PDA

View Full Version : Homebrew Review Panel



R.Shackleford
2016-07-25, 05:36 PM
So, I want to start a Homebrew Review Panel. This will be a group of people who DM and Play the game of D&D and will give a seal of approval for good homebrew works.

I would like to make a DM group and a Player group so we can get both sides.

So far there is me, Eko, and Kryx on board with this idea... Though nothing is fleshed out.

This will specifically be for 5e so that people can obtain quality material since WotC has decided to be slow about it.

Any interest, comments, or questions are appreciated.

MrStabby
2016-07-25, 05:39 PM
A great idea, as long as it is in the homebrew forum not here in the 5th edition pages.

I think there is too much bleed from the homebrew forum to this page as it is - keeping the homebrew in the place where people go to to post and to review homebrew would be, in my opinion, advisable.

DanyBallon
2016-07-25, 05:44 PM
I think it's a great idea, but I'm a bit warry, as most of the homebrew I've seen is some kind of power creep, as they try to fix very specific issues by powering up everything else, instead of toning down what is the real problem

R.Shackleford
2016-07-25, 05:52 PM
A great idea, as long as it is in the homebrew forum not here in the 5th edition pages.

I think there is too much bleed from the homebrew forum to this page as it is - keeping the homebrew in the place where people go to to post and to review homebrew would be, in my opinion, advisable.

In all honesty I'm not even sure it would stay just on this site.

Haven't figured that much out yet haha.


I think it's a great idea, but I'm a bit warry, as most of the homebrew I've seen is some kind of power creep, as they try to fix very specific issues by powering up everything else, instead of toning down what is the real problem

There are two types of power creep.

PC that increases what you already are great at (wizard versatility, new spells are power Creep for them).

PC that increases what you can't already do.

The second type of power creep is typically fine.

DracoKnight
2016-07-25, 06:00 PM
I'd be happy to contribute to analyzing products and helping create them. Also, someone should message JNAProductions - he's usually got great opinions on how to balance things that are OP. ^_^

EDIT: hell, I'll set up an external site for us to do this on. Give me a couple days to do that, though :)

Nicrosil
2016-07-25, 06:02 PM
While I don't have much experience in homebrew or balancing, I have a group that meets pretty regularly every week, so I'm game to field test stuff.

Grod_The_Giant
2016-07-25, 06:05 PM
Hmm. It's a neat idea. I vote for a secondary site, though perhaps with a single discussion thread here.

DracoKnight
2016-07-25, 06:06 PM
Hmm. It's a neat idea. I vote for a secondary site, though perhaps with a single discussion thread here.

I'm with Grod, let's do an external site. And again, I'm more than happy to set it up next week, but this week I have midterms :smalltongue:

Kryx
2016-07-25, 06:07 PM
I think there is too much bleed from the homebrew forum to this page as it is - keeping the homebrew in the place where people go to to post and to review homebrew would be, in my opinion, advisable.
There is so much bleed because that forum is awful. It combines all editions and as a result sees very little traffic. As a heavy Homebrewer myself I forget it even exists half the time. Giantitp doesn't care to fix it however so you get the bleed here to actually receive feedback.

MrStabby
2016-07-25, 06:08 PM
In all honesty I'm not even sure it would stay just on this site.

Haven't figured that much out yet haha.



There are two types of power creep.

PC that increases what you already are great at (wizard versatility, new spells are power Creep for them).

PC that increases what you can't already do.

The second type of power creep is typically fine.


I would argue the second type isn't fine usually. It is the kind of creep that steps on peoples toes. It is like granting expertise to a fighter or sneak attack to a paladin.

R.Shackleford
2016-07-25, 06:20 PM
I would argue the second type isn't fine usually. It is the kind of creep that steps on peoples toes. It is like granting expertise to a fighter or sneak attack to a paladin.

There is no such thing as "stepping on people's toes".

If no one else is playing a sneaking type, then using an avenger subclass on a cleric (sneaking , mobile) works great.

Even if you have three rogues you then have a cleric that can sneak with them.

Stepping on toes is a PC v PC mentality that the game isn't really made for.

MrStabby
2016-07-25, 06:29 PM
There is no such thing as "stepping on people's toes".

If no one else is playing a sneaking type, then using an avenger subclass on a cleric (sneaking , mobile) works great.

Even if you have three rogues you then have a cleric that can sneak with them.

Stepping on toes is a PC v PC mentality that the game isn't really made for.

I think it is a pretty core part of what most people would regard as good DMing to allow people to shine. Each player should get a chance to have their character be better than all the others at something and to take the spotlight for a while. Making that player's "thing" equal amongst all players undermines that.

Zman
2016-07-25, 06:32 PM
Sounds like a stellar idea and I am on board.

Tanuki Tales
2016-07-25, 06:34 PM
Good luck on your endeavor. :xykon:

R.Shackleford
2016-07-25, 06:35 PM
I think it is a pretty core part of what most people would regard as good DMing to allow people to shine. Each player should get a chance to have their character be better than all the others at something and to take the spotlight for a while. Making that player's "thing" equal amongst all players undermines that.


What is keeping 1 cleric out of 4 from coming up with a great idea or using a spell they prepared in a way that the others didn't think about?

Just because people have simular abilities doesn't mean they will use them in the same way.

Edit

I've seen plenty of single class games run smoothly. Even all Rogue parties.

Edit 2

The DM can put you in all the chance to shine that he or she wants, it's up to the player to be full of sunshine and farts in order to stand out.

