Talk:5e House Rules - Revision history

Bartley at 02:46, 22 May 2021

2021-05-22T02:46:33Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:46, 22 May 2021
Line 2:		Line 2:
	:: I like it. It also means a small tactical choice in that you might want to allow the first failure in order to cover from an autokill 1 on the next roll. -gm		:: I like it. It also means a small tactical choice in that you might want to allow the first failure in order to cover from an autokill 1 on the next roll. -gm
	::: Right on, I'll commit. -[[User:Slitherrr\|slitherrr]] ([[User talk:Slitherrr\|talk]])		::: Right on, I'll commit. -[[User:Slitherrr\|slitherrr]] ([[User talk:Slitherrr\|talk]])

			Proposed rule change: Boat Halflings get swim speed equal to walk speed (or if this is too much, swim speed 20' or 25'). Swim speed no longer gives automatic exemption from checks and is more about max speed per turn [[User:Bartley\|Bartley]] ([[User talk:Bartley\|talk]]) 02:46, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Slitherrr at 02:43, 13 May 2021

2021-05-13T02:43:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:43, 13 May 2021
Line 1:		Line 1:
	What if the elf death save ability is changed to "when failing a death save, you may choose to ignore the failure. Once used, this ability cannot be used again until the next short or long rest." It makes it a bit better, but streamlines it a bit since it allows the consciousness clause to be removed. -[[User:Slitherrr\|slitherrr]] ([[User talk:Slitherrr\|talk]])		What if the elf death save ability is changed to "when failing a death save, you may choose to ignore the failure. Once used, this ability cannot be used again until the next short or long rest." It makes it a bit better, but streamlines it a bit since it allows the consciousness clause to be removed. -[[User:Slitherrr\|slitherrr]] ([[User talk:Slitherrr\|talk]])
	:: I like it. It also means a small tactical choice in that you might want to allow the first failure in order to cover from an autokill 1 on the next roll.		:: I like it. It also means a small tactical choice in that you might want to allow the first failure in order to cover from an autokill 1 on the next roll. -gm
			::: Right on, I'll commit. -[[User:Slitherrr\|slitherrr]] ([[User talk:Slitherrr\|talk]])

Detarame at 03:04, 12 May 2021

2021-05-12T03:04:30Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:04, 12 May 2021
Line 1:		Line 1:
	What if the elf death save ability is changed to "when failing a death save, you may choose to ignore the failure. Once used, this ability cannot be used again until the next short or long rest." It makes it a bit better, but streamlines it a bit since it allows the consciousness clause to be removed. -[[User:Slitherrr\|slitherrr]] ([[User talk:Slitherrr\|talk]])		What if the elf death save ability is changed to "when failing a death save, you may choose to ignore the failure. Once used, this ability cannot be used again until the next short or long rest." It makes it a bit better, but streamlines it a bit since it allows the consciousness clause to be removed. -[[User:Slitherrr\|slitherrr]] ([[User talk:Slitherrr\|talk]])
			:: I like it. It also means a small tactical choice in that you might want to allow the first failure in order to cover from an autokill 1 on the next roll.

Slitherrr at 05:47, 10 May 2021

2021-05-10T05:47:03Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:47, 10 May 2021
Line 1:		Line 1:
	*The proposed "~~offical homebrew/possible future errata" is <i>the spell ends once the spirit has restored hit points~~ a ~~number of times equal to twice your spellcasting ability modifier.</i> It's not bad~~, ~~but I don't see any need~~ to ~~include new heals before we even use~~ the ~~old ones and see how they feel~~. ~~-gm~~		What if the elf death save ability is changed to "when failing a death save, you may choose to ignore the failure. Once used, this ability cannot be used again until the next short or long rest." It makes it a bit better, but streamlines it a bit since it allows the consciousness clause to be removed. -[[User:Slitherrr\|slitherrr]] ([[User talk:Slitherrr\|talk]])
	** To be ~~fair, that reasoning can just as easily swing back~~ the ~~other way--we haven't played at all to test whether~~ or ~~not healing spirit feels unbalancing~~. ~~10d6/person heal is~~ a ~~lot~~, but ~~invisibility, blur, blindness/deafness, and so on are also all 2nd-level and~~ it~~'s not too tough to think up circumstances where they could prevent that much damage (blur will always deny~~ a ~~rogue's sneak attack (absent stuff like lucky halfling), for example), with~~ the ~~advantage that they can~~ be ~~set up without healing spirit's hassle. -[[User:Slitherrr\|slitherrr]] ([[User talk:Slitherrr\|talk]])~~


