Check out the Homebrew Basics Video we did on NoNat1's Channel here: ruclips.net/video/fNLOb5X3GpI/видео.html 💜 Join Patreon: www.patreon.com/thedungeoncoach
we started to use an exhaustion status that occurs per knock down but it occurs after the fight. I believe a -2 per knock down is applied to a home brew injury roll save as well. Needless to say we do our best to prevent this from happening.
When it comes to death saves, I homebrew that you take 1 stack of exhaustion if you stand up from making death saves. Exhaustion is awesome and just not utilized enough. With this change I also allow you to heal 1 stack of exhaustion on a short rest since I'm using it more.
I did something similar, however instead of 3 fail saves to die, each failed death goes directly to your exhaustion. By that we double the amount of fails someone needs to die, however exhaustion is harder to heal off. Also, if/when someone raises up after being down you get a condition called injured. Injured lasts until a long rest and reduces all your ability Scores by 1+exhaustion level - that cannot go under 1. That contributes for interesting situations, in combat this raised guy is not going to fight as good as before, outside combat, the teammates might have to carry this guy around.
@@Alan-wp9yn I think he meant an extra attack, not an extra action. An attack as in a weapon attack or (I guess) spell attack. You do not use AoE spells as spell attacks, the enemies roll saving throws instead.
@@hampemakken570 5e also has a rule preventing the use of multiple levelled spells in 1 round. You could fireball and then cast a cantrip, but you couldn't cast Fireball twice even through an Action Surge or similar.
@@FlameUser64 This is false DND has rules against using a levelled spell as a **bonus action** and then casting a levelled spell as your **action** You are able to cast two levelled spells with action surge
@@luckytrap897 Yep, you're right, as I discovered after making that comment. This is a very dumb exploit, but 5e is full of dumb rules. For example: Hand crossbows are light weapons, but this doesn't matter because two-weapon fighting is only defined for melee weapons. Incidentally, darts are not light weapons, for some reason. (But even if they were, it wouldn't matter for the same reason hand crossbows don't function with two-weapon fighting.) Incidentally, this means you can throw daggers faster than you can throw darts, which is a bit of a mess when darts are the closest analogue the system has to shuriken.
I love the idea of the opposite of the “doomed” status being something angelic or holy, where instead of falling and dying, you instantly get up. Maybe an angelic ally, or a god of the clerics gives a boon to fill in one of the saving throwing for death saves instead.
There is a spell that allready do this: Death Ward. If you would get to zero HP, it brings you to 1 and you lose the effect. Implementing this mechanic in more ways outside of the spells would be the way to go.
That first one sounds dangerously like PF1e’s Full Attack action, which quickly becomes the most optimal thing for any martial character to do in almost every situation.
I love the idea of conditions because they make homebrew so much easier. Instead of inventing the wheel every time you want to have an ability/monster/spell/etc. do something other than damage, you can go to the list of conditions and pick the one (or more) that makes the most sense. Unfortunately, it's harder to have a lot of conditions in something like 5e because you have, as you say, fewer dials to tweak. Also, stacking conditions can get annoying fast if you don't have a computer to keep track for you.
One of the main reasons Pathfinder seems real good for taking things for D&D is because Pathfinder 1 is basically a Homebrew D&D 3.5, and then PF2 just reuses some things from PF 1 and builds apon that and makes it better. Example the Resistance X was a 3.5 thing that PF1 used and PF2 decided to keep, D&D 4E also used it, I honestly dont know why they got rid of it in 5E
It is really crunchy also I am not sure if the numbers add up or you use the highest - either way it is really hard to keep track of all the values wherein 5e you just half it. I personally often run huge DnD fights (with many different types of monsters) and keeping track of all those numbers sounds so tedious. I sometimes put it on individual monsters, but I don´t think it should be a mechanic.
Personally, I feel that the best take on a solid d20 system is the happy love-child of 5E+2E. Pathfinder even has the proficiency without level variant which allows a similar playstyle to 5E. But ironically enough, if you just put advantage/disadvantage to 2E, it loses alot of the "Danger" feeling. If there was a way to merge alot of these systems, we would have a system anyone could get into and has any level of complexity a player could want.
That's why I want to play both systems. I have a Bachelor's in game design and I'm going to trade school to get certified in IT. Not to mention I want to go to grad school to get a master's degree to become a video game dev.
That’s what I’m trying to do for my home brew. I come for a DND 2e CRPG background and 2e Pathfinder by way of randomly buying a starter box. But my players love 5e and prefer it. So I’m hoping to combine the best of both. With help from NoNat and Dungeon Coach of course
I can imagine how fiends would have a mechanic that gives them like a plus one or plus two to ALL die rolls for each opponent that has the "doomed" condition... that would be cool. And the "resistance XX" (where XX is 5 or 10 or whatever) is a mechanic from D&D 3.5ed. Love that shield rule!! Would make having metal shields and wood shield a big difference... AND make magic shields really big.
"nd the "resistance XX" (where XX is 5 or 10 or whatever) is a mechanic from D&D 3.5ed." Thanks, I was about to comment this exactly. Which makes it a thing that DND got right, and Pathfinder 1st traced on and kept for Pathfinder 2e. It's a shame that neither the Coach nor NoNat1 explained this much. It feels like they're overselling a bit.
I'd feel like using that shield rule, adding 'iron wood shields' so Druids can have an effective 'metal' shield but still wood, or maybe use bone. I'm going to try to write up some homebrewery stuff about shields in 5e based on old 3.5/PF1 stuff when there was +1/+2/+4 shields :3
@@moonglade420 Yeah... Ironwood from the days of 3.5e was always a rare material, which usually required a quest to accomplish to get access to it... but yes, and Ironwood shield would be as tough as a metal shield for sure, only lighter.
I have been working on my own D20 system on and off for the past 4 or 5 years, and love your videos for inspiration, and mechanics that might not have occurred to me otherwise. This video particularly was really helpful to compare and contrast Pathfinder and 5E to adapt both systems into something unique. It's the very best kind of brain food for my particular project.
I'm trying to Pathfinder 2e in a few weeks for the first time and immediately had come back to refresh myself on this video! These are some amazing ideas I need to try out.
Question about the "overwhelmed" condition: how would a creature get rid of this condition? Insight check? Charisma or Wisdom save? Would it be a condition that lasts only one round, or for the duration of an encounter? What are some things that might trigger the condition other than an Intimidation check?
Probably like most conditions, it last until the end of their next turn, or 1 minutes passes. Conditions don't have durations, the source of the condition details how long it lasts.
@eddie Blanton said is very well! But snapping out of it could be a wis save for sure I’d say being surrounded by 3+ enemies, taking 40+ damage in a single round, anything like that. Or even taking half health in damage? Or when you get below half health??
One thing to PLEASE keep in mind if bringing in the Pathfider 2E action system: GIVE SPELLCASTERS SINGLE-ACTION SPELLS. Pathfinder 2E has a very limited selection of them right now, though making Shield a one-action cantrip is nice. This results in spellcasters often not having a 3-action economy. Instead, they're sent back to the basic 'cast a spell and maybe move if you want, otherwise waste your movement' rule. Pathfinder 2E has started to do this, there are a few spells that are single action, especially shield as a cantrip that I expect will get heavily used (if perhaps still wasted often).
This is a very interesting crossover collaboration, I really like how you two worked off each other for ways to blend the good ideas from two different d20 rule sets. Feat idea: Shield Style Master - use your reaction to gain your proficiency bonus to AC while having a shield equipped. Like Defensive Duelist, but with a shield. Would make that one element of a shield. Maybe +1 strength, that defensive duelist ability, and maybe a shield bash as a bonus action ability.
I totally agree that deriving stat modifiers from base stats will (and should) go the way of the dodo. There are plenty of games out there (including all Powered by the Apocalypse games) that you just get the modifier and that's all you record as the stat, so when you gain a stat your modifier just goes up by 1. Clean and simple!
Items actually can break in d&d. No one uses it, though. The same way a door has hp so you can break it down, a sword or a shield have the same. A monster would just have to specifically target it.
The death saving fail example about going down loses one and coming back up loses another reminds me of Boromirs stand. The dude was literally on death's door but through sheer will power, adrenaline, and resolve he stayed standing as long as he did until he was hit with another arrow that took him out of the fight
One idea I have for the Death Saves is that everytime you drop you lose one and if you take a hit while down you also lose one, but each character gets a number of Death Saves equal to 3 plus their Con mod.
I'm taking the conditions... I'm always looking for ways to make my mosnters more interesting. Also, I totally add a level exhaustion when you drop to 0. It makes it more impactful and it makes the players have to take downtime to recover from really grueling encounters and it uses exhaustion which I love.
Shield HP: As per DMG section on objects: Wood ac is 15, iron ac is 19. I would count an object that is reinforced to be hit as one size larger resilient objects. Shields are small (except for tower shields, which are cover so medium) so a shield would count as medium for HP (tower shields would be large). Shield HP: 18(4d8) Tower shield HP: 27(5d10)
I love those shield rules. Gonna change it to: You must use a bonus action to engage your shield and gain the +2 to AC, if you choose to engage your shield you may use your Reaction to reduce the damage of an attack that hits by an amount equal to your Proficiency bonus. If you do not choose to engage your shield, you may shield bash for 1D6 damage as a bonus action. You can use the following options if you are proficient with shields.
I love that thought and the idea to add durability (it gives use to the blacksmithing and mending spell) but it really steps on the toes of the shield master feat. I have a character based on this feat and I would love to incorporate a rule like this to the game that wouldn't nerf the feat.
@@TheDungeonCoach You don't spend one action to raise your sword every turn, right? Why would it be different for the shield? I have been a reenactor (amateur but still...) and fought with sword and shield, and I find it very strange: when you assume a combat stance you raise both sword and shield and you keep your guard up for the whole fight. Now, for the sake of game balance I can see why there is this mechanic, but I would impose a -1 malus to AC instead if you haven't spent your action to focus on defense
Movement: You could say that you need to move like 10ft atleast in a turn. In a fight you do not usually stand in 5ft square the whole time. Resistance X I think was the old way that dnd used. Atleast 4e did used it. I have used it time to time but I called it "absorb". Death and Healing depends more how you attack with monsters. If someone starts coming up every time they will start attacking them to keep them fully down or take the healer out. OR they could use the 4th edition version where death saves are encounter based. They only reset after encounter.