Tanuki Tales
2016-07-25, 06:56 PM
I'm going to chime in, as a denizen of the homebrew subforum:

If you're going to do a committee that decides what is and is not included in your compendium, you're going to have to do it off site. The mods pretty much banned the existence of such projects several years ago when they broke up and killed the Monster Class project. They don't believe such a thing was conducive to the forum experience they wanted to create and was too prone to basically cronyism.

You'll probably want to shoot Roland or another mod a PM to clarify that, but it probably still holds true.

Tanuki Tales
2016-07-25, 07:06 PM
Thanks for the heads up, I'll ask him. One thing, there's no committee, things are community selected. If there is a committee, their only duties would be to make/modify posts with links to the content that passed, and to set in place the initial rules when this thing is started. They would have as much of a say in the content as anyone else. Oh, they would also maintain the off-site location if that's what gonna end up happening.

As long as everyone gets an equal vote and it's ultimately the decision of the community, you might be alright, since that's the kind of paradigm the homebrew contests work under. Still, definitely give Comrade St. Jude a ring; better safe than sorry because they decide to shut the whole thing down.

R.Shackleford
2016-07-25, 08:00 PM
As long as everyone gets an equal vote and it's ultimately the decision of the community, you might be alright, since that's the kind of paradigm the homebrew contests work under. Still, definitely give Comrade St. Jude a ring; better safe than sorry because they decide to shut the whole thing down.

In all honesty I figured people would bring a homebrew option. Then each person would give it their rating and perhaps a note. Then the score would be tallied up and that would be the score for the homebrew (probably some cute rating system..
Like... goblin, akheg, beholder, and dragon).

Tanuki Tales
2016-07-25, 08:04 PM
In all honesty I figured people would bring a homebrew option. Then each person would give it their rating and perhaps a note. Then the score would be tallied up and that would be the score for the homebrew (probably some cute rating system..
Like... goblin, akheg, beholder, and dragon).

Again, check with the mods. I vaguely remember that kind of system being one of the alternatives they proposed to the Monster Class and similar projects, but I believe it was ultimately decided to be more trouble than it's worth.

I'm definitely rooting for you guys to pull this off. I support homebrew in all of its facets. :smallsmile:

Haruki-kun
2016-07-25, 08:20 PM
Moving this to Homebrew. Good luck.

R.Shackleford
2016-07-25, 09:20 PM
Moving this to Homebrew. Good luck.

Is there a reason why this is being moved to homebrew when this thread isn't specifically about the homebrew?

I'm looking for help/questions/comments on such a set up, specifically 5e players/DM, and not actually reviewing homebrew with this thread.

I mean... If homebrews were being reviewed I could see the switch but this thread isn't about reviewing homebrew but getting info from the 5e community here on giantitp about how to set a system up in order to do so.

RickAllison
2016-07-25, 09:21 PM
I'm game. I don't have as much experience as many people on this forum, but I enjoy trying to break things. Trying to break homebrew is one of the best ways to figure out what adjustments need to be made!

Tanuki Tales
2016-07-25, 11:12 PM
Is there a reason why this is being moved to homebrew when this thread isn't specifically about the homebrew?

I'm looking for help/questions/comments on such a set up, specifically 5e players/DM, and not actually reviewing homebrew with this thread.

I mean... If homebrews were being reviewed I could see the switch but this thread isn't about reviewing homebrew but getting info from the 5e community here on giantitp about how to set a system up in order to do so.

Probably because it's a topic about homebrew and starting up a homebrew project that will be partially run on here, which would classify it as belonging in the homebrew section. -shrugs-

You should shoot one of the homebrew mods to see if they can change your thread flair, so at least everyone knows this is a 5th edition thread. Next homebrew is pretty numerous and populous over here.

Regitnui
2016-07-26, 02:10 AM
I'll be up for offering opinion on flavour.

DeAnno
2016-07-26, 02:56 AM
I would probably participate in such a thing, but structuring strikes me as make or break. I think in general such a project should look to produce a low to medium throughput of high-quality content, possibly with actual editors, review cycles, perhaps even actual playtesting, and so forth.

It might also pay to try to release content in bunches sort of like the splatbooks of old, where you have a group of new options all centered around a common theme. It might give the project a lot of extra oomph to be able to release something like a big (4e Dragon-esque) pdf every month, or even a bigger (3.5e/4e splat-esque) pdf every couple months.

Secret Wizard
2016-07-26, 03:08 AM
A couple of topics that need to be tabled:

Mechanics: Blind reviews vs. playtest reviews. If people are going to voice their opinion over gameplay mechanics involved in homebrew material - will they test them on real games, mock games or just speak from a purely theoretical point of view?

Grading: Explicit criteria matter. This I think is the core of the matter. Myself, I rate homebrew material with conscious and subconscious criteria. Some people will downvote to hell something that others will defend stalwartly. Rather than positing material and having it trashed or praised by a jury of strangers, I think creating a set of values which are looked for in homebrew (or even first-party) content.

For this concern, I put forward the following grading criteria, just in the spirit of getting the ball rolling and of course, subject to change:


Conciseness. Whether the material feels complete - both in that it has nothing missing and nothing extra. If it's missing something, it creates gameplay issues; if it's needlessly complicated, then it's too unappealing to apply.
Balance. Whether the material feels like it would maintain a gratifying level of challenge for the players and the DM.
Originality. Whether the material breaks new ground or whether it wanders on the safe side. While not necessarily a bad thing to lack - as it ensures the work is likely to be easy to gauge in terms of power - any work that has this in spades could be forgiven for whiffing in other areas.

