After they raise a few levels, the spellcasters in my game largely quit casting cantrips.  Just not worth it anymore.

Quote from: Will;807026There's a taste issue ... should spells be powerful big things that unleash, or do wizards live and breathe magic?

If you handle it right at the table, then magic can still be dangerous and mysterious, even with low level spellcasters. As a rule, we don't use spell names, even when the PC Dragonborn is casting spells...he gives me a cue as to what he's doing and I narrate it.

The NPC Warlock that was traveling with the group absolutely terrified them, even though any one of them could have taken him in straight up fight.

Quote from: Zak S;807025That's pretty normal in old school games and spellcasters do fine there in every game I ever saw. Plus in 5e their weapons are better.

Hmm, might be a good idea to try it out then.

Right now I'm totally new to 5E and D&D in general so I don't have the confidence that I won't royally screw something up by tweaking the rules left and right. I've just been focusing on understanding what rules there actually are.

I feel like the players wouldn't like removing the cantrips though.

Oh, another thing I've had a hard time tracking is weight and encumbrance. There's all these items with different weights, I have no idea how much anyone has and haven't bothered to check yet. But I probably should since PCs are doing stuff like trying to carry 5 different weapons and 30 goblin ears.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;807044Hmm, might be a good idea to try it out then.

Right now I'm totally new to 5E and D&D in general so I don't have the confidence that I won't royally screw something up by tweaking the rules left and right. I've just been focusing on understanding what rules there actually are.

I feel like the players wouldn't like removing the cantrips though.

Oh, another thing I've had a hard time tracking is weight and encumbrance. There's all these items with different weights, I have no idea how much anyone has and haven't bothered to check yet. But I probably should since PCs are doing stuff like trying to carry 5 different weapons and 30 goblin ears.

I don't worry about weight and encumbrance unless someone's obviously trying to carry way too much.

If you're new to D&D then just stick to what you feel comfortable with for a few sessions and--if you do decide to make changes-- make sure your players are on board with any changes you make.

New players often like to have powerful characters to start with whereas players who've been around the block a few times are more likely than them to feel like a weak character is a fun challenge.

When you're a new GM there's a balance:

On the one hand, all the rules can seem overwhelming.

On the other hand, you're afraid to mess with stuff and remove rules since you don't know the knock-on effects.

The most important thing is: make sure your players trust your judgment about what's fair. After that, you can work together to push the rules to a place that fits the game you all can agree on.

Its like I said upthread. 5e is pretty sturdy, it doesn't break that easy.

Just be sure to be flexible. If you make a change and it turns out it sucked, rework it or throw it out.

I wouldn't do the cantrip throwing out myself, but I'm sure the game would still work (Warlock might need some adjusting, since Cantrips are most of its strength).

Be confident, and make sure the players trust you. And if you find that you messed up, don't be afraid to say so.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;807044Oh, another thing I've had a hard time tracking is weight and encumbrance. There's all these items with different weights, I have no idea how much anyone has and haven't bothered to check yet. But I probably should since PCs are doing stuff like trying to carry 5 different weapons and 30 goblin ears.

Don't dither with tracking encumbrance.  Just use common sense and the genre trope that someone wearing a backpack can fight just as easily as if they were not wearing one.  Only worry about it if someone does something stupid like say they have 5 polearms on their person or whatnot.

Re, the above posts: how would you guys handle weight then? Just go with what feels right?

For instance, someone carrying five different swords wouldn't make sense, right? But by weight rules they could probably do it easily. I'm not sure.

Hmm, maybe if they had two strapped to their back, one in a scabbard on each leg...

I just don't want my decision of "no, that's too much to carry" to seem arbitrary.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;807053Re, the above posts: how would you guys handle weight then? Just go with what feels right?

For instance, someone carrying five different swords wouldn't make sense, right? But by weight rules they could probably do it easily. I'm not sure.

I'd say if they carried 5 swords and nothing else then maybe.

Remember also: carrying stuff is one thing. Carrying stuff while moving and fighting is quite another. You can probably carry an unconscious friend around but could only fight with them on your back if you had a high strength. I believe the rule of thumb is: STR score x 10= comfortable carry weight in lbs. (not bench press, just: what you could have on your back and walk)) Half that is what you can comfortably fight and do athletics and acrobatics with.

