Additional consequences of critical misses just punishes martial classes the more attacks they get. The more attacks you have a round the more you will roll a 1. A 20th level fighter using action surge has a 30% chance to accidentally hit an ally that round? Consider this before implementing crit misses.
Hard agree. Critical tables don't make combat more exciting, they slow it down. A 5% chance is way too big a chance for fumbles when a martial might make up to 7 attacks at just L10.
One house rule I want to try in my next campaign is enhanced magic item scaling. PCs will gain one attunement slot per level and items will require one slot per rarity level. This includes all non-consumable items. PCs can also partially attune and gain scaled-down benefits from higher level items...that way an item will improve automatically as the player levels up. Consider the present system where a PC can technically attune 3 legendary items at 1st level. It just doesn't make sense. The above system will require them to be 15th to reach that result but they will be able to use many more lower level items in the meanwhile. Of course acquiring the items will still depend on the campaign setting and general magic level. I think it makes sense for 'common' items to actually be more common unlike the listings in the DMG. TCoE and XGtE have a number of common/uncommon items to help with this.
For my table I have developed an extension to the bonus action potion in that you can drink any potion as a bonus action (not just healing) but must succeed on a DC 10 Concentration or Slight of hand check. Failure and the potion doesnt come into effect until the end of the players next turn. I like it because it creates the option for all potions and not just healing.
Critical Miss consequences are always a bad idea in my opinion. It unfairly punishes classes like Monks, that have a much higher amount of smaller attacks, over something like a Rogue that only has that single hyper effective attack. This is not something I would EVER suggest in a game. It's just a bad house rule.
I've considered this recently and came to the conclusion that even though classes that attack more often are more likely to crit fail, it's balanced by the fact that they are also more likely to crit. So I feel a crit fail system is ultimately fair if: A) You're also running a crit system & B) If the crit fail system's drawbacks don't heavily outweigh the benefits of the crit system. Def not for everyone tho.
These all sound good and fine until you consider just how complex some of them would be to keep track of. Reputation system? You have to assign a faction (Or multiple) to each and every NPC that the player comes across, come up with a system to track their reputation levels (Based on points? How much does each interaction give? Outside influences?), and then somehow keep track of these levels. PC backstories would factor into how much influence they'd start with too. So now not only is the DM juggling with the plot, conversations and however many other things going on at once they now have to also remember to assign points after every interaction and check their notes for reputation levels every time a player interacts with someone. Just feels like a lot of added complexity for what you get. Then you have other stuff which just make the game less fair. Character builds that need to take more rests (Like lower level magic users with limited spell slots) would suffer from those random rest encounters, and they'd be negatively impacted for the following gameplay. Critical hits and misses would hit some players much more than others since the more attacks you have to make, the more chances you have of rolling those crits. And when you're playing a game that's already heavily based around RNG you definitely want to have rules in place that affect everyone equally - or rules that players can opt into on an individual basis, like you see with wild magic. I mean, that's not to say none of your suggestions are good. There are still some good ones in there, but others are just... not. That's just my opinion though
The problem with a critical fumble table is that a level 5 fighter who uses action surge to attack 4 times in 1 turn has a 18.5% chance of rolling a 1, while an npc villager that picks up a sword and attacks once has a 5% chance to roll a 1. Basically, on a single attack, a random npc farmer has the exact same chance of hitting themself as a highly trained fighter. That makes no sense.
Crit Misses penalixe matials, who are already underpowered, b/c they roll to hit far more often than casters. And Crit Miss tables compound the penelty. I agree that adding events/encounters during travel is an excelent idea. ADD TO THAT, you don't get the benefit of a Long Rest unless you are in a safe place, like an Inn, and thus thier spell slots and other resources need to last the entire journey. Only requireing nutrients is easily circumvented with a 1st level GoodBerry per day. But if you're spell slots are limited, then you get better choices from the players
🥳🫂👍🏿 Thank you for sharing - I’m on a quest to collect every house rule on RUclips and beyond - so far I’ve got 2,252 videos - I’d love to any others you use to the playlist ❤
Whatever the players can do, the monsters can do. The rules apply to both. Strangely there is no poison in my games. And that's a rule imposed on me by my players.
@@BrushesandBlades None. None needed to. All 'Save or die' rules abolished. Role D20 or die? Traps, poisons, blah, blah - rubbish. Outlawed. Players must always have a fighting chance. And I agree. It's a game. Fun. Throw a level 7 character away because you rolled low? "But it teaches you the truth of reality!" Meh. I already know reality. It's a game, reality sux, lesson learnt. Now let's have fun!
Additional consequences of critical misses just punishes martial classes the more attacks they get. The more attacks you have a round the more you will roll a 1. A 20th level fighter using action surge has a 30% chance to accidentally hit an ally that round? Consider this before implementing crit misses.
Your right that’s why most house rules are a case by case base. Out of all these I only use 2.
Hard agree. Critical tables don't make combat more exciting, they slow it down.
A 5% chance is way too big a chance for fumbles when a martial might make up to 7 attacks at just L10.
Yup it’s an option
Absolutely love the action economy option for the healing potions, “borrowing” that
I use that one too, it’s my favorite on this list.