Kryx
2016-07-26, 03:50 AM
I agree the process is paramount. I think we'll discover than many of us have different desires of the game as we evaluate options. And feelings will be hurt depending on how this works.

Based on the goal of having the content be respected I'd back DeAnno's suggestions of low to medium amount with high quality.
I'd add on to that and Secret's Wizards ideas that all content should:

look like 5e (See naturalcrit)
be worded with 5e wording wherever possible.
Mathematically balanced
Balanced across fighting styles, not just amazing on GWM and awful on TWF or vice versa (this is a big limiting factor)
Fun
Unique


Keep in mind there are already some groups doing this as well.
https://www.reddit.com/r/unearthedarcana already has some great homebrew. They also went through and grouped items that they consider high quality: https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B2UyuHLUuCjxYmhWY1JSM01zbG8&usp=drive_web

Secret Wizard
2016-07-26, 04:45 AM
Honestly, some of the curated content is pretty great but some of it has glaring issues to me that should have been brought up at some point.

One of my players brought me the Order of the Common Man and I had to retool it a bit because a lot of the features simply sounded like a pain to work with. There's a particular feature that affects "those who consider themselves better than the average joe", which not only forces you to make a snap decision on an NPCs psyche, but also has you take an ontological analysis of what would the average joe constitute to, say, a goblin.

Kryx
2016-07-26, 04:48 AM
Agreed that their stuff isn't perfect. I wouldn't use most of it without tweaks. I'm just saying there are other groups out there.

DeAnno
2016-07-26, 05:29 AM
Mathematically balanced
Balanced across fighting styles, not just amazing on GWM and awful on TWF or vice versa (this is a big limiting factor)



This in particular I think could be the cause of a lot of controversy. I think it goes beyond the bounds of a project like this to issue new errata which might nerf some of the strongest options in 5e down in power (whether or not this is even wise is mostly irrelevant to this discussion, I think.) The problem though, is how do we treat homebrew power levels? Should a new feat for two weapon fighting or one handed fighting or thrown weapons be competitive with the power of Sharpshooter or GWM? Some might decry things like that as overpowered, but they do exist and "set the bar" so to speak. This conundrum reminds me a lot of Painful Oath from 4e: it was a very powerful Dragon mag feat for Avengers, but such a thing was probably needed to raise them up to even close to competitive with other, better Strikers like Rangers.

The same could be said for spells; do we want to aim for spells that are competitive with average spells, or competitive with good spells? Should races have to be competitive with Half Elf and Variant Human (or, even, Aaracockra)? Bigger things like Subclasses should be easier to "fit in", but any smaller feature with a lot of content already (some good, some bad, and some ugly) is going to run into this type of issue.

Kryx
2016-07-26, 05:42 AM
I'm not suggesting this panel balance current options. I do, but that's a different topic.

I'm suggesting every new option takes the action economy into account. For example if you look at Frenzy it's rather poorly available to nearly all fighting styles. TWF can't use it because of the bonus action cost. PAM isn't served much by using it (~5%) damage and GWM gets about ~7-12% more damage. Overall the feature is incredibly poorly designed to work with some of the main fighting styles of a Frenzying Barbarian.

For spells I think we should aim at the average. I balance spells (see Spell Balance (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1N4QC6EmXE0avgk8jK1aubJcaFoZDYw8b_DuPHh8aBTc/edit#gid=639488216)), but that is mainly buffing really low damage spells. if we use that as a baseline it'd be easy to valuate new spells and that wouldn't require that everyone also balances their spells.

For features it's much more difficult. The gap between those who play with GWM/PAM and those who don't is huge. We have 2 options imo:

Present 2 options: One for GWM/PAM/Sharpshooter games and one for games without those feats.
Balance around the "standard" value of a feat (not including GWM/PAM/Sharpshooter)

I'd suggest option 2

DeAnno
2016-07-26, 05:56 AM
For features it's much more difficult. The gap between those who play with GWM/PAM and those who don't is huge. We have 2 options imo:

Present 2 options: One for GWM/PAM/Sharpshooter games and one for games without those feats.
Balance around the "standard" value of a feat (not including GWM/PAM/Sharpshooter)

I'd suggest option 2

But is the ASI really the "standard" value of a feat in this system? I think there's a lot of evidence it's not. In addition to those big three, there's also Crossbow Expert and Lucky, both of which have the potential to have far more impact than an ASI.

I'm sort of in the other camp; I think to some extent we have to play the cards that core has dealt us. I certainly don't want to release options that make any of the already strong styles appreciably stronger, but if for example I was designing a Thrown weapons feat I would certainly include a -5/+10 in it, along with probably a quick draw analogue and another useful extra.

I think the number of games which are both open to homebrew and inclined to nerf core content is very small. I don't have evidence to back this up, but it just seems like a thought process not many people are going to buy into all that often. By crafting content that mostly assumes that the best feats are not in play, we are crafting content that is ill suited for the majority of our possible userbase.

Regitnui
2016-07-26, 06:49 AM
an ontological analysis of what would the average joe constitute to, say, a goblin.

It's harmless to them, in my campaign. The goblins of my campaign idolize hobgoblins, so have an inferiority complex. Their 'average Joe' is a hobgoblin.

Kryx
2016-07-26, 06:49 AM
Crossbow Expert is indeed in those level of feats. Lucky is not.

I'm not suggesting to nerf core content as part of this system. I'm suggesting to not balance around the 4 outliers unless you're creating a very similar feat for a different weapon style. And if we do create those kind of feats that compete with the weapon outliers we should offer alternatives without the extra power that PAM/GWM/Crossbow/Sharpshooter bring. Otherwise everything becomes as strong as those 4 outliers and the other "standard" power feats are basically removed from the game.

