House rules I’d like to try

Previously I wrote about some of the house rules I’ve implemented. Here’s a handful of things I would like to try! All of this is, of course, stolen, so I’ve tried to provide some kind of credit where I could. Sometimes it’s a citation of credit.

Alternative initiative systems

So, I don’t feel like initiative is a particularly big problem—or even the right problem—that needs solving, honestly, but I am very curious to see how some other options might influence the feel of combat.

One version people mention fairly often is AngryGM’s Popcorn Initiative. What I (theoretically) like about this version is that it gives players a really concrete motivation to be engaged with what’s happening right now. Ideally, players have some idea of what they want to do and they might update that as they see what happens. In reality, it can be tough to keep that up when your plan gets junked 3 times between turns. Why not skip straight to the “oh oh I have something I can do right now“?

Another system that I’m very interested to try is “Fast/Slow” initiative, which I learned about from Tab Atkins. I like that there are very deliberate trade-offs, benefits to both going fast and slow. And reasons you might change round-to-round. I do wonder if it stacks the deck even further onto the PC side. Making challenging encounters is already, uh, challenging.

I’m interested in things that can potentially change each round because otherwise “high” initiative really doesn’t matter after the first round. I’m not especially interested in things that require telegraphing your move (like a version Colville described where lowest wins and quicker actions use smaller die) or are “crunchy.” Stopping to collect initiative is enough of an interruption as-is, I’d rather not have to do math again each time.

There are some things to shake out about things that give people advantage on, or bonuses to initiative rolls—but since high initiative really only matters for Assassin Rogues and even then only the one time, it feels solvable.

A smaller variation: alternate skill checks

In 5e, Initiative is always a Dexterity check. There are some bonuses, like Barbarian’s Feral Instinct, Bard’s Jack of all Trades, or Gloom Stalker Ranger’s Dread Ambusher. But Dexterity—the implication being it’s all down to physical reaction time—doesn’t always make the most sense. What about when a fight breaks out mid-conversation? What about the party member who snuck around back to take advantage of the distraction?

Some folks have mentioned conditionally using Wisdom (I think I saw that on a comment on one of Dael’s videos but I can’t find it now). Maybe it’s up to the player, but not available if you’re surprised. Barbarians still get advantage, Bard’s still get half proficiency, Gloom Stalker still… adds both, I guess?

Pathfinder 2e makes Initiative a skill check. The default is Perception, but if you’re sneaking, you might use Stealth. If you’re conversing, maybe Insight—or Deception. If you’re sprinting into the room, maybe Athletics.

I like that because I think it feels more verisimilitudinous (that is apparently the real word, I don’t know what to tell you). And it’s not too crunchy. It would probably be a huge boon to Assassin Rogues. Most other benefits would translate, I think. Not sure what to do about Gloom Stalker but we could figure it out if it mattered. But it still suffers from the problem that, after round 1, it doesn’t matter anymore.

Language skill progression

This one is straight-up making something PCs can normally do harder, so I don’t know if I’d find a table that was into it, but in 5e, you either know a language fluently, or you don’t at all, and that seems silly.

I like most of Dael’s system for language skills. Your skill is 0–100, where 100 is fluent, and anything less than that represents some chance of failure to read, understand, or communicate something. Roll a d100, roll equal or under your skill, and you got it. I think her system for starting language skills works well, but I’d want more opportunity to improve during downtime, or even on the road via practice. (In general I think the DMG rules for learning new skills/tools/etc are too onerous, but probably derive from having two levels: completely inept or complete mastery.)

My only hesitation is that it risks getting a little more crunchy, but how often do you get to use d100s, really? I suspect the trick would be not calling for rolls too often.

Rumors

Players have to write down rumors, some true and some false, that the other PCs would have heard about their character. I don’t remember the first place I heard this, but I think it might trace back to Wil Wheaton?

There are a few variations of this, in terms of how many you write and how you distribute them, but the key part in all variations is that some fraction, like 1/4 or 1/3, are false. No one but you and the DM knows which ones are real, which creates an aura of plausible uncertainty around each one.

This isn’t so much a house rule, but I also very much like the idea of PCs coming in with existing relationships. Maybe not everyone knowing each other, like Monster of the Week’s “History” mechanic, but some shared backstory. Maybe some part of this gets played out in a few session 0.5s with each group—Noam did this in a recent campaign and it’s worked out wonderfully. I’d like to think about how to combine that with some idea of rumors.

Partial success, or success at a cost

Technically, the DMG mentions “success at a cost” and “degrees of failure” in Chapter 8, under “Resolution and Consequences”:

When a character fails a roll by only 1 or 2, you can allow the character to succeed at the cost of a complication or hindrance.

DMG, p. 242

So is this a house rule or an optional rule or just RAW? 🤷🏻‍♂️

Rev, the keeper of The Critshow (which I sadly haven’t listened to in a while since my podcast activity waned again) had one of my favorite approaches to this. He—if I remember this answer correctly—interpreted the description of a partial success on the Act Under Pressure move a little uniquely. It says:

On a 7-9 the Keeper is going to give you a worse outcome, hard choice, or price to pay.

Monster of the Week

He interpreted this as: the Keeper gives you each of these and you choose. It’s like if you trip, you have a split second to try to decide if you’ll try to protect the thing your carrying or sacrifice it and protect yourself. He reasoned that the Hunter would have that same split second.

Coming up with the options feels like a lot of work, though I suspect it’s not once you’re in the habit—and Rev said as much, as well. But it might be simpler: if you fail a Fireball’s Dex Save DC by 1, maybe you can succeed by dropping prone. Or if you just miss the Acrobatics check to jump over the fence, you can succeed but you’ll snag some piece of gear and lose it on the other side.

My biggest hold-up here is that I worry there are a number of situations that don’t have obvious trade-offs to make. If you fail the Cha Save against Banishment by one, could you succeed but it mentally exhausts you and you’re stunned or incapacitated for a turn, or maybe you now have disadvantage on your next saving throw? Against something like Banishment or Feeblemind, what’s a trade-off that a PC would even consider possibly not worth it? Maybe it’s OK to say this only makes sense in certain situations—but there’s that habit thing again.

Some other things

• Running – This is a thing I’ve talked with Noam about but I think would take playtesting. Is there a satisfying way to bring the 3.5e “Run” “full round action” into 5e? Like you can full on sprint (regular movement speed is a pretty lazy walking pace) to move a total of 4x your movement but it takes action, bonus action, and maybe reaction. Maybe it grants advantage to attacks of opportunity. Would you need to tweak Rogues/Monks/Expeditious Retreat at all?
• Simpler weight/bulk – In a world of good digital character sheets, this is less important, but if I had to track this by hand again, maybe something like PF2e’s 1/0.1/0.01 system would be better. Or maybe it’s just a thing I’ll more or less ignore forever until it gets ridiculous. (“That dragon’s hoard is probably 3000lbs of coins, you can’t carry that.”)
• Scaling abilities with proficiency bonus – Tasha’s started introducing a number of mechanics where you can use them a number of times per day equal to your proficiency bonus, instead of equal to a particular modifier (often Wisdom). This removes one of the downsides to multiclassing: you are still probably losing out on one or more ASIs, but it doesn’t have the compounding effect of limiting abilities you already have. I’d strongly consider replacing the modifier with PB for things like Bardic Inspiration, a bunch of Cleric Domain abilities, etc.

What are your fave house rules or things you’d really like to try? (I ask the 3 people who read this blog.)