How to run a Post-Apocalyptic 5e Game

[Mongobear]

Trying to figure out a few kinks of a setting im in the final bits of designing. Namely, how would I change/tweak some of the existing classes/spells/abilities to not totally invalidate some or all of the challenge of a setting. Namely, the easily attainable food/water to spellcasters. If the very difficult part of surviving is keeping yourself fed, and someone is able to just magic up a dump truck full of food and goodberries at will, it kind of removes that challenge entirely.

Has anyone done this already? or any ideas on ways to nerf/limit that sort of magic? outright removing it has never really felt right in past experiences, but this is one time I might have to do it.

[NontheistCleric]

How common are spellcasters in this setting? If the PCs' abilities are fairly unique, being able to secure food and water for themselves doesn't remove the challenge, it just makes it slightly different. Now everyone who can't do that kind of magic will view them as a commodity, and especially when law and order have been devastated by the breakdown of civilization, the most common way to secure access to a commodity is to seize it by force.

[Mastikator]

I think keeping everyone at level 1 basically indefinitely might be the answer. When I think post-apocalyptic I think "very deadly and unforgiving", and D&D stops being deadly at level 2.

[rel]

Simple, ban the problem spells.
If a class gets one of the banned spells automatically, give them something else instead.

[Dualight]

Alternatively, make the spells that trivialise those challenges consume a costly material component, and then treat that component as a type of (rare) treasure. Since the spells that create food tend to have the food expire the next day, each casting only solves resources for a single day at most.

[Silly Name]

I would echo Dualight's suggestion: while banning the problematic spells is the quick and easy solution, keeping them in the game but with extra restrictions is going to keep the survival aspect while still allowing players to build for it, and face new challenges.

For example, if Goodberry actually require berries to infuse with magic instead of magically conjuring them, suddenly druids don't get to just ignore all food troubles. Create Food and Water may require a "starting point", such as one pound of bread and a gallon of water, which then get multiplied by the spell.

[Mastikator]

Another option to deal with the problem spells is that they only work in certain locations.

[Amnestic]

If personal survival is the only goal, then banning the spell works.

If the party is tied into any sort of greater narrative - helping out towns, for instance - then the spells will help but not solve any real problems, especially since presumably the PCs can't just sit in town forever, they need to go out and do stuff, adventure and fight monsters, plunder abandoned buildings and tombs and whatnot.

Like, some Fallout examples - would being able to make Goodberries/Create Water solve Shady Sands' problems? Or Megaton's? Or New Vegas?

No, it'd help but their problems are larger than just food+water, and if the PC is taxxing their spell slots on helping out with the food/water situation, they might be less ready for the other problems that come their way.

[Beelzebub1111]

All spells consume material components. Goodberry doesn't work if you can't find mistletoe. That staves off that problem until your cleric reaches 5th level and summons mana from heaven, but by then your players may have established something sustainable or died already.

[Sparky McDibben]

There's a great supplement that deals with this called Weird Wastelands, up on 2CGaming's store. I did a review over on ENworld that might be a good skim.

[Anonymouswizard]

I think keeping everyone at level 1 basically indefinitely might be the answer. When I think post-apocalyptic I think "very deadly and unforgiving", and D&D stops being deadly at level 2.

Eh, that's only true for 'just after the apocalypse' settings. The term can also refer to 'ruins of empire' settings like Nentir Vale (i.e. everybody's back on their feet and building civilisation again, but the downfall of a more powerful one is clearly visible and relevant). Or something like Dark Sun where the world is hostile enough to potentially kill anybody less tough than a dragon (and that's just the weather).


Simple, ban the problem spells.
If a class gets one of the banned spells automatically, give them something else instead.

Hard banning spells is the quick solution, and fine if those spells don't do anything else (is Heroes' Feast still in 5e? I think that one gave buffs). I'd actually argue that unless a class or subclass is built around the concept of magically creating food it's practically harmless, the designers of 5wme wanted you to bash goblins, not track rations.

Soft banning by charging rare components ('this spell can't turn lead into gold but it can do the next best thing: it turns gold into cottage cheese') either just moves the goalposts or is effectively a hard ban, depending on how hard the component is to get.

[P. G. Macer]

Several years ago Web DM did (in my opinion) an excellent video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyE9RnV-w88) on running post-apocalyptic games in 5e. They talk about having to either nerf or remove problematic spells like Goodberry.

