Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Jack Daniel 05-18-05, 11:27 PM	These are just some random thoughts. LEVEL-INDEPENDENT XP I've been using this system for a year now, and taken a whole campaign up to 11th level so far. I have to say, I like it much better than the standard system presended in the DMG, because it offers great flexibility with encounter desgin and XP awards, and makes it very easy to do the math at the end of the day. But it still grants level-ups at a ridiculous rate for those of us more used to AD&D. I almost never find my characters going through a whole 13.33 encounters before they level, and even then that seems a little too quick, so question is, do I double the XP needed to level (0--2,000--6,000--etc.) or merely halve the awards per CR (150--300--450--etc.)? The DMG suggests halving XP awards for slower advancement, but fails to mention what this might do to magic item crafters who need those XPs. In the end, I decided to go with the half-awards, because that requires less work: doubling the table would still require using the XP cost multipiers given in unearthed arcana (x1, x2, x4, and x10), but leaving the advancement table alone means that I merely need to halve the XP awarded per CR, and use XP cost multipiers of x1/2, x1, x2, and x5. POWER ATTACK & TWO-WEAPON FIGHTING In any game where Mas dmg = Con score, two-weapon fighting gets even more worthless than it is, and Power Attack with a two-handed weapon is so good that it becomes part of the standard fighter package. Every warrior becomes Cloud Strife, and nobody shoots for Drizzt. As a matter of fact, the Power Attack method is so (ahem) powerful that even the trusty sword & shield combo is discarded. The 3.0 version of Power Attack is out, because that provided more benefit to a character with two light weapons than it did to the two-handed fighter, and that's not what it's supposed to do. Still, the 3.5 version is too deadly for a game using low Mas damage, and so a middle ground has to be found. Power Attack is a simple fix: the bonus damage is multiplied 1x for a one-handed weapon, .5x for an off-hand attack, and 1.5x for a two-handed weapon, just like bonus damage from Strength. If a character power attacks for -2, the bonus damage is +1 with an off-hand attack, +2 with a one-handed weapon, and +3 with a two-handed weapon. That still doesn't solve the two-weapon fighting problem, though. Compared to a sword and shield, two-weapon fighting actually gives you less damage, which you pay for with feats (ignoring rogues for the time being; this is about fighters choosing their fighting style). Some feats, like Oversize Two-Weapon Fighting and Dual Strike, are worth the feat slot. Others, like Improved and Greater Two-Weapon Fighting, are barely worth the trouble. The last campaign I ran, I tried out a system which made dual-striking the standard form of two-weapon fighting: you could attack with each weapon on a standard attack normally, and for each iterative attack you earned, you attack with each weapon again. This proved to be overpowered once the players got ahold of elemental weapons, and I had all but forgotten to take into account Rapid Shot and high-damage ranged weapons (the party gunslinger, once he got his hands on some .57 revolvers, was dishing out 4d8 damage every attack and scoring massive damage just about every battle). So, I scrapped this system and went back to the core rules for the way two-weapon fighting (and dual striking) works. Still, the benefit-to-feat-cost ratio needed to be addressed. So, the Two-Weapon Fighting fix: a character who takes Two-Weapon Fighting reduces the penalties like normal, and may make as many off-hand attacks as primary attacks. Improved & Greater Two-Weapon Fighitng are nixed, but a character can still take Oversized Two-Weapon Fighting if he has Str 13, and Dual Strike at BAB +6. So far, this (much simpler) fix has proven the ideal solution, making two-weapon fighting worthwhile without overshadowing sword & shield fighters. SIMPLE SKILL CHECKS I started using the level-based skills system in place of skill points a couple of weeks ago in order to speed gameplay, and so far it's been quite successful. Characters don't need to know how many ranks they have in one skill or another to know what their check is, and leveling up takes all of a minute. But there are a few holes that need to be patched to use the system. 1. Languages. A character who knows the Speak Langauge skill should gain one bonus language at 1st level (not four). Other skills don't get a +3 bonus on top of the level check, so neither should Speak Language. 2. Humans. The max skill ranks variant simply says that humans know an extra class skill, but the level-based skill doesn't even mention humans. I let humans choose a bonus class skill at 1st level, and apply a +2 racial bonus to the skill of their choice. 3. Required ranks. As with the max skill ranks variant, a character is considered to have maxxed out his skill ranks if he knows the skill as a class skill. But sometimes, prestige classes require that a few skill points be thrown into one obscure cross-class skill or another. In that case, it should be left up to the DM whether the minor skill requirement can be ignored, or if it's important enough to warrant acquiring the skill through multiclassing or the Skill Knowledge feat. UNARMED STRIKES I like a slightly more detailed ruleset for unarmed combat, and decided upon a system where characters have both one-handed and two-handed unarmed strikes available. Brawling: One-handed unarmed strikes are treated as a double-weapon. A medium sized-character deals 1d3 + his strength bonus damage with a primary unarmed attack, and 1d3 + half his strength bonus damage with an off-hand unarmed attack. Small characters have brawling damage 1d2/1d2. Pummeling: Two-handed unarmed strikes, Captain Kirk style, are treated just like two-handed weapons. Both hands must be free, but