Hello, DC, I did now watched the whole video, but one question that I have for you is: when to stop homebrewing, and move to another system? You always tell us that you do not use every homebrew in every campaign, so they must look much more "normal" than we perceive watching all of your videos and mixing them in our tables, but when a system is so much inspiring that the idea is to take many aspects of that system to integrate current one, isn't the time to move to this other system? I love your videos, and use many of these ideas in my games, but I thought that this could be an interesting topic to discuss. I know it is a bit out of the focus of your channel, but it would be cool to know your opinions about this topic.
Yeah, that would be a bit out there to make a video on, I have to be very strategic with the topics that I choose. But to answer your question if I were to move to another system I would have to homebrew even more than I do currently for DnD. Do you the five year has been the most comfortable of anything that I’ve seen, but I would be lying if I said I wasn’t working on it for TTRPG system of my own... but that’s years away lol
So, I think the honest answer is simply: You stay In the system whose base rules you get the most out of, or most agree with. So really,, It doesn't matter how much pathfinder 2e you bring into DnD 5e, or anything for that matter,, you wouldn't switch to PF if the base rules of DND5e are more in line with what you want.
For the combat rolls I have been workshopping the idea of "Super accurate hits" when payers get between 5 or 10 higher than the target AC. so if they do then they get max damage on their damage rolls.
Coach, you inspired me (not just with this video but many more), to steal the best elements from 5e and Pathfinder (The system I sort of accidentally committed to) to make a home brew that takes the best of both and some of your epic ideas. Thanks coach!
The shield mechanic is clumsy, just have armor add temporary hit points or have AC reduce as hit points reduce (assumes wear and tear on the character). But as ‘no nat 1s’ stated the more you add on the more complicated the game becomes.
Revisiting this because I also want to steal conditions and thought doomed was cool. In 5e, doomed 1-3 would just translate to 1-3 failed death saves when at 0 HP, but D4 is still instant death. Now let’s take this even further for something that should be a rarer occurrence but still a cool addition, the opposite of doomed. Blessed is kind of taken already so I’ll call it exalted. But now the question is do we say your exalted value (a) increases the number of failed saves needed to die e.g. exalted 1 means you can fail 4 saves, or (b) decreases the # successes needed? If A, it cancels with doomed. If B, I’d say E4 means you drop to 1hp instead of 0 and then lose the condition. Maybe not from damage that’s twice HP though, it won’t save you from a fall off a cliff or into lava haha. Tough decision…
After playing Pathfinder 2 I did introduce a wound system into my game. Whenever a character goes unconscious they acquire a wound and then if a character gets enough wounds they receive penalties do their stats or if they receive a lot will die. This prevents characters being ping-ponged up and down with one HP from unconsciousness over and over.
There was a 2ed DnD crit table in a combat accessory book. It had locations 1d10, leg, arm, torso, abdomen, head. There were 12 levels of each crit, 10 plus were instant death plus gory if 11 or 12. Lower crits added negs to hit or move. 1 table for blunt, edged piercing We rolled damage as normal. Then the crit effect was done by do8bling damage, adding a die or 2 based weapon, then quarter the total and add 1 for feat or 1 for sharpness 2 vorpal and was the crit, Damage divided by for epic creatures.
I loved the idea by Vigilant Games that each succeeded Death Save gives a level of Exhaustion, and perhaps in order to prevent the Healing Word spam, there could be some way to incur a greater cost for each time someone comes back - such as needing to restore a certain number of HP, otherwise they remain stable but unconscious, which increases with each Save. This may be too reliant on having healers around, but something to think about!
I've actually been working on a Homebrew system for damaged weapons and armor. I might need to work out some kinks, but I'm proud of what work I did do. Anyway, I actually like some of the Pathfinder mechanics. My favorite is in Character Building where you can get a feat every few levels, on top of you ability score increase. I think that's cool. I question why D&D doesn't have that kind of system.
One of my first homebrews was to deal with 'tubthumping'. When a character gets knocked out, they gain a level of Exhaustion. A long rest rest removes a level of Exhaustion on a successful CON Save (the DC set by the 'lifestyle' of the rest conditions, making it more desirable to pony up for the nice inn as opposed to pinch coppers and sleep on the ground). The first time a character racked up a couple levels of Exhaustion, my players realized they needed to keep people on their feet. One of the things I borrowed from Path2 was racial hit dice (I think I got it from the beta - I don't know if those survived to print). I found that 1st level characters were squishy. I give small races and elves d6, humans and half-elves d8, and half-orcs and dwarves d10. I've toyed with the ideas of the 3-Action economy and the 10+ crit rules. The latter would be easier to introduce, though I balk at doubling the damage for spells on crit fail saves. I might add half damage or just have the spell do max damage. The 3-Action economy would take a bit more work. One thing I would consider with spell casting is have a Standard Action spell require 2 actions, bonus action spells take 1 action, and possibly upcasting require an extra action. It would also work well with my Spellpunk Colonial America campaign with flintlock weapons - guns would require x actions to reload.
I like the tubthumping (good reference) dc for exhaustion removal idea. I was toying with an LR temp hit point idea depending on your accommodations, and this could work alongside that.
Some spell can be enhanced by using more actions to cast. For example, heal. One action gives a range of touch, two actions gives it range of 30 ft, 3 action cast is a nova AOE centered on caster.
Our group uses target +10 you get exceptional hit which you can do cool things based on weapon type. Thanks for making this video. I am going to steal some or all of this stuff!
This is interesting, Because he raised some questions I had when you explained your homebrew. But the interaction made it easier to follow, At least that's how it felt.
This is a fantastic video! I'll be implementing the Doomed condition in my game! When you fail the save, you'll gain the Doomed condition only, no Doom levels. Your Doom levels will increase by 1 at the start of your turn while Doomed and if you save at the end of your turn, you end the condition only, but retain the Doom levels. Doom levels, once the Doomed condition ends, will drop by 1 per short rest and ALL per long rest. It'll be considered a curse, so Remove Curse will both end the condition and remove all levels of Doom. Can't wait to try it, maybe I'll implement it in the hag encounters in Wild Beyond the Witchlight!
I will say, I wish more people would actually play pathfinder instead of just using it to patch up the holes in 5e. 5e is a great jack of all trades starter system, but there are so many other options to play. And if you’re going to go through that much effort to overall one by using the other, why not just... play the other game?
Lets not generalize. A matter of personal tastes. I dislike pathfinder, I’ll play it if my dm wants to but, I really dislike it. The illusion of choice is a major Issue for me with all the feats since only a few per class are worth investing in and the lack of wiggle room for unoptimized builds leads to me experimenting less. Then there is the fact it hates players. If you want to TPk your party in DnD, it’s possible and a DM is lazy if they want a system to do the heavy lifting. ^ my personal tastes entirely
@@ReplicatorFifth Totally fair that its a matter of personal taste. I honestly dont agree with your reasoning, and would love to discuss the merits of both systems in greater depth, but thats not entirely the point here, and doesnt change that different players like different things. My comment was more because I saw many videos, like this one, either explicitely copying pathfinder ideas for 5e, or suggesting house rules that people came up with that pathfinder 2e had done and with greater depth. and given 5e's market dominance over my preferred fantasy TTRPG system, I was a bit bothered people would sooner cannibalize it as a half measure than give it a chance, hence my comment. (also, side note, are you referencing pathfinder 1 or 2e in this context? just to be sure we're on the same page)
2E is quite complicated. By personal choice, I love that the Fighter there is given a little more love that they can rival 5E spellcasters when built right, but in terms of everything else, I’d prefer the simplicity of 5E.
Also, I do love the different combat feats in PF2E. It definitely makes martial classes hella fun when you know you can devastate legions before the epic narration by the DM.
It was really interesting, I'm gonna think and write right now ! I particularly loved the conditions, shields stuff and death stuff, thank you a whole lot for the ideas !
These homebrews are incredible. Mind is going with the possibilities. A devil which dooms players every turn, pulling their souls closer to damnation. I've been working on an epic sword but worried elemental resistance was too good, resist x is perfect. And much prefer how you've done frightened. Usually I just skipped frightening presence as thought it was over powered, now I've got a solution. So glad Reddit recommended your channel.
Speaking of Pathfinder's resistance system: While you're at it, steal either PF1e's vulnerability (+50% instead of +100%) or _D&D 4e's_ vulnerable. Vulnerable in 4e is really neat because it interacts really oddly with small damage values. In 4e, you don't just have vulnerability to fire, you might have vulnerable 5 fire, which means you take specifically _5_ extra damage when you take fire damage. It doesn't really matter whether (to use some 5e examples) that's from a Summer Eladrin's Fey Step hitting you for 3, or a Fireball hitting you for 28, it'd still increase the damage by 5. You could even do some interesting things by having monsters that specifically have tiny amounts of vulnerability to many elemental damage types, rewarding characters whose abilities contribute many different damage types to their attacks.
I love the option of being able to crit on skills, and I love how being better at a task naturally increases your crit chance. I like +10/+10 crits from PF2E and adding a die rather than doubling as well! The makes bards REALLY fun when stacking with inspiration and enhance ability. The things from PF2E I adore that would need to be brewed by hand would be the Focus Point system and the maneuver feats (finishers, flourishes, and simple actions are so rad), which are like successors to 4E's Encounter and At-Will powers. With Martial Classes in D&D5E, I let them combine multiple attacks into single At-Wills like D&D4E and PF2E has. Speeds up combat but also makes it so much cooler
I know this is two years old but I had a cool idea around the doomed condition. A “doomed” character, someone who has all three death saves bubbled in while alive could become either frightened or overwhelmed depending on the situation.
There's zero chance I'm tracking every shield's hit points, but I'd say once per adventure you can change a big damage roll against you to destroying your shield instead. (Magic shields break a strap and can be repaired back in town.)
You should really invest in a copy of the 3.5 and especially the 4th edition Player's Handbooks for D&D. I know it may sound weird to suggest looking at older material for ideas, but I've seen a few of your videos that suggest rules very similar to how things used to be done before 5e.
I'd blend the shield trickery with the "spend all movement to attack with disadvantage" rule from earlier in the video. I'd allow you to _spend all movement_ to raise your shield as well, freeing up your bonus action and reaction. A crucial aspect of the shield rules in PF2e - the aspect that makes them not worthless - is that for every attack you make in a turn, you take a penalty on subsequent attacks made that same turn. Your first attack has no penalty, your second has -4 (iirc), and your third and beyond have -8 (iirc). So raising your shield usually isn't sacrificing some massively valuable action once you're in the thick of things; it is usually sacrificing an attack at a -8 penalty. (Incidentally, PF2e monk uses this multiattack penalty in an interesting way as well: unlike in PF1e, monk is actually mobile. And the reason for this mobility is the Flurry of Blows action, which spends only 1 action to make two attacks, and can only be used once in a turn. Both the attacks still advance your multiattack penalty, which means your remaining two actions are often best spent on other things than just making more attacks at -8.)
