feets help alter that a bit. Though i'll see how it goes.
Let me know how it goes! sounds like it could be better in the manner of every level granting something nice, might adopt that idea too
Love the marble idea!
Glad to hear that! Try it out and let me know how it goes!
a couple of homebrew things I do is stacking advantage/disadvantage, flanking, and super crits. Both monsters and players can do all 3, so with stacking adv/disadv you add a d20 on top of your advantage rolls and flanking just adds advantage if an a player is on opposing sides of an enemy in melee range. For super crits i might start changing critical hits to maximum values like you do but originally for my rule, if you roll a critical hit you can reroll the d20 to see if you super crit. if you do you roll your crit damage as normal and then double the number you roll. So for instance if you put them all together, if a monster is prone, paralyzed, flanked, and the barbarian uses reckless attack, the player would roll 5 d20's if one of them rolls a 20 it would count as a super crit since paralyzed targets auto crit. so all of that combined can make for some really interesting strategy from a player and DM standpoint.
I definitely love the consideration of factors outside of the crit itself. Going to be using that now too!
Great list. Well done sir.
I think rules 3 and 5 can be combined by allowing feats to be gained in exchange for a sufficient number of inspirations being spent on them. Allow your PCs to accumulate up to three inspirations rather than just having inspiration or not, with benefits coming from spending more than one (2 inspirations: re-roll a D20 after learning that it wasn't a high enough roll; 3 inspirations: take a natural 20), but when they gain a fourth they either have to give it away immediately or convert three inspirations into one feat point. Once they've accumulated three feat points (or four or more after a certain level, if you think the game risks becoming unbalanced) they get their feat. This lets you be more generous with handing out inspirations, or even at the end of a session where you didn't award an inspiration let your players vote on which PC they think did something worthy of earning one (which you don't have to be bound by, of course -- you want to use this opportunity for gain to encourage better roleplaying).
If you require all players to state beforehand which two feats they most want their PCs to work towards gaining next, you can encourage roleplaying in support of that, regardless of whether a feat eventually comes from feat points or an ASI. It also lets you build something like the acquisition of Fey-Touched or Shadow-Touched into the storyline, or even to deny it to a party if it would mess with your plans, since you can lay down that exception well in advance and not disappoint the player in what they thought would be their moment of achievement.
I absolutely love this idea. I have seen a lot of players hold onto their inspiration for the perfect moment but this allows them to earn a feat instead. Definitely will implement it from now on
@@MidknightCoffeeThanks, it's kind of you to say that.
One thing to be aware of is that players may hoard their three inspirations and keep on handing a fourth to one specific PC, in order for that character to get a feat the party think will benefit them all. But this won't necessarily be a bad thing, as long as it makes sense in the context of the game and contributes to good strategy and good roleplaying.
"OK, folks, gather round. We've completed our research and it's clear that the tomb complex is rightly reputed to be trap-heavy, amongst other things. We're definitely going to need Grokk The Rogue to complete his Dungeon Delver training before we face this. We've all been supporting him so far, making time for him to spend with his trainer every instance we've found ourselves back in the city, but I reckon we now need to bung his teacher an extra 200gp out of the party coffers to put in some overtime, because if we can complete our preparations by the end of next week then we'll much improve our chances of clearing the tomb safely and getting back out of the mountains before winter shuts us in."
@@RichWoods23 haha last time my players instead kidnapped a goblin and forced him to be their scout
@@MidknightCoffeeHeh. And did the goblin survive the first arrow trap? How often did the party have to go back to the goblin village and kidnap a new trap detector? Did they realise that they were more likely to grab a goblin with a low Perception and DEX than one with a high Perception and DEX?
The Marbles system sounds pretty cool. It sort of reminds me of Bennies from Savage Worlds, but sounds like a lot more fun (since Bennies are tied not only to fun stuff, but also damage absorption in SW). I love hearing different people's homebrew rules.
Glad you liked it!
