Rules and Conventions

Here's a thread to present the optional rules we are using, to discuss how rules are implemented, and conventions that we adopt for this game. These first posts will document the rules and conventions, and will be updated as necessary if we make any changes/additions.

RULES

CONVENTIONS

Question on Rations. Currently we are on a 20-day caravan. Princess has zero rations on character. Meals caravan supplied or should rations be accounted for on character. Princess does have a flask for water to drink.

Food is absolutely provided with the caravan; the PCs won't need to draw upon their rations while with the caravan.

Here's a question about conventions that I'd like the players to answer.

The Dungeon in a Box adventures - of which Secrets of the Greenwold is the first - are written for replayability. One way they achieve that is with a lot of random tables. You won't see the tables, but I will be rolling to select items randomly at times. Tables will determine things like minor NPCs, interstitial locations, random encounters, etc: things that happen between and sometimes inform the set-piece, anchor encounters/locations. My question is: when the adventure calls for a roll on a table, do you players want to see that I am making such a roll, or not?

I can see that it could be fun either way. Seeing the rolls happen might impart a sense of the unexpected, but not seeing the rolls might help with the sense of a continuous narrative. Which would you prefer?

I'm a fan of GM doing lots behind curtain and I find out later what just hit. Don't need to see the rolls or even know that you did them. Same is for skill rolls needed. Just do them for me and I find out later. I don't even need to see the rolls either. Trust you figured them out right.

Same here. I’m a big fan of DM making whichever and however rolls as possible. I’ve always felt like, PC’s making unsolicited rolls, esp things like Perception, really doesn’t always make a lot of sense.

I'm good either way!

I enjoy both and either. Always fun to just be entertained, and I also like to look behind the curtain when allowed. More grist for my own mill.

Thanks for your responses! Just to be clear, I wasn't talking about PC skill checks (though your preferences there are good to know!) or any other rolls that players would do, but rather the sort of things like random encounter-type rolls.

99.9% of the time -- especially in play-by-post -- my answer will be "whatever is easiest for our GM."

And I mean that.

What ever is easist for the GM. We meet a bear defecating in the woods. Is it part of the plot or random encounter? I'll enjoy the encounter either way.

What does frustrates me is when GM makes a post with a secret message to another player, and that other player replays in an open post. I'm left feeling excluded or feeling that I must have missed something important somewhere.

Secret posts really ought to have a tag to let the recipient know it’s a secret msg.

How about this convention? If it's a message intended for only one player - say, I'm pointing out a mistake that they made and trying to not call the group's attention to it - I'll begin with "This is a private message to you. If you feel the need to reply in detail, use the private tag when you respond."

Trust and meddling. Such a problem. Can you trust a person to react as if they didn't see the info. I'm not a fan of hidden messages. That is my answer.

Since that doesn't apply to what I was talking about, you need not be concerned.

That's an interesting question. There isn't an explicit set of rules for wrestling and choking in official 5e, so we'd have to make something ourselves. I think, for ease of use, I'm leaning toward something like this for humanoids:
- grapple check to grab the neck, if possible
- After the round of the initial grapple, maintain the grapple for a number of rounds equal to the target's CON modifier (minimum 1) to knock the target unconscious.

Now I might apply modifiers to the grapple checks based on size differences, as it will be harder to grab and choke a giant than a pixie. These rules would only apply to creatures with consciousness, a circulatory system, one brain, and anatomy familiar to the wrestling attacker.

What does everyone think? Once we decide on a ruleset we like, I'll document it in the initial post of optional rules.

Seems solid enough to me.

I would look at some class features like the monks stunning strike. The house rule must not be better than class features.

What you are suggesting can put any humanoid down in as little as 2 rounds. That is strong.
I would have you do non-lethal damage instead while you grabbing. Something like 1d10+2*proficiency. That could take a 25hp guard down in 2 to 4 rounds ~ 12 to 30 seconds

I have a question about Inspiration. In the D&D 5e rules, Inspiration can be granted for any of a variety of reasons. But it is expended to grant ADV on a roll. This implicitly means that the player using Inspiration has to declare it before making the initial roll. The intent, as I have always understood it, is for players to use their Inspiration for particularly critical rolls: "I really have to win this race, so I'll spend my Inspiration to get ADV on my CON check," or "Half the party is down and dying, I only have 5 HP, and this spellcaster is going to kill the rest if he maintains his concentration on that spell, so I'll spend my Inspiration in my attempt to hit him and break his concentration."

That's a great goal, but in practice, I've observed that very few players think to use Inspiration in this way. They either spend it as soon as they get it, or they forget to use it at all when the chips are down and tension is high. If anything, I've observed that this dynamic is even more pronounced in play-by-post games, where the slow pace of turns (and the fact that people log in for a few minutes every day or two) seems to diminish the urgency.

So I have been considering an adjustment to how Inspiration is used. Specifically, I'm considering letting people spend Inspiration in the normal way - gaining advantage when spending Inspiration before a roll - but also spend Inspiration like the Lucky trait: if you make a roll and are dissatisfied with the result but the DM hasn't yet described the result, you can spend Inspiration to roll again. You must use the new result, and you can't use more Inspiration to roll a third time.

How does that sound to you? I know it's a change, but I know some tables already use Inspiration this way, I think it isn't a game-breaking change, and I think it might encourage people to use Inspiration more often.

I vote both. I’m usually good about remembering things in my DnD games (thank you weird mental focusing on random things), but I forget sometimes more specific things I can do and despite playing pbp for a long while, I’m still honestly new to DnD and don’t have all the basic things memorized yet.

