Fleshing Out 5e (featuring animal companions, medicine & grappling)

[GalacticAxekick]

One of 5e's greatest strengths is its simplicity. It's by far more accessible than 3.x, and far more flexible, both thanks to the simple way it handles space, time, advantage and disadvantage.

The downside is that 5e is missing a lot of rules for certain builds. 5e's simple, flexible rules let players improvise these playstyles together (with the DM's permission), but they don't let players invest in and bank on these playstyles the way class features, feats and spells allow.

My examples of choice are companions in combat (http://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/r13n0ioM-), as well as non-magical healing (http://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/Bk_qMLV3e), which I've written some rules for.

EDIT: Thanks to some fantastic criticisms, I've edited my rules for companions and non-magical healing! I'd love to hear the forum's ideas for a few more areas 5e never fleshed out:

Wrestling. 5e doesn't support wrestlers beyond grappling and shoving a target. I'd like to see Fighters access choke holds (which might knock the target unconscious without damaging them) and joint locks (which might deny use of body parts). Rogues should be able to kidnap (blinding/deafening/silencing a grappled target, or even using them as a shield), and Ranger should be able to climb larger creatures using their grapple.
Armed combat. I'd like to see a system similar to casting cantrips that would let martial characters produce different effects, such as area-of-effect, various/lingering status effects, demanding for saves against damage, area denial, abjurations and buffs.
Specialized spellcasting. 5e doesn't offer enough spells for spellcasters to specialize in many areas and produce many concepts. The Cleric and Wizard, for example, don't have enough spells to be dedicated necromancers, which I tried to solve some time ago (http://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/HkQUYOHRql). A greater variety of spells that control elements and spells representing telekinesis would be great areas to start, in my opinion, since those are obvious concepts 5e doesn't support.

[SilverStud]

Gotta be careful. You just gave everyone with Animal Handling a better version of the vanilla Beast Master Ranger. I know that archetype sucks, and the ranger is weak overall, but you're really stepping on his toes big time.

Think of the difference between a [good owner and his well-trained dog] and [K-9 handler and partner]. My brother in law is a good owner and has a well-trained dog that obeys his commands. He even has a trained cat. He, in 5e terms, has proficiency in Animal Handling.

Have you ever had the opportunity to see a K-9 unit in action? It is a wonder to behold. I got to watch a practice session once. The handler and dog moved like a well-oiled machine. The dog followed his commands so perfectly, he could command it to abort its attack MID LEAP and it would do it. He, in 5e terms, is a Beast Master Ranger.

I don't think it's a good idea to hand out Beast Master tickets to everyone with Animal Handling.



I have mixed feelings about your changes to the Healer's Kit. Why did you make it worse, first of all? Vanilla, it automatically stabilizes someone by expending one of its ten uses. Why hide that behind a skill check? Especially since the rules already let anyone with Medicine make that check without a kit? And why such a high DC?

I'm really loving the Treat Illness option though. I think that is a great addition to the "things Healer's Kits can do." I would change it though. Might I suggest the following:

Trauma Treatment
You can use this kit to help another creature recover from certain conditions. As an action while you are within 5 feet of an afflicted creature, make a Wisdom(Medicine) check against the DC of the creature's affliction. If you succeed, the condition is removed immediately. If the condition is inflicted by ongoing magic, you have disadvantage on the check.
You can cure the following conditions: Blinded, Deafened, Paralyzed, Stunned, or Poisoned.

I don't think that the kit should be able to remove diseases or poisons. Sure, a standard kit might have things to help you function while poisoned (removing the condition and accompanying Disadvantage) but pretty much all poisons require a specific anti-toxin. I don't think your kit has the antidote to Purple Worm Venom.

I also think it makes no sense to let a little bag of salves and band-aids somehow cure exhaustion. (Fatigued doesn't exist in 5e)


The Treating Wounds feature is... well, it's already covered as a Feat. Also, letting someone immediately heal as if Short Rest is stupid OP, especially for something as cheap as a Healer's Kit. Also also, by what mechanism does the Healer's Kit let someone rejuvenate as if they rested for X hours? Just stick with RAW on this one. Let the Healer feat do its job.

Your Surgery feat is interesting, and the flavor is good. But it needs some fixes. You're stepping directly into Raise Dead territory, but you're not requiring any resources or skill checks to replace that expensive spell. I feel like it should take at minimum the entire contents of a Healer's Kit. Hell, I'd even go so far as to require Surgeon's Tools, a new kit I just invented. It should also require some stiff skill checks, no lower than DC 20.

