Dmg 252 5e

There are a lot of variant rules in the DMG. I feel like every time I see a Reddit thread where someone asks for a rule for some obscure need, one of the top responses is 'DMG, page x'. Despite this, I've never actually sat down and read all of them. Now I'm going to, and I'll write down my thoughts about each one to see how many of these variant rules may have a place in your game.

Magic Item Variant Rules

Explosives Optional DMG 267. Facing Optional DMG 252. Falling Optional XGE 77. Familiars Variant MM 347. Familiars Variant VGM 213. Fear and Horror Optional DMG 266. Feats Optional PHB 165. Firearms Optional DMG 267. Flanking Optional DMG 251. Group Patrons TCE 83. Healers Kit Dependency DMG 266. Healing Surges DMG 266. Hero Points Optional DMG 264. Can a touch spell delivered by the familiar trigger the Death Domain clerics Touch of Death dnd-5e spells class-feature cleric familiars share.

Potion Mixing (pg. 140)

When you mix two potions, the effects can be volatile. Roll 1d100 to see what happens! There's a 55% chance that the potion functions normally, a 1 % chance it blows up, and a 1% chance that one of the potion effects becomes permanent.

Rule Evaluation: I like this one. It's simple and can result in some whacky situations. I might make both potions work less often as I feel it's the least exciting result, both narratively and mechanically. Even just one of the potion effects working is more interesting since characters won't know which one is working until they drink it.

Would I use this in my game? Yup! It is a reasonable, low effort way of handling potion mixtures and makes potions feel unpredictable and magical.

Scroll Mishaps (pg. 140)

Whenever you cast a spell from a scroll, you have to make a DC 10 intelligence save or bad stuff happens. Bad stuff can range from the spell targeting someone random, or going off 1d12 hours later.

Rule Evaluation: I don't love this one given how scrolls work in 5e. There are already limitations on scrolls, like that you can only use a scroll if you have its spell on your spell list. I might implement a rule like this if I opened scrolls up to being usable by non-casters. Casters could use scrolls without the worry of a mishap, but the barbarian might mess up his pronunciation and goof up the casting.

Would I use this in my game? Not unless I tweaked scrolls.

Wands That Don't Recharge (pg.141)

Most wands are rechargeable; this rule allows for wands that aren't. This rule puts a hard limit on how many uses you get out of some wands.

Rule Evaluation: Not much to say about this one. It just makes wands a little more versatile of a tool for DMs, since it allows for chargeable and not chargeable wands. It's useful for providing powerful wands that you don't want getting recharged. It might be ok to give a low-level party a wand with a couple of casts of fireball on it if they can't recharge it, for example.

Would I use this in my game? Sure! I'm sort of surprised this is a variant rule and not just the default behavior of wands.

Running the Game Variant Rules

Automatic Successes (pg.239)

If you think it makes sense for a character to succeed, you can have characters do so without rolling. For example, you might not have your 20 Strength barbarian roll to kick down a door even If you would have your 8 Strength Rogue roll for the same action.

Rule Evaluation: I think there's an argument to be made that this isn't even a variant rule. DM's are supposed to call for rolls, but they always have the right not to. Either way, I like this rule. If the character is doing something for which there is no consequence for failure, or it would make no sense for them to fail, there's no reason to call for a roll.

Would I use this in my game? Absolutely! I already do this, and I didn't know it was a variant rule.

Players Give Out Inspiration (pg. 240)

You've got enough to think about while running the game, let the players give out inspiration instead.

Rule Evaluation: This one is fine. The only issue with this rule is that your players might not remember to give inspiration either. I suppose a group could try to abuse this rule, but you can always take inspiration privileges away if you need to.

Would I use this in my game? Yeah, I use this rule already. My players also forget to give out inspiration, though, so it's basically moot.

Flanking (pg. 251)

If you have an ally on the opposite side of an enemy, you get advantage on attacks against that enemy.

Rule Evaluation: I don't love flanking in 5e for a few reasons. First, it's so easy to trigger that you devalue other methods of getting advantage a little. Spells like faerie fire or combat options like knocking someone prone lose a little 'oomph' when getting advantage is so easy.

Flanking bonuses are a little trickier to get in previous versions of D&D. In 3.5 and Pathfinder, for example, if I walk around a target, I'll usually provoke an attack of opportunity. In 5e, you can dance around monsters at will, making flanking trivially easy to achieve. Unfortunately, this also means there is very little tactical depth added by the flanking rules.