The only problem I see with the extra attack based on your movement action is that it takes more time. What I would maybe do with this idea is allow people to choose an action augmenter when they forgo movement. So, you could get an attack bonus, damage bonus, AC bonus, specifically choose to get an extra Reaction, reduce or remove any flanking bonus someone may have against them, stand their ground (they can't be pushed or pulled or have a chance to resist it). For casters, you could allow them to supe up their spells where saves are made at a disadvantage, or healing effects are increased (you'd need to make it so this would be the healing amount out of combat, though), etc.
For my D&D5e games, I've also borrowed the idea of incurring a penalty each time you return from death door. Each time you are brought back, you suffer 1 level of Fatigue. You naturally recover 1 level of Fatigue per Long Rest, unless you receive a Restoration spell (Lesser heals 1 level, Greater heals all), so playing too much "whack-a-mole" will cause days of suffering and reduced adventuring ability.
As for stats it still matters because for ASI you may not put "level" up to the next modify bonus. For example, you have a 14 Str (+2) and take a feat that also gives you a +1 to the Str, so you will have a 15 Str (+2) but if you forego the feat and dump +2 to Str you will wind up with a 16 Str (+3). So just think of odd numbered stat numbers as half-modifier points rounded down.
I agree that having a shield have X HP would feel more realistic but feels too cumbersome for the spirit of 5e. What about something like the firearm misfire / repair mechanic? So on a critical hit landed against you make a shield durability roll... on a fail the shield is unusable untill you can repair it. Still allows for shield mechanics, but is easy to track and would only need a very occasional additional roll. Could just automatically break but having a shield durability could help distinguish one construction of shield feom another. (which something that always botheres me... dozen of weapons and damage types... 1 type of shield for the whole game!?)
A LOT of these rules make the game more cumbersome. That is the biggest difference between the two games, 5E is much more simple and easy to learn and PF2 is for those people who want more complex things that are likely to slow the game down a bit. I do REALLY like the PF2 3 action thing more than D&D's "main" action, move, and bonus action. I don't like that I can't use a "main" action to do bonus action stuff but I can use my "main" action for movement, yeah sure they created an "action" called dash but let's be honest it's just using your action for moving a second time.
I totally agree with things like this being too crunchy for fifth edition. But this definitely makes you want to tinker around with other mechanics that are a little more light for shields
I agree hp, durability, wear...good for realism but doesn't slide into 5e easily. But not having varying shield types has bugged me, and I like them to have a mechanical narrative effect. I also really want to include tower shields because tower shields are cool.
@@shadesofgray9 Yes tower shields! Big ancient and early medieval millitary fan, and the shapes and materials of the shields were at least as important as the weapons. Persian archers often had wicker shields, as they were mostly meant to protect against long range missle fire. Then thermopylae happened. Roman testudo formation! Roman throwing spears were designed with thin neck under the point. so it would get stuck in shield and the weight of the shaft would bend the neck... seriously weighing down and shield manuverablity. Kite shields for mounted knights! Mahogany shields were though but heavy Soft pine shields offered less protection but were light and could trap an enemies axe! Should these be in every campaign? heck no! but in a low fantasy, historical campaign? the could add a cool realism!
There is a guild book where you separate shields in +1,+2 and +3 based on the strength you need(0/13/15 can't do AoO), it also have rules to fix mended armor and the status decrease when they are damaged by a critical hit.
Mentioning no nat ones i your video title would raise appeal, since it implies a duo convo, which some people are more attracted to ;3 I think that's what people usually do with collabs Great video, shields got me thinking a bunch
My shield rule is; AC as usual, magic bonus included - The AC value is the shield's "HP". A shield can actually block critical hits. You can use your reaction to "cancel" a critical. You still take normal damage, but not the critical damage or effects (i.e. vorpal, ect) Once you use your shield to block a critical it reduces its "HP" by 1. So a magic shield +1 would have 3 shield HP. You block the critical hit, the shield is reduced by 1 to have 2 shield HP left and therefore can only give you an AC bonus of 2. The magical property is reduced first. (or you can have the physical reduced first and have the magic "holding it together". DM choice) Once the shield is reduced to zero, it is useless unless repaired. Magic shields require more arcane means to be repaired. And that's it. I have play tested it, it works pretty well, very simple. You can add hardness to it, or add that you can use your shield to give you breath weapon or some other resistance if used in this way, but it would reduce the shield in the same way. So with this alternate rule, you can 'block' a dragon breath weapon as a reaction to take half damage, if you save AND block you would take a quarter damage. If you have resistance already, block, and save, you take 1/8th damage. But the shield is still damaged by 1. It's like having "protection charges". This has made it where people in my game actually use a shield for more than just an AC boost. The Shield Mastery Feat or the Defender Martial ability can add some cool things to having a shield as well to help mitigate the shield damage. (i.e. Shield Master gains the alternate "breath weapon" rule.) As with anything, it is DM's choice. I also have something similar with helmets; simply put, helmets give you resistance to fall damage. That's pretty much it. They are zero AC but you could have a Magic Helmet +1 that gives you either an AC boost of +1 or maybe a CON save +1. Alternatively you can also have a helmet give you resistance (or immunity) to critical hits to the head specifically. Either way, once you have "used" a helmet to prevent or reduce damage it is no longer usable and must be repaired or replaced.
I do love the rules in Pathfinder 2e, but for the simplicity of D&D 5e these are good...I'd go with something a little more simple, and also look at D&D 4e for some similar rules from PF 2e. Could help
Sacrificial armor, shields, or weapons would be pretty cool. Basically instead of taking big damage such as a crit you can choose to sack your weapon, armor, or shield. This also helps make spells or skills that fix things be worthwhile. I do like having the shield be able to be used offensively, too. Nice for pushing, for example.
Raising sheild - When your sheild is raised, gain the benifits of the shield and you may gain damage reduction agaist slashing, bludgeoning and piecing damage, moving half onto the shield, if the shields hp drops to 0, it breaks, and must be repaired before being used again. You can raise your sheild by spending your move action, as you raise your sheild, bracing your self for impact, Or as a bonus action as you, mix its inherit defence with mobility.
For death saves I still use them but if you get brought back up from magic or a potion I implement that it puts extra strain on your body and you gain a point of exhaustion every time you get back up this way. However you can remove these by using two hit dice and you only gain 1/2 what you roll from those during a short rest. It helps make the amount you heal a downed opponent matter because you don't want to go down multiple times and it also make hit die more relevant
My favorite homebrew rule is basically already in 5e. I call it minor advantage or minor disadvantage. Its basically: add 1d4 to a roll or subtract 1d4 from a roll. This prevents 1d4 stacking and it makes text easier to read out. Its also the only reason why i dont ban peace domain at my table.
A couple of things. 1. Resistance X is not new, it was in D&D 3.5 edition. 2. The mechanic I think that reduces in combat usage of movement the most is Opportunity Attacks. I think it's over simplified for everything and their dog to have an opportunity attack. As once you get into combat, you can't leave or you will be punished for it, making movement sub optimal for most classes in most combat encounters. If you want movement to be used more, increasing it's value is not enough, you also have to reduce its cost and punishment. Perhaps limiting opportunity attacks to only martially trained classes/creatures or ones with high perception, like dragons. Or perhaps limit it to only the target(s) that the creature has attacked since their last turn. IE the creatures they are actively engaged with.
I’m implementing a wound system where an enemy crit can result in one of 6 potential “persistent’ wounds that has permanent effects (can be stored by physical therapy or near-god level restoration.
When I was dreaming of making my own TTRPG rules about two years ago, I also went for a 3 action per turn system :P (which I called 3 segments) Never thought a game like Pathfinder would go there. I like it of course :P - my tabletop friends only play 5e though, so.
I think requiring the bonus action to engage the shield is too severe for certain classes (Artificers unite) but I like using a reaction for it. This nerfs the armor+shield+shield spell combo, but makes more practical sense.
This is similar to one of the unearthed arcana weapon feats that never made it to a canon book. The sword master feat let you, while using a sword, use your reaction on your turn to take a defensive/parry stance giving you a small armor class bump, so it's not like the 5e creators didn't consider something like it (which is always a good metric for me when considering homebrew concepts.)
In regards to rule #3, I think I remember in 3.5 or PF1 had it that when you got silly giant number, there was an optional rule that added a flat amount equal to how much over you went -5 (I think it was mass armies or duels or something). So if the AC was 20, and you got 32 to hit, you dealt 7 extra damage, or something along those lines. It's been a while since I read PF1 source books, but I remember something like that and thought it was super cool. Also Nonat forgot Drained as a Ability Score condition, it penalizes Fort checks and tanks your max health
Rather than messing with getting extra attacks for standing still, maybe encourage players to move? Like a plus one bonus for ranged attacks against creatures who stand still and attack, but maybe plus one or two on dex saves for still having movement left... Pros and cons.
Notes: 1. Spending your movement to attack, or do something 2. Initiative isn’t just based on Dex. You can use your stealth if you’re ambushing. Use your wisdom to spot the enemy first. As long as you can explain it. 3. Plus 10, or minus 10 you get critical success or critical failure. Ex. Hitting someone with a 15 AC with a 16 vs. a 29. You get a bonus for having a crazy attack bonus. 4. 42 “conditions,” check them out later 5. Dying Condition vs. death saving throw. If you stabilize, then you have “dying 1” and each time you’re downed then you get another “dying” “Doomed” means that when you’re downed the DC to stabilize increases. 6. Clutz, enfeebled, stupefy, aka your stat is weakened temporarily 7. Resistance. Instead of taking 1/2 damage no matter what, you get (blank) resistance. So if you take 11 fire damage, and you have 10 fire resistance, then you take 1 point of damage. 8. You have a new system for shields. Use your bonus action to raise your shield, it has a hardness(reduces damage to you), it has a health pool.