And now we flip back to the positive feelings:

I love the Treating Injury feature. I think that is probably the best part of what you've done here. It is great. I'm not a DM who does Massive Damage and Permanent Injury in his games, but I've played under DMs who do. And lemme tell ya, having an ability like that would be a breath of fresh air. Constantly losing limbs and eyes just sucks.

I do recommend changing it too, though. Make it an hour of uninterrupted treatment, followed by a recovery period kinda like the "just came back from dead" one. Also, require a Medicine check.



When it comes to armed combat beyond making an attack, I don't think we ought to touch that. The core books already provide plenty of that in the form of Battle Master Fighters, monks, and optional rules about disarming and such.

I think there is room for expanding on grappling, but we need to be careful. There's already a feat in that territory, though most consider it unsatisfactory. How would you improve it?

I think I've said enough for one post. What are your thoughts on Poisoner's/Herbalist's Kit, and Alchemist's Tools?

[GalacticAxekick]

Gotta be careful. You just gave everyone with Animal Handling a better version of the vanilla Beast Master Ranger. I know that archetype sucks, and the ranger is weak overall, but you're really stepping on his toes big time.

Think of the difference between a [good owner and his well-trained dog] and [K-9 handler and partner]. My brother in law is a good owner and has a well-trained dog that obeys his commands. He even has a trained cat. He, in 5e terms, has proficiency in Animal Handling.

Have you ever had the opportunity to see a K-9 unit in action? It is a wonder to behold. I got to watch a practice session once. The handler and dog moved like a well-oiled machine. The dog followed his commands so perfectly, he could command it to abort its attack MID LEAP and it would do it. He, in 5e terms, is a Beast Master Ranger.

I don't think it's a good idea to hand out Beast Master tickets to everyone with Animal Handling.I totally agree that it steps on the Beast Master's toes. I'd rather scrap the beast master and make animal handling accessible to other classes than keep the BM and restrict companions to Rangers. I don't see a thematic or mechanical reason why Fighters and Barbarians (for instance) shouldn't be able to command attack dogs or ride battle-ready horses.


I have mixed feelings about your changes to the Healer's Kit. Why did you make it worse, first of all? Vanilla, it automatically stabilizes someone by expending one of its ten uses. Why hide that behind a skill check? Especially since the rules already let anyone with Medicine make that check without a kit?I made this change to make Medicine a valuable skill. Mechanically, it promises that proficiency in Medicine is valuable whether or not you have a kit. Thematically, this represents how only someone trained in first aid can reliably use a first aid kit.


And why such a high DC?Once again, to make Medicine a valuable skill. Someone who is making death saves needs either 3 successes against DC 10 or one natural 20 to stabilize, and dies if they accrue 3 failures. According to the rules, someone without proficiency in Medicine and with even -1 Wis has a 50% chance of stabilizing a dying creature instantly. Investing in Medicine doesn't add much to that.

To make Medicine valuable, I'm only allowing first aid to make a death save on the patient's behalf. Someone with a 50% chance of succeeding or failing is just as likely to kill the patient as to stabilize them. It takes someone with proficiency to reliably succeed on saves or score that 20 and stabilize the target instantly.


I'm really loving the Treat Illness option though. I think that is a great addition to the "things Healer's Kits can do." I would change it though. Might I suggest the following:I personally want to avoid giving powers to the kit, in favour of offering skills and feats. This thread is about builds, after all: skills, feats, spells and class levels we invest in to dedicate to one role or another.


Trauma Treatment
You can use this kit to help another creature recover from certain conditions. As an action while you are within 5 feet of an afflicted creature, make a Wisdom(Medicine) check against the DC of the creature's affliction. If you succeed, the condition is removed immediately. If the condition is inflicted by ongoing magic, you have disadvantage on the check.
You can cure the following conditions: Blinded, Deafened, Paralyzed, Stunned, or Poisoned.I disagree with the "ongoing magic" clause, since the vast majority of such effects are magical, and to have disadvantage practically all the time would make the feature a very unreliable use of your action.


I don't think that the kit should be able to remove diseases or poisons. Sure, a standard kit might have things to help you function while poisoned (removing the condition and accompanying Disadvantage) but pretty much all poisons require a specific anti-toxin. I don't think your kit has the antidote to Purple Worm Venom.That makes sense.


I also think it makes no sense to let a little bag of salves and band-aids somehow cure exhaustion. (Fatigued doesn't exist in 5e)You're right that it's called exhaustion. I disagree that it makes no sense. 5e exhaustion goes beyond sleep deprivation and exertion to include "starvation and the long-term effects of freezing or scorching temperatures". First aid (and by extention, first aid kits) should include treatments for frostbite, sunburn and such.