Currently designing my own system, and here are my insights on all of these rules:
1: I opted for Action Points, rather than having a set Action, Bonus Action, Movement system that D&D 5e did, or the 3 Actions that Pathfinder did. In my system, Bonus Action = 1 Action Point (a Brief Action), Action = 2 Action Points (a Standard Action), and I added in a third option for unique abilities/spells called an Extended Action, which costs 3 Action Points. Drinking a Potion is a Brief Action, but feeding a potion to someone else is a Standard Action unless they use a Reaction to drink it. None of my players have complained about this system so far, so I'm just going to assume it works and try not to ruin it.
1a: I changed Potions completely, because I hate 5e potion mechanics. I think potions should be 2 dice + a flat value depending on the strength of the potion. 2d4+12, 2d6+13, 2d8+14, 2d10+15, and 2d12+16. I prefer rolling, just not so many dice that it's completely unreasonable.
2: I don't think the natural 20 is necessarily a reason to celebrate *every time it shows up,* so I kind of disagree here. I respect why you have it here, but I personally don't value it very much.
3: I actually did this in my system as well. I think that choosing between Feats (in my system they're called Perks) and Ability Increases is, quite frankly, ridiculous, so one of the first things I did was make sure that Perks weren't optional, and they didn't come at the cost of a stat boost. But, as a consequence, none of my Perks offer an increase to a Character's Ability Score. But, I also made different classes get Ability Increases at different levels. I have 3 TYPES of Classes in my system: Adept, Martial, and Caster, all of which scale up to Level 50, and Adept Classes get 12 ASIs up to level 50, Martial Classes get 11 ASIs, and Casters get 10 ASIs. I also have scaling Ability Maximums which get higher with level thresholds, I don't really enjoy 5e's hard restriction of 20 as maximum for everything, so it isn't just a race to see who gets every Ability to 20 the fastest.
4: The way I reworked Crits in my system is pretty similar to that initial calculation. I gave Weapon Attacks a Base Damage Value depending on the weapon type, which is supposed to generally represent how reliable that weapon is at dealing strong damage. For example, Spears are an incredibly reliable weapon, so I gave them a d4 Damage Die, but they gain a flat Damage Bonus of 7, because of how easy it is to deal good damage with a spear. On the other end of the spectrum, Battleaxes are exceptionally powerful, but hard to get excellent damage, so they get a 1d10 Damage Die, but a Flat Damage of 2. The way I worked Critical Hits in is that a Critical Hit gains bonus damage equal to the Maximum Value of the Damage Die. Therefore, when a Spear gets a Crit, that's 1d4+11 damage, which isn't super impressive, but still better than a normal hit, while a Battleaxe deals 1d12+14, which is a major boost in potential. This way, I've geared certain builds towards certain weapons depending on their Damage Die that I've given them. Personally, I enjoy this damage system, especially since it means combat has the potential to be significantly more deadly, and as a consequence, it moves much faster than the ones I've run in 5e.
That being said, I don't think I'm too big a fan of the Crazy Crits mechanic. Seems like it could end up getting pretty hefty math in some situations.
5: I honestly just don't have inspiration in my system. I don't like rewarding players for having cool _moments,_ but cool _ideas,_ which is what I think is more valuable. For that, I tend to give them bonus dice to roll depending on how in-character the action is, how creative the idea was, and most importantly, how much they thought through the consequences of this idea for the rest of the party.
If anyone took the time to read this, I'm not apologizing for how much I write, or how eager I am to talk about my system. But thank you for your time.
haha thank you for writing all that! I'm always interested to see how other people run their games as well!
We are using a different flanking rule so flanking doesn't take away for features that give advantage.
When you attack an enemy you get a +1 for every creature that is hostile to the target, that stand within 5 ft. of it from different direction than you.
That naturally caps out at x3, because there are only 3 directions other than the one you are attacking from.
Ranged attackers can profit from having melee attackers near the target, but they don't add to the bonus for others, since they are not within 5 ft of it.
I do the potion bonus action thing but if the players choose to use an action they get the max HP healed from the potion.
Gives a choice. Do it fast or do it well.
