A collection of mechanical ideas

[demonslayerelf]

Hello all! IT'S ME AGAIN!
I come today to get feedback on a few different ideas I had for mechanics. I start DM'ing again in a couple weeks, and I think it would help.

Quick idea for dealing with the varying weapon lengths.
A character or creature may spend 5 feet of movement to take a half-step. On a grid, this would essentially be resting on a line, rather than a square/hex.
A character half-stepping toward or away from another creature creates three different "Ranges."
At a short range, when two creatures are only 1 half-step away, a character wielding a Short weapon(Such as a Dagger) would add the proficiency modifier twice when attacking with it(If they are proficient to begin with.) A creature wielding a Long weapon(Such as a Spear) cannot add their proficiency modifier to attacks made at this distance(If they are proficient to begin with.) If they aren't proficient, they take a -5 penalty.
At a medium range, when creatures are 2 half-steps away(Or, normal distance), no changes are made in combat.
At a long range, when creatures are 3 half-steps away, a creature wielding a Short weapon(Such as a Dagger) cannot add their proficiency modifier to attacks made at this distance(If they are proficient to begin with.) If they aren't proficient, they take a -5 penalty. A character wielding a Long weapon(Such as a Spear) would add the proficiency modifier twice when attacking with it(If they are proficient to begin with.)

Just a few thoughts on other damage types.
Bleed Damage, which would obviously be taken from bleeding out or having blood sucked. This may seem unnecessary, but 5e itself doesn't seem to have the answer, as a Stirge sucks your blood, and the monster manual only states "You lose 1d4 hit points," without specifying a type.

Radiation Damage, which would be useful in a Godzilla or Sci-fi setting. Who doesn't want a Radiation Dragon?

Ethereal Damage, which I think would be a good sort of "Ghost Damage," or damage caused by creatures on the Astral Plain.

This is the one I need the most feedback about.
Essentially a Legendary Action, but for PC's. After all, a PC eventually amasses their own legends and myths about themselves.
My idea is that, when a PC reaches their 15th level, they gain a once/day Heroic Action. They may take an Action, Bonus Action, or Movement when it is not their turn, but not in the middle of another creature's turn. A Fighter may not use an Action Surge in this time, and similar abilities also cannot be used.


Hoping for feedback!

[GalacticAxekick]

A character or creature may spend 5 feet of movement to take a half-step. On a grid, this would essentially be resting on a line, rather than a square/hex.

A character half-stepping toward or away from another creature creates three different "Ranges."5e was designed to work without grids and miniatures. All the rules grid combat like flanking were dropped for this reason.

It's okay to include variant rules for grid combat (as he DMG does), but be aware that the system can't support them as well as, say, 3.5e or Pathfinder.


At a short range, when two creatures are only 1 half-step away, a character wielding a Short weapon(Such as a Dagger) would add the proficiency modifier twice when attacking with it(If they are proficient to begin with.) A creature wielding a Long weapon(Such as a Spear) cannot add their proficiency modifier to attacks made at this distance(If they are proficient to begin with.) If they aren't proficient, they take a -5 penalty.

[...]

At a long range, when creatures are 3 half-steps away, a creature wielding a Short weapon(Such as a Dagger) cannot add their proficiency modifier to attacks made at this distance(If they are proficient to begin with.) If they aren't proficient, they take a -5 penalty. A character wielding a Long weapon(Such as a Spear) would add the proficiency modifier twice when attacking with it(If they are proficient to begin with.)
No. 5e was designed with a philosophy called "bounded accuracy" in mind. This means that even the most skilled adventures fail at simple tasks occasionally, and even a novice will succeed at difficult tasks once in a while.

This is why even the highest level adventurer with optimized stats can't roll higher than 1d20+6+5 (12 to 31) plus a few small and rare bonuses. But with your double-proficiency system, that knight can manage 1d20+6+6+5 (18 to 37) and literally never miss against full plate armour.

The only reason Expertise is okay is because (A) skill checks are nowhere near as vital as attack rolls or saving throws and (B) contested skill checks give even the dumbling novice a chance to beat the minimum roll at 18, while a static AC or DC does not.

[Markoff Chainey]

I agree with GalacticAxekick, but for this:

The only reason Expertise is okay is because (A) skill checks are nowhere near as vital as attack rolls or saving throws and (B) contested skill checks give even the dumbling novice a chance to beat the minimum roll at 18, while a static AC or DC does not.

Expertise is not ok.