DeAnno
2016-07-26, 07:27 AM
I think it's fine to only put Weapon Style feats on the level of the big 4 (and put them such that more than two can never intersect at once; possibly never even more than 1 1/2 in the way that PAM and GWM have some counterfeiting), and keep everything else on the level of reasonable feats like Sentinel or Alert or whatever. I'm a bit more leery of having a second whole differently balanced group of Weapon Style feats for a theoretical game with certain feats already banned, because I think it sends a divisive message and doesn't really meet the goal of low volume/high quality very well. Maybe such feats could be half feats, so that they were still worth taking in open games for certain situations.

Whatever the merits of Lucky it's safe to assume its enough of an aberration that we don't need to worry about it much anyway (though for short workdays, Lucky, seriously, calm down)

As for spells I think it's generally fine if we never produce anything particularly competitive with say, Haste or Bless or Conjure Possible Polymorphs, since there's a bit more space for a variety of spells on a character.

Kryx
2016-07-26, 07:36 AM
This comes back to not everyone will agree. These are the most contentious feats in the game with a forum post a week created about them with endless debate generated.

Imo the best option is to explain the divide and provide an alternate option(s). For example I know Zman and I both think those style of feats are overpowered, but we have different methods of handling them.

Specter
2016-07-26, 09:33 AM
Count me in. As a DM, I'd like to help.

Zman
2016-07-26, 10:08 AM
This comes back to not everyone will agree. These are the most contentious feats in the game with a forum post a week created about them with endless debate generated.

Imo the best option is to explain the divide and provide an alternate option(s). For example I know Zman and I both think those style of feats are overpowered, but we have different methods of handling them.

Haha, that is the truth. We agree on a lot, we just disagree about how much we agree, or how far we need to go, or the particulars and best methodology for addressing them.

I think a homebrew guidelines could be in order. Basically a framework where the good, the bad, and too good class features/feats etc are pointed out and it is iterated why they fall into those categories and that they should be used as an upper and lower bounds on what homebrew should aim for. So, when a homebrew throwing weapon feat is proposed and it is found to be much better than Savage Attacker, but not quite as good as say Sharpshooter, that feat would fall into the correct balance range, and then would need to be judged on its merits for ease of use, playability, need etc.

As much as I like the idea of balancing 5e, that shouldn't be the aim of this kind of project, this project must assume the stock ruleset for all proposed homebrew. Although, a separate category of homebrew, a tweaks or general balance category, meant to balance the game could be acceptable and each could be judged on its own merits, but wouldn't be used to necessarily judge other homebrew. In a tweaks category we don't necessarily look for the best solution as consensus is near impossible, but we could see if in the scope of that particular balance patch the changes worked and were effective at addressing that particular perceived design flaw. I see that as a an effective compromise, it could even lead to a grouping of particular fixes.

Belac93
2016-07-26, 12:32 PM
I can jump in and offer some advice, if that's fine.

On the ideas of having things that are as a powerful as PAM, GWM, and Sharpshooter, I think that getting out something that good should only happen if it boosts a suboptimal option.

So, say, a feat that boosts daggers, or javelins, or spears, or tridents. Something that makes an option that someone trying to make a character who can pull their weight in combat would never consider, possible, and even good.

Rerem115
2016-07-26, 12:41 PM
Eh, I'll give this a shot. Count me in; there's gotta be something I can do with my (extremely) limited 5e expertise :smalltongue:.

R.Shackleford
2016-07-26, 04:45 PM
In all honesty I wasn't going to use this as a "here is how you fix your homebrew" or "the entire panel agrees on X".

Basically everyone gets ten points. Give it a rating out of 10.

Say what you liked, what you didn't like, and any notes that you want.

This isn't for the benefit of the homebrewer, but for the benefit of players and DMS that run across the homebrew class/monster/race whatever.


For example

Core Fighter (Champion)

Player Rating: 5/10

Pros: Does direct weapon damage

Cons: Not Dynamic. Doesn't grow as a class past level 5, all class festures revolve around doing things tou could already do. Can really be built for basic builds that really any class can emulate well enough.

DM Rating: 8/10

Pros: You will know exactly what the player can do with their class features.

Cons: Almost every other class can be built to outshine the champion on a base level. Sure the Champion can be a higher DPR class but if others can take out creatures in the same number of turns then that extra DPR doesn't mattet.

You need to be careful what you throw at this vlass, they don't have many options or abilities that can overcome basic features of monsters.


Edit

Then whoever all reviewed the homebrew would add their ratings up. So if 10 people rated the Champion a 5 out of 10 it would have a 50/100 rating but each with their own notes so people can see why the homebrew was rated in such a way.

Kryx and I could have totally different opinions and that's fine. He could rate the Champion a 10 and I a 5 and it doesn't matter :)


Edit 2

The rating would be 15/20 or 75% Approval...

We may need to have a minimum number of raters before a publish rating occurs.

JNAProductions
2016-07-26, 04:55 PM
Does this still do stuff? Because I've a good eye for balance.

Kryx
2016-07-26, 06:18 PM
Random people rating seems pointless. From the discussions I've seen around options people rarely read the whole thing much less model the math of options and how it affects many other options.

That's not sufficient to provide reasonable certainty that something is well made or balanced.

DracoKnight
2016-07-26, 06:48 PM
Does this still do stuff? Because I've a good eye for balance.

