Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Gailbraithe 12-09-05, 10:26 PM	HOUSE RULES The official name of the campaign is Blade Bay and Beyond. It is assumed that all players are mature adults and don't need to have common courtesy, both at the gaming table and in my home, explained to them. All characters are expected to be adventurers, character concepts that have no reason to adventure with a party should not be considered. This is a group activity, please be a team player. CHARACTER CREATION The following house rules apply during character creation. Roll 4d6, reroll any 1's, and drop the lowest die. Record this number. Repeat six times, and arrange to suit. Character's may have at most one 18, two 17's, and two 16's (before applying racial modifiers). Remove ability points until the character is in compliance. The total attribute modifiers of a 1st level character may not be more than +18 (after racial modifiers). Remove ability points until the character is in compliance. Players may select from all races listed in the Player's Handbook. Players may also select genasi (all types), aasimar, tiefling, and orc as player character races. Players may select from all Core classes listed in the Player's Handbook. Classes not listed in the PHB may not be selected, with the exceptions of Bounty Hunter (C&P), Favored Soul (CDiv), Scout (CAdv), and Swashbuckler (CWar). Psionic characters, other than the Soul Knife, are subject to DM approval. MULTI-CLASSING The following house rules apply when a character multi-classes. Unless otherwise noted, all standard rules (Paladin, Monk, etc.) are in effect. Barbarians may not gain further levels as a Barbarian if they opt to multi-class. To the Barbarian, multi-classing means to turn away from their culture and become civilized. Characters may multi-class into any of the core classes except Barbarian, Monk and Paladin and including Hexblade, Ninja, Samurai, Shujenja, Soul Knife, Spellthief, Spirit Shaman, Warlock, Warmage, and Wujen. Characters seeking to multi-class into Favored Soul, Sorcerer or Warlock must fulfill a special quest to awaken their powers. Characters wishing to multi-class into all other allowed classes must find a mentor and train with them. Training costs vary from mentor to mentor, and it takes time to learn a whole new set of skills (see below). Class (Training Time) Fighter, Rogue, Spirit Shaman (2d4 weeks) Hexblade, Samurai, Soulknife, Spellthief (1d4 months) Cleric, Druid, Ninja, Warmage, Wizard, Wujen (2d4 months) A mentor must have at least six class levels in the class he wishes to train others in. Player characters may mentor other player characters if they meet this requirement. A character must devote 24 hours a week to training while in training. Generally this allows a character four days a week for work or adventuring, and three days a week for training. A character does not need to have sufficient experience to gain a level in the new class when they begin training. If a character does not have sufficient experience to gain a level when they end training, they have one month to gain it, or the training must be repeated. Characters do not require training to advance levels in classes they already belong to. CHARACTER DEATH The following house rules apply when a character dies, and yes this will happen, and when new players join. Characters may also choose to retire active PC, who then become NPCs. New players characters start at the beginning of one ECL lower than the lowest level member of the party. Replacement characters for existing players start at the beginning of one ECL lower than the previous character. Players may select from all races listed in the Player's Handbook. Players may also select genasi (all types), aasimar, tiefling, and orc as player character races. Players may also select other races, and even monsters, provided that the race or monster has been encountered by the party in the past, and the new character's ECL would not be greater than one ECL lower than the deceased or retired character, or the lowest leveled member of the party in the case of new players. This is, of course, subject to DM approval. Players may select from all Core classes listed in the Player's Handbook. Classes not listed in the PHB may not be selected, with the exceptions of Bounty Hunter (C&P), Favored Soul (CDiv), Scout (CAdv), and Swashbuckler (CWar). Characters may also select any class for which a mentor has been found. The new character is a former student of that mentor. New characters start off with equipment and magical items as appropriate for their level, class, and race. These are to be picked by the player, and are subject to DM approval. NEW RULES: BLOODED The following house rules apply to all characters. Blooded characters are characters who have seen combat and discovered the true test of their mettle. Unblooded characters have never truly faced their fear of death, and are more easily intimidated by violence. [list] Any class with a Good BAB is automatically blooded at first level. Any class with an Average or Poor BAB is automatically unblooded at first level. A morale check is a DC 15 Fortitude Save. If the check succeeds, there is no effect. If the check fails, the character is shaken for the remainder of the combat, and 1d10 minutes following the combat. Unblooded characters must make a morale check at the beginning of each initiative. Unblooded characters must make an additional morale check each time they witness a fellow PC fall unconscious, die or when they perform a stabilize action, and at the DM's discretion. Characters who roll a natural "1" on a morale check are panicked instead. Characters who roll a natural "20" on a morale check become blooded. NEW FEATS The following new feats are available. Blooded (Ex): The character is automatically blooded. **** You Smile (Ex)*: The character may threaten as a move action. Prerequisites: blooded, Threaten Threaten (Ex)*: The character may force any character in a space it threatens to make a Will save (DC + character's Intimidate). If the save fails, the character is shaken. Use of this ability requires a standard action. Prerequisites: blooded, Intimidate 8 Thousand Yard Stare (Ex)*: The character gains a +2 bonus to Intimidate and a +1 morale bonus to Will Saves. Prerequisites: blooded Wild Forrester (Ex): The character may multi-class freely between Barbarian and Ranger. Wild Druid (Ex): The character may multi-class freely between Barbarian and Druid. Wild Shaman (Ex): The character may multi-class freely between Barbarian and Spirit Shaman. *A fighter may select this feat as one of his fighter bonus feats.