Trading movement for any one action at disadvantage could be great. Combined with stuff that makes attack actions like grappling more useful, this could make martials way more fun to play, while the one levelled spell per turn can keep spellcasters in check
There’s RAW basis for the mechanical buffs or nerfs within 5E. I use the inverse of this rule sometimes to beef up creatures. It’s on page 113 in Tales From the Yawning Portal. “Reduced-Threat Monsters A reduced-threat monster uses a normal monsters statistics, but it has half the normal hit point maximum and takes a -2 penalty on attack rolls, ability checks, saving throws, and saving throw DCs. A reduced threat creature that is based on a creature bigger than Large is instead Large. Some specific reduced-threat creatures also make changes to the abilities they can use. A reduced-threat creature is worth half the normal XP earned for defeating it.” I also toy with the idea of replacing exhaustion with this mechanic.
My homebrew for shields is you can sacrifice it to negate a critical destroying the shield. A magical shield gets a save, 1d20+proficiency+magic bonus v DC 15.
Man, this was awesome. Ya'll gotta do another one! there is SO much we can gain from pathfinder! Excited to check out that doc and adapt some of this to my own games! As a side note, items in DnD can and do break! While i get what ur intnt was in the shield conversation with this, and I dont disagree, its important to remember that everything has an AC and everything has HP. Check out the DMG, page 246-247. The AC of steel is 19, stone 17, wood 15. Objects have a size category which determines their hit die size, and they might either have the resilient or fragile traits, increasing or decreasing their number of hit dice. So, if a PC whats to go full Edmund Pevensie and destroy the witches wand, that wand is a tiny wooden object. Probably neither fragile nor resilient, so it has 2d4 hp and an AC of 15. And maybe, as a homebrew note, boost its AC by the dex mod of the wielder. Iv'e actually developed a custom set of actions for my players to use when the want to destroy objects, such a the witches wand, the undead sentinel's shield, or the fulcrum of doom thats pulsating void magic into the sanctuary, or whatever. Sunder: When you take the attack action on your turn, you may attempt to destroy an object another creature is holding. The normal rules for attacking an object apply, but the object's AC is increased by the wielder’s Dexterity modifier. If you have multiple attacks per attack action, this is considered a single attack. Rules for attacking objects: Attacking an object with a weapon that does not have the Sundering (see homebrew weapon traits) property or is not otherwise a tool specifically designed to break the object you are attacking is very difficult and can cause damage to the weapon. When attacking without a Sundering weapon or other specifically designed implement, all attacks made against objects that do not have the fragile trait are made with disadvantage, and do half damage on a hit. If the attack roll is a 1 or misses the object’s AC by 5 or more, the weapon used (or attacker if the attack is an unarmed strike) takes damage equal to the normal damage for the attack. This does not affect natural weapons. Attacks against magical objects (other than Common items) are ineffective and do no damage unless made with another magical weapon. A magical object gains a bonus to its AC and an additional hit die equal to its rarity level; +1 for Uncommon, +2 for Rare, +3 for Very Rare, +4 for Legendary, and +5 for Artifacts (Common magic items gain no bonus). Additionally, they are immune to thunder, fire, lightning, cold, acid, psychic, and poison damage, as well as bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage that is not dealt by magical weapons, to which they are resistant instead. (I gave the sundering trait to battleaxes, warhammers, mauls, light hammers, warpicks, and a few others to be thematically appropriate. Iv'e done a lot with weapons, but we dont need to get into all of that here haha!)
This is easily the best video yet. My "overwhelmed" will be a -2, but "Terrified" will be proficiency bonus. Doomed is happening THIS WEEK with my necromancer boss fight!
Interesting to notice that others who are playing the 5e edition have homebrewed the shield usage in some way. My group has made this rule that if a character has a shield the player must inform the dm that they are wearing it otherwise the shield bonus doesn’t count
About the shield mechanic, I suggest you read about the covers in Warhammer 40k Only War For a quick briefing basically it blocks damage and if the damage surpasses it’s armor, the armor is reduced but I’ll leave the details about that up for you to read up on Only War has many complex mechanics but there are many things you could take from them I personally think it has less mechanics than D&D5e but yea most of them are really complicated, which to me makes it easier to use because you can ignore half of it and only use the tip of the iceberg and go on a tangent about it whenever I mention it lol
I prefer something similar to the death save homebrew presented here, but by applying 1 level of Exhaustion instead of a Death Save Fail (when coming back up from 0 hit points).
That's the start of a good idea! I think just giving them the exhaustion is bad because you don't decide really as a player when you stabilize. So maybe have them make increasingly difficult Constitution saves each time they come back from 0 and if they fail they get 1 level of exhaustion, that way you aren't forcing something on players without giving them ANY way to try and prevent it, plus if makes constitution even more important than it already is(I'm crazy though and occasionally make Con m dump stat, this rule definitely gives me more to think about when doing so!)
In the 5e campaign I've been running for over a year now we've changed movement to what I call a limited action. With your limited action you can: Movement A single weapon attack Cast a cantrip at 1st level Drink a potion Direct your mounts actions Casting cantrips as a limited action makes blade ward and true strike much more useful and less broken. And forgoing movement to make an attack makes movement in general more critical. If you can force your opponent to have to spend his limited action to move then you rob him of some of his offensive output. And to make things more interesting the disengage action allows 5' of movement away from the creature you are engaged with. Both the 5' of movement with a disengage and the limited action makes movement and positioning much more important and dynamic.
I totally agree on wasted/unnecessary movement, but my solution is inspired by your homebrew for opportunity attacks and held/tandem turns. My Rule: When an enemy goes from being adjacent to not without disengaging, anyone can use their movement to chase after them. They can't move more than their speed in one full round, barring magic, so they can't follow if they have already spent all of their movement on their turn or won't be able to move when their turn comes if they use it all up beforehand. Disengage: Denies opportunity attacks and makes the first 5 ft unfollowable so that the enemy can't close the distance until their turn. I also allow opportunity attacks to be a grab or a trip (grapple/shove) even thought RAW, Sage Advice explicitly doesn't allow them. I personally feel like it makes more sense than swinging a lot of the time, and find the reasoning against it unconvincing, airing on the side of dynamic and eventful within reason.
I've been homebrewing some breakable weapons and shields that give elevated buffs until they hit a breaking point then require a tool check on a short rest to restore. I think it's an awesome way to make it really good but not overpowered.
In our Pathfinder campaign, if you go below 0, then are healed, you are unconscious for 1 round equal to how far below 0 you went. Unless you are healed to full plus how far below 0 you were! One of the ting i love about the Palladium system is that armor has hp and will be destroyed.
When you got to the shield portion of the video I had my own version bubbling up in my head. For 5e an alternate ruleset could be more like the 'parry' ability that some monsters get. This will also be likened to the 'shield' spell. When wearing a shield you gain +1 to AC passively, and you can spend your reaction to gain +3 AC and - 3 damage until the end of the triggering creatures turn (or maybe until the start of their next turn). Then magical +1 and -1 etc respectively for magical shields. So martial classes would almost get the equivalent of the Shield spell bonus of AC and it means they need to be more tactical whether they focus on defence or offense, since you would lose the ability to make opportunity attacks if you focused on blocking.
What if you had resistance in percentages? Having three levels of resistance: level 1 gives 25% (1/4) reduction level 2 gives 50% reduction level 3 gives 75%. (3/4) reduction
Then you end up with more math than people trying to have a good time are going to be willing to do. That is why ThAC0 is gone as well, too much math! I'm pretty good at math and even I don't want to do that much to figure things out, ESPECIALLY in the middle of combat!
21:27, the example of a tiefling's level in fire resistance is a thing in PF2E, especially with character options that are grounded in dragon lore (Sorcerer bloodlines, archtypes, kobold features, etc.)
apparently Pathfinder heard of my Action Point system (FifthWorld) you get Action points from Celerity and Reason) each Phase, and you can spend on attack (costs 1) to a movement (1 per 10') etc. when your out of Action points in your Phase, (or within the Cycle) your done. Thus the player controls whe they want to spend those Action Points for each time.
Check out the Homebrew Basics Video we did on NoNat1's Channel here: ruclips.net/video/fNLOb5X3GpI/видео.html
💜 Join Patreon: www.patreon.com/thedungeoncoach
A solid HOUR of pure primo content between our channels? Sounds like a great time for everybody involved!!!
we started to use an exhaustion status that occurs per knock down but it occurs after the fight. I believe a -2 per knock down is applied to a home brew injury roll save as well. Needless to say we do our best to prevent this from happening.
you guys didn't talk about the crafting system in Pathfinder. I'm really fed up with how underwhelming crafting is in 5e
Let's gooooo!! This was a freaking blast to work on! Hope everyone enjoys watching it as much as we enjoyed making it!
Same to you man! Loved talking about homebrew with ya!
MORE GOBLIIIIINSSSS!!!!!
Bro i don't even play P2E and I'm subbing. Awesome work!
@@scythe0925 Thanks a ton, bud! Glad you enjoyed it!
@@TheDungeonCoach - You two have great energy together. I would LOVE to see more discussions between you.
Stamps below
0:49 unwasted movement
4:20 alt initiative
7:57 crits
10:52 conditions 1
14:00 dying 1
16:44 conditions 2
18:58 resistance
21:36 blocking
28:13 dying 2
Not all heroes wear capes.
@@KevinVideo or masks
@@obiwankenobi9439 hello there
Not all herod wear capes²
When it comes to death saves, I homebrew that you take 1 stack of exhaustion if you stand up from making death saves. Exhaustion is awesome and just not utilized enough. With this change I also allow you to heal 1 stack of exhaustion on a short rest since I'm using it more.
That’s a solid Homebrew for death, great for having a consequence AND using exhaustion more lol
Yes!! I do exactly this! Well done!
This is the homebrew I use too!!!
I did something similar, however instead of 3 fail saves to die, each failed death goes directly to your exhaustion. By that we double the amount of fails someone needs to die, however exhaustion is harder to heal off.
Also, if/when someone raises up after being down you get a condition called injured. Injured lasts until a long rest and reduces all your ability Scores by 1+exhaustion level - that cannot go under 1.
That contributes for interesting situations, in combat this raised guy is not going to fight as good as before, outside combat, the teammates might have to carry this guy around.
@@fredericodargel9919 That leads to death spiral quickly though. I am guessing you guys play extremely tactical for this to work.
I like the idea of foregoing movement for an extra attack at disadvantage, reminds me of the Full Round Attacks in 3.5e
The only issue would be AoE attacks for spellcasters. Double fireball is a great way to end a fight near instantly.
@@Alan-wp9yn I think he meant an extra attack, not an extra action. An attack as in a weapon attack or (I guess) spell attack. You do not use AoE spells as spell attacks, the enemies roll saving throws instead.