[Parabola]

The thing that probably annoys me the most on this subject is the wanderer feature in the outlander background. For a flavour ribbon to completely obviate a section of the game rules is just nuts. They went to the effort of writing survival rules and then bent over backwards to make them completely pointless. They really need to learn that well designed features interact with their own rules rather than ignore them.

[NontheistCleric]

The thing that probably annoys me the most on this subject is the wanderer feature in the outlander background. For a flavour ribbon to completely obviate a section of the game rules is just nuts. They went to the effort of writing survival rules and then bent over backwards to make them completely pointless. They really need to learn that well designed features interact with their own rules rather than ignore them.

To be fair, Wanderer does say '...provided that the land offers berries, small game, water, and so forth', so it probably wouldn't work post-apocalypse, depending on the details.

I also think they learned their lesson about obviating rules, which is why the Ranger got an option to replace its ability that did that with something more exciting.

[Mastikator]

Eh, that's only true for 'just after the apocalypse' settings. The term can also refer to 'ruins of empire' settings like Nentir Vale (i.e. everybody's back on their feet and building civilisation again, but the downfall of a more powerful one is clearly visible and relevant). Or something like Dark Sun where the world is hostile enough to potentially kill anybody less tough than a dragon (and that's just the weather).

Troo that. What kind of apocalypse really matters. IMO OP mentioned limiting survival-solving spells gives me the clue that they're talking about surviving natural elements as a major theme.

[Mongobear]

How common are spellcasters in this setting? If the PCs' abilities are fairly unique, being able to secure food and water for themselves doesn't remove the challenge, it just makes it slightly different. Now everyone who can't do that kind of magic will view them as a commodity, and especially when law and order have been devastated by the breakdown of civilization, the most common way to secure access to a commodity is to seize it by force.

I am trying to keep it low/mid magic. Arcane magic likely wont suffer too hard, altho Wizard schools likely wont be a thing, but nothing is stopping Sorcery or Warlock Pacts.

Divine Magic is the part im unsure how to handle, since Nature is likely very ravaged and Druids would have some difficulty in their power source, and the relationship between Clerics and Dieties might be stressed if not totally missing, if part of my "apocalypse" resulted in the Gods leaving the plane.

I am thinking that the early levels will be the PCs trying to find somewhere safe to settle, getting crops/other necessities going, and beginning to rebuild. Afterwards, I think they will begin striking out into their surrounding area, clearing monsters, handling threats like more savage survivors preying on others, and fighting for resources. then the later end being a threat (possibly the cause of the Apocalypse) coming back and trying to destroy the world again, while the PCs fight them off.


I think keeping everyone at level 1 basically indefinitely might be the answer. When I think post-apocalyptic I think "very deadly and unforgiving", and D&D stops being deadly at level 2.

This doesnt sound all that appealing, altho milestone XP and keeping it drawn out for several sessions is possible.


Simple, ban the problem spells.
If a class gets one of the banned spells automatically, give them something else instead.


Alternatively, make the spells that trivialise those challenges consume a costly material component, and then treat that component as a type of (rare) treasure. Since the spells that create food tend to have the food expire the next day, each casting only solves resources for a single day at most.


I would echo Dualight's suggestion: while banning the problematic spells is the quick and easy solution, keeping them in the game but with extra restrictions is going to keep the survival aspect while still allowing players to build for it, and face new challenges.

For example, if Goodberry actually require berries to infuse with magic instead of magically conjuring them, suddenly druids don't get to just ignore all food troubles. Create Food and Water may require a "starting point", such as one pound of bread and a gallon of water, which then get multiplied by the spell.

I am torn between outright banning these spells, and adding a costly component that is hard to come by so that you cannot just ignore the issues of not having food and water at the ready at all times.


If personal survival is the only goal, then banning the spell works.

If the party is tied into any sort of greater narrative - helping out towns, for instance - then the spells will help but not solve any real problems, especially since presumably the PCs can't just sit in town forever, they need to go out and do stuff, adventure and fight monsters, plunder abandoned buildings and tombs and whatnot.

Like, some Fallout examples - would being able to make Goodberries/Create Water solve Shady Sands' problems? Or Megaton's? Or New Vegas?

No, it'd help but their problems are larger than just food+water, and if the PC is taxxing their spell slots on helping out with the food/water situation, they might be less ready for the other problems that come their way.