Hochiu 12-09-05, 10:32 PM	I dont think I like the ability score limits much.
Surgo 12-09-05, 11:31 PM	On training: I don't like this very much. You're pushing mechanical rules on something that should be complete roleplaying, I don't see the point of it at all besides being an annoyance for the players. On blooded: The PCs' enemies will have to make the same fortitude saves, right? Otherwise this is pretty silly.
Tenzhi 12-10-05, 03:06 AM	Fortitude save... for morale? Seems like it should be a Will save. I like the "blooded" thing in concept, however. I might add a "Blooded" feat to the mix, though, possibly first-level only with the prerequisite of having an Average BAB.
Gailbraithe 12-10-05, 03:56 AM	Fortitude save... for morale? Seems like it should be a Will save. The characters who should be most affected by these rules - those lovable bookworm Wizards, and gentle peace-loving Clerics - also have the highest Will saves. Also a Will save doesn't necessarily represent overcoming fear, so much as knowing oneself well enough to know that the magical fear isn't a real emotion. This check is different, this is real fear, the fight or flight instinct. A much more physical, gut reaction. Examining it tends to make it worse, and "thinking men" should be more susceptibel to thsi sort of fear than less. On blooded: The PCs' enemies will have to make the same fortitude saves, right? Otherwise this is pretty silly. Yes, if they are unblooded. I dont think I like the ability score limits much. No one ever does. :) They are necessary to balance out the very generous rolling system. The rolling system guarentees you won't have a character crippled by inadequecies, with several good, solid stats. The caps ensures you won't generate Captain Uber, who invariably makes the other players (who still didn't roll so hot) feel inferior.
Tenzhi 12-10-05, 04:27 AM	The characters who should be most affected by these rules - those lovable bookworm Wizards, and gentle peace-loving Clerics - also have the highest Will saves. Also a Will save doesn't necessarily represent overcoming fear, so much as knowing oneself well enough to know that the magical fear isn't a real emotion. This check is different, this is real fear, the fight or flight instinct. A much more physical, gut reaction. Examining it tends to make it worse, and "thinking men" should be more susceptibel to thsi sort of fear than less. Thinking men have high intelligence, whereas Will is a function of wisdom. Situations where one must make a roll to overcome instinct - such as various Barbarian/Wild prestige classes with uncontrollable rage abilities that may have them instinctively attacking everything nearby be it friend or foe - call for a Will save or Wisdom check to avoid/suppress the instinct. That mages have a high base Will save won't matter, as odds are gratuitously in favour of them being "blooded" before their class saves give them a sinificant advantage on those rolls. Thirteen encounters to level 2 and a 1 in 20 chance of becoming blooded in any given encounter means there's a darn good chance they'll be "blooded" before they even hit level 3. (Gentle, peace-loving clerics? This is the same class that decks itself out in full armor and smites things with maces and hammers. "Peace-loving" clerics are a minority.)
Gailbraithe 12-10-05, 05:44 AM	Situations where one must make a roll to overcome instinct - such as various Barbarian/Wild prestige classes with uncontrollable rage abilities that may have them instinctively attacking everything nearby be it friend or foe - call for a Will save or Wisdom check to avoid/suppress the instinct. That's not a fear effect. In that situation, the Will check models the characters superego overiding the id. Essentially the character "talks himself down", whether by counting backwards, or repeating a mantra. Mentally disciplined characters would naturally be better at such a task. This is the opposite. This is real fear, where thinking about it will only slow you down. The Fort save represents the ability to just accept the fear and push on forward, while the rage ability represents the abiltity to tap into the instinct and take power from it. Suppressing the instinct will get you killed, because it's the fight or flight instinct. Suppress it and you can neither fight or flee. In fact, a shaken character might not be afraid but rather preoccupied by fear management. That mages have a high base Will save won't matter, as odds are gratuitously in favour of them being "blooded" before their class saves give them a sinificant advantage on those rolls. Given that it is a Fort save, their Good base Will save won't give them any benefit. Their poor Fort save also won't give them any benefit until after 3rd level, by which time they should already be blooded. Thirteen encounters to level 2 and a 1 in 20 chance of becoming blooded in any given encounter means there's a darn good chance they'll be "blooded" before they even hit level 3. Yes. That's intentional. (Gentle, peace-loving clerics? This is the same class that decks itself out in full armor and smites things with maces and hammers. "Peace-loving" clerics are a minority.) This is really a role-playing issue. I consider any deity who has the Good domain to be "peace-loving", and any deity with the Good and Healing domain to be "pacifistic". I also tend to think that a person who is firmly committed to the ideals of a god who embodied these domains would tend to be, by their nature, gentle. Gods that embrace these domains tend to be popular choices for PC clerics, in my experience, because of the healing bonuses. YMMV.