I know I’d appreciate the ability to go "oh shit, I forgot I could use an advantage roll with this" *tosses a second roll onto my post before hibernating my phone*

The inspiration mechanic does'nt really work that well in 5e. I remember reading the D&D One rules where they were given more often, and thus more used. Humans start the day with inspiration for instance. I don't precisely remember how it went, but I believe it has worked as you describe. As an advantage or a reroll. Both are useful, as the rouge can get his sneak attack in using a inspiration, and the figther can use his reroll when he fumbles the heroic act.

I don't think inspiration is very useful if the point is to get people to role play. I think everyone (except me) has been doing a pretty good job. I've never had inspiration, so I won't vote

Honestly, I'm not a fan if inspiration in general. It's a limited resource, and while it's intended to let you make sure you come through in the clutch and provide these awesome moments your group will talk about for years...

Using it usually just ends up feeling bad.

Either you roll a 2 and a 5, seriously missing the shot you had to make, or the opponent saves anyway, or some other result that just makes it feel like you wasted it -- the exact opposite of the feeling it's intended to create.

...that's all a discussion for another time. Anyway, voted for the houserule to give a little more versatility to using Advantage.

The "table" games I play in use the latter option. No one ever remembers they have the inspiration until there is a critical moment and their roll wasn't optimal and then they start scanning their sheet for a "what can I do now to try and fix this" option. Being able to "wait let me try again!" before the result is announced has been the norm for me in most games I've played.

can Ishi use his BeaSt sense nd Speak with Animals rituals with the Druid in bear form? also could he collect hair from the bear to make his totem spirit smulet,

We could role play thus with Ishi being extra polite and obsequious,

Lol. Morik would be like "wtf?" But I think that’d be fun, I’m game for it.

Hey Spaceseeker, I has a question about the adventure card benefit thingys. What exactly do you define as a session? One in game day, one IRL day, once per adventure section?

Thank you for drawing this to my attention. I realize now that I hadn't added this to the list of conventions, though I did address it in the original post. The answer is: for the purposes of those cards, it's once per long rest, which is about once every 24 hours in-game.

Do the benefits stack? (Benefit from last level usable at this level as well?)

Yes, each benefit is permanent, and each can be used once per long rest (if they say "once per session" - which I think they all do).

About the Steel Defender's Deflect Attack ability: I was considering whether it makes sense for the Steel Defender to be able to Deflect an attack when it is restrained. While it makes a little sense that it wouldn't be able to Deflect if it can't move (restrained) because you might imagine that it is jumping to interpose itself, at the same time I thought of the Paladin's Interception fighting style. The Paladin can intercept (mechanically and narratively similar to the Deflect Attack) even when restrained, as long as the paladin is armed. Well, the Steel Defenders armaments are part of its body. So here's what I'm considering: if it's adjacent to the attacker, it can still Deflect (using Adran's reaction) even when it cannot move from grappling/restraint (also including when prone??), but it would NOT be able to when unconscious, stunned, paralyzed, or otherwise incapacitated. If we agree, this will apply to all such similar reaction-based abilities. What do you think?

One question: Would it be the Artificer's reaction?

You already have to use a bonus action to instruct it to do anything beyond dodge. (I assume that includes telling it to use its Deflect Attack ability if the situation presents itself.) If Deflect Attack also takes your reaction, that's effectively two actions to use an ability. The way it's worded, I always read it as the Defender uses its own reaction to utilize Deflect Attack.

That seems a bit stiff. 🤷 That said, as the GM it's entirely your call.

Yes, that's Rules as Written for the Deflect Attack ability.

My question is about which conditions might affect such an ability.

I understand your question, but I'm not currently addressing that as I have one of my own.
I don't think it is though. The write-up says the Steel Defender can use its reaction.
I'm certainly open to seeing the rule that confirms that it has to use the Artificer's reaction, but in its own write-up it doesn't seem to specify.

That's fine by me.

I was mostly just trying to be sure because 1) I'm always happy to learn, and 2) action economy being what it is, knowing what takes what action can be important.

Also... RAW can be weird and Jeremy Crawford isn't always helpful. Lol

I actually feel that the rules are very clear on this point.
The Steeldefender act as a separate creature, with its own movement and reactions. But if you want an attack then the action economy dictates that the artificer uses a bonus action.

It's been maybe 14 hours since the party took their last long rest in the Grayhaven bolt hole. The 5e rules say that "You can only take one long rest in a 24 hour period," which is one of the two reasons I have been tracking time in the "Passage of Time" thread.

The phrase can be interpreted in one of three ways (that I've seen in D&D5 games):
1) A minimum of 24 hours must pass between long rests (the long rest doesn't count as part of the 24 hours)
2) A minimum of 16 hours must pass between long rests (the long rest counts as part of the 24 hours)
3) A party can take a long rest only once between one midnight and the next, ie. only once each day (the 24 hours is considered independently of when the long rest happens).

I prefer #2, but I am suggesting that we run with #3, both for ease of timekeeping and because the party may want to rest now, without having to idle for a couple more hours. What do you think?

what about the elvish trance?
and watches?

I’m down to run with the third option, especially if it makes things easier for you.

Same. Anything to make GM life easier so they can spend more time in the game with us dingbats and less time mathing.

#2 is how I've always viewed it, it makes the most sense narratively IMO. That said, if you want to run #3, then run #3.

Despite the literal reading of the rules, I have always been happy to say that a 4-hour elvish trance can count as a long rest. In fact, I suspect we've already played it that way in this game. I see no reason to change that. That being the case, whatever we decide upon for long rests in general would apply to elvish trances used as long rests...that is to say, while an elf can go into a trance at any time, only one trance can count as a long rest in the given period.

I'm not sure what you mean by "watches," though...is there a rule or ruling needed about watches?

I'm good with whichever option makes it easier for you the DM.

OK, I've updated the list of conventions (at the start of this thread) with the two clarifications: elven trances and long rests.