@@hampemakken570 5e also has a rule preventing the use of multiple levelled spells in 1 round. You could fireball and then cast a cantrip, but you couldn't cast Fireball twice even through an Action Surge or similar.
@@FlameUser64 This is false
DND has rules against using a levelled spell as a **bonus action** and then casting a levelled spell as your **action**
You are able to cast two levelled spells with action surge
@@luckytrap897 Yep, you're right, as I discovered after making that comment. This is a very dumb exploit, but 5e is full of dumb rules. For example:
Hand crossbows are light weapons, but this doesn't matter because two-weapon fighting is only defined for melee weapons. Incidentally, darts are not light weapons, for some reason. (But even if they were, it wouldn't matter for the same reason hand crossbows don't function with two-weapon fighting.) Incidentally, this means you can throw daggers faster than you can throw darts, which is a bit of a mess when darts are the closest analogue the system has to shuriken.
I love the idea of the opposite of the “doomed” status being something angelic or holy, where instead of falling and dying, you instantly get up. Maybe an angelic ally, or a god of the clerics gives a boon to fill in one of the saving throwing for death saves instead.
There is a spell that allready do this: Death Ward. If you would get to zero HP, it brings you to 1 and you lose the effect. Implementing this mechanic in more ways outside of the spells would be the way to go.
It's been amazing watching this chan grow so fast, I remember just a year ago barley having 15-20 ppl in the chats and now we have full rooms.
Heck yea man! Your one of the OGs!! 💜 thanks for being here for the ride!
That first one sounds dangerously like PF1e’s Full Attack action, which quickly becomes the most optimal thing for any martial character to do in almost every situation.
I loved to hear the natural conversation that took place in this video. I would really enjoy seeing more content like this.
I love the idea of conditions because they make homebrew so much easier. Instead of inventing the wheel every time you want to have an ability/monster/spell/etc. do something other than damage, you can go to the list of conditions and pick the one (or more) that makes the most sense. Unfortunately, it's harder to have a lot of conditions in something like 5e because you have, as you say, fewer dials to tweak. Also, stacking conditions can get annoying fast if you don't have a computer to keep track for you.
Well said about the fewer dials! I always love your comments!
One of the main reasons Pathfinder seems real good for taking things for D&D is because Pathfinder 1 is basically a Homebrew D&D 3.5, and then PF2 just reuses some things from PF 1 and builds apon that and makes it better. Example the Resistance X was a 3.5 thing that PF1 used and PF2 decided to keep, D&D 4E also used it, I honestly dont know why they got rid of it in 5E
That is a great point! PF2 is a “fixed” version of dnd 3.5 lol! Nice!
Simplicity. A lot of rules of DnD 5e focused on one thing: Reduce the calculations, streamline the math and simplify how things work.
You know why 5e got rid of it. To make the game appeal to a wider crowd and make more money.
It is really crunchy also I am not sure if the numbers add up or you use the highest - either way it is really hard to keep track of all the values wherein 5e you just half it. I personally often run huge DnD fights (with many different types of monsters) and keeping track of all those numbers sounds so tedious. I sometimes put it on individual monsters, but I don´t think it should be a mechanic.
Personally, I feel that the best take on a solid d20 system is the happy love-child of 5E+2E. Pathfinder even has the proficiency without level variant which allows a similar playstyle to 5E. But ironically enough, if you just put advantage/disadvantage to 2E, it loses alot of the "Danger" feeling. If there was a way to merge alot of these systems, we would have a system anyone could get into and has any level of complexity a player could want.
Gotta find that right balance for you! I totally agree!
That's why I want to play both systems. I have a Bachelor's in game design and I'm going to trade school to get certified in IT.
Not to mention I want to go to grad school to get a master's degree to become a video game dev.
That’s what I’m trying to do for my home brew. I come for a DND 2e CRPG background and 2e Pathfinder by way of randomly buying a starter box. But my players love 5e and prefer it. So I’m hoping to combine the best of both. With help from NoNat and Dungeon Coach of course
I can imagine how fiends would have a mechanic that gives them like a plus one or plus two to ALL die rolls for each opponent that has the "doomed" condition... that would be cool. And the "resistance XX" (where XX is 5 or 10 or whatever) is a mechanic from D&D 3.5ed. Love that shield rule!! Would make having metal shields and wood shield a big difference... AND make magic shields really big.
Oooooo I love that for doomed! Awesome to see people run with stuff!
"nd the "resistance XX" (where XX is 5 or 10 or whatever) is a mechanic from D&D 3.5ed."
Thanks, I was about to comment this exactly. Which makes it a thing that DND got right, and Pathfinder 1st traced on and kept for Pathfinder 2e. It's a shame that neither the Coach nor NoNat1 explained this much. It feels like they're overselling a bit.
I'd feel like using that shield rule, adding 'iron wood shields' so Druids can have an effective 'metal' shield but still wood, or maybe use bone. I'm going to try to write up some homebrewery stuff about shields in 5e based on old 3.5/PF1 stuff when there was +1/+2/+4 shields :3
@@moonglade420 Yeah... Ironwood from the days of 3.5e was always a rare material, which usually required a quest to accomplish to get access to it... but yes, and Ironwood shield would be as tough as a metal shield for sure, only lighter.
I have been working on my own D20 system on and off for the past 4 or 5 years, and love your videos for inspiration, and mechanics that might not have occurred to me otherwise. This video particularly was really helpful to compare and contrast Pathfinder and 5E to adapt both systems into something unique. It's the very best kind of brain food for my particular project.
I'm trying to Pathfinder 2e in a few weeks for the first time and immediately had come back to refresh myself on this video! These are some amazing ideas I need to try out.
Question about the "overwhelmed" condition: how would a creature get rid of this condition? Insight check? Charisma or Wisdom save? Would it be a condition that lasts only one round, or for the duration of an encounter? What are some things that might trigger the condition other than an Intimidation check?
Probably like most conditions, it last until the end of their next turn, or 1 minutes passes. Conditions don't have durations, the source of the condition details how long it lasts.
@eddie Blanton said is very well!
But snapping out of it could be a wis save for sure
I’d say being surrounded by 3+ enemies, taking 40+ damage in a single round, anything like that. Or even taking half health in damage? Or when you get below half health??
@@TheDungeonCoach So basically the old OD&D "Morale check."
One thing to PLEASE keep in mind if bringing in the Pathfider 2E action system: GIVE SPELLCASTERS SINGLE-ACTION SPELLS. Pathfinder 2E has a very limited selection of them right now, though making Shield a one-action cantrip is nice. This results in spellcasters often not having a 3-action economy. Instead, they're sent back to the basic 'cast a spell and maybe move if you want, otherwise waste your movement' rule. Pathfinder 2E has started to do this, there are a few spells that are single action, especially shield as a cantrip that I expect will get heavily used (if perhaps still wasted often).
This is a very interesting crossover collaboration, I really like how you two worked off each other for ways to blend the good ideas from two different d20 rule sets. Feat idea: Shield Style Master - use your reaction to gain your proficiency bonus to AC while having a shield equipped. Like Defensive Duelist, but with a shield. Would make that one element of a shield. Maybe +1 strength, that defensive duelist ability, and maybe a shield bash as a bonus action ability.
PS: using that "sucking death saves away" ability for my campaign's BBEG, THANKS!
I totally agree that deriving stat modifiers from base stats will (and should) go the way of the dodo. There are plenty of games out there (including all Powered by the Apocalypse games) that you just get the modifier and that's all you record as the stat, so when you gain a stat your modifier just goes up by 1. Clean and simple!
Items actually can break in d&d. No one uses it, though. The same way a door has hp so you can break it down, a sword or a shield have the same. A monster would just have to specifically target it.
Object HP, very true! Yea I’d be a jerk if I kept breaking my players stuff tho lol. But 100% know what you mean
@@TheDungeonCoach But those rust monsters!
The death saving fail example about going down loses one and coming back up loses another reminds me of Boromirs stand. The dude was literally on death's door but through sheer will power, adrenaline, and resolve he stayed standing as long as he did until he was hit with another arrow that took him out of the fight
One idea I have for the Death Saves is that everytime you drop you lose one and if you take a hit while down you also lose one, but each character gets a number of Death Saves equal to 3 plus their Con mod.
I'm taking the conditions... I'm always looking for ways to make my mosnters more interesting.
Also, I totally add a level exhaustion when you drop to 0. It makes it more impactful and it makes the players have to take downtime to recover from really grueling encounters and it uses exhaustion which I love.
i like the skill and skill feat system in pathfinder and character customization that it has right from 1st level to max level.
I am 100% implementing that in my Homebrew versions of all the classes!! I agree
I also have an entire point by feet system with 200 sheets on my T spring for that reason too!
Shield HP:
As per DMG section on objects:
Wood ac is 15, iron ac is 19.
I would count an object that is reinforced to be hit as one size larger resilient objects. Shields are small (except for tower shields, which are cover so medium) so a shield would count as medium for HP (tower shields would be large).
Shield HP: 18(4d8)
Tower shield HP: 27(5d10)
I love those shield rules. Gonna change it to: You must use a bonus action to engage your shield and gain the +2 to AC, if you choose to engage your shield you may use your Reaction to reduce the damage of an attack that hits by an amount equal to your Proficiency bonus. If you do not choose to engage your shield, you may shield bash for 1D6 damage as a bonus action. You can use the following options if you are proficient with shields.
Ooooo I like adding in the shield bash to it! Well done!
I love that thought and the idea to add durability (it gives use to the blacksmithing and mending spell) but it really steps on the toes of the shield master feat. I have a character based on this feat and I would love to incorporate a rule like this to the game that wouldn't nerf the feat.
@@TheDungeonCoach You don't spend one action to raise your sword every turn, right? Why would it be different for the shield? I have been a reenactor (amateur but still...) and fought with sword and shield, and I find it very strange: when you assume a combat stance you raise both sword and shield and you keep your guard up for the whole fight. Now, for the sake of game balance I can see why there is this mechanic, but I would impose a -1 malus to AC instead if you haven't spent your action to focus on defense
Movement: You could say that you need to move like 10ft atleast in a turn. In a fight you do not usually stand in 5ft square the whole time.
Resistance X I think was the old way that dnd used. Atleast 4e did used it. I have used it time to time but I called it "absorb".
Death and Healing depends more how you attack with monsters. If someone starts coming up every time they will start attacking them to keep them fully down or take the healer out. OR they could use the 4th edition version where death saves are encounter based. They only reset after encounter.
I do the same thing with death saves, they reset every long rest for me usually, and yea I love all your other points too!