We're still working on officially forming it. We'd be happy to have you aboard! (Well, at least, I would ^_^)

R.Shackleford
2016-07-26, 07:05 PM
Random people rating seems pointless. From the discussions I've seen around options people rarely read the whole thing much less model the math of options and how it affects many other options.

That's not sufficient to provide reasonable certainty that something is well made or balanced.

So Yelp, Amazon, or any other user rating is pointless?


It would be, essentially, a "verified" user rated type system.

Having different opinions and play styles is actually a plus. If someone sees a few reviews by you and likes your reviews they can look specifically at your rating instead of the overall rating.

If a DM agrees with certain reviewers, that DM could say "homebrew approved by Kryx is allowed but not by R.Shackleford" and so on. Or "if it had a general rating of 75% or higher OR 80% by Kryx you may use the homebrew".

(We could use whatever... 5 star system, x out of 10, or whatever... that part specifically doesn't matter).

DeAnno
2016-07-26, 08:36 PM
I agree that a general Yelpesque rating panel seems like it would just fade into the noise of 5e without something more to it. Strict guidelines, experienced raters with a variety of specialties, a "threshold" beyond which content is folded into some sort of larger document, things like this would put a project above the crowd and make it more worth the effort of implementing in the first place.

Part of the problem with homebrew that a lot of people have is a lack of standardization. There's a perception (for better or for worse) that content from WotC is all on the same page, but content from random homebrewers is going to be randomly balanced according to the individual brewers' tastes and inclinations and biases. Therefore incorporating homebrew into a campaign can result in problems like endless power creep, unlimited forum diving, and constant subjective decisions.

Streamlining a collection (or collections) of homebrew into single cohesive body with well-policed standards fixes many of these problems. Ideally we could get to a similar point that the Ink Monkeys supplements are at in Exalted, above the chaotic morass that most homebrew resides in.

R.Shackleford
2016-07-26, 10:02 PM
I agree that a general Yelpesque rating panel seems like it would just fade into the noise of 5e without something more to it. Strict guidelines, experienced raters with a variety of specialties, a "threshold" beyond which content is folded into some sort of larger document, things like this would put a project above the crowd and make it more worth the effort of implementing in the first place.

Part of the problem with homebrew that a lot of people have is a lack of standardization. There's a perception (for better or for worse) that content from WotC is all on the same page, but content from random homebrewers is going to be randomly balanced according to the individual brewers' tastes and inclinations and biases. Therefore incorporating homebrew into a campaign can result in problems like endless power creep, unlimited forum diving, and constant subjective decisions.

Streamlining a collection (or collections) of homebrew into single cohesive body with well-policed standards fixes many of these problems. Ideally we could get to a similar point that the Ink Monkeys supplements are at in Exalted, above the chaotic morass that most homebrew resides in.

See, this gets into a bad territory.

A review panel should NOT be changing or fixing a homebrew. The homebrew does not belong to the panel (well, unless someone submits theirs for review) and that isn't the point of it at all. The panel would be able to make recommendations or gives notes on how they would.like to see improvements.

Finding, rating, and showing people what is and what isn't quality homebrew is the entire point of a panel such as this.

If you want to make a panel of homebrewers who create quality homebrew... Well, that isn't really a review panel and more of a group of people creating new material (or updating existing material) and falls more under a RPG development team.

:smallsmile:

Kryx
2016-07-27, 03:14 AM
What you suggest already exists in dmsguild.com. They have a rating system and more.

A Blood Hunter, the Gunslinger, and the College of the Maestro have 4.5/5. That tells me that people like it, but it only gives me an idea of how well it is balanced. For example Gunslinger wasn't very balanced when it came out and yet still had a great rating.

I don't see the value in duplicating dmsguild.

DracoKnight
2016-07-27, 04:40 PM
I don't see the value in duplicating dmsguild.

If we did that, there's nothing in our DvP that we can offer that the dmsguild doesn't. So, I think the "seal of approval" thing should come through playtests run by the panel, or groups who send video documenting the play of the character to the panel, etc.

EDIT: Or roll20 games that the panel are all sitting in on.

Gastronomie
2016-07-28, 04:38 AM
There's a thread that includes the data for all homebrew, but no thread that includes the data for just the especially good homebrew.

And we need one like that. Preferrably stickied. Otherwise people wouldn't get to know even the "gems" that are hidden among this ocean of homebrew material.

I think it'd be interesting for this place to not be just somewhere to rate and fix homebrew, but also a place where people can find out what homebrew material is balanced and ready to use without fear of it breaking the game. Sorta like the "Giantip UA" idea that was in the 5e forums.

EDIT: Actually, the thread where you can see the "ready-to-use" homebrew should be probably a separate thread. But anyways.

That said, does anyone have homebrew they wanna "promote" for this thread? Doesn't need to be your own, but it's summer vacation and I figure a lot of people can playtest.

IShouldntBehere
2016-07-28, 06:38 AM
If this is just going to be a "by the numbers" mathematical analysis of DPR, wouldn't it just be easier to publish a calculator tool for people to plug their stuff into and have it spit out an up/down vote.

It's not going to be able to cover everything obviously, but it seems efficient to just have folks running the same calculations over and over and over.

Zman
2016-07-28, 07:30 AM
If we did that, there's nothing in our DvP that we can offer that the dmsguild doesn't. So, I think the "seal of approval" thing should come through playtests run by the panel, or groups who send video documenting the play of the character to the panel, etc.

EDIT: Or roll20 games that the panel are all sitting in on.