I believe there will be some of this, altho early on it will mostly be self-sustaining their own little group. There might be some other small groups that they can interact with, whether for better or worse.


There's a great supplement that deals with this called Weird Wastelands, up on 2CGaming's store. I did a review over on ENworld that might be a good skim.

Do you have a link to this? I cant find it.


Several years ago Web DM did (in my opinion) an excellent video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyE9RnV-w88) on running post-apocalyptic games in 5e. They talk about having to either nerf or remove problematic spells like Goodberry.

Ive seen this video, they had some good advice, but it also raised even more questions.


Troo that. What kind of apocalypse really matters. IMO OP mentioned limiting survival-solving spells gives me the clue that they're talking about surviving natural elements as a major theme.

Im thinking something like the Book of Eli, but obviously with a tinge of magic mixed in. Perhaps Mages got out of hand and someone cast a forbidden spell that got away from them and it fried the atmosphere, or maybe something akin to the Spellplague, but it was the God of Life/Nature that was killed, and it wiped out like 90% of the living things in the world.

It would start out small scale, then possibly turn into a larger scale "fixing the world" scope once they reach the appropriate levels.

[Ionathus]

Alternatively, make the spells that trivialise those challenges consume a costly material component, and then treat that component as a type of (rare) treasure. Since the spells that create food tend to have the food expire the next day, each casting only solves resources for a single day at most.

I give this advice to any DM who's overwhelmed by resurrection spells and doesn't want to remove them entirely: you are the arbiter of this world. You decide how common 300gp diamonds are. It's the cleanest and quickest way to control for spells that break resource-management.

Just ensure you make it absolutely clear to your players how things will be changing. The last thing you want is somebody picking a class and then realizing they won't get to use half of the spells/features they were excited about because of (homebrewed) resource limitations.

[Mastikator]

Im thinking something like the Book of Eli, but obviously with a tinge of magic mixed in. Perhaps Mages got out of hand and someone cast a forbidden spell that got away from them and it fried the atmosphere, or maybe something akin to the Spellplague, but it was the God of Life/Nature that was killed, and it wiped out like 90% of the living things in the world.

It would start out small scale, then possibly turn into a larger scale "fixing the world" scope once they reach the appropriate levels.

In that case, if I was the DM, I'd pick something other than D&D. However since you're posting this in a D&D5e forum I'll give you my advise for D&D5e: I'd just ban all full casters, and use milestone, and keep it VERY low level. The players stay level 1 for many, many sessions, then once the story approaches the conclusion is where I'd level the player characters. They can do one final confrontation with the big monster (or whatever) at level 5. Then it's over.

The thing about the Book of Eli is that it's lonely and deadly. Lonely stops being a thing when you have a party, and deadly stops at level 3 unless you're willing to throw insanely deadly encounters at the players.

[Anonymouswizard]

Troo that. What kind of apocalypse really matters. IMO OP mentioned limiting survival-solving spells gives me the clue that they're talking about surviving natural elements as a major theme.

True, but it's still important to recognise the differences between something like Fallout and something like Dark Sun.


I give this advice to any DM who's overwhelmed by resurrection spells and doesn't want to remove them entirely: you are the arbiter of this world. You decide how common 300gp diamonds are. It's the cleanest and quickest way to control for spells that break resource-management.

Is it back to a single diamond then? That'll make it fun if I ever run Midnight, diamonds have lost pretty much all their value in that setting... Although I'd probably just declare Cleric-only spells off limits for Magical Secrets, which mostly nips it in the bud anyway.


Just ensure you make it absolutely clear to your players how things will be changing. The last thing you want is somebody picking a class and then realizing they won't get to use half of the spells/features they were excited about because of (homebrewed) resource limitations.

Also definitely this, the same for cutting spells entirely.

[Sparky McDibben]

Do you have a link to this? I cant find it.

Sure thing! https://www.enworld.org/threads/weird-wastelands-3rd-party-review.698025/

It's the sixth entry where I start talking about new spells and changes to old ones, but the whole thing is a good read if you're interested.

[Ryuken]

Remember, it's not just food & water issues that magic can solve. Extreme heat/extreme cold. How about weather control? Healing?

I think there are a lot of thematic ways to limit magic and still retain the gist of what you're going for without a "I'm banning these spells" presentation.

Did the cataclysm wreck the natural world? Then maybe the druidic magic doesn't work as well or is corrupted because of the damage. Maybe it only fully works in pristine locales.

