The you are empowered part is my favorite bit, but I think it’s often just hard to say no to player requests, which is why it’s in there 
just because I’m not secure enough to say “no” in such a situation isn’t really a reason to ban or not ban something. That’s a specific situation and including it in general rules isn’t really helpful.
I could avoid that situation, for example, by clarifying in the forum that I don’t allow it.
We dont what to have downleveling banned, right? So the wording would need a change for the first sentence. Also, I don’t think we need to prevent a downleveled character from getting rewards. They are going to be “worse” than what the character would gain if played at their original level anyways, no need to be overly punishing. Just keep it simple and give them normal rewards except for the level-up.
What should be clarified though is how downleveling works - what I did in my suggested text already.
What do you think of this?
Downleveling Characters can only gain levels, not lose them. if you want to play a character whose level is too high for the game in question, you may ask the DM if they allow you to reduce your character’s level - but bear in mind, DMs are not obliged to allow a level decrease.
If the level decrease puts the character into a lower tier (e.g. going from level 11 to 10), you have to adhere to the new tier’s magic item limits. That means you can only equip as many items as the new tier allows and you cannot use items of a rarity greater than what is allowed in the new tier.
The downleveled character gains rewards as usual with the exception of getting no level-up - a level decrease always is of temporary nature, thus the character returns to their original level at the end of the session. However, if the character dies and is not resurrected, the death is considered permanent.
PS: fully agree in regards to the Code of Conduct.
Yes, we also do not want to legitimize it by having official rules for it. As stated above, optional rules are not really optional. And no matter how empowered DMs get, they will be put on the spot which is something we want to avoid.
A general assumption on my part is, that the VALUE rules work as “everything that is written down is allowed, everything else is unregulated and up to DMs but not assumed to be standard and/or expected” Therefore I think we should not regulate it.
Edit: maybe the use of “we” is a bit over the top, since I do not speak for everyone, but I just took the language of the above post. I hope this is understood in the good faith as it is intended
Disclaimer: this is just my own thinking and proposals. And as stated above, I’m still reconsidering because I don’t want DMs to feel forced. I greatly appreciate the Code’s support though!
Yes, I am proposing banning, but that doesn’t mean it can’t happen. By default, anything you do against VALUE rules is homebrew, we don’t need to spell it out. Using the magic items as an example: VALUE rules say you can only drop 1 magic item max for a character, right? It’s all in bold and everything? But DMs can and do drop additional items, or items not in an official book, which is technically against the VALUE rules, so they say it’s homebrew and can only be used at their table.
If a DM does something by a VALUE or official rule, then in general, all the other DMs are supposed to accept it. If a DM does something against a VALUE or official rule, then it’s considered homebrew, and it stays at that DM’s table. I would prefer down-levelling to be in the “Against normal rules, therefore homebrew, stays at that DM’s table”.
It seems pretty clear that some people don’t want down-levelling (just as it’s clear that some people do want to accept it), so I don’t think we should force it on them. Which is why I don’t think we should allow characters to take rewards from a down-levelled session to another DM’s table, because that DM may think they shouldn’t have ever been in that down-levelled session to begin with.
However, I can respect a DM’s decision (if they feel comfortable) to run their own table and to accept down-levelling, so as long as it stays at their own table and doesn’t interfere with mine, I don’t feel like I can say much. Hence the homebrew and the “don’t take it with you”- the DM does what they want, but it doesn’t interfere with anyone else.
So I kinda like my wording better, but I understand that it may not be what you’re looking for.
If you’re worried about the phrasing, we could add “normally” into the mix, to imply there are abnormal situations:
“Down-levelling is normally prohibited. If a DM permits down-levelling at their table, the reduction in level is considered homebrewed, and applies only at that table. A character may not gain downtime days, levels, gold, equipment, or magic items at a session where they are down-levelled. If the character dies, the character death is considered permanent unless resurrected per VALUE rules.”
Of course, there’s always downtime days. There’s downtime days for leveling, showing that people are working really hard on their days off. That’s WAY too unrealistic, even for a fantasy game! We can always have a more realistic version:
Downtime Activity:
Sloth (10 Downtime Days): You spend your days off on the couch, watching soap operas like “As the Beholder Turns” and infomercials for Keoghtom’s ointment on your large screen crystal ball. Your muscles atrophy and you forget the spells that you were supposed to remember. You lose one level. If this causes you to move to a lower tier, then your household has become so messy that you misplace all of your higher tier magical items, and lose them from your character sheet.
(Note that this is just a joke, meant to lighten the mood 
)
You say it’s just a joke, but that sounds unironically hilarious and could probably work
I actually wanted to write something similar but didn’t have the time for it. Unironically though.