Tenzhi 12-10-05, 06:56 AM	That's not a fear effect. Nope, it's an instinct thing, and you said morale wasn't a fear effect it was an instinct effect. All fear effects magical or otherwise in the game are also resisted by Will, by the way. This is the opposite. This is real fear, where thinking about it will only slow you down. Making a Will save has little to do with thinking. You can have an Intelligence of 1 and still have a great modifier to Will saves. The Fortitude save is what keeps you from being poisoned, nauseated, or killed. In short, it resists physical effects - the body killers. Fear is not a body killer, fear is the mind killer. The Fort save represents the ability to just accept the fear and push on forward Acceptance is a function of the mind, not the body. Fortitude is a function of the body, not the mind. Will is a function of the mind, not the body. You may as well be making a Reflex save to avoid the fear effect for all the sense it makes to have it as a Fortitude save. This is really a role-playing issue. I consider any deity who has the Good domain to be "peace-loving", and any deity with the Good and Healing domain to be "pacifistic". I seem to recall there are deities with both the Good and War domains - possibly with Healing in the mix as well.
Temrek 12-10-05, 08:33 AM	I would make the morale check a straight level check (maybe not counting non-combatant levels such as commoner or expert and maybe bard). I would also make the DC more dynamic, think about it. If you are traveling with 10 of the worlds best warrios and fight an unarmed goblin you are less likely to be afraid as when alone and facing 10,237 orcs.
Bryarr 12-10-05, 09:49 AM	The medical and psychological professions disagree with you. The ability to controll one's sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems (the systems that turn your "fight or flight" reaction on and off, respectively) are very difficult to control, HOWEVER, research shows that those who have more will power are much more likely to be sucessful than those who do not. And don't get me started with Freud's conceptualization of the unconscious. While I give him all sorts of props for starting my profession, no one really takes his ideas seriously anymore. ESPECIALLY when you start involving biological functions, such as fight/flight. He just made stuff up that sounded good to him, without ever doing any proper research. (Several decades later, BF Skinner started the whole psychological research thing.) Bry Ph.D. in Clinical Neuropsychology (and psychometrics on the side, for kicks) in training. Edit: disambiguated the first sentence.
Bryarr 12-10-05, 09:52 AM	I would also make the DC more dynamic, think about it. If you are traveling with 10 of the worlds best warrios and fight an unarmed goblin you are less likely to be afraid as when alone and facing 10,237 orcs. I like this idea a lot. To build on it, why not make it a +1 bonus for every blooded companion? Bry
Gailbraithe 12-10-05, 12:43 PM	The medical and psychological professions disagree with you. The ability to controll one's sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems (the systems that turn your "fight or flight" reaction on and off, respectively) are very difficult to control, HOWEVER, research shows that those who have more will power are much more likely to be sucessful than those who do not. The medical and psychological professions don't disagree with me, YOU disagree with me. You are not a profession, and trying to give your argukments false weight by claiming the entire profession supports you is ridiculous. Also, you're simply not paying attention to what I'm trying to say. Look, it's very simple. People who have been trained to fight deal better with combat stress than people who have never been trained to fight. This is an unarguable fact. Given the rules system presented, the one I have to work with, basing it off a Will Save would create many unteneable, unrealistic effects. For example, monks have Good Fort Saves and Good Will saves, while wizards have Good Fort Saves and Good Will saves. If I based the roll on a Will save, then monks have no advanatge over wizards, when monks CLEARLY should have an advantage over wizards. Furthermore, if the role is based on Will, then fighters - who are defined by combat experience, and who have all the right skills and equipment to survive combat - would be more likely to fail their roll than wizards. That is just DUMB. I don't understand hopw you guys can be arguing for something that is blatantly counterintuitive. I really challange any of you who think this should be a Will save to explain why you think a bookworm is less likely to be shaken by the thought of immediate violence than a physicallyu powerful trained fighter.
Gailbraithe 12-10-05, 12:47 PM	I would make the morale check a straight level check (maybe not counting non-combatant levels such as commoner or expert and maybe bard). I would also make the DC more dynamic, think about it. If you are traveling with 10 of the worlds best warrios and fight an unarmed goblin you are less likely to be afraid as when alone and facing 10,237 orcs. Making DCs dynamic is what DM's are for. I've tried writing up lists of modifiers, but its really easier to just make them up on the fly than try to preguess every concievable scenario. But yeah, in the first scenario, a roll wouldn't even be made.
Surgo 12-10-05, 01:12 PM	Another problem with this is the blooded feat is entirely useless as dice rolls eventually gives you its benefits. You would have to be an idiot to take that feat. I wouldn't play under this system.
