Tossing out attunement/concentration/etc. limitations ?

[DnDegenerates]

Hey fellow d&dorks,

Our podcast is about to finish playing through the HOTDQ hardcover and are going to be going Homebrew. There are three players. Only one of which is all that knowledgeable of the finer details within the rules. They all are pretty easy to manage as far as players go.

So far we've had fun playing by AL rules but I'm thinking of giving the players the option of less limitations so that we don't have to micro manage thinks like magical item attunement, concentration, etc.

We have stepped away from grid style gameplay already due to the podcast format, so I'm also considering being less picky about movement speed in favor of allowing for a more fluid theatre of the mind gameplay. Obviously relative distances will still matter.

My players aren't prone to abusing rules or game mechanics. They're more into arguing with NPCs and making a scene to justify their own vindictive in character purposes. So it helps when combat is a bit more quick paced and theatric as opposed to a never ending dice roll off.

I'm also not big on handing out Chuck Norris items that'll break the game. They're usually flavor trinkets or common magical items with a sprinkling of the cooler more iconic stuff.

We've already opted for average initiatives, which has sped up combat encounters quite a bit without really changing much of our gameplay.

I'm also going to be recording and doing our sessions while at a law enforcement academy sometime in the near future, as opposed to in person, which will give us limited time to play maybe once a week for 4-5months. So time is pretty important to us.

What do you folks think about tossing some micromanaging rules out in favor of simplifying the game and speeding things along? I hear that often people play with a heavy lean towards the rule of rule as opposed to gripping the rulebooks tightly between their buttcheeks as they play. I'm hoping it'll work for us.

Thanks in advance. As always I value the input of you much more booksavvy and experienced tabletoppers.

-dungeons & degenerates

[Unoriginal]

Those are not "micromanagement rules".

The only way that Concentration or attunement limits could slow down the game significantly is if you have players who try to abuse them... which you just told us aren't what your players will do.


In fact, Concentration *speeds* the game compared to no Concentration, because that way you don't have to handle tons of spell effects that stay active over several rounds.

Plus, if your players aren't that interested in magic items and you aren't giving them many either, it's not likely the attunement limit will ever be a factor.


So in both cases, those are not rules that'll let you speed things up by ignoring them.



If you want to speed the game, I'd advise removing damage rolls and using the average damage. I wouldn't like it, but it does make a turn goes faster.

[Davrix]

Best ways to speed up the game.

Rolling Hit and damage die as one and having them ready for the action they are doing when their turn comes up. This helps with tip 3 below.

Make sure players give check and save totals and not saying what they rolled on the D20 first so you can make quick rulings.

Having another player manage the initiative order and give ques when each player or what monster is up on deck as the next person is going.

removing concentration will just slow things down because as someone has said, more to track and the same goes for magic items. The more you have, the more you either forget to use or the more you have to keep looking up to use.

[Grod_The_Giant]

The main way I can think that Concentration would slow down the game is having to make repeated Concentration saves. That part you could maybe replace with a static value (any hit dealing at least 1/4 your health in one shot breaks Conc?), but I wouldn't toss out the rule entirely. Especially not in the name of speed--in my experience, the two things that slow down combat are players being slow to decide what to do on their turn, and players not knowing the specifics of their abilities.

EDIT: Things I can see improving speed, in no particular order...

Use average damage for at least most purposes, sot that instead of rolling d8+4, and sometimes another 3d6 sneak attack, the Rogue simply does 9 or 20 damage.
Turn monster saving throws into static defenses (8+bonus) and have players roll against that, instead of the monster rolling. Combine that with publicly-displaced AC/saves and your players can know if they succeed or failed without any back-and-forth with you.
I find that pure Theater of the Mind tends to lead to a lot of repeated question about layout. Then again, strict grids can lead to a lot of time puzzling out exact ranges and movements, so I suggest a compromise-- use a very loose map with simple counters for players and monsters, but with ranges an AoOs and such assessed loosely.
When the tide of battle swings towards the PCs, accelerate things. Have monsters start surrendering or fleeing-- heck, just end things narratively with "sensing the goblins faltering, you press your attack all the harder; after another bloody minute, the battle is over."

[Bobbyjackcorn]

Honestly guy, I threw out the concentration rules and I haven't had a single regret. Does it slow down the game? I don't believe so, but I'll tell you what- it makes the game easier and in the opinion of my players, more fun. It's possible they *could* abuse it, but we're all friends at the table so I just asked them to be responsible with the freedom and not make me regret it, and I haven't noticed much in the way of balance issues.

[Mister_Squinty]

Honestly guy, I threw out the concentration rules and I haven't had a single regret. Does it slow down the game? I don't believe so, but I'll tell you what- it makes the game easier and in the opinion of my players, more fun. It's possible they *could* abuse it, but we're all friends at the table so I just asked them to be responsible with the freedom and not make me regret it, and I haven't noticed much in the way of balance issues.

Do you have players trying to stack buff spells? CoDZillas in 3.5 running 5 or 6 buff spells at once was what led to the implementation of Concentration in the first place.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Do you have players trying to stack buff spells? CoDZillas in 3.5 running 5 or 6 buff spells at once was what led to the implementation of Concentration in the first place.
To be fair, even without Concentration that would be hard to pull off in 5e-- most spells have a much shorter duration, and there really aren't any ways to extend the ones that don't. (Unlike 3.5 and bloody Persistent Spell)

[Unoriginal]

To be fair, even without Concentration that would be hard to pull off in 5e-- most spells have a much shorter duration, and there really aren't any ways to extend the ones that don't. (Unlike 3.5 and bloody Persistent Spell)

Well boost spells's effects are also pretty noticeable this edition, so even having one caster holding two or three normally-concentration-buffs could be pretty nasty.