But in practicality, thorough play tests of random Homebrew is not feasible nor likely to ever happen in practice. Even a small amount of play testing of a class doesn't necessarily give a god example of how the class plays. What can be useful is simple builds at different levels compared to other classes in the game. Ask the question of how much damage can this class do, how capable is it outside of combat, in what ways does it potentially break the game, does this Homebrew class have multiple viable builds, or does this rule change have a butterfly effect? Etc.


There's a thread that includes the data for all homebrew, but no thread that includes the data for just the especially good homebrew.

And we need one like that. Preferrably stickied. Otherwise people wouldn't get to know even the "gems" that are hidden among this ocean of homebrew material.

I think it'd be interesting for this place to not be just somewhere to rate and fix homebrew, but also a place where people can find out what homebrew material is balanced and ready to use without fear of it breaking the game. Sorta like the "Giantip UA" idea that was in the 5e forums.

EDIT: Actually, the thread where you can see the "ready-to-use" homebrew should be probably a separate thread. But anyways.

That said, does anyone have homebrew they wanna "promote" for this thread? Doesn't need to be your own, but it's summer vacation and I figure a lot of people can playtest.

Agree, but the hard part is coming up with a way to delineate "good" from "bad" Homebrew in a way that is consistant, balanced in 5e, does not show favoritism, and is within the forum rules.

If you're itching to look at some Homebrew, feel free to check out my Tweaks thread or the PDF in my Sognature.


If this is just going to be a "by the numbers" mathematical analysis of DPR, wouldn't it just be easier to publish a calculator tool for people to plug their stuff into and have it spit out an up/down vote.

It's not going to be able to cover everything obviously, but it seems efficient to just have folks running the same calculations over and over and over.

I don't think this is all we are talking about, though this kind of balance is a focus for some of us, and making sure classes are math stoically balanced in one aspect to good Homebrew. If each of those on the panel do what they do best we can really offer quality feedback. Math is great, but sometimes limited.

Skylivedk
2016-07-28, 07:57 AM
I would love to help out. Mostly, I'm a DM, but I've player experience as well. Both for around 10 years.

My approach is:

- based around GWM/PAM (so I bring martial feats UP to their level, not down - except I'd change PAM away from the bonus action and give more control instead).
- with a buffed TWF (TWF attack doesn't use BA and if you have extra attack, you make two attacks extra post level 11; feat gives ability mod and rend; fighting style allows larger weapons and +1 hit).

I like flavour options to mechanically viable (hence I've been active in the TWF/GWM discussions as well as the one about Frenzy), and I like the classes to be able to offer something for all pillars, meaning I'm prone to:
- give the martial classes more to do outside of combat
- remove Simulacrum and remove/limit other spells that steal the spotlight from core classes


Forgot this:

I continuously test tweaks with my 5-6 man group. So far, we've adhered pretty strictly to the 2-3 shorts rests pr. adventuring day.

Gastronomie
2016-07-28, 08:00 AM
Agree, but the hard part is coming up with a way to delineate "good" from "bad" Homebrew in a way that is consistant, balanced in 5e, does not show favoritism, and is within the forum rules.

If you're itching to look at some Homebrew, feel free to check out my Tweaks thread or the PDF in my Sognature.I saw the "Tweaks" thread, and I think they're nice, but frankly I don't think that there's that much of a problem with the current rules. Not that the current rules are necessarily better than the ones you suggest, just, it's a pain to keep track of all the different rules you suggest and explain them to the players whenever they do something.

I don't think favoritism is a problem. If multiple people join in the process of promoting homebrew material, it's not favoritism anymore, it's just that it was attractive to many people. Consistence and balance are fine if test-played. And I don't see how it'd go against forum rules unless it involves flaming the hell out of all the contestants that didn't make it to the finals. I think it's worth doing.

Zman
2016-07-28, 08:22 AM
I saw the "Tweaks" thread, and I think they're nice, but frankly I don't think that there's that much of a problem with the current rules. Not that the current rules are necessarily better than the ones you suggest, just, it's a pain to keep track of all the different rules you suggest and explain them to the players whenever they do something.

I don't think favoritism is a problem. If multiple people join in the process of promoting homebrew material, it's not favoritism anymore, it's just that it was attractive to many people. Consistence and balance are fine if test-played. And I don't see how it'd go against forum rules unless it involves flaming the hell out of all the contestants that didn't make it to the finals. I think it's worth doing.

I disagree that it is a pain to keep track of the changes, the actual gameplay changes are relatively small, less than one page and all are quite easy to implement. The rest is taken care of on the character sheet, most is choosing from a different list of feats, or a couple of race/class tweaks. Basically 90% of those tweaks happens when you make or level your character and there is relatively little to keep track of.

My point was that depending on who makes the panel it runs the risk of acting like a "club". If there is any discrimination based on post count, time on forum, lack of familiarity, etc it can. Basically anything on this forum that treats some members as "more" than other members is against the rules. Being a member of this panel could be viewed that way depending on how it is implemented. I'm not saying it can't work, but that you have to be careful.

Gastronomie
2016-07-28, 08:33 AM
I disagree that it is a pain to keep track of the changes, the actual gameplay changes are relatively small, less than one page and all are quite easy to implement. The rest is taken care of on the character sheet, most is choosing from a different list of feats, or a couple of race/class tweaks. Basically 90% of those tweaks happens when you make or level your character and there is relatively little to keep track of.Well, the players who I work with don't have problems with the current rules, so... I understand your rules are probably better for some people, but in my games, it isn't "required".