War Angel 12-10-05, 01:38 PM	HOUSE RULES CHARACTER CREATION The following house rules apply during character creation. Roll 4d6, reroll any 1's, and drop the lowest die. Record this number. Repeat six times, and arrange to suit. That's fine, and I have used the same very high powered campaigns where the players should be strong. I even go a step further for my tougher campaigns. I alow the rules you listed above as well as they can roll three columns and pick the best column. ANother method I have used is just allow the players to pick their stats, and I have the final say. Believe it or not they a good job and rarely go over the top. Character's may have at most one 18, two 17's, and two 16's (before applying racial modifiers). Remove ability points until the character is in compliance. The total attribute modifiers of a 1st level character may not be more than +18 (after racial modifiers). Remove ability points until the character is in compliance. Players may select from all races listed in the Player's Handbook. Players may also select genasi (all types), aasimar, tiefling, and orc as player character races. Players may select from all Core classes listed in the Player's Handbook. Classes not listed in the PHB may not be selected, with the exceptions of Bounty Hunter (C&P), Favored Soul (CDiv), Scout (CAdv), and Swashbuckler (CWar). Psionic characters, other than the Soul Knife, are subject to DM approval. Now this is getting weird. Why would you encourage powerful players with rerolling 1's then shackle them with major limitations? As a player I would be confused. On one hand you are telling them that you are a DM that can handle strong players, then a second later you are saying that your unable to handle strong PCs, as that is the only reason to shackle them. If you want to shackle them I would allow a 24 point buy only as you obviously wish to contain their power level. Shackle from start to finish to avoid confusion. Either it is a tough campaign or isnt in my mind. Now remember these are only my observations. You are the DM and I cannot begin to fully understand why you are doing this as we can only see the surface. Barbarians may not gain further levels as a Barbarian if they opt to multi-class. To the Barbarian, multi-classing means to turn away from their culture and become civilized. I don't agree with this. A barbarian in my eyes is a way of life. What if you visit a city and the barbarian finds great interest in studying the finer arts of combat? Then upon leaving the city he reverts back to ways of the wilds? I leave this up to RPing. I really disagree with this one strongly. Classes do not determine civility imo. A wizard must be civilized? Once again this is a misconception. They must read yes, but what if the wizard was trapped in the wilds after his group had been utterly destroyed. Now to survive the wizard must learn to adapt to his surroundings an make do with what he has. Perhaps he lives in a cave, and learns new spells that offer diferent things. Paladins also do not have to be civil. If they are half-orc paladins that live in the wilds and protect the innocent that travel the roads. Once again this outlook is forcing your ideals on their RPing with somewhat close mindedness. I find that allowing players to fully get whacky and RP their hearts out creates the best games. I cherish this type of RP and encourage it as well. Characters seeking to multi-class into Favored Soul, Sorcerer or Warlock must fulfill a special quest to awaken their powers. This is not a bad house rul, but it doesn't fit the mold of that class. To become a Favored Soul in my mind may go something like this (A paladin I RPed became a Favored Soul in this fashion.), The groups paladin walks up the party cleric and engages him in a bit of philisophical conversation."I have been having dreams of late, and until now their meaning has escaped my grasp. I feel as though Torm is speaking to me while I sleep. I have been having these dreams for sometime, and I was unsure of their meaning until this morning. When I awoke I felt a strange power brewing within my mind. The words and gestures to spells toil in my thoughts, and I feel as if I have been chosen for a greater purpose. I was hoping you may be able to shed some light on this odd new gift of knowledge in which I have been blessed." Again this is RPing. Encourage RP from your players by alowing them the freedom to RP. Sorcerery, Favored Souls, and such are inate. Something they were born with. Sometimes it is their god that awakens this power, or sometimes it is by mistake. Per the WOtC writtings on the scorcerer they grow up with this wild magical power, and they rarely know why, or how they can do what they do. In many cases they hide this fact to protect themselves from seeming like an outcast. While others embrace it and become more powerful as they continue to use their innate spell power. I would seriously recommend sitting don with your players and going over RPing options. I do this and it has worked out for some fantastic RPs. Characters wishing to multi-class into all other allowed classes must find a mentor and train with them. Training costs vary from mentor to mentor, and it takes time to learn a whole new set of skills (see below). This is not a bad idea at all, but perhaps someone in the group can also train them. That is what D&D had in mind I believe. In our group if a fighter wishes to learn the trade of a rogue I have them apprentice under the groups rogue. Now some classes just happen. A barbarian may be forced into learning the ways of living in harsh conditions. Again I would sit down with the player for a sec or just talk over the phone before the game starts, and go over this. A fighter that wishes to become a barabarian out of the clear blue sky, I would have to deny this as it is just silly. Now to become a paladin one must have it within him to do so or be tsaught the ways by a paladin order or another paladin. My paladin started out as a fighter, then MCed to Favored Soul, then finally answered the call of the Paladin. He was however born in a temple of Torm in which his mother was the head priestess. Even though he was not a paladin he always acted as one in deed and thought. I think Torm may call upon him to serve as his champion of the light through dreams or visions. I don't like shackle my players and setting things in stone. I encourage RP and inventiveness at all times. If you don't you will lose out on great RP moments. NEW RULES: BLOODED The following house rules apply to all characters. Blooded characters are characters who have seen combat and discovered the true test of their mettle. Unblooded characters have never truly faced their fear of death, and are more easily intimidated by violence. Any class with a Good BAB is automatically blooded at first level. Any class with an Average or Poor BAB is automatically unblooded at first level. A morale check is a DC 15 Fortitude Save. If the check succeeds, there is no effect. If the check fails, the character is shaken for the remainder of the combat, and 1d10 minutes following the combat. Unblooded characters must make a morale check at the beginning of each initiative. Unblooded characters must make an additional morale check each time they witness a fellow PC fall unconscious, die or when they perform a stabilize action, and at the DM's discretion. Characters who roll a natural "1" on a morale check are panicked instead. Characters who roll a natural "20" on a morale check become blooded. NEW FEATS The following new feats are available. Blooded (Ex): The character is automatically blooded. **** You Smile (Ex)*: The character may threaten as a move action. Prerequisites: blooded, Threaten Threaten (Ex)*: The character may force any character in a space it threatens to make a Will save (DC + character's Intimidate). If the save fails, the character is shaken. Use of this ability requires a standard action. Prerequisites: blooded, Intimidate 8 Thousand Yard Stare (Ex)*: The character gains a +2 bonus to Intimidate and a +1 morale bonus to Will Saves. Prerequisites: blooded Wild Forrester (Ex): The character may multi-class freely between Barbarian and Ranger. Wild Druid (Ex): The character may multi-class freely between Barbarian and Druid. Wild Shaman (Ex): The character may multi-class freely between Barbarian and Spirit Shaman. *A fighter may select this feat as one of his fighter bonus feats. Now this I like. Kudos!
