"Mini Games" and Homebrew Systems in your campaign?

[Millface]

I've often tried to add little systems here or there to spice things up from campaign to campaign, I've got a group going that's been playing once weekly for about 6 years now, and it helps to keep it fresh. We've done stuff from a kind of "Sim City" tabletop edition to advanced naval combat.

I'm just wondering, have any of you homebrewed a sort of side project with an actual system for your campaigns? If so, what were they? (I'm fishing for ideas here).

I'm sure many of us have had players start towns or run businesses, did any of you handle that in a unique way where you wrote up concrete rules for it, or did you just kind of wing it? I'd be interested in seeing what those were as well, if anyone feels like sharing/bragging!

[Man_Over_Game]

One thing I implemented was a survival-esc resource management thing that was simply designed to force players into managing rations well when they didn't have excessive supplies. Like if they were in a desert or shipwrecked or something.

I basically lumped food and water together for simplicity, and they can use two rations when they slept for the benefit of a long rest, one ration to gain the benefits of a long rest with short rest healing (used hit die that didn't regenerate), or no rations to get the previously mentioned benefit but with exhaustion.

Also, in order to gain the benefit of a short rest, you must spend a ration. With this, you can expect to go through 3-5 rations a day.

Events throughout the day will cause players to take risks (such as investigating an oasis), and failure could mean that they lose several rations worth of energy (like if the oasis was actually a mirage).

Make it so that players can only carry so many rations worth of supplies at one time without improving their carrying conditions (like camels, bigger waterskins, etc) and they'll start to improve some of the stuff around them. They're be more inclined to steal when no one's looking, or to stick to caravans, or to take risks for water or such.

They thought it was interesting, but they just focused on using spells to solve their problems. I made it so that goodberries only counted as one ration, so it wasn't super beneficial, but it did help. Overall, a good experiment.

[Millface]

One thing I implemented was a survival-esc resource management thing that was simply designed to force players into managing rations well when they didn't have excessive supplies. Like if they were in a desert or shipwrecked or something.

I basically lumped food and water together for simplicity, and they can use two rations when they slept for the benefit of a long rest, one ration to gain the benefits of a long rest with short rest healing (used hit die that didn't regenerate), or no rations to get the previously mentioned benefit but with exhaustion.

Also, in order to gain the benefit of a short rest, you must spend a ration. With this, you can expect to go through 3-5 rations a day.

Events throughout the day will cause players to take risks (such as investigating an oasis), and failure could mean that they lose several rations worth of energy (like if the oasis was actually a mirage).

Make it so that players can only carry so many rations worth of supplies at one time without improving their carrying conditions (like camels, bigger waterskins, etc) and they'll start to improve some of the stuff around them. They're be more inclined to steal when no one's looking, or to stick to caravans, or to take risks for water or such.

They thought it was interesting, but they just focused on using spells to solve their problems. I made it so that goodberries only counted as one ration, so it wasn't super beneficial, but it did help. Overall, a good experiment.

That would have been hella useful when I ran ToA, that's pretty good in the right environment!

[strangebloke]

Angry GM's time pool rules.

The assumption is that there is a certain portion of the monsters in a dungeon that are roaming, looking for the PCs. At the beginning of the dungeon, you determine how many monsters are in this pool.

As the adventurers wander about in the dungeon, the DM adds 'threat dice' to represent that the monsters are organizing. When combat finally does happen, you roll the dice. Based on the number of hits that come up on the threat dice, you add a certain number of monsters to the encounter.

This system incentives players to hustle through a dungeon, and generates a sense of urgency.

The size of the threat dice is based off of how aware of you the monsters are. So this mechanic also incentives players to play stealthily as much as is possible.

[Millface]

Angry GM's time pool rules.

The assumption is that there is a certain portion of the monsters in a dungeon that are roaming, looking for the PCs. At the beginning of the dungeon, you determine how many monsters are in this pool.

As the adventurers wander about in the dungeon, the DM adds 'threat dice' to represent that the monsters are organizing. When combat finally does happen, you roll the dice. Based on the number of hits that come up on the threat dice, you add a certain number of monsters to the encounter.

This system incentives players to hustle through a dungeon, and generates a sense of urgency.

The size of the threat dice is based off of how aware of you the monsters are. So this mechanic also incentives players to play stealthily as much as is possible.

This is cool, so the number of monsters in a given dungeon aren't necessarily preset in this system, but instead the number is decided by the threat level mechanic?

I like that. As the party makes noise or takes their time here or there behind the scenes you're keeping track. It always seemed a little silly to me to have a dungeon full of static monsters anyway, this seems like an easier way to keep track of that to make them more fluid.

[strangebloke]

This is cool, so the number of monsters in a given dungeon aren't necessarily preset in this system, but instead the number is decided by the threat level mechanic?