My point was that depending on who makes the panel it runs the risk of acting like a "club". If there is any discrimination based on post count, time on forum, lack of familiarity, etc it can. Basically anything on this forum that treats some members as "more" than other members is against the rules. Being a member of this panel could be viewed that way depending on how it is implemented. I'm not saying it can't work, but that you have to be careful.I don't think there's any sort of "discrimination" you mentioned, at least as far as I can see right now. It probably does depend on who runs it, like you say, but at least the people posting in this thread so far - I don't see problems with them.
As for the "being treated as 'more than others'" issue,it doesn't have to be that only certain "members of this panel" can review and rate the work. Simply have it that anyone can join the process as long as they post in the "reviewing/revising/rating" thread. Wouldn't that work?

Zman
2016-07-28, 09:02 AM
Well, the players who I work with don't have problems with the current rules, so... I understand your rules are probably better for some people, but in my games, it isn't "required".
I don't think there's any sort of "discrimination" you mentioned, at least as far as I can see right now. It probably does depend on who runs it, like you say, but at least the people posting in this thread so far - I don't see problems with them.
As for the "being treated as 'more than others'" issue,it doesn't have to be that only certain "members of this panel" can review and rate the work. Simply have it that anyone can join the process as long as they post in the "reviewing/revising/rating" thread. Wouldn't that work?

And I understand that, and if your game and players don't have a problem with the rules as is, then don't change it. I know my players voiced immediate concern when GWM hit the table.

I don't think there is any either, my point is cautionary looking to the future. What you described will probably work, I'm just saying that it always has to be kept in mind lest it inadvertently happen.

Gastronomie
2016-07-28, 09:19 AM
I don't think there is any either, my point is cautionary looking to the future. What you described will probably work, I'm just saying that it always has to be kept in mind lest it inadvertently happen.I see. Will keep in mind.

Anyhow, I think we should do this "Giantip UA" thing we talked about earlier in a different thread. Does anyone have stuff they wanna nominate?

Personally, I'm really, really interested in Michael7123's "Specific Warlock Patron"s (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?428960-Michael-s-Specific-Walrok-Patrons-The-Megathread). Their concepts seem really amazing. I would love to use them.

But at the same time, they're really overpowered in some places. So if Michael agrees with us doing this (I'm sending a PM), and if other people want to do this too, how about we propose tweaks, testplay, and turn it into something that's so good it can be officially published?

Belac93
2016-07-28, 12:12 PM
I really enjoyed the the Libran (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?430062-The-Libran) by RazDelacroix. One of my favorite homebrews.

Gastronomie
2016-07-29, 07:35 AM
I really enjoyed the the Libran (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?430062-The-Libran) by RazDelacroix. One of my favorite homebrews.What's wonderful about it is that despite the really Mary Sue-ish original concept, the flavor text seems it look really hilarious in a good way instead.

Magikeeper
2016-07-30, 02:46 PM
What is the goal here? Is it helping homebrewers? Then how about this:


> Every two weeks, have a meeting thread where folk talk about the currently active homebrew threads and note the results of their playtesting efforts.
>> Anyone should be able to post on the thread, but this will ONLY work if there is a core group of people that make a dedicated effort to post on every discussion thread. Random people aren't going to ignite an empty thread, but if you have 4-5 people discussing things every two weeks others might join in. Regulars will also come and go.

--

There. That's simple, and would be of great help to everyone. Build up a culture of reviewing. Stuff like categories and such would develop over time. We're seeing a little bit of that on this very thread, in fact. Also, try to nudge people towards being more descriptive in their reviews.

I'd suggest implementing such a meeting ASAP, you're running out of summer.

--

Whatever you do decide, do it fast. I see a whole lot of suggestions, and not much movement on any of them.

Secret Wizard
2016-08-02, 05:57 PM
Okay guys, juice me up. I'm trying to make a martial archetype for a Fighter that I don't hate.

How's this: http://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/rJyzL1RO

DracoKnight
2016-08-02, 06:52 PM
Okay guys, juice me up. I'm trying to make a martial archetype for a Fighter that I don't hate.

How's this: http://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/rJyzL1RO

I almost stopped reading when I saw that you gave them Action Surge (2) at level 3. Normal fighters have to wait until 17TH LEVEL for this. Giving it to the Pit Fighters 14 levels early is not okay.

Secret Wizard
2016-08-02, 07:01 PM
I almost stopped reading when I saw that you gave them Action Surge (2) at level 3. Normal fighters have to wait until 17TH LEVEL for this. Giving it to the Pit Fighters 14 levels early is not okay.

Well, they don't get any other boosts to damage. Champions get 19-20 crits, Battle Masters get superiority dice... these guys get one more Action Surge.

JNAProductions
2016-08-02, 07:02 PM
Well, they don't get any other boosts to damage. Champions get 19-20 crits, Battle Masters get superiority dice... these guys get one more Action Surge.

Right, because it's not like Action Surge is one of the biggest reasons to dip Fighter. Can't believe I didn't think that would be an issue...

Secret Wizard
2016-08-02, 07:08 PM
Right, because it's not like Action Surge is one of the biggest reasons to dip Fighter. Can't believe I didn't think that would be an issue...

Oh, I've never played with multiclassing, so I'm terrible at keeping that into account.

What would be a good boost to damage for the 3rd level that fits the theme?

Zman
2016-08-02, 07:39 PM
Okay guys, juice me up. I'm trying to make a martial archetype for a Fighter that I don't hate.

How's this: http://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/rJyzL1RO

Third level is a big problem,mint is just too powerful to allow a second Action Surge at suck low of a level.

What if you got Cha Mod Crowd Pleaser Points that you could use to grant advantage on an attack or Shove, or use them to cancel disadvantage renewed on a Short Rest?