	*How interested are you in owning the Sword Coast Adventure Guide? We're not playing in Faerun any time soon, but there's some neat stuff in there besides that. -[[User:Slitherrr\|slitherrr]] ([[User talk:Slitherrr\|talk]])

Slitherrr at 18:37, 4 December 2017

2017-12-04T18:37:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:37, 4 December 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
	*The proposed "offical homebrew/possible future errata" is <i>the spell ends once the spirit has restored hit points a number of times equal to twice your spellcasting ability modifier.</i> It's not bad, but I don't see any need to include new heals before we even use the old ones and see how they feel. -gm		*The proposed "offical homebrew/possible future errata" is <i>the spell ends once the spirit has restored hit points a number of times equal to twice your spellcasting ability modifier.</i> It's not bad, but I don't see any need to include new heals before we even use the old ones and see how they feel. -gm
	** To be fair, that reasoning can just as easily swing back the other way--we haven't played at all to test whether or not healing spirit feels unbalancing. 10d6/person heal is a lot, but invisibility, blur, blindness/deafness, and so on are also all 2nd-level and it's not too tough to think up circumstances where they could prevent that much damage (blur will always deny a rogue's sneak attack (absent stuff like lucky halfling), for example), with the advantage that they can be set up without healing spirit's hassle. -[[User:Slitherrr\|slitherrr]] ([[User talk:Slitherrr\|talk]])		** To be fair, that reasoning can just as easily swing back the other way--we haven't played at all to test whether or not healing spirit feels unbalancing. 10d6/person heal is a lot, but invisibility, blur, blindness/deafness, and so on are also all 2nd-level and it's not too tough to think up circumstances where they could prevent that much damage (blur will always deny a rogue's sneak attack (absent stuff like lucky halfling), for example), with the advantage that they can be set up without healing spirit's hassle. -[[User:Slitherrr\|slitherrr]] ([[User talk:Slitherrr\|talk]])


			*How interested are you in owning the Sword Coast Adventure Guide? We're not playing in Faerun any time soon, but there's some neat stuff in there besides that. -[[User:Slitherrr\|slitherrr]] ([[User talk:Slitherrr\|talk]])

Slitherrr at 17:54, 4 December 2017

2017-12-04T17:54:23Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:54, 4 December 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
	*The proposed "offical homebrew/possible future errata" is <i>the spell ends once the spirit has restored hit points a number of times equal to twice your spellcasting ability modifier.</i> It's not bad, but I don't see any need to include new heals before we even use the old ones and see how they feel. -gm		*The proposed "offical homebrew/possible future errata" is <i>the spell ends once the spirit has restored hit points a number of times equal to twice your spellcasting ability modifier.</i> It's not bad, but I don't see any need to include new heals before we even use the old ones and see how they feel. -gm
			** To be fair, that reasoning can just as easily swing back the other way--we haven't played at all to test whether or not healing spirit feels unbalancing. 10d6/person heal is a lot, but invisibility, blur, blindness/deafness, and so on are also all 2nd-level and it's not too tough to think up circumstances where they could prevent that much damage (blur will always deny a rogue's sneak attack (absent stuff like lucky halfling), for example), with the advantage that they can be set up without healing spirit's hassle. -[[User:Slitherrr\|slitherrr]] ([[User talk:Slitherrr\|talk]])

Detarame: Created page with "The proposed "offical homebrew/possible future errata" is the spell ends once the spirit has restored hit points a number of times equal to twice your spellcasting ability..."*

2017-12-04T02:56:42Z

Created page with "*The proposed "offical homebrew/possible future errata" is <i>the spell ends once the spirit has restored hit points a number of times equal to twice your spellcasting ability..."

New page
*The proposed "offical homebrew/possible future errata" is <i>the spell ends once the spirit has restored hit points a number of times equal to twice your spellcasting ability modifier.</i> It's not bad, but I don't see any need to include new heals before we even use the old ones and see how they feel. -gm