That's actually a really good system to build tension. Definitely sounds like a better option in more difficult campaigns.
I also recently saw someone talk about potion belts, pretty much you place a number of potions on the belt and those ones can be used as a bonus action, all others need to be an action as you search your bag
I have bonus action potions you roll for HP, because you're rushing. Action potion drinking gets you max. Makes potions out of combat a bit more effective.
I have seen that rule recently and I think its really good!
1:33 i have the optional rule that if a player cant succeed in a roll, they do not roll. i takes some memorization on my part, but i have both meaning 20s, but not automatic successes.
Agreed, if a 20 does not succeed I will tell the player what they do results in an automatic fail, since its beyond the realm of possibility. Personally for me if I was a player and a 20 didn't succeed I would feel that the whole roll was just an act, with the DM hoping I get anything other than 20 so they can say this is why it failed.
I'm fond of variable potion drinking.
Full action? congrats, you get full usage, automatic max roll on the healing.
Bonus action? You chug it and it's gross, you dribble/spill some, roll the dice
Using a full action to administer to a friend within range? Roll the dice.
Yeeting the flask at someone across the battlefield? Roll to hit, breaking the flask deals 2 damage, automatic minimum roll for healing.
I can get behind those rules!
I agree and already use most of these!
Cool marble system!
I reward with cool magical items aplenty!
someone said they don't do incapacitated at 0 hp, you are still active while making death saves, but it's a risk to stay in the fight.
Another had people make up story elements for their character for things they regret or wish they could have done on each death save. Not sure if he gave a bonus to the save based on how good the story bit was... but I would.
I think a potential fix for crunchy crit is just to only maximize the weapon's damage and not damage from other sources (sneak attack and divine smite, for example).
I can get behind that! It allows paladins and rogues to still have a bit more power to single hits, but doesn't make them incredibly deadly
I believe that adventurers are HEROIC. They are beyond the norm. As such, I allow them to elevate all stats to a minimum of 10 when starting a level 1 character, if they want. My players know the option is there, and some choose not to elevate one or more stats this way to fit their character.
Here's my healing potion homebrew:
Healing potions (50gp) heal all lost hit points but incurs a cumulative level of Exhaustion.
The only thing i would change about the feats and ASI increase is getting rid of the additional score increases that come with feats
Solid idea simply for the fact of keeping the feats as a story/rp thing rather than a min/max thing
I always give a free *flavor feat at character creation for the exact same reason (I don’t allow anything that would be too busted at level 2 and they need to justify the feat to me basically to help prompt their backstory). Then I’m always torn between free ASI feats or feats as occasional quest rewards.
The ASI one is easier to keep track of and for the players to look forward to. But also if there is a fighter I’m not always sure if I should scale it back to just a feat on their extra ones or their stats might get a little weird; especially with half feats.
I found at least in my experience that players would take feats for story reasons to to sharpen a specialty they want to do. For example I had two fighters, one wanted to be a king so looked to take linguist so they can communicate to other kingdoms, and the other took the cook feat and loved the idea of cooking meals for the party and being a dad figure. Pretty much I saw that combat focused classes tended to take roleplay feats and vice versa.
@@MidknightCoffee 100% why I do it. Totally opens up the RP feats.
I agree with the free starting feat. If you require that it be a racial feat or one which can quite reasonably come from the character's background (eg Alert, Durable or Skulker for urchins) then you can hold back the more powerful ones (like Magic Initiate, Telekinetic and War Caster) for later levels without too much risk of disagreement.
@@RichWoods23 It is a cool concept to grant feats based on specific race or background choices. I like that alot!
Ooh marbles a new thing to add to my hoard
More trinkets!
1: I use Bonus Action to drink a potion too.
4: The Hulmes Crit.
I'll check it out!
Let me know some of your favorite rules!
nat 20 love
Jasonization love haha
My favorite D&D homebrew rule is I play a different system than D&D
Don't make me learn another system lol, D&D is already enough
Your game your rules but ASI and a feat is pretty nuts. Especially in experienced parties who know the meta Feats to grab
I'd also argue that it further dilutes the character since everyone's just going to give themselves a 20 in their main stat no matter what. Then everyone boosts CON unless they have a specific multi-class they're building up for.