Secret Wizard
2016-08-02, 08:09 PM
Nice idea, Zman (by the way, I've been liking your feat fixes in my home games).

I switched stuff around a little bit, and finally decided to make Second Wind have an offensive component, so you are kind of actively trying to get hit so you don't waste the healing, and then deliver some pain.

It works out much better with the whole "you thought you brought me down, but I was just goading you" element I was trying to work in.

I'm happy with the unarmed punch disadvantage and the Wisdom to Charisma save change, as they create some tension in builds (STR/CON/CHA builds lose DEX saves, STR/DEX/CON/CHA builds are spread out, DEX/CON/CHA builds lose their attribute modifier to the haymakers).

My current concern moves onto the last levels.

Zman
2016-08-02, 08:34 PM
Nice idea, Zman (by the way, I've been liking your feat fixes in my home games).

I switched stuff around a little bit, and finally decided to make Second Wind have an offensive component, so you are kind of actively trying to get hit so you don't waste the healing, and then deliver some pain.

It works out much better with the whole "you thought you brought me down, but I was just goading you" element I was trying to work in.

I'm happy with the unarmed punch disadvantage and the Wisdom to Charisma save change, as they create some tension in builds (STR/CON/CHA builds lose DEX saves, STR/DEX/CON/CHA builds are spread out, DEX/CON/CHA builds lose their attribute modifier to the haymakers).

My current concern moves onto the last levels.

Thanks. Glad you are enjoying them, my table certainly is. Feel free to comment in the thread with your experiences and what Tweaks you are using. I'm actually in the middle of tossing those changes in a massive spreadsheet to see the balance options for combat and feats and it's looking pretty good.

Cheap Shot, love it, but it's too good. Make it the first attack has disadvantage, all having disadvantage is too good IMO.

Throwing Spectacle could use a bit better wording but is neat.

The Stuff of Legends is pretty cool... Probably a bit too good. Assume 65% to hit rate, not improves your Crit rate to to 42%. Against a High AC Enemy its 25%, against a low AC enemy its 64%. Basically, any build that has easy access to Advantage say Trip Battlemaster, etc it kind of breaks combat. Compare it to the 15th level Champion ability improving Crit rate from 10%(19% with advantage) to 15%(27.5% with advantage). I mean throw a Wolf Barbarian in the party and the Fighter is Critting multiple times a round especially if they take GWM for the extra attack on Crit.

Secret Wizard
2016-08-02, 08:51 PM
Cheap Shot, love it, but it's too good. Make it the first attack has disadvantage, all having disadvantage is too good IMO.

I thought it had some neat tension... make a TWF attack with a 1d4 weapon rather than something better, and lose the ability to Action Surge for Dodge or Second Wind for the turn... for the off-chance that if you hit, ONE enemy has disadvantage against attacking you. It's a riskier move than simply Action Surging into Dodge.


The Stuff of Legends is pretty cool... Probably a bit too good. Assume 65% to hit rate, not improves your Crit rate to to 42%. Against a High AC Enemy its 25%, against a low AC enemy its 64%. Basically, any build that has easy access to Advantage say Trip Battlemaster, etc it kind of breaks combat. Compare it to the 15th level Champion ability improving Crit rate from 10%(19% with advantage) to 15%(27.5% with advantage). I mean throw a Wolf Barbarian in the party and the Fighter is Critting multiple times a round especially if they take GWM for the extra attack on Crit.

Made it +CHA damage on double advantage hit, so it's capped as +5 damage -- if you ever have the extra ASI to max CHA to 20, which I don't think you will. So it will likely be +2, +3 or +4, which is not that much damage.

Zman
2016-08-02, 11:10 PM
I thought it had some neat tension... make a TWF attack with a 1d4 weapon rather than something better, and lose the ability to Action Surge for Dodge or Second Wind for the turn... for the off-chance that if you hit, ONE enemy has disadvantage against attacking you. It's a riskier move than simply Action Surging into Dodge.



Made it +CHA damage on double advantage hit, so it's capped as +5 damage -- if you ever have the extra ASI to max CHA to 20, which I don't think you will. So it will likely be +2, +3 or +4, which is not that much damage.

Action surge doesn't require a bonus action. Action Suge dodge is unlikely to really be used, double attacks almost all the time. I like the idea, it just is a bit too good as is, the first attack being at disadvantage for being knocked off balance is thematic and mechanically sound.

Just +Cha damage isn't good enough, make it +d10 damage that way it gets doubled on a Crit. It'll average more damage and occasionally be awesome.

RATHSQUATCH
2016-08-03, 09:21 AM
I'd be happy to help as a DM or Player. I work on homebrew a lot and could give a few ideas/tips/criticisms. Just let me know what you need.

Kryx
2016-08-03, 10:03 AM
Just thought I'd mention it again. This system exists https://reddit.com/r/boh5e

DaveGoff
2016-08-10, 10:58 AM
If anybody has time, I'd love to get some feedback on my collection of monsters.

(I can't post links yet) - dmsguild.com/product/188647/Creepy-Crawly--Crazy
You can also find my stuff by searching my name, Dave Goff.

Work is killing me right now, but if there are some short items I can review with a read-through, I'd be happy to return the favor.

Dave

Dralnu
2016-08-10, 01:41 PM
Just thought I'd mention it again. This system exists https://reddit.com/r/boh5e

I'll have to echo Kryx here. I think it would best serve the community to have homebrew reviewing all in the same place. They're always looking for more people to help review. Which reminds me that I should offer my help there too!