the damage is 1d6 + one-and-a-half the character's strength bonus, or 1d4 for small characters. (Just like a character wielding a greatsword or any other two-handed weapon, a character using a pummeling unarmed strike may still make an off-hand attack using a brawling unarmed strike or armor spikes.) Monks: Monks increase their unarmed strike damage with levels, like normal, but only brawling attacks are treated as special monk weapons. The monk has to have Unorthodox Flurry (pummeling) to use pummel attacks with a flurry of blows. However, since unarmed strikes now follow the same rules for off-hand attacks and two-weapon fighting as any other weapon, even for monks, monks are granted Two-Weapon Fighting as a bonus feat at 1st level, and under the revised version of the feat given above, this allows monks to make as many off-hand brawling attacks as primary attacks. ----Brawling---- --Pummeling-- Level Medium Small Medium Small 1-3 1d3/1d3 1d2/1d2 1d6 1d4 4-7 1d4/1d4 1d3/1d3 1d8 1d6 8-11 1d6/1d6 1d4/1d4 1d10 1d8 12-15 1d8/1d8 1d6/1d6 2d6 1d10 16-19 1d10/1d10 1d8/1d8 2d8 2d6 20 2d6/2d6 1d10/1d10 2d10 2d8 Knuckles: Any character can use a brass knuckle to deal lethal damage with unarmed strikes and to apply magical enhancements to a brawl attack (but not a pummel attack). For characters who are already able to deal leathal unarmed damage at no penalty, brass knuckles grant a +1 enhancement bonus to damage (but as with a masterwork weapon's bonus to hit, this doesn't stack with magical enhancement bonuses). Combining the two-weapon and unarmed strike rules, monks get a lot of options when attacking unarmed. When making a single attack, a pummel is usually advantageous (and though the magical or special materials qualities of a brass knuckle won't apply, ki strike will). For full attacks, brawling is better, especially since knuckle weapons can be used to make up for the reduced damage. A 20th level monk has an attack of +15/+10/+5 when pummeling, and either +15/+15/+15/+10/+5 when brawling. Throw in two-weapon fighting, and the monk can pummel at +13/+8/+3 and brawl at +13/+8/+3, or brawl two-handed at +13/+13/+13/+8/+3 in each hand. (That may look powerful at first glance, but it's nothing next to a lv-20 fighter with Oversized Two-Weapon Fighitng and a pair of bastard swords: +18/+13/+8/+3 in each hand at 1d10 damage, crit 19-20/x2.) DAMAGE REDUCTION The 3.5 rules for damage reduction did a good job solving the "you must be this tall to fight this monster" problem. You don't need a +3 weapon to whack powerful monsters, if you can get your hands on a silver or iron weapon that will fit the bill. It reflects the mythology better, makes special materials worth something, and even provides characters with a reason to seek out monsters' weaknesses and then quest for weapons that can damage them, without forcing the DM to place a +X weapon in the adventure. Still, the new rules create problems. Now there's, "Caddy, er, I mean henchman, reach into my golf bag and give me the cold iron." And weapons with enhancement bonuses above +1 almost certainly aren't worth the gp cost given in the DMG. It's easy to get +1 bonuses to hit and +2 bonuses to damage under the d20 system -- they're everywhere. Those high-end enhancement bonuses used to be worth something -- they represented powerful magic weapons that could strike powerful enemies. The problem can be solved with a house rule that several people (including Monte Cook) have suggested, and it really does work. It solves both problems: if you have a good magic weapon, you don't need a golf bag, and if you don't have a good magic weapon, you can still find one made from a special material to beat that annoying fey or lycanthrope. The DR equivalency is as follows: +1 - Magic +2 - Damage Type (P/B/S) +3 - Silver or Iron +4 - Adamant +5 - Alignment (G/E/L/C) Each weapon carries the effective DR-bypassing properties of the weapon beneath it, so a +5 weapon bypasses DR vs. magic, piercing, bludgeoning, slashing, silver, iron, adamant, good, evil, law, and chaos. Monks go back to the old method of ki strike. They get +1 at 4th level, +2 at 8th level, +3 at 12th level, +4 at 16th level, and +5 at 20th level.
Thelon Fairblade 05-19-05, 09:53 AM	TWF: IMC, I tied TWD and ITWF/GTWF together. I still require ITWF to get iterative off-hand attacks, but it automatically upgrades TWD as well. Just throwing out ITWF and GTWF... I haven't gotten there yet. Unarmed: *shrug* I guess that's fine. DR: *My* solution to +X enchantments becoming obsolete was to make "DR/magic" stepped, in 5 point groups. Example: a +1 weapon will penetrate 5 points of DR/magic. This will breach a mephit's or gargoyle's DR 5/magic, but only partially negate a vampire's DR 10 or a lich's 15. You need a +2 silver weapon to breach a vampire's DR "10/magic and silver", and a +3 mace to breach a lich's DR "15/magic and bludgeoning". +4 and +5 weapons are never created (really), but are instead frequently used on "artifacts" and other DM-created items. I don't like having stronger enhancement weapons bypassing not just different but *more* DR types. You don't need a golfbag, really. You pretty much only need two weapons; an adamantine slashing weapon (which you should have just for the utility of cutting holes in stone) aligned with law or good, and a silvered bludgeoning weapon, aligned with the other. Against Fey (cold-iron), just deal with the DR or let the monk beat it up. If you are really concerned, get the +2 Metalline enchantement on your favorite weapon. I *like* the fact that I need to have a silver weapon (or silversheen, or silver-weapon spell) to fight lycanthropes, or I need to plan ahead and bring a holy cold-iron weapon before entering the Demon Gate. Just having a +3 weapon shouldn't solve 80% of my DR needs. The concept of DR being a real issue is a big attraction of the 3.5e system - some critters are just really hard to defeat without the right equipment (or magic).