[GalacticAxekick]

I'm not a fan of it myself, but it isn't game-breaking. An equivalent for attack rolls or saving throws would be.

[demonslayerelf]

So, 3 quick things.

1- Holy hell calm down. I said these were quick ideas, not that I had thought through literally everything.

2- You haven't actually said what a better alternative would be... D for effort. Think advantage/disadvantage would be a good replacement?

3- Any thoughts on anything that isn't the minor thought on weapon length?

[FreddyNoNose]

So, 3 quick things.

1- Holy hell calm down. I said these were quick ideas, not that I had thought through literally everything.

2- You haven't actually said what a better alternative would be... D for effort. Think advantage/disadvantage would be a good replacement?

3- Any thoughts on anything that isn't the minor thought on weapon length?

You asked for feedback and you got it. Don't cry about it.

Weapon Length Answer: Try it in your game and write a report about it after a few sessions and let us know what you think about it.

[GalacticAxekick]

1- Holy hell calm down. I said these were quick ideas, not that I had thought through literally everything.Did I attack you, exaggerate, or in any way lose my calm? Did I claim you had thought through literally everything? I don't think I did. You asked for feedback so I gave feedback: the grid idea might be difficult to support in 5e, and the double proficiency idea is completely unbalanced.


2- You haven't actually said what a better alternative would be... D for effort. Think advantage/disadvantage would be a good replacement?You haven't asked for better alternatives. You also haven't described what you want this system to accomplish, and so I don't know what an alternative would be supposed to do. Do you want precise position to be more important in combat? Do you want weapons to be more distinguished from one another? Do you want ways to overcome high AC? D for clarity.

I just noticed "quick idea for dealing with weapon lengths" and so I presume your goal is to make weapons of different lengths perform differently. How about this:

A melee weapon with the light property is short, making it deft and well suited for close range. You can make an opportunity attack with this weapon when a creature you can see moves within your reach.
A melee weapon without the light property is long enough to reach far further than your empty hand. You can make an opportunity attack when a creature you can see enters your reach.
A melee weapon with the reach property is especially long, suited for combat from a safe distance but poor for combat at close range. You have disadvantage on attacks against a creature within 5 feet of you.
Approaching someone with a long weapon, especially at lower levels when a single attack can be lethal, becomes extremely dangerous, because they get the chance to attack before you do. Surprise becomes necessary to make the first attack safely, which might be worth building rules around. Maybe creatures can't react until their first turn, offering the first creatures a safe approach.

Similarly, you'll provoke constant opportunity attacks from a mob armed with short weapons, making some of the weakest weapons in the game valuable as defensive tools for pack tactics.

Finally, reach weapons become extremely attractive options thanks to the opportunity attacks made when a foe enters 10 feet. But they must be used with a retreat, a side arm or an ally in mind, lest the enemy close in.
Moving on, I think advantage/disadvantage would be an improvement over double proficiency, but I think this would make Rogues far stronger than they were meant to be (with Sneak Attacks essentially at will) and overall make melee a lot more bloody.

Another problem with giving advantage/disadvantage is that advantages can't stack. Why blind, trip or restrain your foes when you could more easily step towards/away from them? 3.5e and Pathfinder solved this by making close combat/close weapons dangerous to use (provoking an opportunity attack, if I'm not mistake, to step into close ranger) and making reach weapons useless in close range. These are among the grid-based rules 5e threw out.

3.5e and Pathfinder also used numerical bonuses and penalties that can stack with the bonuses/penalties for being blinded, tripped, etc. This is another thing 5e avoids because of bounded accuracy.


3- Any thoughts on anything that isn't the minor thought on weapon length?Besides weapon length you proposed additional damage types. They're fine. I think radiation is redundant (see: radiant), as well as ethereal (see: force), but that's just my opinion. Adding these damage types does no harm to the system.

Heroic actions would obviously make player characters far more powerful, but challenges can be boosted accordingly. I see no issue.

[Andrezitos]

The third option is quite interesting IMO. I would give players legendary actions at faster rate (every six levels, for example), but tie they to another mechanic like saves (save or fail to use it) or rest (x times per short/long), or both, etc. Actions out of turn (AooT) is a really cool concept WotC explored meagerly (Counterspell is the only meaningful option I remember). The ratio of players options/DMs options is drastically perturbed when a legendary creature (not to mention a creature with lair actions) comes to play. A counter argument against giving players this mechanic would be that too many AooT would harm turn management or DMs control of the game.