One house rule I want to try in my next campaign is enhanced magic item scaling. PCs will gain one attunement slot per level and items will require one slot per rarity level. This includes all non-consumable items. PCs can also partially attune and gain scaled-down benefits from higher level items...that way an item will improve automatically as the player levels up. Consider the present system where a PC can technically attune 3 legendary items at 1st level. It just doesn't make sense. The above system will require them to be 15th to reach that result but they will be able to use many more lower level items in the meanwhile. Of course acquiring the items will still depend on the campaign setting and general magic level. I think it makes sense for 'common' items to actually be more common unlike the listings in the DMG. TCoE and XGtE have a number of common/uncommon items to help with this.
Nice!
For my table I have developed an extension to the bonus action potion in that you can drink any potion as a bonus action (not just healing) but must succeed on a DC 10 Concentration or Slight of hand check. Failure and the potion doesnt come into effect until the end of the players next turn. I like it because it creates the option for all potions and not just healing.
That’s a pretty cool idea 💡
Critical Miss consequences are always a bad idea in my opinion. It unfairly punishes classes like Monks, that have a much higher amount of smaller attacks, over something like a Rogue that only has that single hyper effective attack. This is not something I would EVER suggest in a game. It's just a bad house rule.
Fun thing is it’s an option, what do you think of the others?
I've considered this recently and came to the conclusion that even though classes that attack more often are more likely to crit fail, it's balanced by the fact that they are also more likely to crit.
So I feel a crit fail system is ultimately fair if:
A) You're also running a crit system
&
B) If the crit fail system's drawbacks don't heavily outweigh the benefits of the crit system.
Def not for everyone tho.
Well said! 😁
These all sound good and fine until you consider just how complex some of them would be to keep track of.
Reputation system? You have to assign a faction (Or multiple) to each and every NPC that the player comes across, come up with a system to track their reputation levels (Based on points? How much does each interaction give? Outside influences?), and then somehow keep track of these levels. PC backstories would factor into how much influence they'd start with too. So now not only is the DM juggling with the plot, conversations and however many other things going on at once they now have to also remember to assign points after every interaction and check their notes for reputation levels every time a player interacts with someone. Just feels like a lot of added complexity for what you get.
Then you have other stuff which just make the game less fair. Character builds that need to take more rests (Like lower level magic users with limited spell slots) would suffer from those random rest encounters, and they'd be negatively impacted for the following gameplay. Critical hits and misses would hit some players much more than others since the more attacks you have to make, the more chances you have of rolling those crits. And when you're playing a game that's already heavily based around RNG you definitely want to have rules in place that affect everyone equally - or rules that players can opt into on an individual basis, like you see with wild magic.
I mean, that's not to say none of your suggestions are good. There are still some good ones in there, but others are just... not. That's just my opinion though
Very true, I wouldn’t recommend to use to many or certain combinations. Out of all theses I only use two.
The problem with a critical fumble table is that a level 5 fighter who uses action surge to attack 4 times in 1 turn has a 18.5% chance of rolling a 1, while an npc villager that picks up a sword and attacks once has a 5% chance to roll a 1.
Basically, on a single attack, a random npc farmer has the exact same chance of hitting themself as a highly trained fighter. That makes no sense.
that's the fun, you don't need to use it and I only use to of theses in my games.
Crit Misses penalixe matials, who are already underpowered, b/c they roll to hit far more often than casters. And Crit Miss tables compound the penelty.
I agree that adding events/encounters during travel is an excelent idea. ADD TO THAT, you don't get the benefit of a Long Rest unless you are in a safe place, like an Inn, and thus thier spell slots and other resources need to last the entire journey. Only requireing nutrients is easily circumvented with a 1st level GoodBerry per day. But if you're spell slots are limited, then you get better choices from the players
That’s the fun part you get to pick and choose house rules. I only use 2 of these
I would only use critical miss fumbles for tier one adventurers and reduce the chance as they level--maybe by rolling a DEX save with a decreasing DC.
Dropping a sword even hitting the wrong target makes for so goofs 🤣
🥳🫂👍🏿
Thank you for sharing - I’m on a quest to collect every house rule on RUclips and beyond - so far I’ve got 2,252 videos - I’d love to any others you use to the playlist ❤
You can do it!
Whatever the players can do, the monsters can do. The rules apply to both. Strangely there is no poison in my games. And that's a rule imposed on me by my players.
No poisoning is a unique house rule. Witch of your players died from poisoning the first game?
@@BrushesandBlades None. None needed to. All 'Save or die' rules abolished. Role D20 or die? Traps, poisons, blah, blah - rubbish. Outlawed. Players must always have a fighting chance. And I agree. It's a game. Fun. Throw a level 7 character away because you rolled low? "But it teaches you the truth of reality!" Meh. I already know reality. It's a game, reality sux, lesson learnt. Now let's have fun!
I've used it to "push" players in a right direction. "follower- Oh, there's someone that can heal this in X camp/town."
Kinda hard to pay attention when you can see when your reading the script
Level 2 RUclipsr and I rolled low on charisma 😂
@@BrushesandBlades tuff💀 lies tho
Tomorrow’s video is inspired by your post, be sure to let me know what you think. 🤩
@@BrushesandBlades well I'm flattered, and I 100% will put my two cents in lol
😂🤣😂🤣