EDIT: also I don't know why you would implement this rule due to a game where everyone played the same class. If the idea is that the characters were too samey, that might be because... they all chose the same class lol. Now if you're running a campaign where the intent is everyone is to have the same class then I can see this rule adding something interesting. Since the party is going to be missing a lot of key elements of a normal balanced party
You bring up a good point. It's definitely a feat that gives more power to players. I do caution other DM's that it could very well warrant enough of a problem that its not worth adding in if you don't want to. In my experience players have used this to take feats that open up a specific playstyle or a roleplay flavor. For example a fighter took the linguist feat and wanted to act like a diplomat between kingdoms.
Overall all these rules are homebrew and made at the table, so I understand that in some tables the rules don't work as well. In a group of min/maxers I probably wouldn't implement the rule
Always love a good house rule - always going to be negative Nancys in the comments, but these are all good if they’re good for your table
As long as the same crit rules are applied against the PCs, then any crit system works. It's when only the PCs can get crits that this fails.
I have crits against players just be full damage + rolled or average damage. This way combat moves faster from my end. That being said I do have my "BBEG"s follow the crazy crit rule to also increase the intensity of the important fights.
We have a homebrew rule for rogues...they don't "hide" they "steady aim". Steady aim grants Advantage on next strike and sneak attack. However rogue can be attacked like any other creature. If hidden you get a surprise round but you can't hide in combat. This solved " I have a 28 stealth this round he can't hit me...Lincoln you shot a man at a dinner party in front of 13 guests and are hiding in the corner of a well lit room...yea I know and with 28 stealth." TLDR I don't like stealth in combat RAW
Yeah that's really good, I don't like the sudden oh I disappear from combat because of my stealth roll even tho Im 5ft away from the guy
oohhh. crazy crits would make players feel powerful ( and be thematic ) in fights against hordes of mobs. the more normal way you do crits is perfectly acceptable always.
Concerning Rule#4 with the Max Dmg die and Rolled Dmg die is that rolled or max die doubled still??
Max damage means grab the highest possible number it could be, and the rolled damage is where they still roll the dice and get the value. For example 2D8+5 for an attack would be a max of 21, and lets say they rolled 15, their total damage would be 36. Then the Crazy Crits is an optional additional system that makes repeating crits in a single fight scale up in damage.
@@MidknightCoffee WOW! TY :) Awesome vid BTW.
flash forward 9 months and the new players handbook agrees its a bonus action.
I have to defend not letting a crit always be a success.
That is a 5% chance always. So the rogue goes to pick the lock and gets a 19, nope it was very difficult and he would have succeeded, but not this time...
But the barbarian says, let me try. He gets a 20 and even though he has a -5 on his dexterity he succeeds?
I personally describe that as moments of luck or insane odds, however I do also keep in mind what would be possible and probable. If I believe what they are trying do is way beyond the scope of their characters abilities, then I declare it so and don't have them roll in the first place. For example if the barbarian tries to open an arcane circle without holding any magic themselves, I would not have them roll but rather say there is no spark no matter what you try. So in a way crits are always a success when I ask for the roll, but if even a 20 wont succeed then I wont ask for the roll and showcase in-game how it does not work
We do the first three.
Has it worked well in your games? I received very good feedback with them
What happens when they spend a marble?
In-Character, they crush the marble in whatever way they want. Some players like to say they crush it, eat it, or drop it and crush it with their foot. Out-of-character they hand me the marble and I place it back in the box of marbles.
@@MidknightCoffee sorry I mean what mechanical effect does it have. Do they get advantage, a definite crit, double damage?
Was gonna subscribe but your count is at 669 and i didnt wanna mess with that. Anyways interesting stuff to think about.
I'm at 670 now haha
671 now.