Are the divines punishing the world for their actions? Maybe as a pantheon they've decided to pull back on their help - sort of a reap what you sow kind of thing or a prove you're worthy of our intercession vibe. Maybe helpful spells only work in consecrated temples? For the Faithful?

Arcane magics are a little tricker but I still think are doable. For wizards, treat new spells like lostech. Gotta find intact books, mentors, and so on to learn new spells and some may just be lost. Warlocks already get power from a patron, so maybe the deal isn't good enough for those spells to be granted. Innate casters would be tougher and kind of told up front that some spells are off limits, unless you want to tie that into discoverable lore/components/foci.

I don't think it's too limiting to spellcasters to say hey, this is how I would like to world to be and these spells are like a cheat code.

[Sparky McDibben]

For wizards, treat new spells like lostech.

You could extend this to most magic-users. Maybe everyone but sorcerers and warlocks have to quest to learn new spells. That's a great way to remove goodberry; it simply can't be learned in this setting. It would require reworking the spells known on clerics and druids, but that's a small price to pay, honestly.

[rel]

The thing that probably annoys me the most on this subject is the wanderer feature in the outlander background. For a flavour ribbon to completely obviate a section of the game rules is just nuts. They went to the effort of writing survival rules and then bent over backwards to make them completely pointless. They really need to learn that well designed features interact with their own rules rather than ignore them.

The thing is 5e doesn't have an exploration or resource management minigame.

It has a bunch of disconnected elements like encumbrance and priced ammunition that used to interact with such systems way back when. But for the last 3 editions at least they haven't been tied together into something that results in interesting decisions at the table. At best, they're a source of continuous low level bookkeeping that occasionally becomes relevant.

And I think the designers are well aware of this. They didn't want to outright remove all the vestigial legacy elements for fear of damaging the feel of the game, so they did the next best thing. They made them as unobtrusive and easy to circumvent as possible.

Your archer doesn't have the ability to never run out of ammo, but the encumbrance rules, equipment table, and expected treasure rewards are all written such that you can absolutely buy 10GP worth of arrows at character creation and never have to think about ammunition again.

An argument could even be made that issues around the expected length of the adventuring day and the availability of short rests stem from the fact that spell slots and HP were once also resources that tied into those now missing systems.

[Sorinth]

Probably the easiest way to deal with the food/water spells outside of banning them is to use Gritty Realism. Players can still spend spell slots to get food/water, but when spellslots don't come back every night they will still need/want to get food/water without magic. Honestly it's probably more things like Leomund's Tiny Hut that will give you problems.

But I would question why you really want food/water to be a game mechanic. Even without magic it's not really a fun challenge within the 5e framework. You can run a post apocalyptical world, even one where food/water is "scarce" just fine even if skipping over that aspect for the player because it's less about mechanics and more about storytelling and world building, so as long as the rest of the world can't easily ignore that scarcity then you should be fine. If the players find an oasis in a desert world where water is rare it's valuable to them regardless of the fact that they can conjure water easily simply because it's valuable to the rest of the world.

[greenstone]

If a caster can create food or heal disease, that caster is now a valuable possession to someone.

Every warlord (it's post apocalyptic, so there will be warlords :-) is going try to capture, enslave, or otherwise control any caster who can create food and water, heal, and so on.

PCs are going to have to watch their backs constantly.

[Mongobear]

Having talked to my group, I got this bit of info about what sort of post-apoc features they want in a game.

"I like to explore old ruins, and find stuff I dont know about. Old tech/magic and forgotten lore."

"I like a hostile environment, where the threats are from the over-populated wildlife and not generic bandits"

"I like the settings themes, being unbound by laws and/or normally civilized ways of life."

"I like a setting that is bleak and unforgiving, where the very world is part of the challenge."

(amongst all of them, they all shared two or more of these traits.)

I feel like all of these but the final one can fit into literally any setting/genre and isn't unique to Post-Apoc games. Like I could run the bare minimum PA style setting, and sprinkle the slightest bit of any of these in here and there and it would be fine, but that doesnt feel right to me. I am a world-builder, I want the world to actually fit the genre and not just check marks on a list and meet a requirement.

[Sorinth]

Having talked to my group, I got this bit of info about what sort of post-apoc features they want in a game.

"I like to explore old ruins, and find stuff I dont know about. Old tech/magic and forgotten lore."