Gailbraithe 12-10-05, 01:43 PM	Another problem with this is the blooded feat is entirely useless as dice rolls eventually gives you its benefits. You would have to be an idiot to take that feat. That's not really a "problem", so much as it a "fact". Taking the Blooded feat goives a slight advantage at early levels, and no advatnage at later levels. It is, in a way, like the Toughness feat. If you take it at first level, you get 3 HP. When you're 15th level, you'll probably wish you'd used that feat to get something more than 3 HP. But at low levels, those 3 HP could be what allows you to survive til 15th level. You're right that the die rolls will eventually get a character the same result - but if you're playing a rogue with ice in his veins, then you might not want to leave yourself open to the possibility that you're rogue might not have the courage he thinks he does. I wouldn't play under this system. What amazing useful information. I'll make sure to not invite you to the game.
Cymraegmorgan 12-10-05, 01:49 PM	I dont think I like the ability score limits much. Ditto. If you want limits, but not wimps, go with a 32 point buy, or a 35. Your way has that schizo "Indian Giver" feel to it.
Surgo 12-10-05, 01:54 PM	What amazing useful information. I'll make sure to not invite you to the game. Hey, you asked for it in the title of the thread. If you don't want to know, don't ask. And I've never known anyone who took the toughness feat if it wasn't for a prereq. They made improved toughness for a reason, and people still don't take that! The blooded feat also begs the question of what happens when you take it and then psychic reform it out: after all, it's a one-time status change.
Gailbraithe 12-10-05, 02:03 PM	That's fine, and I have used the same very high powered campaigns where the players should be strong. I even go a step further for my tougher campaigns. I alow the rules you listed above as well as they can roll three columns and pick the best column. ANother method I have used is just allow the players to pick their stats, and I have the final say. Believe it or not they a good job and rarely go over the top. It's not an official rule, but once I get to know a player I usually do the same. :) Now this is getting weird. Why would you encourage powerful players with rerolling 1's then shackle them with major limitations? As a player I would be confused. On one hand you are telling them that you are a DM that can handle strong players, then a second later you are saying that your unable to handle strong PCs, as that is the only reason to shackle them. If you want to shackle them I would allow a 24 point buy only as you obviously wish to contain their power level. Shackle from start to finish to avoid confusion. Either it is a tough campaign or isnt in my mind. Now remember these are only my observations. You are the DM and I cannot begin to fully understand why you are doing this as we can only see the surface. Well, I explained my reasoning above, but basically I wnat the PCs to be very good without being uber. This system ensures that your character will have a high primary stats, a few strong supporting stats, and few moderate to average stats. It probably would make more sense to use a point buy, but both of my core players HATE point buys, and feel they are being robbed of the opportunity to roll dice and ride their luck. I eventually implemented the caps because on of my two core players had a tendancy to roll up characters with +12-18 in ability mods, and the other would regularly roll +18-24. I saw him roll a character with 4 18's and two 17's. It's not that I, as DM, can't compete, it was that Player A's flavored soul was a better fighter than Player B's actual fighter. This system helps ensure that players don't feel inadequate for the jobs taks they pick, and at the same time ensures they don't steal each other's thunder. I don't agree with this. A barbarian in my eyes is a way of life. What if you visit a city and the barbarian finds great interest in studying the finer arts of combat? Then upon leaving the city he reverts back to ways of the wilds? I leave this up to RPing. I really disagree with this one strongly. Classes do not determine civility imo. A wizard must be civilized? Once again this is a misconception. They must read yes, but what if the wizard was trapped in the wilds after his group had been utterly destroyed. Now to survive the wizard must learn to adapt to his surroundings an make do with what he has. Perhaps he lives in a cave, and learns new spells that offer diferent things. Paladins also do not have to be civil. If they are half-orc paladins that live in the wilds and protect the innocent that travel the roads. Once again this outlook is forcing your ideals on their RPing with somewhat close mindedness. I find that allowing players to fully get whacky and RP their hearts out creates the best games. I cherish this type of RP and encourage it as well. I feel that the barbarian is an outsider, and that he should remain such. By becoming civilized, he becomes soft, and loses the edge that makes him a barbarian. I might allow a barbarian to undergo some sort of huge quest to reconnect with his wild heart, much as might allow a paladin to undergo some sort of quest to regain his paladin status. But I think that taking a level in wizard should represents a MAJOR break for the barbarian from hsi own roots. This is not a bad idea at all, but perhaps someone in the group can also train them. Anyone can mentor once reaching 6th level, including PCs. It actually says that. The line is: "A mentor must have at least six class levels in the class he wishes to train others in. Player characters may mentor other player characters if they meet this requirement." Now this I like. Kudos! Danke.