Hey guys lets just throw the dice out the window fuck it lol
And the 6th rule I use myself:
I fudge most of the monster rolls to make the game more fun for my players. I make the fights close calls when they need to be, and stomps when the party needs to feel strong.
❤️🥳👍🏿
Well if modifiers don't matter what's the point?!?! 20s auto hit/crit I'm combat but for skill checks that's lame. You have a -9 to persuasion but because you rolled a 20 you persuaded the king to give you his crown and kingdom. Amazing. Doesn't matter you have a 6cha score not perfeicient and you have that curse of words nope you rolled a 20 so the world is yours.
So the idea is that if a 20 doesn't succeed for them then I won't have them roll in the first place and will say it results in failure. I would rather keep the integrity of dice rolling than deceive players into thinking they should roll for an ability only to still say no when they get the highest number. Overall what I'm saying is that if a 20 doesn't succeed then don't make them roll, and if you make them roll then you should have it in mind that a 20 does something based on the characters ability to make something happen
@MidknightCoffee but you don't know if a 20 would be a success or not. Things like guidance pass without a trace bardic inspiration . Maybe they explain what they are doing lowers DC because it was very clever. Magic items that give bonuses to skills. All sorts of things and the DM probably won't have every players skills memorized. Might have a rough idea okay this player is this so probably good at that but you don't know the exact number. Also there are degrees of success and failure. For example a player made a horrible choice of trying to persuade a King to give him his kingdom so on a 1 they get thrown in the stockade for 2 hrs being pelted by vegetables , on a 5. Maybe all future interactions with king get -5 to skill check. On s 10 the King kicks them out of his keep. On a 15 the king gets annoyed but still listens on a 20 the King laughs and takes it as a joke. On a 25 the king finds this most amusing and wants the player to serve him as a member of his court on a 30 the king is most amused and wants the player to court his daughter.
@@bernieseth5115 I know a 20 would be a success, because I set it in my mind that a 20 will succeed if its rolled when I ask them to roll. Overall my thinking is what's fun for the players and the game, and I always want my players to get excited if they see a 20.
@MidknightCoffee if that works for you, that's great. The most important part of the game is that everyone is having fun. Every dm does things differently, and rules are just guidelines.
I think the idea is that with rolling the nat 20, it is an automatic success, but since the character only has 6 CHA, (using your example), then that level of success only reaches to the level of that character's skills/abilities. So, instead of handing the crown over per say, maybe the level of success was maybe something was said that might have planted an idea in the kings head that could have an end result of the character becoming king, or being made into a lord with lands. The success doesn't always have to be an extreme. It could just mean that the king now "trusts" the character that much more getting them closer to whatever their end goal is.
Nothing to steal(
When I get recommended a new channel I always ask if they bring me something new to my knowledge, and this one didn't, but it also failed me as it actually focuses on the "most popular" game on the market.
D&D is my passion, doesn't really matter if its popular or not.
@@MidknightCoffee Fair, I just always have the gut reaction to when people claim to prefer a game that heavily relies on homebrews to fix things. If a car company needed you to fix as much as DnD does, and goes about as smooth ("45 minutes of fun in a 3 hour period of time") then thatc ar company would have crashed and burned.
@@gendor5199 haha good analogy. I think D&D providing a skeleton structure for the game is actually a really good thing, since it allows DM's to customize the game based on the parties interest. For example sometimes I have a group of players that like dark fantasy like Witcher or Dark Souls, and others that love fantasy adventure like lord of the rings. As such I run different rules for both campaigns to fit the theme better. You are correct in the fact that there is a ton of work the DM needs to do. I do tell people all the time that its perfectly okay to love dnd as a player and not a DM for that reason.
@@MidknightCoffee that is the worst excuse. "This car can do anything, it can be used to drive your kids to school, it can be used to carry your office with you, it can be used to race against go-karts and F1 races, You just need to customize it"
Wawnt to play The Witcher? There is an RPG for that. Dark souls? There is an RPG for that. LotR? There is at least 3 RPGs for that. DnD is not even user friendly.