"I like a hostile environment, where the threats are from the over-populated wildlife and not generic bandits"

"I like the settings themes, being unbound by laws and/or normally civilized ways of life."

"I like a setting that is bleak and unforgiving, where the very world is part of the challenge."

(amongst all of them, they all shared two or more of these traits.)

I feel like all of these but the final one can fit into literally any setting/genre and isn't unique to Post-Apoc games. Like I could run the bare minimum PA style setting, and sprinkle the slightest bit of any of these in here and there and it would be fine, but that doesnt feel right to me. I am a world-builder, I want the world to actually fit the genre and not just check marks on a list and meet a requirement.

Keep in mind you can have bleak and unforgiving world where wildlife/weather is dangerous without resorting to tracking food/water. Sure to an extent a weather event that keeps the party in place as they wait it out can have more tension if food supplies are dwindling, but it's far from the only way to make weather events hostile/unforgiving.

[Mongobear]

Keep in mind you can have bleak and unforgiving world where wildlife/weather is dangerous without resorting to tracking food/water. Sure to an extent a weather event that keeps the party in place as they wait it out can have more tension if food supplies are dwindling, but it's far from the only way to make weather events hostile/unforgiving.

I think part of the issue I am having figuring this out is that compared to my players, I have a much more specific idea of what "Post-Apocalyptic" (PA) means compared to them.

A few of the ones in favor of "exploring old ruins" camp cited examples of Forgotten Realms, Netheril and Illefarn empires, but I wouldnt categorize Faerun as post apocalyptic, its just an old planet that has had a ton of civilizations built/collapsed on it.

For the people that want the unchecked wildlife and/or the wilderness to be a threat, again that isnt a feature unique to PA settings. Any world can just have rough/dangerous regions, look at Earth, and the regions of northern Canada, that's some of the harshest natural areas and wildlife like a Grizzly Bear that could absolutely maul a normal person.

The few people who wanted the thematic elements, I feel that can just be RP'd as any flavor of Chaotic alignment. It isn't something unique to PA.

It's just causing frustration on my end, because im trying to ask them for examples, and am being given extremely vague/generic things that can be used literally anywhere, and when I bring up something actually specific to PA pop-culture references like Mad Max, Walking Dead, Resident Evil, Book of Eli, etc I am told that's not PA enough, and im just sitting here making the confused Jackie Chan meme face.

[Amnestic]

Mad Max and the Walking Dead aren't post apocalyptic enough? That's...surprising, since they're pretty bad for anyone living there! I can see it for Resident Evil, since their disasters tend to be localised rather than global (much to Wesker's chagrin) though I suppose part of the question is "how bad does a setting need to be beyond what the player's interact with".

Did they provide any pop culture examples of their own for you to work with, since they shot down yours?

[Mongobear]

Mad Max and the Walking Dead aren't post apocalyptic enough? That's...surprising, since they're pretty bad for anyone living there! I can see it for Resident Evil, since their disasters tend to be localised rather than global (much to Wesker's chagrin) though I suppose part of the question is "how bad does a setting need to be beyond what the player's interact with".

Yeah, that's kind of my reaction. (Also included in my examples were a lot of other movies/shows with "Zombies" like 28 Days/Weeks Later, which were similarly shot down.


Did they provide any pop culture examples of their own for you to work with, since they shot down yours?

The closest example given to an existing IP was Forgotten Realms having stuff like the Netheril and Illefarn Empires that have fallen, but still occasionally have relevance in the modern day.

[Amnestic]

Very weird.

I guess if FR's what they're after though then Anauroch's probably your best bet? The great sand sea where the Netherese used to hang out before their whole empire imploded, now populated mostly just by desert nomads and occasionally treasure hunters. Crossing it from east to west by the 'main' road seems to take about 3 weeks on foot, so it's pretty large, though not inescapable.

[Sorinth]

I think part of the issue I am having figuring this out is that compared to my players, I have a much more specific idea of what "Post-Apocalyptic" (PA) means compared to them.

A few of the ones in favor of "exploring old ruins" camp cited examples of Forgotten Realms, Netheril and Illefarn empires, but I wouldnt categorize Faerun as post apocalyptic, its just an old planet that has had a ton of civilizations built/collapsed on it.