One optional rule that everyone seems to accept as optional is flanking, so is the rarely used cleaving through enemies. I don’t think anyone would argue that they are always on just because they are optional.
I started thinking “I feel like if you spend downtime watching the Planar Geographic channel on the crystal ball, you should get advantage on a Nature check…” That prompted me to actually try to turn it into something useful, and so I am turning the pre-planning topic to Downtime Activities!
It was mentioned a while back that maybe we could add or overhaul some of them, so here are some thoughts. The numbers are just initial guestimates. I’m also not going too far into the details, we can flesh out the wording to make things better (for example, specifying that if you change a ASI/feat, you still have to meet the minimums for all the other feats/classes that you have)
10 Downtime Days: You gain Inspiration. (This might be used a lot before mini-campaign finales).
30 Downtime Days: You gain a tool proficiency or a language.
40 Downtime Days: You may retrain an ASI or feat.
50 Downtime Days: You gain a skill proficiency.
100 Downtime Days: You gain expertise in one skill that you have.
I’m also thinking about the “Work” and “Temple Services” downtime activities and feel like we can use them to resolve each other. I think it’s been suggested that a True Resurrection is too expensive. People have talked about having a ton of downtime days they can’t use at higher levels. And I would also say that the “Work” Downtime Activity isn’t very useful. So how about this?
Work: You may spend 10 downtime days to gain gold equal to the maximum per session for your tier.
We can clean up the language. But this would be useful for new players (levels 1-4) who don’t want to rush to higher levels, but could really use better equipment or the money to scribe spells. This would also resolve the “T4 characters can’t afford true resurrection, but have lots of downtime days”, because once they reach T4, they can use 40+ downtime days to prepare a pile of gold. So it’ll still cost them something… 40+ downtime days is a decent investment, but it’s more doable. We can also adjust the amount of gold if people feel it’s too much (10 downtime days for half the max amount, or whatever).
Just some thoughts toward that Season 4 prep.
Offtopic but… this just makes me wonder if anyone is ever going to play, like, a T2 character, frozen for dozens if not hundres of games at the same level, just to farm downtime days and acquire skills and expertise in every skill possible 
I feel like that would make sense if it was balanced with a luck chexk in front of every ability check. Oh, I’m proficient eith sleight of hand? +7? But first roll to see if you get to add ANY modifiers.
I want to run a campaign to try that… darn
gaining inspiration - not a fan, not all DMs (like to) use inspiration, this would force them, and almost everybody uses it wrong anyway
gaining a language - probably not problematic gaining a tool proficiency - probably not problematic but might feel like taking away from some classes/backgrounds
retrain feats/asi’s sounds good to me, honestly would make it cheaper (probabl 10-20 downtime days)
gaining a skill proficiency - hard no imho, completely upsets balance
gaining expertise - hard no imho, completely upsets balance and removes a big factor for some classes
Totally fine with the hard nos… Inspiration wasn’t really what I wanted, but I was trying to make it something “standard” for ease of rules. For the skill stuff, I’m less trying to think up cool downtime rewards, and more trying to acknowledge play time. It was more “congrats on playing X amount of sessions with the same character!”
My actual thinking for those: If a player takes a character from level 1 to 20, without the use of downtime levelling or DM rewards, it’d be nifty to acknowledge it in some way. Although I suppose we can just get the person a cupcake
Or what about an magical item of your choice (within the tier boundaries) for the 50(or 100?) downtime days? It’s nothing game breaking, since item limits and attunement are still a thing. But choosing the one thing you always wished for is nice. So maybe that’s something what could reward a player for pushing through with one character.
spending Downtime days to “retrain”
might be a good idea
adding one - aside from a Hombrew award that only works on that table - I would also ‘hard no’
RPG Vienna: Very enthusiastic about sloth. Work, not so much. :b
I’m no DM (yet), so I just defend the player’s viewpoint so far.
I really like this kind of rules, that are not like an all-out-ban. Prohibited, but if… and that would suffice imho, because that next session is what matters, the fun at the table!
I was thinking of another solution for @Arthilas’s problem that evening that works best with the app. Copy Character, cut some levels (as if you would create a new character, so it might turn out to be lvl5 or lvl1, what I don’t like either btw, but I can take it) and items according to the rules, rename and play! It stays legal, no discussions and can uplevel faster after the session with the downtime days if necessary.
I don’t really have much time to respond to everything I saw here, but:
As I can remember, something similar is being written in the new bastion rules in the 2024 DMG https://5e.tools/book.html#xdmg,7
This is very similar to that what I’ve been wishing for (but even better)! 
At that point it’s very hard to stop everything from being legal. Technically I released myself as a playable class in regards to the ogl when the whole ogl fiasco happened.
Are you even available in the app? WOW! 