Stumbled on this collaboration and loved it, great job to the both of you.
Hello, DC, I did now watched the whole video, but one question that I have for you is: when to stop homebrewing, and move to another system? You always tell us that you do not use every homebrew in every campaign, so they must look much more "normal" than we perceive watching all of your videos and mixing them in our tables, but when a system is so much inspiring that the idea is to take many aspects of that system to integrate current one, isn't the time to move to this other system?
I love your videos, and use many of these ideas in my games, but I thought that this could be an interesting topic to discuss. I know it is a bit out of the focus of your channel, but it would be cool to know your opinions about this topic.
Yeah, that would be a bit out there to make a video on, I have to be very strategic with the topics that I choose.
But to answer your question if I were to move to another system I would have to homebrew even more than I do currently for DnD. Do you the five year has been the most comfortable of anything that I’ve seen, but I would be lying if I said I wasn’t working on it for TTRPG system of my own... but that’s years away lol
@@TheDungeonCoach how much effort would it really take to make your tips and tricks be pathfinder compatible?
So, I think the honest answer is simply: You stay In the system whose base rules you get the most out of, or most agree with.
So really,, It doesn't matter how much pathfinder 2e you bring into DnD 5e, or anything for that matter,, you wouldn't switch to PF if the base rules of DND5e are more in line with what you want.
For the combat rolls I have been workshopping the idea of "Super accurate hits" when payers get between 5 or 10 higher than the target AC. so if they do then they get max damage on their damage rolls.
That's a good rule, how has it been going?
For death saves I personally prefer them to literally just carry over: Getting healed simply does not remove your fails.
Coach, you inspired me (not just with this video but many more), to steal the best elements from 5e and Pathfinder (The system I sort of accidentally committed to) to make a home brew that takes the best of both and some of your epic ideas. Thanks coach!
5:36 :skull: alright, on today's episode of reading the rules
*Temporal Awareness:* you can add your intelligence modifier to your initiative rolls
The shield mechanic is clumsy, just have armor add temporary hit points or have AC reduce as hit points reduce (assumes wear and tear on the character). But as ‘no nat 1s’ stated the more you add on the more complicated the game becomes.
Your energy is infectious to others that you bring on. Keep ‘em coming.
You should check out Level Up’s Advanced 5e. It’s looking to have the simplicity of the 5e system, with a bit more options and customisation
I am actually doing my own version and yes they are on a similar page as me!
@@TheDungeonCoach sounds great, would love to see it!
Revisiting this because I also want to steal conditions and thought doomed was cool. In 5e, doomed 1-3 would just translate to 1-3 failed death saves when at 0 HP, but D4 is still instant death.
Now let’s take this even further for something that should be a rarer occurrence but still a cool addition, the opposite of doomed. Blessed is kind of taken already so I’ll call it exalted. But now the question is do we say your exalted value (a) increases the number of failed saves needed to die e.g. exalted 1 means you can fail 4 saves, or (b) decreases the # successes needed? If A, it cancels with doomed. If B, I’d say E4 means you drop to 1hp instead of 0 and then lose the condition. Maybe not from damage that’s twice HP though, it won’t save you from a fall off a cliff or into lava haha.
Tough decision…
At my table whenever you get knocked unconscious and get healed up again you get one level of exhaustion
After playing Pathfinder 2 I did introduce a wound system into my game. Whenever a character goes unconscious they acquire a wound and then if a character gets enough wounds they receive penalties do their stats or if they receive a lot will die. This prevents characters being ping-ponged up and down with one HP from unconsciousness over and over.
There is a few things I liked about pathfinder. Three action economy in combat is one of them :) good video
There was a 2ed DnD crit table in a combat accessory book.
It had locations 1d10, leg, arm, torso, abdomen, head.
There were 12 levels of each crit, 10 plus were instant death plus gory if 11 or 12. Lower crits added negs to hit or move.
1 table for blunt, edged piercing
We rolled damage as normal.
Then the crit effect was done by do8bling damage, adding a die or 2 based weapon, then quarter the total and add 1 for feat or 1 for sharpness 2 vorpal and was the crit,
Damage divided by for epic creatures.
I loved the idea by Vigilant Games that each succeeded Death Save gives a level of Exhaustion, and perhaps in order to prevent the Healing Word spam, there could be some way to incur a greater cost for each time someone comes back - such as needing to restore a certain number of HP, otherwise they remain stable but unconscious, which increases with each Save. This may be too reliant on having healers around, but something to think about!
There’s some great stuff in here! I definitely was inspired by the different action economy!
I've actually been working on a Homebrew system for damaged weapons and armor. I might need to work out some kinks, but I'm proud of what work I did do.
Anyway, I actually like some of the Pathfinder mechanics. My favorite is in Character Building where you can get a feat every few levels, on top of you ability score increase. I think that's cool. I question why D&D doesn't have that kind of system.
One of my first homebrews was to deal with 'tubthumping'. When a character gets knocked out, they gain a level of Exhaustion. A long rest rest removes a level of Exhaustion on a successful CON Save (the DC set by the 'lifestyle' of the rest conditions, making it more desirable to pony up for the nice inn as opposed to pinch coppers and sleep on the ground). The first time a character racked up a couple levels of Exhaustion, my players realized they needed to keep people on their feet.
One of the things I borrowed from Path2 was racial hit dice (I think I got it from the beta - I don't know if those survived to print). I found that 1st level characters were squishy. I give small races and elves d6, humans and half-elves d8, and half-orcs and dwarves d10.
I've toyed with the ideas of the 3-Action economy and the 10+ crit rules. The latter would be easier to introduce, though I balk at doubling the damage for spells on crit fail saves. I might add half damage or just have the spell do max damage. The 3-Action economy would take a bit more work. One thing I would consider with spell casting is have a Standard Action spell require 2 actions, bonus action spells take 1 action, and possibly upcasting require an extra action. It would also work well with my Spellpunk Colonial America campaign with flintlock weapons - guns would require x actions to reload.
I like the tubthumping (good reference) dc for exhaustion removal idea. I was toying with an LR temp hit point idea depending on your accommodations, and this could work alongside that.
Racial things!(good dreamy thoughts) How I will miss thee!
The 3 action system is 100% worth it. One 3 action spell or 2 action spell and a move or ready
Yea it sounds like a pretty awesome system!
Some spell can be enhanced by using more actions to cast. For example, heal. One action gives a range of touch, two actions gives it range of 30 ft, 3 action cast is a nova AOE centered on caster.
Our group uses target +10 you get exceptional hit which you can do cool things based on weapon type.
Thanks for making this video. I am going to steal some or all of this stuff!
This is interesting,
Because he raised some questions I had when you explained your homebrew.
But the interaction made it easier to follow,
At least that's how it felt.
This is a fantastic video! I'll be implementing the Doomed condition in my game! When you fail the save, you'll gain the Doomed condition only, no Doom levels.
Your Doom levels will increase by 1 at the start of your turn while Doomed and if you save at the end of your turn, you end the condition only, but retain the Doom levels.
Doom levels, once the Doomed condition ends, will drop by 1 per short rest and ALL per long rest.
It'll be considered a curse, so Remove Curse will both end the condition and remove all levels of Doom.
Can't wait to try it, maybe I'll implement it in the hag encounters in Wild Beyond the Witchlight!
I will say, I wish more people would actually play pathfinder instead of just using it to patch up the holes in 5e. 5e is a great jack of all trades starter system, but there are so many other options to play.
And if you’re going to go through that much effort to overall one by using the other, why not just... play the other game?
Lets not generalize. A matter of personal tastes. I dislike pathfinder, I’ll play it if my dm wants to but, I really dislike it.
The illusion of choice is a major
Issue for me with all the feats since only a few per class are worth investing in and the lack of wiggle room for unoptimized builds leads to me experimenting less. Then there is the fact it hates players. If you want to TPk your party in DnD, it’s possible and a DM is lazy if they want a system to do the heavy lifting.
^ my personal tastes entirely
@@ReplicatorFifth
Totally fair that its a matter of personal taste.
I honestly dont agree with your reasoning, and would love to discuss the merits of both systems in greater depth, but thats not entirely the point here, and doesnt change that different players like different things.
My comment was more because I saw many videos, like this one, either explicitely copying pathfinder ideas for 5e, or suggesting house rules that people came up with that pathfinder 2e had done and with greater depth.
and given 5e's market dominance over my preferred fantasy TTRPG system, I was a bit bothered people would sooner cannibalize it as a half measure than give it a chance, hence my comment.
(also, side note, are you referencing pathfinder 1 or 2e in this context? just to be sure we're on the same page)
2E is quite complicated. By personal choice, I love that the Fighter there is given a little more love that they can rival 5E spellcasters when built right, but in terms of everything else, I’d prefer the simplicity of 5E.
Also, I do love the different combat feats in PF2E. It definitely makes martial classes hella fun when you know you can devastate legions before the epic narration by the DM.
@@ReplicatorFifth "the illusion of choice" feel is more often than not a matter of looking at things from the wrong perspective
It was really interesting, I'm gonna think and write right now !
I particularly loved the conditions, shields stuff and death stuff, thank you a whole lot for the ideas !
These homebrews are incredible. Mind is going with the possibilities. A devil which dooms players every turn, pulling their souls closer to damnation. I've been working on an epic sword but worried elemental resistance was too good, resist x is perfect. And much prefer how you've done frightened. Usually I just skipped frightening presence as thought it was over powered, now I've got a solution.
So glad Reddit recommended your channel.
Speaking of Pathfinder's resistance system: While you're at it, steal either PF1e's vulnerability (+50% instead of +100%) or _D&D 4e's_ vulnerable. Vulnerable in 4e is really neat because it interacts really oddly with small damage values. In 4e, you don't just have vulnerability to fire, you might have vulnerable 5 fire, which means you take specifically _5_ extra damage when you take fire damage. It doesn't really matter whether (to use some 5e examples) that's from a Summer Eladrin's Fey Step hitting you for 3, or a Fireball hitting you for 28, it'd still increase the damage by 5. You could even do some interesting things by having monsters that specifically have tiny amounts of vulnerability to many elemental damage types, rewarding characters whose abilities contribute many different damage types to their attacks.
I love the option of being able to crit on skills, and I love how being better at a task naturally increases your crit chance.
I like +10/+10 crits from PF2E and adding a die rather than doubling as well! The makes bards REALLY fun when stacking with inspiration and enhance ability.