For the people that want the unchecked wildlife and/or the wilderness to be a threat, again that isnt a feature unique to PA settings. Any world can just have rough/dangerous regions, look at Earth, and the regions of northern Canada, that's some of the harshest natural areas and wildlife like a Grizzly Bear that could absolutely maul a normal person.

The few people who wanted the thematic elements, I feel that can just be RP'd as any flavor of Chaotic alignment. It isn't something unique to PA.

It's just causing frustration on my end, because im trying to ask them for examples, and am being given extremely vague/generic things that can be used literally anywhere, and when I bring up something actually specific to PA pop-culture references like Mad Max, Walking Dead, Resident Evil, Book of Eli, etc I am told that's not PA enough, and im just sitting here making the confused Jackie Chan meme face.

FR isn't PA on the whole, but if the campaign existed entirely in the Anauroch desert then it could be. As a guess I would imagine the problem with those PA settings is because most of the threats faced are other people, yes including zombies in the people category. They aren't really fighting a harsh environment and exploring ruins, there just happens to be lots of ruins in those ruins which is different.

So my suggestion in terms of world building would be it's post-fall a powerful magical empire where magic itself is very wild. There's the chicken or egg mystery of whether the empire caused magic to go wild, or wild magic caused the empire to fall that can be investigated by exploring the ruins. The wild magic has infused areas of the land causing different areas to have very unique properties. So one area might be cause deadly magical storms, another places will have pockets of anti-gravity, another has a weird time dilation, another is infused with necrotic energy which causes recurring damage while in the area, etc... In the end there aren't a lot of areas where civizilization can thrive so the towns are small and scattered, travel between towns is almost non-existent because it requires going through those dangerous areas, so it's not done by regular folk. Whatever still lives outside the towns have been mutated by the wild magics, so you don't face off against the classic orc/goblin war parties but instead abberations and mutated beasts such as owlbears, displacer beats, or winter wolves.

[Ryuken]

Maybe instead of the entire world being the PA setting, it could just be the section on the world where all the McGuffins are. In the AD&D setting there was a desert bordered by tall, monster-infested mountain ranges. The desert used to be a highly magical, advanced society. Until the place got magic-nuked by a rival state.

So you've got lost, hidden (powerful?) treasures in a very hostile environment, extremely isolated from any kind of outside support. In an area filled with natural hazards and whatever critters you want. Fiction even had an underground society of degenerates existing separately from the surface.

Creating water or food in quantity then doubles as an uncontrolled monster summoning as every resource-lean critter comes to gorge. Tiny huts can get smothered by sandstorms or be stuffed PC meatballs for large predators (purple worm = sandworm)

[rel]

I think part of the issue I am having figuring this out is that compared to my players, I have a much more specific idea of what "Post-Apocalyptic" (PA) means compared to them.

A few of the ones in favor of "exploring old ruins" camp cited examples of Forgotten Realms, Netheril and Illefarn empires, but I wouldnt categorize Faerun as post apocalyptic, its just an old planet that has had a ton of civilizations built/collapsed on it.

For the people that want the unchecked wildlife and/or the wilderness to be a threat, again that isnt a feature unique to PA settings. Any world can just have rough/dangerous regions, look at Earth, and the regions of northern Canada, that's some of the harshest natural areas and wildlife like a Grizzly Bear that could absolutely maul a normal person.

The few people who wanted the thematic elements, I feel that can just be RP'd as any flavor of Chaotic alignment. It isn't something unique to PA.

It's just causing frustration on my end, because im trying to ask them for examples, and am being given extremely vague/generic things that can be used literally anywhere, and when I bring up something actually specific to PA pop-culture references like Mad Max, Walking Dead, Resident Evil, Book of Eli, etc I am told that's not PA enough, and im just sitting here making the confused Jackie Chan meme face.

Pin things down a bit on your end. Roughly figure out a game you want to run, then pitch it to the other players and see if you get enough interest for a campaign.

[Sparky McDibben]

In my experience, players care less about the world than about, "OK, but what do we actually do?"

[taleteller50]

If you really want a D&D Setting with more of a post apocalyptic feel to it try Dark Sun. It doesn't have an official 5th edition release but there's homebrew books available.

Some of it does depend on the type of post apocalypse you or you're players are looking for. I always think of stuff like Mad Max or Deadlands: HoE when I think of post apocalyptic.

If you are looking for a little mix of D&D 5th with road warrior combat the Infernal War Machines from Descent into Avernus works well.