The Treating Wounds feature is... well, it's already covered as a Feat. It's covered by a feat, but I'd like it to be covered by a skill. As easily as a Cleric can learn Cure Wounds at 1st level, I'd like anyone with proficiency in Medicine to be able to treat wounds from the start.


Also, letting someone immediately heal as if Short Rest is stupid OP, especially for something as cheap as a Healer's Kit.That's a fair criticism. I can reduce the healing so it scales the same way as the Healer feat (with the same once-per-rest clause to replace the limited pool of hit dice as a limit).


Also also, by what mechanism does the Healer's Kit let someone rejuvenate as if they rested for X hours?By what mechanism does resting for an hour heal a person's stab and burn wounds at all? It makes far more sense that a Medicine check can stop bleeding and tend burns.


Just stick with RAW on this one. Let the Healer feat do its job.It doesn't do the job I'd like it to: offer non-magical healing to 1st level characters, independent of the healer's kit.


Your Surgery feat is interesting, and the flavor is good. But it needs some fixes. You're stepping directly into Raise Dead territory, but you're not requiring any resources or skill checks to replace that expensive spell. I feel like it should take at minimum the entire contents of a Healer's Kit. Hell, I'd even go so far as to require Surgeon's Tools, a new kit I just invented. It should also require some stiff skill checks, no lower than DC 20. It does require skill checks. After Surgery is done, the dead creature needs to succeed on death saves. Someone needs to make three successful DC 10 checks (or one DC 20 check) to finally bring the creature back.

I'll edit the text to clarify this.


I do recommend changing it too, though. Make it an hour of uninterrupted treatment, followed by a recovery period kinda like the "just came back from dead" one. Also, require a Medicine check.Reasonable!


When it comes to armed combat beyond making an attack, I don't think we ought to touch that. The core books already provide plenty of that in the form of Battle Master Fighters, monks, and optional rules about disarming and such.I strongly disagree.

Everyone can shove, trip and attack, of course. But the Open Hand Monk just shoves, trips and makes extra attacks while attacking. Besides Stunning Strike, their combat features don't expand their role the way a spellcaster's area-of-effect, various/lingering status effects, demand for saves against damage, area denial, abjurations, buffs, minion-summoning and healing do. My rules for Animal Handling and Medicine tackle the latter two, but only the latter two.

The Battle Master does a better job, since it can access a wider ranger of effects. But between a limited pool of superiority dice and a lot of emphasis on dealing extra damage instead of these effects themselves, you can't really carve out a role like "area controller" or "blaster" or "bodyguard" using the archetype.


I think there is room for expanding on grappling, but we need to be careful. There's already a feat in that territory, though most consider it unsatisfactory. How would you improve it?Some representation of chokeholds (to deal damage over time, or even incapacitate without damaging), and some representation of joint locks (to disadvantage or prevent effects that require movement), and some representation of pain-compliance holds and locks (to deal damage using saving throws or ability checks, since armour is a non-factor) for instance.


I think I've said enough for one post. What are your thoughts on Poisoner's/Herbalist's Kit, and Alchemist's Tools?I don't think I've ever thought of them. Even now that you mention it, I don't I feel like I'm missing out on poison rules or alchemy rules.

Do you have a system in mind that you think would be interesting?

[demonslayerelf]

I'm a little late to the party, so I don't have many big things to say, but I do have a few.

Galactic, I'm mostly with you on what you and Silver are discussing.
It's worth saying that DnD is a fantasy game at it's core; not much makes sense, and it's a good thing, because it's far more entertaining this way. That's why I won't point out that a dead person's brain becomes unsaveable in minutes without deep-freezing, and there's no way anything can bring them back after that. It's dnd, it's fine, people heal when they sleep, and poking someone 200 times can kill. Anyway, onto the actual things.


I'm going to disagree with Silver on saying that the kit probably wouldn't treat poisons, because while it is true a lot of them require specific antivenins, there are general antivenins made, which cover nearly all snake(For instance) bites. These are also a very important thing for a low-level adventurer, and this is an adventurer's med-kit. Therefore, I'm gonna go with it's equipped with Antivenin, which will cover nearly any poison originating with a Beast. However you want to phrase that.


Animal Companions look good, but I feel like it's a little too restrictive as to what can be your companion. I mean, it doesn't even include Large beasts, like tigers or bears... Or some dogs. All of which have been befriended by we humans at some point. Elephants, too, in an even larger capacity(Get it? Because they're Huge). So, they fare a bit bigger than medium. But on a broader point, I also don't see why it HAS to be a beast; Nightmares and Pegasi are also classical mounts for evil and good paladins, respectively. Griffons are also nice companions. Entries in the MM also mention Displacer Beasts as pets, and I don't know if it's mentioned in 5e, but I remember hearing that giants kept White Dragons as pets.