I like that. As the party makes noise or takes their time here or there behind the scenes you're keeping track. It always seemed a little silly to me to have a dungeon full of static monsters anyway, this seems like an easier way to keep track of that to make them more fluid.

Well, no, the monsters are predetermined. But if you take their time, you're more likely to encounter them all at once.

I usually have a deadly encounter worth of monsters roaming. When combat starts, I roll the threat dice, and count the hits. A portion of the roaming monsters proportional to the number of hits then enters the encounter on the second or third turn.

It requires a bit of prep, since you have to determine how many hits correspond to how many monsters, and you have to determine the initial level of threat. I have used this mechanic quite a few times, and I'd reccomend using it only when the party is in for a long, drawn-out dungeon run. I'd also reccomend building in some hard stops where the dice will get rolled unless the players are very creative. (For example, a steel door that they have to beat down)

One of the things I really like about this, beside the building tension, is that it allows for a big tempo swing later in a fight. Usually, even a deadly encounter is going to drag on a bit by the fourth round or so, since everyone's dropped their big abilities and the PCs are probably going to win. Reinforcements can really shake things up.

In my last session, the party was trying to escape from a city. The plan they developed was to have most of the party lay low, while one party member ran a distraction and another member tried to bribe/intimidate some guards. The plan worked beautifully, but it took a long time to set up. The distraction pulled some of the max monster pool away, so when they did alert the guards (trying to steal some horses) even though the max number of hits came up, the party they encountered was pretty small.

[EggKookoo]

Well, no, the monsters is predetermined. But if you take their time, you're more likely to encounter them all at once.

I totally am going to steal this.

Also, in that vein, not that it's a minigame but more of an approach, I'm a huge fan of the Five Room Dungeon (https://1d4chan.org/wiki/Five_Room_Dungeon) model.

[Millface]

I totally am going to steal this.

Also, in that vein, not that it's a minigame but more of an approach, I'm a huge fan of the Five Room Dungeon (https://1d4chan.org/wiki/Five_Room_Dungeon) model.

I'll definitely take a look!

Really, Mini-Game was possibly the wrong term for what I'm looking for, though it does apply. When I made a system for starting-and then running-a town while the players adventured it was almost like another game inside D&D.

I'm really looking for any homebrewed systems anyone uses to fill the gaps in RAW. If there's not something that outlines what should happen or how it should happen in a place, what did people implement to cover it, if anything.

So something like the five room dungeon certainly applies!

[Knaight]

I'll definitely take a look!

Really, Mini-Game was possibly the wrong term for what I'm looking for, though it does apply. When I made a system for starting-and then running-a town while the players adventured it was almost like another game inside D&D.

I'm really looking for any homebrewed systems anyone uses to fill the gaps in RAW. If there's not something that outlines what should happen or how it should happen in a place, what did people implement to cover it, if anything.

So something like the five room dungeon certainly applies!

So, subsystems? Including subsystems for content generation.

[EggKookoo]

I'm really looking for any homebrewed systems anyone uses to fill the gaps in RAW. If there's not something that outlines what should happen or how it should happen in a place, what did people implement to cover it, if anything.

Another thing I find myself doing more and more, especially with higher-level PCs but really across the board, is use multiple cumulative checks. You know how like with a death save you have to get three successes before you get three failures? I do that all over the place with anything that feels like it should be more than a single die roll. Anything that feels like an extended but essentially single action. Like, sneaking down a corridor trying to avoid the guards who have a patrol pattern. Start making DEX/Stealth checks. If you get three successes before you get three failures, you make it to the end of the corridor without being spotted.

The players find this fun because it creates a sense of rising tension, and it feels less like a single bad roll can screw them. It feels more fair somehow. It also allows them to use features like Portent without simply auto-winning (unless they happen to have enough Portent uses, but how often is that?). You can also spice things up by having failures incrementally raise the DC, or successes lower it. Or require not just three successes but three in a row, or offer a special success if that's not required but they get it anyway. Depending on what you're trying to model, you could also just require three successes regardless of the number of failures, especially if it's a time-based thing and you limit the players to one check per turn or round.

This would only be for those kinds of actions that feel stretched out over time. I don't recommend using it in place of Attack rolls and whatnot.

This isn't an original concept. Aside from it being how death saves work, a few other systems like to use it.

[Eradis]

For the traditional town building/management, I used this system (https://www.reddit.com/r/boh5e/comments/3zn9ut/fortresses_temples_strongholds_by_uthe_singular/)(which is not mine). The pdf link is at the top.