I started playing Cogent and Symbaroum, two very simple systems from very different gameplay styles, and then when I got to try 5th edition I kept stumbling onto problems, "When do I use this? Oh, never? Okay, when do I add this number? Oh, sometimes? (Just to add onto this: I always had to ask, "I rolled X" and the GM said it was a fail, followed by ANOTHER player asking "Did you add X?" and THEN it was a success)"
In the end they always used the same excuse: IT WILL BE EASIER WHEN YOU GET USED TO IT. That can be used for everything. "Oh you'll be a better body cleaner when you get used to the smell", "You become a better prostitute when you get used to it", "You will be a better fraud when you get used to it", this is a shit excuse to excuse a shit game system. If a game is good, it should be quick and easy to pick up and play, but a while back there was some magical "GM SHORTAGE" in a market ruled by a specific game system of some kind?
DnD has been ripped so far apart the only people who support it are the people who Have to because they have the fear of learning something new, or a game group that suffer from the same fear.
"Oh, I was really bad at DnD for several MONTHS! I don't want to feel bad ever again!" shit, DnD is the only system I actually played that made me feel like an idiot, and I've played a total of 5 different systems.
#2 Jump with excitement for natural 20. Guys, it's 5%, lmao relax. It happens way too regularly to garner such extreme enthusiasm for it. If you were playing 1d100 system and you gave that power for 1% then I could get it, since it's not like you're bound to hit it during a session, but 20s aren't special. Also, as much as it can be detrimental to hear "add modifiers to 20" it can be the opposite too. It feels way rewarding when you add bunch of modifiers and cross DC30 line than it beings DCX doesn't matter you always have 5% chance to succeed. D20 is rolled way too much for it to be special, unless you're rolling way less than an average game experience. Now 20 into 20, that deserves an excitement, because it's probably only happening once in 3 sessions. I've even seen 3 consecutive 20s into 3 consecutive 1s. Absolute 20s rule really seems like an artificial way to boost normie enjoyment of the game. It's already automatic hit on anything and a crit, what more can a 5%ter ask for.
#5 Honestly, this just feels like you've been playing with people that don't play certain classes. A lot of these marbles are sort of core identity of some subclasses. Why take utility divination spells when you can simply choose yellow marble? Why have a second wind feel like a distinct heal when anyone can have red marble? Why play wildmagic Barbarian when every spellcaster can have access to blue marble? Why take precision strike maneuver when anyone can take solid marble?
By allowing everyone to access anything, you strip identities of niche mechanics. It also transfers to world too, for anything that PCs can, NPCs ought to be capable of too, and now you have to juggle marbles for NPCs too. There's also issue with physicality, since something physical is capable of being stolen, which is bound to feel bad for PCs. And before you say "just don't steal it from them then" it's the same issue with "just don't use counterspell" and the answer is no. If they have mechanic that NPCs don't, it's unimersive, but at the same time if marbles are physical, good luck trying to convince your rogue to not go on a treasure hunt of pickpocketing. But if rogue can steal it, it can be stolen too. Similarly to counterspell issue, like sorry, I don't care how "bad it feels" for PC to get their spell counterspelled, it feels even worse to have a BBEG Lich that's supposed to be a scheming mastermind and then NOT have the most useful tool in the arsenal of mage duels.
#3 Really comes down to tendency to multiclass in your group. I prefer to encourage thematic multiclassing so I use feats on levels too, instead of class levels. Player making a pact with X and dipping 1-3 levels into Warlock just to then feel compelled to push to level 4 to not lose feat seems rather stupid. I generally also often buff certain feats to become half ASIs, so people don't feel forced to pick most meta stuff and feel good with feats like linguist. Many underwhelming feats suddenly feel good if they also give +1 on a stat, and that way someone can take 2 interesting feats who become half ASIs without feeling they're losing progression in terms of stats. Personally, full ASI on every feat opportunity feels like it makes most boring characters.
#4 I really like this one, I agree that it's pretty much ass to roll 5% just to double 1 or 2 damage. I might not like absolute 20s because I dislike idea of automatic success in non combat situations, but when you do get that 5% in the combat, it should feel rewarding.