There should definitely be a limit, but I would focus it more on Hit Dice, Alignment, Intelligence, and the like. Right now in your system, it would be easier to tame a Beetle than a Tiger... And have you ever tried communicating with a beetle?


The last little thing is also with animal companions and mounts, and it's a minor one. Druids and Rangers don't necessarily have Animal Handling, but I really feel like a 20th level nature-magician who becomes animals for fun, and at-will, should get some sort of bonus here... It seems a little weird that they wouldn't. For Druids, I suggest tying it to Druidic, because that's "The language of nature" and whatnot. For rangers, I dunno. Probably a bigger buff, for balancey reasons... Also because they're the famous animal companion people.

[GalacticAxekick]

Galactic, I'm mostly with you on what you and Silver are discussing.
It's worth saying that DnD is a fantasy game at it's core; not much makes sense, and it's a good thing, because it's far more entertaining this way. That's why I won't point out that a dead person's brain becomes unsaveable in minutes without deep-freezing, and there's no way anything can bring them back after that. It's dnd, it's fine, people heal when they sleep, and poking someone 200 times can kill. Anyway, onto the actual things.Absolutely! I didn't mean to say that the lack of realism was a problem. I just thought drawing the line as using first aid to heal people would be silly in a world where naps heal people.


Animal Companions look good, but I feel like it's a little too restrictive as to what can be your companion. I mean, it doesn't even include Large beasts, like tigers or bears... Or some dogs. All of which have been befriended by we humans at some point. Elephants, too, in an even larger capacity(Get it? Because they're Huge). So, they fare a bit bigger than medium.That makes sense! I think as long as the "common companions" list is relatively tame (cue rimshot) I can drop the size restriction on animal companions. Acquiring an uncommon companion is as hard as the DM makes it, so why not make it worthwhile?


But on a broader point, I also don't see why it HAS to be a beast; Nightmares and Pegasi are also classical mounts for evil and good paladins, respectively. Griffons are also nice companions. Entries in the MM also mention Displacer Beasts as pets, and I don't know if it's mentioned in 5e, but I remember hearing that giants kept White Dragons as pets.I was actually concerned with this while I wrote the rules! I think it would be silly if Animal Handling taught you how to handle non-animals, but writing a blurb for fantastic beasts like nightmares, pegasi and griffons counting as "animals" would make sense. It would ultimately be left to the DM's discretion.


The last little thing is also with animal companions and mounts, and it's a minor one. Druids and Rangers don't necessarily have Animal Handling, but I really feel like a 20th level nature-magician who becomes animals for fun, and at-will, should get some sort of bonus here... It seems a little weird that they wouldn't. For Druids, I suggest tying it to Druidic, because that's "The language of nature" and whatnot. For rangers, I dunno. Probably a bigger buff, for balancey reasons... Also because they're the famous animal companion people.That makes sense! I could definitely tie it to the Druid's Druidic and the Revised Ranger's Primeval Awareness. Both features could count as proficiency in Animal Handling for the purpose of companions and mounts, but not for the purpose of actually rolling Wisdom (Animal Handling).

[SilverStud]

So I can definitely get onboard with the way you handle Stabilizing. Turns out, I misread your text as "It's a DC 20 Medicine Check to stabilize someone." You have to agree, that would be stupid and a straight up nerf of the kit. If that's what you had said.

As you actually said, I think that your change gives value to the Medicine skill, which is criminally underpowered.

That said, I still absolutely stand by what I said about the kit treating exhaustion. D&D doesn't care about real-world definitions of words, and we shouldn't either. We need to focus on how 5e defines a term if we want to work with it and justify changes.

In 5e, exhaustion is a condition that slowly cripples you across six levels, culminating in death. There are no spells that inflict exhaustion levels, no abilities available to players either. Discounting the magical nature of places such as the layers of the Abyss, there are exactly 8 ways to gain an exhaustion level:
1: That stupid penalty for Frenzy Barbarians
2: Don't eat for more than four days (3 + Con mod[min 1])
3: Drink half your daily water, then fail a DC15 save, or don't drink water at all
4: Failing your hourly DC10 save in cold environments, if you're not dressed properly
5: Failing your hourly, compounding-difficulty save in hot environments
6: If your DM is using the optional Chase Sequence rules, sprinting for too long
7: Traveling (marching, climbing, rowing, swimming, etc.) for too long
8: A few specific diseases

You know what all of these things have in common? They are all examples of the body being overtaxed. The reason heatstroke and hypothermia are bad things is because they put your body out of balance and cause it to suddenly burn through buckets of energy trying to fix it. Have you ever had to treat someone who got heat exhaustion or hypothermia? Let me tell you, those are some long nights. You have to make sure they keep snacking and drinking water. The most realistic part of this unrealistic game is the fact that it takes either proper rest or powerful magic to recover from exhaustion.