Otherwise, I like to add a "flashback" kind of element for higher level games. It implies that your players have to build their character from level 1 to the starting level of the campaign on different character sheet. Usually I would simply put some checkpoint to avoid wasting too much time (ex.: level 1, 3, 5). Using a pdf sheet is simpler since you can save each level as you create your character, but it does allow you to revisit moments of the PCs life to add to the storytelling.

Army management is also a possibility. I haven't try it yet, but I am looking forward to it. I'd envisage a system inspired by the Heroes of Might & Magic games. It would keep the overall application quite simple to determine how many troops are lost in said amount of time.

[Millface]

For the traditional town building/management, I used this system (https://www.reddit.com/r/boh5e/comments/3zn9ut/fortresses_temples_strongholds_by_uthe_singular/)(which is not mine). The pdf link is at the top.

Otherwise, I like to add a "flashback" kind of element for higher level games. It implies that your players have to build their character from level 1 to the starting level of the campaign on different character sheet. Usually I would simply put some checkpoint to avoid wasting too much time (ex.: level 1, 3, 5). Using a pdf sheet is simpler since you can save each level as you create your character, but it does allow you to revisit moments of the PCs life to add to the storytelling.

Army management is also a possibility. I haven't try it yet, but I am looking forward to it. I'd envisage a system inspired by the Heroes of Might & Magic games. It would keep the overall application quite simple to determine how many troops are lost in said amount of time.

That sounds like work, but work I'd love to do. That's an absolutely fantastic way to bring players closer to characters that start at higher levels.

If you start at level 1, by level 15 you've created a myriad of memories to look back on, if you start at 15 you have to kind of just imply those. If you use this flashback system they get to actually live it. We almost always start at level 1-3, but I'm stealing this in case we change that up in the future. Presumably, the PCs wouldn't have been together the entire span of their past, do you run these flashbacks separately or does everyone else kind of get to watch when someone's individual flashback comes up?

Armies I was never good at. I used to co-dm with a guy that was great with it. He'd run Tuesday, and I was in that game, then I'd run wednesday, and he was in that one, but the other players were different. We played both in the same world, though, and both groups were working toward the same goal along different paths. At the end, we brought everyone together for a 10 hour, two group, two DM session where he DMed the overworld battlefield and clashing of armies with characters mixed form both groups while I DMed the dungeon delve to try to cut the head from the snake with the other half.

I didn't get to see much of what he was doing, and I worried his table would be less fun since there was a heavy homebrew system element to it, but everyone got super into it and seemed to be having a blast at both tables, so I can only assume it was well thought out. I'm pretty sure I'll never bottle that lightning again though, that day was just insane.

[MaxWilson]

I've often tried to add little systems here or there to spice things up from campaign to campaign, I've got a group going that's been playing once weekly for about 6 years now, and it helps to keep it fresh. We've done stuff from a kind of "Sim City" tabletop edition to advanced naval combat.

I'm just wondering, have any of you homebrewed a sort of side project with an actual system for your campaigns? If so, what were they? (I'm fishing for ideas here).

I'm sure many of us have had players start towns or run businesses, did any of you handle that in a unique way where you wrote up concrete rules for it, or did you just kind of wing it? I'd be interested in seeing what those were as well, if anyone feels like sharing/bragging!

Once upon a time I did build this Traveller-inspired chargen tool (https://maxwilson.github.io/Beast/AbstractDungeoneering/) for character generation during one campaign. I don't think any of my players actually showed up with a character made with it, and I'd revamp it and add details before using it again, but... there it is. I think it gives a nice balance between levels and stats--you typically wind up with good stats and decent levels, or high levels and decent stats, but not both.

In the past I've also built systems for reputation, the most elegant of which can be summarized as, "Reputation within a social group has only two mechanical effects: everyone in the group knows the reputation of everyone else in the group, and the rules for gaining/losing reputation can be changed by a plurality of the total reputation within the group." So, Reputation doesn't let you do anything per se, but it does let you influence those who desire to gain reputation within the group, which is exactly how it works in real life. And if the Mean Girls get together to decide that wearing black lipliner is now uncool and a way to lose reputation instead of gain it, all of their flunkies will probably start wearing different lipliner.

So all you need to do at that point is track the PCs' reputation within all of the circles they interact with, and make sure they know the rules for that social circle and the major players in that circle. If slaying a dragon gets you +100 reputation among the Heroes' Club members, and missing the annual Hero ball makes you lose half your reputation, and there's a dragon rampaging the countryside right before the annual ball... the scenario writes itself. It's a perfect opportunity for some relative unknowns to make a big splash, or (maybe even better) to get hired by the king's youngest son or someone else who desperately wants to make a big splash as bodyguards/tour guides on the big dragon hunt.

And it's easy to invent new circles on the fly: boxing champions, the Black Circle, the assassins' guild, the town council of Verona, etc.