Oh, 10d6 was too much damage for a race feature that you get at 1st level? Who would have thought?! Okay, let's tone it down to 1d6 and try again. Well, the whole point of playtesting is to learn. If it is not, remake it taking into account whatever you learned from your tests. That's why you try it out: to check if it's okay. You will screw things up and make OP and UP homebrews that will completely break the game or suck, if you try enough times. Sorry, but you're not better than an entire devs' team dedicated solely to game developing and balancing. The official release of 5e had lots of playtests before actual release. Nobody knows if something is going to be balanced or not. Find a table of friends that are fine with you using them as lab rats. Some of the UA races/classes have feedback from the community. Although the Unearthed Arcana (UA) is not playtested and well balanced, it might serve as a good start as well. The Wizard's official site also has some insights on Modifying Classes and the DMG has some insight on modifying races. Do you have a heavily martial type class? Compare it to Barbarians or Fighters, etc. If you stray too much from the original books, you might find yourself in a difficult position where only experienced DMs should be. Do you have a flying race? Compare it to Aarakocra. Do you have something that deals elemental damage in an area? Compare it to Dragonborn's Breath. Usually, you should be creating something "close" to the original features. For example, in my opinion, this is not true for feats in 5e, which are heavily disbalanced. Note that it only works if you assume the original devs did a decent job in balancing whatever they published. You can either create a rating system of your own or use a well acepted rating system from the internet, e.g. The first (and most important) step is to compare it to official and published race/classes. These are the most important things I've learned in the process. I'm constantly creating new stuff for fun. Some background: I love to homebrew things.
0 kommentar(er)