Or just other spell combos. Haste on self + Call Lightning? Jeez

[Bobbyjackcorn]

Do you have players trying to stack buff spells? CoDZillas in 3.5 running 5 or 6 buff spells at once was what led to the implementation of Concentration in the first place.


My party has been really good about not abusing the rules, and they're also aware that not using the concentration rules for them means I am also not using them for the monsters, so there is an unspoken understanding that if they start abusing it, *I* could also do that to them.

[DnDegenerates]

Thanks for your responses everyone.

Yeah, I guess you're right. Concentration mechanically probably saves more time than it costs. Up until now I've been a pretty by the books dm. Which works because our group helped set up and run a good few AL games at local comic stores, helping build the community. Recently I've been wanting to do more old-school d&ding with my home group.

Also, I have three players. I've played with less and definitely more in the past. But three or four is my favorite table. The problem being with three or less you kind of have to expect them to be more engaging players and encourage them to be more in character and utilize their tools/abilities more. There simply aren't as many inventories or players worth of resources otherwise. Especially in a podcasting format, where you don't want to bog down a game with anything too monotonous. It's just as much for the listeners as the players involved.

I think more of what I had in mind was to remove the concern over whether or not one is maintaining concentration on one spell before casting another.

This kind of ties in to a more carefree style of gameplay that encourages a bit more role-play and improv, without expecting players to know everything off of the top of their head. Rewarding them for creative and in character decisions instead of stopping their momentum to nitpick rules.

I hear other 5e Podcast folks who kind of let their spellcasts wing it, often casting spells as their imagination kicks in. Which usually has fun results. The DM in these situations usually throws out the fine lines and lets spells interact with each other to create a more enjoyable scene without stopping the flow of fun/combat.

I think an example I heard recently was on The Adventure Zone, where an NPC used gust of wind to blow stink cloud into a crowd of people. There wasn't any time wasted reading spell descriptions to see if it was possible. They just did it off the top of their heads and it made for a good mental image. TAZ actually does a lot of this. You can hear the DM mentally working through whether or not letting things play out is too much sometimes, because his players can be quite innovative. Especially with mundane item, minor magical items, and spells in general.

So my revised question is this.

Do you think that removing rules such as concentration and attunement for the sake of giving players less to worry about when creatively problem solving?

Thanks again. I was happy to see there were so many of you discussing this when I came back!

[Unoriginal]

Ignoring the spells' limits so you can do whatever and solve the situation isn't "creative problem solving". It's "casters are gods who don't have to worry about solving problems with anything but brute-force power".

Creative problem solving is when you use the tools at your disposal to come up with an interesting solution. Omnipotence through hand-wavy "rule of cool" might be fun, same way as a video game can be fun when you're in god-mod and neither the enemies nor the typical limits can stop you. But it's not going to encourage cleverness or roleplaying.

Especially because meanwhile the martials can... be there and watch?

Not to say that you should never go "let's wing it" or authorize something because it's cool, but if it's the norm, well, why bother with the rules?

[Grod_The_Giant]

Do you think that removing rules such as concentration and attunement for the sake of giving players less to worry about when creatively problem solving?
I mean, if "wait, am I already concentrating on a spell" is really slowing things down at your table" is an issue, I guess removing the rule might help? More generally, though, it sounds like your group might enjoy a less rules-intensive game than 5e-- there's only so much you can cut in the name of speed before it winds up a totally different system anyway.

EDIT: That said, Unoriginal has a good point about not leaving mundane characters too far behind. Maybe you could give noncasters... I dunno, two "stunt points" per short rest, roughly paralleling Warlock slots. When you want to do something really big and creative without magic, spend a stunt point to bypass a lot of otherwise too-hard skill checks.

[Unoriginal]

it's not even that martials are less extraordinary than casters, it's just that most people are *not* going to hand-wave away what a martial can do.

"No, you can't lift the giant above your head"

"No, you can't break the door with one punch"

"No, you can't just decide to fire arrows to write your name on the target to show how good an archer you are"

"No, you can't just decide to steal the wizard's ring of power, you need to roll"

[mgshamster]

I've always believed that creativity comes from limited resources, not expanded resources.

Some people are capable of finding creativity with infinite options, but most people would rather just find the option that solves the problem and move forward without much though.

But when you need to solve a problem and don't have a ready solution, that's when creativity kicks in with most people.

Try giving your players only two non-combat spells to work with through an adventure, and you'll really see those creativity wheels roll.

As an example, I just made level 2 with a wizard who only had Mold Earth (cantrip) and Jump (1st level spell twice a day). I was using the Jump spell so often and in so many circumstances that my DM was starting to wonder if it was too OP. The jump spell, too over powered! Can you imagine that? Once we had a frank conversation about the spell and just how weak it is compared to everything else, he opted to not Nerf the spell, but the fact that he was even considering it goes to show how limited options ramp up that creativity.

[Nidgit]

I'd recommend looking for feedback from your audience. I've seen TAZ face some backlash for ignoring the rules too much so finding the right balance to please your listeners is important.

As for attunement, try to make whatever non-attunement items you give your players something that does something cool and versatile but only one or two times a day. That should keep things from stacking up too ridiculously.