Gailbraithe 12-10-05, 02:10 PM	Hey, you asked for it in the title of the thread. If you don't want to know, don't ask. No, I asked for people to evaluate my house rules, not make snarky and useless comments that are only intended to aggravate others. Telling me that you wouldn't play in my game is neither constructive nor helpful. And I've never known anyone who took the toughness feat if it wasn't for a prereq. They made improved toughness for a reason, and people still don't take that! There are many sub-optimal feats that people take for flavor. Maybe you play with munchkins who would never consider taking a feat for character reasons rather than metagame reasons. The blooded feat also begs the question of what happens when you take it and then psychic reform it out: after all, it's a one-time status change. What is psychic reform?
Gailbraithe 12-10-05, 02:11 PM	Ditto. If you want limits, but not wimps, go with a 32 point buy, or a 35. Your way has that schizo "Indian Giver" feel to it. My players loathe point buy systems, and feel they've been cheated. This system they don't feel cheated. Go figure.
Surgo 12-10-05, 02:33 PM	I must have missed where my comment was "snarky and useless"; it seemed like quite a fair evaluation to me. There are many sub-optimal feats that people take for flavor. Maybe you play with munchkins who would never consider taking a feat for character reasons rather than metagame reasons. Overused munchkin word being thrown out, I see. Taking a useful feat like Power Attack over a useless feat like Toughness makes you a munchkin? I guess that makes munchkins of almost all D&D players. I've never seen anyone take a suboptimal feat for flavor, especially as flavor comes from roleplay and not mechanics. What is psychic reform? Psychic Reformation. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/psychicReformation.htm)
Gailbraithe 12-10-05, 04:51 PM	I must have missed where my comment was "snarky and useless"; it seemed like quite a fair evaluation to me. Well it's not. Telling me you wouldn't use such a system, without giving any reason, tells me absolutely nothing useful. What exactly am I supposed to do with that information? Should I give up on the concept entirely just to keep open the possibility that Surgo might want to play in my campaign? Who are you that I should give a rat's ass that you wouldn't play? Its a rather concieted presumption, that I would care if you would play or not. Overused munchkin word being thrown out, I see. Taking a useful feat like Power Attack over a useless feat like Toughness makes you a munchkin? I guess that makes munchkins of almost all D&D players. I've never seen anyone take a suboptimal feat for flavor, especially as flavor comes from roleplay and not mechanics. No, the refusual to even consider taking a feat that fits strongly with one's backstory but provides little or not metagame benefit is a sign of beinga munchkin. That you've never seen anyone take a suboptimal feat for flavor reasons tells me volumes about the sort of people you play with. Psychic Reformation. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/psychicReformation.htm) That's a pretty cheesy power. By the time a character could swap out Blooded with this power, they would almost certainly be blooded anyways, so I don't really see a problem with it. Its not like its going to be a common occurance anyways.
Bryarr 12-10-05, 09:08 PM	The medical and psychological professions don't disagree with me, YOU disagree with me. You are not a profession, and trying to give your argukments false weight by claiming the entire profession supports you is ridiculous. Would you like citations? I can supply you with citations. =) Also, you're simply not paying attention to what I'm trying to say. Upon further reflection, this may actually be true. I think what we're all up in arms about is that you are calling it a "fear" or "morale" save. That elicits instant connections with Wisdom modifiers and Will Saves for us, so we are more inclined to argue with you when you base it upon Constitution and Fortitude. Why not do a combonation of both? A Fortitude Base save bonus adjusted by Wisdom modifier? This allows those with training (Good Fort saves) to be better at it, while also allowing those with strength of determination (good Wisdom) to grin and bear it through this new situation. Your thoughts? Bry
Gailbraithe 12-10-05, 09:40 PM	I think what we're all up in arms about is that you are calling it a "fear" or "morale" save. That elicits instant connections with Wisdom modifiers and Will Saves for us, so we are more inclined to argue with you when you base it upon Constitution and Fortitude. Well I think you should get over it. We could quibble over philosophical justifications all day, but at the end of the day I'm going with the Fort save for mechanical reasons. Why not do a combonation of both? A Fortitude Base save bonus adjusted by Wisdom modifier? This allows those with training (Good Fort saves) to be better at it, while also allowing those with strength of determination (good Wisdom) to grin and bear it through this new situation. I'd associate strength of determination with Charisma more than Wisdom. I tend to think of Wisdom as a reflection of understanding of the world in an intuitive sense. I think high Wisdom characters should be more vulnerable to the shock of violence, precisely because they are more intuitive, and understand much more than others why violence is wrong - or, at least when one is talking about Good aligned characters. Charisma, on the other hand, does represent force of will. A CHA bonus to the Fort save - rather than a CON bonus - might make sense, particularly if the character has the Force of Personality feat. In fact, I may adopt that as the mechanic for real fear (as oppossed to magical fear) from here on out.
