this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2023
32 points (100.0% liked)
D&D Next - 5e Discussion
2396 readers
1 users here now
A place to discuss the latest version of Dungeons & Dragons, the fifth edition, known during the playtest as D&D Next.
Join our discord! https://discord.gg/dndnext
-- Rules --
- Be Civil. Unacceptable behavior includes name calling, taunting, baiting, flaming, etc. Please respect the opinions of people who play differently than you do.
- Use Clear, Concise Titles.
- Limit Self-Promotional Links. External links to blogs, kickstarters, storefronts, YouTube channels, etc, must be related to DnD and posted no more than once every 14 days. Affiliate links are never allowed.
This is a new community and the rules are in flux. Please bear with us (and give your feedback!) as we navigate building this new community. Thank you!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Oh I do so much actually. Well, I have a ton of house rules in a doc that are 99% pretty little things, minor QoL stuff, mostly to buff martials and character options that need the help. For example:
Blimey, that's a rewrite of half the classes! Have you found any problems with these changes?
Hmm, not particularly; most of them are fairly small changes in play even if they take up a decent amount of text in the doc. I'm mostly just trying to put the weaker options more on par with stronger options. If something comes up in a game where I realize "Whoops I made that too strong" I'll reassess.
So far my players have liked them as it's mostly buffs: I've definitely seen the weaker Sorcerer subclasses get more play because of the changes. You could argue that Sorcerers are casters and don't need the help, but I feel it just puts them on par with Wizards at worst.
Fair, I might just ask the players if there's anything they'd like to play but that they feel is a bit weak and offer some of your buffs if required!