Rule Evaluation: I like this one. It's simple and can result in some whacky situations. I might make both potions work less often as I feel it's the least exciting result, both narratively and mechanically. Even just one of the potion effects working is more interesting since characters won't know which one is working until they drink it.

Would I use this in my game? Yup! It is a reasonable, low effort way of handling potion mixtures and makes potions feel unpredictable and magical.

Scroll Mishaps (pg. 140)

Whenever you cast a spell from a scroll, you have to make a DC 10 intelligence save or bad stuff happens. Bad stuff can range from the spell targeting someone random, or going off 1d12 hours later.

Rule Evaluation: I don't love this one given how scrolls work in 5e. There are already limitations on scrolls, like that you can only use a scroll if you have its spell on your spell list. I might implement a rule like this if I opened scrolls up to being usable by non-casters. Casters could use scrolls without the worry of a mishap, but the barbarian might mess up his pronunciation and goof up the casting.

Would I use this in my game? Not unless I tweaked scrolls.

Wands That Don't Recharge (pg.141)

Most wands are rechargeable; this rule allows for wands that aren't. This rule puts a hard limit on how many uses you get out of some wands.

Rule Evaluation: Not much to say about this one. It just makes wands a little more versatile of a tool for DMs, since it allows for chargeable and not chargeable wands. It's useful for providing powerful wands that you don't want getting recharged. It might be ok to give a low-level party a wand with a couple of casts of fireball on it if they can't recharge it, for example.

Would I use this in my game? Sure! I'm sort of surprised this is a variant rule and not just the default behavior of wands.

Running the Game Variant Rules

Automatic Successes (pg.239)

If you think it makes sense for a character to succeed, you can have characters do so without rolling. For example, you might not have your 20 Strength barbarian roll to kick down a door even If you would have your 8 Strength Rogue roll for the same action.

Rule Evaluation: I think there's an argument to be made that this isn't even a variant rule. DM's are supposed to call for rolls, but they always have the right not to. Either way, I like this rule. If the character is doing something for which there is no consequence for failure, or it would make no sense for them to fail, there's no reason to call for a roll.

Would I use this in my game? Absolutely! I already do this, and I didn't know it was a variant rule.

Players Give Out Inspiration (pg. 240)

You've got enough to think about while running the game, let the players give out inspiration instead.

Rule Evaluation: This one is fine. The only issue with this rule is that your players might not remember to give inspiration either. I suppose a group could try to abuse this rule, but you can always take inspiration privileges away if you need to.

Would I use this in my game? Yeah, I use this rule already. My players also forget to give out inspiration, though, so it's basically moot.

Flanking (pg. 251)

If you have an ally on the opposite side of an enemy, you get advantage on attacks against that enemy.

Rule Evaluation: I don't love flanking in 5e for a few reasons. First, it's so easy to trigger that you devalue other methods of getting advantage a little. Spells like faerie fire or combat options like knocking someone prone lose a little 'oomph' when getting advantage is so easy.

Flanking bonuses are a little trickier to get in previous versions of D&D. In 3.5 and Pathfinder, for example, if I walk around a target, I'll usually provoke an attack of opportunity. In 5e, you can dance around monsters at will, making flanking trivially easy to achieve. Unfortunately, this also means there is very little tactical depth added by the flanking rules.

Would I use this in my game? No, I don't think this one is right for my table, and I would hesitate to use it if I was aiming for more tactical combat.

Diagonals (pg. 252)

Instead of counting diagonal movement as 5ft per square, alternate between counting it as 5ft and 10ft.

Rule Evaluation: If it bothers you that diagonal movement is pretty quick in 5e, this is a reasonable rule to implement. It's a relatively minor change that won't break anything.

Dmg 252 5e Manual

Would I use this in my game? No, I'm okay with 5ft per square diagonally. I don't think either way is mechanically more interesting, but keeping movement costs uniform is one less thing to remember, and I don't feel strongly enough about it to make movement even slightly more complicated.

That's it for this time!

Dmg 252 5e Feats

Next time I'll be looking at more rules in the Running the game section. Look out for my takes on facing and madness (I know that's a subsystem, but I'm counting it as an optional rule)!

Dmg 252 5e Series