Tenzhi 12-11-05, 02:47 AM	Look, it's very simple. People who have been trained to fight deal better with combat stress than people who have never been trained to fight. This is an unarguable fact. Which has nothing to do with the Fortitude save, save by coincidence. If it's combat training you're after, base the check off of BAB. Furthermore, if the role is based on Will, then fighters - who are defined by combat experience, and who have all the right skills and equipment to survive combat - would be more likely to fail their roll than wizards. They can't be more likely to fail a roll they're apparently never required to make. That is just DUMB. I don't understand hopw you guys can be arguing for something that is blatantly counterintuitive. I really challange any of you who think this should be a Will save to explain why you think a bookworm is less likely to be shaken by the thought of immediate violence than a physicallyu powerful trained fighter. A good Will save has nothing to do with being a bookworm, it just requires having a strong (not necessarily *smart*) mind. Counterintuitive is using Fortitude (a saving throw that measures "your ability to stand up to physical punishment or attacks against your vitality and health") to resist a morale (a measurement of psychological well-being, often strategically targetted by psychological warfare) or fear effect when Will (a save that reflects "your resistance to mental influence") is so obviously more appropriate.
JStegmaier 12-11-05, 05:57 AM	Well I think you should get over it. We could quibble over philosophical justifications all day, but at the end of the day I'm going with the Fort save for mechanical reasons. I have a quote in my signature for such attitudes. To wit: So let me get this straight: you put up a house rule and the only feedback you get regarding that rule is that you should leave the rules regarding attacks of opportunity alone. So you take that as a reason to say "Well, I think my rule sounds great so I will do it." Why did you even bother coming here? Next time, just write your house rule down on a piece of paper, then write a few comments on how cool and great the rule is. Then go ahead and implement it. If you ever want actual feedback, then come here again. Geez.
Tenzhi 12-11-05, 06:55 AM	If he decides to stick with it in the face of negative criticisms - it's his game. It's perfectly alright to post stuff wanting feedback and not agree with the feedback you get.
darkwarrior42 12-11-05, 07:32 AM	True, but just for the record: I think high Wisdom characters should be more vulnerable to the shock of violence, precisely because they are more intuitive, and understand much more than others why violence is wrong - or, at least when one is talking about Good aligned characters. "Wisdom describes a character's willpower, common sense, perception, and intuition" Page 9, PHB. And also for the record, the save to not be scared by the completely non-magical Frightful Presence of a True Dragon is a Will Save. I don't have any problem with him making it a Fortitude save for mechanical reasons (it is his rule after all), but I just wanted to point out that it's not really a matter of opinion whether or not Wisdom represents willpower. Charisma, on the other hand, does represent force of will. A CHA bonus to the Fort save - rather than a CON bonus - might make sense, particularly if the character has the Force of Personality feat. In fact, I may adopt that as the mechanic for real fear (as oppossed to magical fear) from here on out. Charisma represents your ability to project your personality and inner properties outward. That's why spontaneous casters use Charisma, and why many monster special abilities use Charisma as a modifier. For example, a dragon with high charisma has a higher DC for its Frightful Presence; it's personality is stronger, and it makes itself felt more powerfully. In contrast, Wisdom is the ability not only to resist the influence of others, but to see things as they really are. High charsima lets you pass yourself off as something you aren't, and to make others think and believe differently, while Wisdom allows you to avoid having others do that to you. They're opposite sides of the equation. One more thing to consider, regarding using Charisma against real fear: many races suffer from low charisma, including many races that are known for their lack of fear. Examples I can think of include: Trolls, Ogres, and most importantly, dwarves and half-orcs. Changing the system would give the two PC races most known for martial characters an innate penalty against fear.
Fargren 12-11-05, 11:10 AM	I love blooded, even thou I think it should be will, but I'm not here to discuss that. I just thought that blinded characters should be considered unblooded, unless they have the blindfight feat and aer noramlly blooded. I say this because, no mater how well you fight if you sudenly can't rely in your most important sense(at least the more important for battlig, maybe along with tact), you are quite likely to be frightened. The other day, I had a PC attacked in a Sleet Storm by 3 Dire bats(gotta love the Druid). I think the emotional shock of being attacked by things you can't see and don't know where they are should be really big, even if you are trained to fight. Maybe you could become pemanently "Blind Blooded" by roling a 20 in the save against sahken will blind... my to coper pieces.