There is currently exactly one way to get rid of exhaustion, nonmagically: rest.

In all my searching, (and I scoured the three core rulebooks) I found exactly two ways to get rid of exhaustion without resting.

1: Potion of Vitality. A very rare (actual classification) item, thus intended for mid-level use.
2: Greater Restoration. A freaking 5th level spell. This means that the earliest a character is guaranteed the chance to "cure" exhaustion is 9th level!

You want non-magical healing to be buffed? I think that's a great idea, but you do need to recognize that exhaustion shouldn't be reliably "curable" at any level before ninth. There are so few checks on a character's abilities. Exhaustion is one of the most reasonable: no one can just keep going forever, right?

Up above I made an argument that exhaustion shouldn't be cured by medkits because of realism, but the real reason I think this is for the sake of the game balance. I think that a lot of your stuff can be added the the game without affecting balance at all. But handing out a cure to exhaustion like this is too much. Even paladins, those guys who use the pure power of justice to cure diseases and poison, can't use Lay on Hands to reduce exhaustion.

Moving on to the subject of disease and poison, I did realize something. I completely misread Treat Illness. What you're doing is succeeding on a save for them, not curing the disease or poison. Like, the medic is basically helping them through it. I actually really like that! I still think that it shouldn't affect exhaustion (because there are no circumstances where you make a save to reduce exhaustion), but it's actually quite a good thing you've got. Perhaps, though, you should have this ability give the suffrer Advantage on their check, or a bonus, or something. If I misread it, certainly others will too. Maybe not many, but you don't want to deal with even one more of me, do you? :P



It's worth saying that DnD is a fantasy game at it's core; not much makes sense, and it's a good thing, because it's far more entertaining this way. That's why I won't point out that a dead person's brain becomes unsaveable in minutes without deep-freezing, and there's no way anything can bring them back after that. It's dnd, it's fine, people heal when they sleep, and poking someone 200 times can kill. Anyway, onto the actual things.


Actually, in light of this I think you should dial back the timeframe on Resuscitation to 10 minutes.



Ah, you mentioned the revised Ranger! I am a big fan of the revised ranger, and since you mentioned tying your new rules to it, I'm guessing you are too. I think it actually lets the Beast Master archetype shine. Since your rules for pets are basically just the vanilla beast master (minus the animal improving over time), I think your rules just need one thing:
They need to be behind a feat.

There's actually a lot of precedent for this: letting anyone with the right feat access toned-down versions of class features. Think about Actor (toned down version of Imposter from rogues), Magic Initiate (toned down version of any spellcaster), and Ritual Caster (feature from wizards and bards), and Martial Adept (miniature Battlemaster).

I think that locking your Animal Companion behind a feat is very reasonable, given these other examples. Especially since, as it is written, it still allows Beast Master Rangers (revised ranger) to be special: their pet "levels up" with them, they can rez the pet, etc..



On the subject of Rangers and Druids being better with animals even without the official skill, I don't think you need to homebrew anything for that. Revised Ranger already lets rangers communicate basic things with beasts, no check required, and I personnally have always let Druid (currently wildshaped druids, that is) communicate with animals almost like humans. That just makes sense, and is more of a DM Style thing than a rules thing.

As for the Herbalist/Poisoner Kits, I've always felt that this game is severely lacking in the crafting department. I have a very simple, tiny homebrew for poisons and herbalism.

This "system" is available to anyone with proficiency in either kit. Herbalist Kits are used to make healing salves, or condition-curing mixtures. Poisoner Kits are used to make mixtures that harm or negatively impact. Overall, someone will get more varied use out of a poisoner kit, but healing should never be underestimated.

Mixtures are made from Herb Bundles. Herb Bundles have no monetary value, and your DM may decide that certain powerful effects require special ingredients. Those may or may not have monetary value.

You can get Herb Bundles by foraging, as you would for food. Your DM sets the DC based on your environment, and decides how much you find based on your roll.

By default, there are three types of bundle: Healing, Harming, and Special. It should be pretty obvious which makes what.

It takes an hour to use your kit to make mixtures. Make a tool check using the appropriate kit. Your DM will decide how many doses of the mixture you make, as well as how many bundles it took to make them, based on your roll. You can make a number of mixtures per hour no greater than your proficiency bonus, and can spend no more than 8 hours per day crafting mixtures. A mixture lasts for a number of days equal to your proficiency bonus, after which time it becomes inert and foul-smelling.