In general: use what's plausible in the version of life or fiction that you are imagining as your guide.

Your rules have to be tighter if you have players who will push them to the extremes--if you don't you can just spot check like "What all are you carrying?"

Many players just won't ever push the situation to 5 swords, so it's a problem you may never have to solve.

Quote from: Emperor Norton;807046I wouldn't do the cantrip throwing out myself, but I'm sure the game would still work (Warlock might need some adjusting, since Cantrips are most of its strength).

Its not as booyah as some make it out to be. My test run against the wolves in the other thread was so far the most I have used that cantrip to date and it couldnt even drop a wolf in one shot. Usefull? Yes. vital? YMMV on that. But I get the feeling that some people bitch about the cantrips havent actually played a caster type to see them in use. Or if they did, they waved their magic cock around the first few levels and declared it overpowered.

As for the OPs question. Things that havent worked?

Not much really. Everything seems to so far be clicking along.

At worst I think that the combat lethality can be at times deceptive since the system changes have shifted the balance in odd ways that sometimes skew the outcome. Not necessarily a bad thing. But it can lead to either too easy or too hard a battle until you get the hang of it.

Well, I can't say for certain that it "hasn't worked" because I flat fucking refused to use it, but I'm still pretty disappointed in the 3e-style multiclassing rules.

Quote from: FaerieGodfather;807066Well, I can't say for certain that it "hasn't worked" because I flat fucking refused to use it, but I'm still pretty disappointed in the 3e-style multiclassing rules.

I am personally actually pretty happy that the 5e multiclassing rules make multiclassing "dipping" just about useless. No one in the group I am in or DM for has any interest in multiclassing.

Quote from: Vic99;806911For those of you that have actually played 5e, is there a mechanic or a concept that does not work as well or as easily as it seemed?  I have a few ideas, but I don't want to start the thread by biasing it in one direction.  Thanks.

Surprise does not seem to work how I would have done it.

Animal Companions (be they familiars, beast master pets, whatever) require you to use you action o attack (if they can attack at all), which to me makes no sense. How I have fixed this is by using the Loyalty Rules in the DMG. If your pet has a Loyalty of 10+ it will happily attack on its own, less that that you have to use an action to command it as per the usual rules. It's a bodge, but it seems to keep everyone happy.


But all in all, its holding up pretty well.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;807053Re, the above posts: how would you guys handle weight then? Just go with what feels right?

For instance, someone carrying five different swords wouldn't make sense, right? But by weight rules they could probably do it easily. I'm not sure.

Hmm, maybe if they had two strapped to their back, one in a scabbard on each leg...

I just don't want my decision of "no, that's too much to carry" to seem arbitrary.

Ask the player to draw a quick sketch of their character.  Or use some swords/swordlike things around the house and ask them to demonstrate how their character is carrying it.  Your point will quickly drive home.

Quote from: Omega;807069I am personally actually pretty happy that the 5e multiclassing rules make multiclassing "dipping" just about useless. No one in the group I am in or DM for has any interest in multiclassing.

Same here: I'm more in favor of these rules now that I caught on that a characters gets their bonus ability score improvements or feats based on individual class level totals, not their overall character level. Multiclass too much and you "screw" yourself over a little.

To answer the OP: not a complaint, just a warning. The game can be deceptively lethal at low levels. One of my players' PC got one-shotted by two goblin archers who beat him in initiative*. Luckily he was a half-orc, and his racial ability saved him from having to make Death Saving checks.

* i actually don't really use initiative rules: I just let the in-game scene determine who goes first based on each individual situation. In this case, though, the PC and the monsters surprised each other, and so I just made a ruling to have them roll off initiative to see who had better wits to act first.

Quote from: jadrax;807072Surprise does not seem to work how I would have done it.

Animal Companions (be they familiars, beast master pets, whatever) require you to use you action o attack (if they can attack at all), which to me makes no sense. How I have fixed this is by using the Loyalty Rules in the DMG. If your pet has a Loyalty of 10+ it will happily attack on its own, less that that you have to use an action to command it as per the usual rules. It's a bodge, but it seems to keep everyone happy.


But all in all, its holding up pretty well.

According to the DMG, it seems to be that "absent any direct orders, they will follow their nature", which means an animal companion may attack to defend his friend on its own. Its just that it takes an action to direct it when you're wanting something specific.