The things from PF2E I adore that would need to be brewed by hand would be the Focus Point system and the maneuver feats (finishers, flourishes, and simple actions are so rad), which are like successors to 4E's Encounter and At-Will powers.
With Martial Classes in D&D5E, I let them combine multiple attacks into single At-Wills like D&D4E and PF2E has. Speeds up combat but also makes it so much cooler
I know this is two years old but I had a cool idea around the doomed condition. A “doomed” character, someone who has all three death saves bubbled in while alive could become either frightened or overwhelmed depending on the situation.
This is fantastic. I love the audacity of Pathfinder for the combat. Great video.
PS: Coach, you need a PoP for your mic.
I have one but thought it was distracting, but I hear what your talking about! I’ll put it back on!
There's zero chance I'm tracking every shield's hit points, but I'd say once per adventure you can change a big damage roll against you to destroying your shield instead. (Magic shields break a strap and can be repaired back in town.)
You should really invest in a copy of the 3.5 and especially the 4th edition Player's Handbooks for D&D. I know it may sound weird to suggest looking at older material for ideas, but I've seen a few of your videos that suggest rules very similar to how things used to be done before 5e.
Agreed. I've noticed a lot from this creator is basically reworking 3.5 into 5 but not calling back to the source material of 3.X
I'd blend the shield trickery with the "spend all movement to attack with disadvantage" rule from earlier in the video. I'd allow you to _spend all movement_ to raise your shield as well, freeing up your bonus action and reaction.
A crucial aspect of the shield rules in PF2e - the aspect that makes them not worthless - is that for every attack you make in a turn, you take a penalty on subsequent attacks made that same turn. Your first attack has no penalty, your second has -4 (iirc), and your third and beyond have -8 (iirc). So raising your shield usually isn't sacrificing some massively valuable action once you're in the thick of things; it is usually sacrificing an attack at a -8 penalty.
(Incidentally, PF2e monk uses this multiattack penalty in an interesting way as well: unlike in PF1e, monk is actually mobile. And the reason for this mobility is the Flurry of Blows action, which spends only 1 action to make two attacks, and can only be used once in a turn. Both the attacks still advance your multiattack penalty, which means your remaining two actions are often best spent on other things than just making more attacks at -8.)
The only problem I see with the extra attack based on your movement action is that it takes more time. What I would maybe do with this idea is allow people to choose an action augmenter when they forgo movement. So, you could get an attack bonus, damage bonus, AC bonus, specifically choose to get an extra Reaction, reduce or remove any flanking bonus someone may have against them, stand their ground (they can't be pushed or pulled or have a chance to resist it). For casters, you could allow them to supe up their spells where saves are made at a disadvantage, or healing effects are increased (you'd need to make it so this would be the healing amount out of combat, though), etc.
For my D&D5e games, I've also borrowed the idea of incurring a penalty each time you return from death door. Each time you are brought back, you suffer 1 level of Fatigue. You naturally recover 1 level of Fatigue per Long Rest, unless you receive a Restoration spell (Lesser heals 1 level, Greater heals all), so playing too much "whack-a-mole" will cause days of suffering and reduced adventuring ability.
I feel like blocking should take the place of an attack and two weapon fighting would let you use it as a bonus action.
As for stats it still matters because for ASI you may not put "level" up to the next modify bonus. For example, you have a 14 Str (+2) and take a feat that also gives you a +1 to the Str, so you will have a 15 Str (+2) but if you forego the feat and dump +2 to Str you will wind up with a 16 Str (+3). So just think of odd numbered stat numbers as half-modifier points rounded down.
I agree that having a shield have X HP would feel more realistic but feels too cumbersome for the spirit of 5e.
What about something like the firearm misfire / repair mechanic?
So on a critical hit landed against you make a shield durability roll... on a fail the shield is unusable untill you can repair it.
Still allows for shield mechanics, but is easy to track and would only need a very occasional additional roll.
Could just automatically break but having a shield durability could help distinguish one construction of shield feom another. (which something that always botheres me... dozen of weapons and damage types... 1 type of shield for the whole game!?)
A LOT of these rules make the game more cumbersome. That is the biggest difference between the two games, 5E is much more simple and easy to learn and PF2 is for those people who want more complex things that are likely to slow the game down a bit. I do REALLY like the PF2 3 action thing more than D&D's "main" action, move, and bonus action. I don't like that I can't use a "main" action to do bonus action stuff but I can use my "main" action for movement, yeah sure they created an "action" called dash but let's be honest it's just using your action for moving a second time.
I totally agree with things like this being too crunchy for fifth edition. But this definitely makes you want to tinker around with other mechanics that are a little more light for shields
I agree hp, durability, wear...good for realism but doesn't slide into 5e easily. But not having varying shield types has bugged me, and I like them to have a mechanical narrative effect. I also really want to include tower shields because tower shields are cool.
@@shadesofgray9 Yes tower shields! Big ancient and early medieval millitary fan, and the shapes and materials of the shields were at least as important as the weapons. Persian archers often had wicker shields, as they were mostly meant to protect against long range missle fire. Then thermopylae happened.
Roman testudo formation!
Roman throwing spears were designed with thin neck under the point. so it would get stuck in shield and the weight of the shaft would bend the neck... seriously weighing down and shield manuverablity.
Kite shields for mounted knights!
Mahogany shields were though but heavy
Soft pine shields offered less protection but were light and could trap an enemies axe!
Should these be in every campaign? heck no! but in a low fantasy, historical campaign? the could add a cool realism!
There is a guild book where you separate shields in +1,+2 and +3 based on the strength you need(0/13/15 can't do AoO), it also have rules to fix mended armor and the status decrease when they are damaged by a critical hit.
Mentioning no nat ones i your video title would raise appeal, since it implies a duo convo, which some people are more attracted to ;3
I think that's what people usually do with collabs
Great video, shields got me thinking a bunch
My shield rule is;
AC as usual, magic bonus included - The AC value is the shield's "HP".
A shield can actually block critical hits. You can use your reaction to "cancel" a critical. You still take normal damage, but not the critical damage or effects (i.e. vorpal, ect)
Once you use your shield to block a critical it reduces its "HP" by 1. So a magic shield +1 would have 3 shield HP. You block the critical hit, the shield is reduced by 1 to have 2 shield HP left and therefore can only give you an AC bonus of 2. The magical property is reduced first. (or you can have the physical reduced first and have the magic "holding it together". DM choice)
Once the shield is reduced to zero, it is useless unless repaired. Magic shields require more arcane means to be repaired.
And that's it. I have play tested it, it works pretty well, very simple. You can add hardness to it, or add that you can use your shield to give you breath weapon or some other resistance if used in this way, but it would reduce the shield in the same way. So with this alternate rule, you can 'block' a dragon breath weapon as a reaction to take half damage, if you save AND block you would take a quarter damage. If you have resistance already, block, and save, you take 1/8th damage. But the shield is still damaged by 1. It's like having "protection charges".
This has made it where people in my game actually use a shield for more than just an AC boost. The Shield Mastery Feat or the Defender Martial ability can add some cool things to having a shield as well to help mitigate the shield damage. (i.e. Shield Master gains the alternate "breath weapon" rule.) As with anything, it is DM's choice.
I also have something similar with helmets; simply put, helmets give you resistance to fall damage. That's pretty much it. They are zero AC but you could have a Magic Helmet +1 that gives you either an AC boost of +1 or maybe a CON save +1. Alternatively you can also have a helmet give you resistance (or immunity) to critical hits to the head specifically. Either way, once you have "used" a helmet to prevent or reduce damage it is no longer usable and must be repaired or replaced.
I do love the rules in Pathfinder 2e, but for the simplicity of D&D 5e these are good...I'd go with something a little more simple, and also look at D&D 4e for some similar rules from PF 2e. Could help
Sacrificial armor, shields, or weapons would be pretty cool. Basically instead of taking big damage such as a crit you can choose to sack your weapon, armor, or shield. This also helps make spells or skills that fix things be worthwhile.
I do like having the shield be able to be used offensively, too. Nice for pushing, for example.
Raising sheild - When your sheild is raised, gain the benifits of the shield and you may gain damage reduction agaist slashing, bludgeoning and piecing damage, moving half onto the shield, if the shields hp drops to 0, it breaks, and must be repaired before being used again. You can raise your sheild by spending your move action, as you raise your sheild, bracing your self for impact, Or as a bonus action as you, mix its inherit defence with mobility.
For death saves I still use them but if you get brought back up from magic or a potion I implement that it puts extra strain on your body and you gain a point of exhaustion every time you get back up this way. However you can remove these by using two hit dice and you only gain 1/2 what you roll from those during a short rest. It helps make the amount you heal a downed opponent matter because you don't want to go down multiple times and it also make hit die more relevant
I like the your home brew for death saves. I like giving a level of exhaustion.
My favorite homebrew rule is basically already in 5e.
I call it minor advantage or minor disadvantage. Its basically: add 1d4 to a roll or subtract 1d4 from a roll. This prevents 1d4 stacking and it makes text easier to read out. Its also the only reason why i dont ban peace domain at my table.
As a veteran PF1 I love 5th edition, but I always tought it to be a little too "bare bones" of a system. This video is just what I was looking for.
A couple of things. 1. Resistance X is not new, it was in D&D 3.5 edition.
2. The mechanic I think that reduces in combat usage of movement the most is Opportunity Attacks. I think it's over simplified for everything and their dog to have an opportunity attack. As once you get into combat, you can't leave or you will be punished for it, making movement sub optimal for most classes in most combat encounters.
If you want movement to be used more, increasing it's value is not enough, you also have to reduce its cost and punishment. Perhaps limiting opportunity attacks to only martially trained classes/creatures or ones with high perception, like dragons. Or perhaps limit it to only the target(s) that the creature has attacked since their last turn.
IE the creatures they are actively engaged with.
I’m implementing a wound system where an enemy crit can result in one of 6 potential “persistent’ wounds that has permanent effects (can be stored by physical therapy or near-god level restoration.
That is a really fun way to replicate the old save vs Death of previous editions. I might steal that one.
When I was dreaming of making my own TTRPG rules about two years ago, I also went for a 3 action per turn system :P (which I called 3 segments) Never thought a game like Pathfinder would go there. I like it of course :P
- my tabletop friends only play 5e though, so.
I think requiring the bonus action to engage the shield is too severe for certain classes (Artificers unite) but I like using a reaction for it. This nerfs the armor+shield+shield spell combo, but makes more practical sense.