Healing: a number of d4's equal to your proficiency bonus. It takes a bonus action to use.
Damage Poison: a number of d4's equal to your proficiency bonus. One mixture can coat melee weapon or 5 arrowheads. The poison takes effect upon a successful hit, and only once. Enemies hit with coated arrows get to save against the damage, taking half on a success.
Effect Cure/Poison: Speak with your DM about what effect you want to inflict/cure, and work out the details with him/her. There are too many possibilities for it to be worth my time to write them all here.

[GalacticAxekick]

With the misunderstanding of the DC 20 in mind, I totally understand your criticisms of my rules for stabilizing and treating illnesses, SilverStud. A system that gives advantage would be simpler, but I'm reluctant, since it makes a 1st Level medic with -1 Wis just as good as a 20th Level medic with +5 Wis.

Moving on, you make an overwhelming argument against treating exhaustion. I'll drop that effect.

And finally, I can definitely dial the resuscitation back to 10 minutes of surgery, but I'll need to limit it to a corpse that's been dead for, say, an hour. If I leave it at 24 hours, a player could conceivably revive 144 people a day, or make 144 attempts on one person. Death would be trivial.


There's a huge precedent for class features being put behind feats, but I honestly don't think the Beast Master subclass should be a thing. I'd rather have animal companions available to everyone from the start and Ranger's choosing between Hunters and Stalkers, that way you don't have to wait until 4th level to start your companion build.

I totally agree with your ideas on Druid's and Ranger's being better with animals than most, though.

[SilverStud]

OH I think I mis-stated my thoughts on resuscitation. I think long hours of surgery is totally fine, but surgery ought to start within 10 minutes of death. Within an hour of death also seems reasonable, but I think 8 hours of surgery is good.

I still think, and always will think, that having pets according to your writeup of the rules is far too strong to give to literally anyone who's good with animals. You've left it open for people to have multiple pets at the same time. I think that's cool, and has great historical and practical justification. But remember that when kings and lords had kennels of hounds, they also had one (or several) men whose sole calling in life was the training and management of those dogs. I'll mention K-9 units again, because it applies.

Giving every Animal Handling character a pet like this is like letting everyone proficient in Arcana have a book of rituals, or everyone with Athletics a climbing and swimming speed. If it costs someone next to nothing to get a huge boost (and let's be honest, a skill is not a huge sacrifice), then nearly everyone will. Suddenly anyone from any class/race that can get Animal Handling should do so, because it lets them bring more power to any fight or situation.

D&D has always been a game about picking a niche and excelling in that niche. That's why everything is tied into class, from how much of a punch you can take to how much money you start with. The idea of giving pets to anyone with Animal Handling (pets the caliber of a ranger beast, that is [which is what you have written]) is an idea that would fit in very nicely in a system like GURPS or FATE. Those systems don't like classes, and revel in the "whatever you have the points for" approach.

But even those systems will charge you for your pet or your laser sword or whatever. By taking an advantage over here, you lose flexibility over here. Take this skill, struggle in this other area. Your 'pets for everyone' is basically something for nothing. At the very least, it is way too much for way too little.

[GalacticAxekick]

OH I think I mis-stated my thoughts on resuscitation. I think long hours of surgery is totally fine, but surgery ought to start within 10 minutes of death. Within an hour of death also seems reasonable, but I think 8 hours of surgery is good.That makes sense!


I still think, and always will think, that having pets according to your writeup of the rules is far too strong to give to literally anyone who's good with animals. [...]The strongest and most durable common companion (the mastiff) deals 1d6+1 damage with +3 to hit and has 5 hit points. Using your action to command it means dealing less damage, on average, than if you'd just attacked on your own, and expecting it to tank for you won't buy you much time. Even if you do the work to gather many companions, you can only command one at a time (since it's an action), and the remaining companions will act on their own accord.

With feats like Pack Tactics to carefully coordinate and buff attacks, or Huntbeast to have your companion scout and track as your proxy, or Warbeast to make your companion truly durable and powerful, you start to get the K-9 experience. But those are feats.

And by taming and training a wild animal, the player might acquire an uncommon and powerful companion. But that's the prize they win for the work they put in, no different from improved gear.

Animal Handling itself offers a change in strategy, not an increase in power.