Sorry didn't realize your comment until now
I can definitely agree with a lot of your points, for me the absolute 20 is more important for the meaning on anything is possible rather than the DM has complete control with DC checks. I don't believe in changing reality, but changing fate. A natural 20 in the right moment can completely define a character.
The marbles have been received pretty well so far from my players. I do understand that it can take away from special abilities, but they are handed out in moments of amazing roleplay or creative decisions, as such the players are gaining a much more immersive experience that they are happy to pay the price. As far as the marbles themselves, I run it where they are granted by Fate and as such are binding to the character. That way while it is a physical object in the game, it simply teleports back to the owner if ever parted.
Running feats as an overall level is actually a really good idea, I love what you said there.
Glad to see you respond, hope your campaigns are going well!
@@MidknightCoffee It totally isn't, haven't played in 2 months because some people got different jobs and one went back to school. Been drowning my DnD itch by making cardboard terrain I've seen from Crooked Staff Terrain.
Honestly, a month later, I might even say I'd go back a bit on my comment about marbles. They seem okay if you have to cycle through every single one before you're capable of gaining the previous one. So it doesn't really cancel out any subclass mechanics if the player gets that one opportunity to feel like that class.
I'd definitely have the issue of hoarding them, as would my players. Hell, I've had a shady but super cheap village vendor sell them cursed fungus helmet that gives night vision but when taking damage you throw WIS saving throw or gain minor temporary insanity. Only player who didn't have night vision absolutely refused to put it on himself knowing there's some catch. And yet they still bought 3 healing potions from the same guy, for 5th of a price, ignoring the possibility that they might be cursed too. I've been waiting for 2 sessions and 3.5 months for them to chug it, so I can laugh.
I still stand behind my hate for 20s, probably precisely because of what you've said. "Anything possible" gives me shudders down my spine. I prefer grittier, more grim darker settings, Curse of Strahd, Dark Sun, Witcher, WarHammer Fantasy etc. Even when playing regular DnD I tone down all the cutesy elements like fairies while amping up fey similar to redcaps and hags. If that works for your group, it works, but among my cynical people, we kind of agree that we hate vanilla heroism you see in the books. We're far more likely to play something akin to JRR Martin, Abercrombie or Sanderson settings, where goodie two-shoes characters often die ungloriously quickly.
@@MrMrtvozornik I definitely run different rules and themes based on my groups and I love anyone who does the same. One set of rules don't always transfer to another table sometimes not even a new campaign. Curating the experience based on the theme proposed, discussed, and loved by the players will never have anyone go wrong. Hope your dnd fix comes soon haha
Absolute 20's make no sense. You say a PC succeeds to the best of their abilities. What should mean within their modefiers, otherwise the PC would accomplish something that is bejond their best. A 0 skill barbarian should even at its best be incapable to pick a master class lock.
I definitely agree with skills above their means, which is why in those situations I don't have them roll and let them know it automatically fails. If rolling a natural 20 for that character isn't enough to make them succeed then there is no point to have them roll in the first place, its already decided they won't pass.
Hey man! Super impressive that youre making this high quality of videos for having 32 subs at time of writing. These ideas are good. I do like the set healing from potions, I'm gonna use that. Absolute 20's I already use that. I like the asi and feat on everything. I'll use bigger mojsters aswellmsince they'll be stronger. Rule 4 is great. I love it. It's mine now. 🫴 Give give. Pay up. I already use a varient of 4.2 (crazy crits) but that's a good multicrit system aswell. The marble system is super cool, and yet again... Mine. Give it here you rascal! But fr I'm taking that because I have a God that would be perfect for that. He's the human form of a goat demon :). Loved this, but I have stuff to do so I can't bingewatch more right now. I will be back good sir!
I never saw this comment on my notifications, Thank you so much! Happy to see you around
@@MidknightCoffee np bro keep up the great content :D
@@MidknightCoffee also now at over a hundred subs 🎉 noice