Yea I was leaning towards reaction as well, they can’t take opportunity attacks because they are being defensive
This is similar to one of the unearthed arcana weapon feats that never made it to a canon book. The sword master feat let you, while using a sword, use your reaction on your turn to take a defensive/parry stance giving you a small armor class bump, so it's not like the 5e creators didn't consider something like it (which is always a good metric for me when considering homebrew concepts.)
In regards to rule #3, I think I remember in 3.5 or PF1 had it that when you got silly giant number, there was an optional rule that added a flat amount equal to how much over you went -5 (I think it was mass armies or duels or something). So if the AC was 20, and you got 32 to hit, you dealt 7 extra damage, or something along those lines. It's been a while since I read PF1 source books, but I remember something like that and thought it was super cool. Also Nonat forgot Drained as a Ability Score condition, it penalizes Fort checks and tanks your max health
Rather than messing with getting extra attacks for standing still, maybe encourage players to move? Like a plus one bonus for ranged attacks against creatures who stand still and attack, but maybe plus one or two on dex saves for still having movement left... Pros and cons.
Notes:
1. Spending your movement to attack, or do something
2. Initiative isn’t just based on Dex. You can use your stealth if you’re ambushing. Use your wisdom to spot the enemy first. As long as you can explain it.
3. Plus 10, or minus 10 you get critical success or critical failure. Ex. Hitting someone with a 15 AC with a 16 vs. a 29. You get a bonus for having a crazy attack bonus.
4. 42 “conditions,” check them out later
5. Dying Condition vs. death saving throw. If you stabilize, then you have “dying 1” and each time you’re downed then you get another “dying”
“Doomed” means that when you’re downed the DC to stabilize increases.
6. Clutz, enfeebled, stupefy, aka your stat is weakened temporarily
7. Resistance. Instead of taking 1/2 damage no matter what, you get (blank) resistance. So if you take 11 fire damage, and you have 10 fire resistance, then you take 1 point of damage.
8. You have a new system for shields. Use your bonus action to raise your shield, it has a hardness(reduces damage to you), it has a health pool.
Trading movement for any one action at disadvantage could be great. Combined with stuff that makes attack actions like grappling more useful, this could make martials way more fun to play, while the one levelled spell per turn can keep spellcasters in check
There’s RAW basis for the mechanical buffs or nerfs within 5E. I use the inverse of this rule sometimes to beef up creatures.
It’s on page 113 in Tales From the Yawning Portal.
“Reduced-Threat Monsters
A reduced-threat monster uses a normal monsters statistics, but it has half the normal hit point maximum and takes a -2 penalty on attack rolls, ability checks, saving throws, and saving throw DCs.
A reduced threat creature that is based on a creature bigger than Large is instead Large. Some specific reduced-threat creatures also make changes to the abilities they can use. A reduced-threat creature is worth half the normal XP earned for defeating it.”
I also toy with the idea of replacing exhaustion with this mechanic.
I loved this! I'm a patron of both of you already, so this was very exciting!
I like the idea of death saving throws dont replish until a long rest. and if you die and are revived it adds a point of exhaustion.
My homebrew for shields is you can sacrifice it to negate a critical destroying the shield. A magical shield gets a save, 1d20+proficiency+magic bonus v DC 15.
Man, this was awesome. Ya'll gotta do another one! there is SO much we can gain from pathfinder! Excited to check out that doc and adapt some of this to my own games!
As a side note, items in DnD can and do break! While i get what ur intnt was in the shield conversation with this, and I dont disagree, its important to remember that everything has an AC and everything has HP. Check out the DMG, page 246-247. The AC of steel is 19, stone 17, wood 15. Objects have a size category which determines their hit die size, and they might either have the resilient or fragile traits, increasing or decreasing their number of hit dice. So, if a PC whats to go full Edmund Pevensie and destroy the witches wand, that wand is a tiny wooden object. Probably neither fragile nor resilient, so it has 2d4 hp and an AC of 15. And maybe, as a homebrew note, boost its AC by the dex mod of the wielder. Iv'e actually developed a custom set of actions for my players to use when the want to destroy objects, such a the witches wand, the undead sentinel's shield, or the fulcrum of doom thats pulsating void magic into the sanctuary, or whatever.
Sunder: When you take the attack action on your turn, you may attempt to destroy an object another creature is holding. The normal rules for attacking an object apply, but the object's AC is increased by the wielder’s Dexterity modifier. If you have multiple attacks per attack action, this is considered a single attack.
Rules for attacking objects: Attacking an object with a weapon that does not have the Sundering (see homebrew weapon traits) property or is not otherwise a tool specifically designed to break the object you are attacking is very difficult and can cause damage to the weapon. When attacking without a Sundering weapon or other specifically designed implement, all attacks made against objects that do not have the fragile trait are made with disadvantage, and do half damage on a hit. If the attack roll is a 1 or misses the object’s AC by 5 or more, the weapon used (or attacker if the attack is an unarmed strike) takes damage equal to the normal damage for the attack. This does not affect natural weapons.
Attacks against magical objects (other than Common items) are ineffective and do no damage unless made with another magical weapon. A magical object gains a bonus to its AC and an additional hit die equal to its rarity level; +1 for Uncommon, +2 for Rare, +3 for Very Rare, +4 for Legendary, and +5 for Artifacts (Common magic items gain no bonus). Additionally, they are immune to thunder, fire, lightning, cold, acid, psychic, and poison damage, as well as bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage that is not dealt by magical weapons, to which they are resistant instead.
(I gave the sundering trait to battleaxes, warhammers, mauls, light hammers, warpicks, and a few others to be thematically appropriate. Iv'e done a lot with weapons, but we dont need to get into all of that here haha!)
This is easily the best video yet.
My "overwhelmed" will be a -2, but "Terrified" will be proficiency bonus.
Doomed is happening THIS WEEK with my necromancer boss fight!
Hahahahaha My apologies to your players!
Interesting to notice that others who are playing the 5e edition have homebrewed the shield usage in some way. My group has made this rule that if a character has a shield the player must inform the dm that they are wearing it otherwise the shield bonus doesn’t count
About the shield mechanic, I suggest you read about the covers in Warhammer 40k Only War
For a quick briefing basically it blocks damage and if the damage surpasses it’s armor, the armor is reduced but I’ll leave the details about that up for you to read up on
Only War has many complex mechanics but there are many things you could take from them
I personally think it has less mechanics than D&D5e but yea most of them are really complicated, which to me makes it easier to use because you can ignore half of it and only use the tip of the iceberg and go on a tangent about it whenever I mention it lol
I actually want to play both D&D 5e and pathfinder 2e. Mainly to create my own system using things from both systems.
I prefer something similar to the death save homebrew presented here, but by applying 1 level of Exhaustion instead of a Death Save Fail (when coming back up from 0 hit points).
That's the start of a good idea! I think just giving them the exhaustion is bad because you don't decide really as a player when you stabilize. So maybe have them make increasingly difficult Constitution saves each time they come back from 0 and if they fail they get 1 level of exhaustion, that way you aren't forcing something on players without giving them ANY way to try and prevent it, plus if makes constitution even more important than it already is(I'm crazy though and occasionally make Con m dump stat, this rule definitely gives me more to think about when doing so!)
O for sure that is a very popular Homebrew and I love that idea too
In the 5e campaign I've been running for over a year now we've changed movement to what I call a limited action. With your limited action you can:
Movement
A single weapon attack
Cast a cantrip at 1st level
Drink a potion
Direct your mounts actions
Casting cantrips as a limited action makes blade ward and true strike much more useful and less broken. And forgoing movement to make an attack makes movement in general more critical. If you can force your opponent to have to spend his limited action to move then you rob him of some of his offensive output.
And to make things more interesting the disengage action allows 5' of movement away from the creature you are engaged with.
Both the 5' of movement with a disengage and the limited action makes movement and positioning much more important and dynamic.
I totally agree on wasted/unnecessary movement, but my solution is inspired by your homebrew for opportunity attacks and held/tandem turns.
My Rule: When an enemy goes from being adjacent to not without disengaging, anyone can use their movement to chase after them. They can't move more than their speed in one full round, barring magic, so they can't follow if they have already spent all of their movement on their turn or won't be able to move when their turn comes if they use it all up beforehand.
Disengage: Denies opportunity attacks and makes the first 5 ft unfollowable so that the enemy can't close the distance until their turn.
I also allow opportunity attacks to be a grab or a trip (grapple/shove) even thought RAW, Sage Advice explicitly doesn't allow them. I personally feel like it makes more sense than swinging a lot of the time, and find the reasoning against it unconvincing, airing on the side of dynamic and eventful within reason.
I've been homebrewing some breakable weapons and shields that give elevated buffs until they hit a breaking point then require a tool check on a short rest to restore. I think it's an awesome way to make it really good but not overpowered.
In our Pathfinder campaign, if you go below 0, then are healed, you are unconscious for 1 round equal to how far below 0 you went. Unless you are healed to full plus how far below 0 you were!
One of the ting i love about the Palladium system is that armor has hp and will be destroyed.
When you got to the shield portion of the video I had my own version bubbling up in my head.
For 5e an alternate ruleset could be more like the 'parry' ability that some monsters get. This will also be likened to the 'shield' spell.
When wearing a shield you gain +1 to AC passively, and you can spend your reaction to gain +3 AC and - 3 damage until the end of the triggering creatures turn (or maybe until the start of their next turn). Then magical +1 and -1 etc respectively for magical shields.
So martial classes would almost get the equivalent of the Shield spell bonus of AC and it means they need to be more tactical whether they focus on defence or offense, since you would lose the ability to make opportunity attacks if you focused on blocking.
Feats like heavy armour master and other agile parry abilities already in the game might just augment this to make the numbers higher.
What if you had resistance in percentages?
Having three levels of resistance:
level 1 gives 25% (1/4) reduction
level 2 gives 50% reduction
level 3 gives 75%. (3/4) reduction
Then you end up with more math than people trying to have a good time are going to be willing to do. That is why ThAC0 is gone as well, too much math!
I'm pretty good at math and even I don't want to do that much to figure things out, ESPECIALLY in the middle of combat!
21:27, the example of a tiefling's level in fire resistance is a thing in PF2E, especially with character options that are grounded in dragon lore (Sorcerer bloodlines, archtypes, kobold features, etc.)
apparently Pathfinder heard of my Action Point system (FifthWorld) you get Action points from Celerity and Reason) each Phase, and you can spend on attack (costs 1) to a movement (1 per 10') etc. when your out of Action points in your Phase, (or within the Cycle) your done. Thus the player controls whe they want to spend those Action Points for each time.