[GalacticAxekick]

Thanks to some fantastic criticisms, I've edited my rules for companions and non-magical healing! I'd love to hear the forum's ideas for a few more areas 5e never fleshed out:

Wrestling. 5e doesn't support wrestlers beyond grappling and shoving a target. I'd like to see Fighters access choke holds (which might knock the target unconscious without damaging them) and joint locks (which might deny use of body parts). Rogues should be able to kidnap (blinding/deafening/silencing a grappled target, or even using them as a shield), and Ranger should be able to climb larger creatures using their grapple.
Armed combat. I'd like to see a system similar to casting cantrips that would let martial characters produce different effects, such as area-of-effect, various/lingering status effects, demanding for saves against damage, area denial, abjurations and buffs.
Specialized spellcasting. 5e doesn't offer enough spells for spellcasters to specialize in many areas and produce many concepts. The Cleric and Wizard, for example, don't have enough spells to be dedicated necromancers, which I tried to solve some time ago (http://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/HkQUYOHRql). A greater variety of spells that control elements and spells representing telekinesis would be great areas to start, in my opinion, since those are obvious concepts 5e doesn't support.

[SilverStud]

It's me again! This time chiming in about Armed Combat!

So someone mentioned to me, a long time ago, the idea of "called shots." He seemed to think it was a normal thing, so maybe a previous DM of his did this? Anyway, let's try this.


As someone trained in the fine art of weaponized murder, you can do so much more than make simple attacks.
Before you take an attack action on your turn, you can use your bonus action to Call a Shot (shots detailed below). Your next attack, if it hits, deals an effect in addition to damage. If it crits, it inflicts a more powerful effect. Only your first attack each round can be a Called Shot.

Discombobulate: Your target is deafened until the end of its next turn. Critical: On a critical hit, your target is stunned until the end of its next turn.
Groin Shot: Your target's movement is reduced by 10 feet until the end of its next turn. Critical: On a critical hit, your target's movement is reduced to 0 until the end of its next turn.
Target the Eyes: Your target is blinded until the beginning of its next turn. Critical: On a critical hit, your target is blinded until the end of its next turn.
Gut Shot: Your target is winded, and cannot speak until the end of its next turn. Critical: On a critical hit, your target is knocked prone in addition to the other effects.



And you know what, while we're at it let's try something for wrestling. Bear in mind that, like many other things, I think there should be some sort of cost to this (like, say, putting it in a feat).

Wrestler
Prerequisite: Athletics proficiency
You are highly skilled at what martial artists call "ground work." You take your opponents down and you keep them there, often inflicting great pain along the way.

When you successfully grapple a Medium or Small creature, you may choose to enter their space. If you do, you both go prone.
While you and the creature you are grappling are prone, you may make an additional grapple attempt to pin them. If you succeed, your movement becomes 0 and they are restrained.
You can put restrained creatures into special holds by making another grapple attempt. If you succeed, you may place creatures into either the Choke Hold or the Arm Bar. Creatures in either hold have disadvantage on checks made to escape you.

Choke Hold: While you have a creature in a choke hold, you can use your action to knock them out. Make a final grapple attempt. If you succeed, the creature falls unconcious for 1 minute. If you maintain pressure, you may choose to break the creature's neck, killing it instantly.
Arm Bar: While a creature is in an arm bar, you can use your bonus action to painfully torque their limb, giving yourself or a creature you choose advantage on their next Charisma(Intimidation) check against that creature. You may also choose to break that limb. Make an Athletics check contested by the creature's own Athletics check. If you win the contest, you break their limb, and that creature suffers the appropriate Lingering Injury (DMG p272).


This feat replaces the Grappler feat already in the PHB.

[Mith]

It's me again! This time chiming in about Armed Combat!

So someone mentioned to me, a long time ago, the idea of "called shots." He seemed to think it was a normal thing, so maybe a previous DM of his did this? Anyway, let's try this.


As someone trained in the fine art of weaponized murder, you can do so much more than make simple attacks.
Before you take an attack action on your turn, you can use your bonus action to Call a Shot (shots detailed below). Your next attack, if it hits, deals an effect in addition to damage. If it crits, it inflicts a more powerful effect. Only your first attack each round can be a Called Shot.

Discombobulate: Your target is deafened until the end of its next turn. Critical: On a critical hit, your target is stunned until the end of its next turn.
Groin Shot: Your target's movement is reduced by 10 feet until the end of its next turn. Critical: On a critical hit, your target's movement is reduced to 0 until the end of its next turn.
Target the Eyes: Your target is blinded until the beginning of its next turn. Critical: On a critical hit, your target is blinded until the end of its next turn.
Gut Shot: Your target is winded, and cannot speak until the end of its next turn. Critical: On a critical hit, your target is knocked prone in addition to the other effects.



And you know what, while we're at it let's try something for wrestling. Bear in mind that, like many other things, I think there should be some sort of cost to this (like, say, putting it in a feat).

Wrestler
Prerequisite: Athletics proficiency
You are highly skilled at what martial artists call "ground work." You take your opponents down and you keep them there, often inflicting great pain along the way.

When you successfully grapple a Medium or Small creature, you may choose to enter their space. If you do, you both go prone.
While you and the creature you are grappling are prone, you may make an additional grapple attempt to pin them. If you succeed, your movement becomes 0 and they are restrained.
You can put restrained creatures into special holds by making another grapple attempt. If you succeed, you may place creatures into either the Choke Hold or the Arm Bar. Creatures in either hold have disadvantage on checks made to escape you.

Choke Hold: While you have a creature in a choke hold, you can use your action to knock them out. Make a final grapple attempt. If you succeed, the creature falls unconcious for 1 minute. If you maintain pressure, you may choose to break the creature's neck, killing it instantly.
Arm Bar: While a creature is in an arm bar, you can use your bonus action to painfully torque their limb, giving yourself or a creature you choose advantage on their next Charisma(Intimidation) check against that creature. You may also choose to break that limb. Make an Athletics check contested by the creature's own Athletics check. If you win the contest, you break their limb, and that creature suffers the appropriate Lingering Injury (DMG p272).


This feat replaces the Grappler feat already in the PHB.

I like these idea behind called shots, as it gives Barbarians and Champions specifically something to play with as they have multiple attacks, and a greater then 5% chance at critical hit.

As for Choke hold, is your thought process 4 grapple checks over 3 rounds to inflict Massive Damage on a victim with no save? If you take the Expertise feat that allows a Barbarian double prof. along with adv., they will be quite good at this with +19 with Adv. against their victim's roll. Not saying it's terrible, the no save just die feels wrong to me.

Personally I would say 3 grapple checks over two rounds (2 to pin, one to hold) and then t following round a Con Save against a DC set by your Athletics Proficiency. If you have Adv. on STR skills, you impose dis. on the check. A successful save does takes STR mod d10 + STR mod damage instead.

My suggestion is more to give a starting point for ideas rather then a final version.

As I am writing this, I am thinking about taking the Battle Master Combat Manuvers and turning it into a Fighter Subsystem, with all Fighters having access to most manuvers that work without the concept of Superiority Dice. The Called Shot system is a slimmed down version that all classes have. The Battle Master then has a few specific manuvers added to their repertoire along with Superiority Dice to improve them.

So the system goes: Called Shots (everyone), Combat Manuvers (Fighters), Superiority Dice (Battle Master).

[SilverStud]

If you take the Expertise feat

Remember that, as written, Wrestler is locked behind a feat. Barbarians only have the normal amount of ASI, so it would be a large sacrifice for them to get 2 feats (especially considering their capstone is underwhelming if you haven't maxed STR and CON)

But I see what you're saying about that last roll. Probably should make it a STR save, tbh. I was just trying not to add too many rolls to the game, ya know?

I'm glad you like Called Shots! Personally, I think that class separation/specialization is a fantastic concept that we ought to preserve (I respectfully disagree with the OP on this point), so in my own games I would give Called Shots to Fighters, Rogues, and maybe Barbarians. All the other classes have enough going for them that they don't need the boost. Plus, while it would be kinda hilarious, a Wizard calling his shot with his staff just seems wrong to me. S/he shouldn't be martially good enough for that.

[Mith]

Remember that, as written, Wrestler is locked behind a feat. Barbarians only have the normal amount of ASI, so it would be a large sacrifice for them to get 2 feats (especially considering their capstone is underwhelming if you haven't maxed STR and CON)

But I see what you're saying about that last roll. Probably should make it a STR save, tbh. I was just trying not to add too many rolls to the game, ya know?

I'm glad you like Called Shots! Personally, I think that class separation/specialization is a fantastic concept that we ought to preserve (I respectfully disagree with the OP on this point), so in my own games I would give Called Shots to Fighters, Rogues, and maybe Barbarians. All the other classes have enough going for them that they don't need the boost. Plus, while it would be kinda hilarious, a Wizard calling his shot with his staff just seems wrong to me. S/he shouldn't be martially good enough for that.

If you reduce the number of set up rolls by one, and add a save, it balances out.

As for the Wrestler feat, Variant Human gives the 1 free feat at level 1 for a bit more freedom. I ususally roll for stats, so I can see characters where this would work well evean without variant Human.

[GalacticAxekick]

Thanks so much for your input! Based on your ideas and some of my own, I've written some rules (http://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/SkbrkbxErG) that expand the uses of grappling and provide class features and spells that work together with grappling.

I'm less sold on the idea of called shots as a universal mechanic, though. I think it'd be best to represent them through class features among martial classes (namely the Barbarian, Fighter and Rogue, but possibly the Monk, Paladin and Ranger). I also think they should compete with the Attack action instead of improve upon it, since all of these classes are doing plenty of damage as things are.