Gailbraithe 12-12-05, 01:59 AM	A good Will save has nothing to do with being a bookworm... Except that all of the bookworm characters, most notably the wizard, have good Will saves. I really don't know how many times I can point that out. You can say that the one has nothing to do with other til we're both sick of it, but the fact remains that wizards (and archivists, another bookworm class) have good Will saves. If he decides to stick with it in the face of negative criticisms - it's his game. It's perfectly alright to post stuff wanting feedback and not agree with the feedback you get. Yes, thank you. The only people whose criticism really matters is my players, and they found my reasoning for basing it on a Fort save sound. Since I've already stated why I'm basing it on the Fort save (mechanical reasons), and no one is addressing that and instead addressing "fuzzy" issues that don't relate to the mechanical reasons, I don't really want to discuss it. It is just beating a dead horse.
Jesper 12-14-05, 12:45 PM	I do not like the no 20's at first level deal but as for blooded I might try useing this in some of my campains *yoink*
starfire311 12-14-05, 01:03 PM	I seem to recall there are deities with both the Good and War domains - possibly with Healing in the mix as well. Heironeous God of Good, Law and War Coellon Larethian God of Chaos, Good, Protection and War These are not peace loving nancy pants gods, these are smiting ass-kicking gods.
starfire311 12-14-05, 01:10 PM	(I liek most of your rules and wouldnt have a problem playing with them Except the whole blooded idea is kinda silly. Fear is not physical it is mental. It should clearly be resisted by a will save. and most if not all of the players will be blooded within one or 2 games sessions, so what is the point of all these convoluted rules that will not have much impact on the game. Will new characters that join the game at higher levels be considored blooded? Heck I would be tempted to just say all characters that have less than a +1 BAB are considored unblooded, that way at 2nd level and higher everyone will be blooded and you can just be done with it.
Gailbraithe 12-14-05, 01:45 PM	...most if not all of the players will be blooded within one or 2 games sessions, so what is the point of all these convoluted rules that will not have much impact on the game. I don't run anywhere near that many fights, and my current campaign is more role-playing oriented, so it will actually be ten to twelve sessions before the two unblooded character's become blooded. Later I intended to add a second layer to the Blooded rules that simulate post-traumatic stress and the emotional deadening the accompanies a life of combat. The "point' of these rules is to add a layer of psychological realism to the game. They are an experiment. Will new characters that join the game at higher levels be considored blooded? Heck I would be tempted to just say all characters that have less than a +1 BAB are considored unblooded, that way at 2nd level and higher everyone will be blooded and you can just be done with it. Any non-arcane-magic-using-characters (cleric, monk, rogue, etc.) of 2nd level or higher with an adventuring background will be considered Blooded. Any arcane-magic-using-characters (wizards, sorceror) of 3rd level or higher with an adventuring background will be considered Blooded. Characters with non-adventuring backgrounds (a 5th level wizard who gained all his XP through study, training, and research) would not be blooded.
Gailbraithe 12-14-05, 01:50 PM	I do not like the no 20's at first level deal but as for blooded I might try useing this in some of my campains *yoink* You could have a 20 at first level, if you have a racial bonus. The cap of 1 18, 2 17's, and 2 16's is before racial mods are applied. So you could take your one 18, place it in a stat you get a +2 to, and presto, you've got a 20. Of course, your character can still only have a +18 total ability modifiers.
starfire311 12-14-05, 03:33 PM	I don't run anywhere near that many fights, and my current campaign is more role-playing oriented, so it will actually be ten to twelve sessions before the two unblooded character's become blooded. Later I intended to add a second layer to the Blooded rules that simulate post-traumatic stress and the emotional deadening the accompanies a life of combat. The "point' of these rules is to add a layer of psychological realism to the game. They are an experiment. Unblooded characters must make a morale check at the beginning of each initiative. Unblooded characters must make an additional morale check each time they witness a fellow PC fall unconscious, die or when they perform a stabilize action, and at the DM's discretion. This rule amkes me think it won't take long to get blooded... 1st level wizard will need to roll like a 15 to get pass the check. that means a 15-20 will pass and they keep rolling each round and sometimes more than once a around. This means that if they pass their save there was about a 20% chance that they rolled a nat 20 to do it. so basically each combat they roll untill they pass and that means each combat they have at least a 20% chance of becoming blooded. In addition to chances whenever someone gets knocked out.
dgit 12-14-05, 03:57 PM	The general house rules seem ok but i'm also not to sure about the blooded thing. I understand you wanting to simulate the fact that a studious wizard would be more suceptable to the fear of a charging orc than a fighter however on certain terms i also disagree with that. Sure the fighter is covered in armour and skilled with his sword but the wizard can make the orc weaker than a school marm with a simple gesture and a level 1 spell, and thats just one thing he has the ability to do, what if he charmed the fearsome orc..? At higher levels this effect is even more pronounced, the fighter has the highest armour class and the most hit points translating into a skill and confidance in his abilities that means the orc is hardly a threat to him thus making him less likely to "fear" the orc, however the wizard can fly 60ft above the battlefield where the orc can hardly reach him, he can surround himself in a bubble of force that will repel even the orcs strongest attack, he can rain fire, flay the skin from your bones with a gesture and even kill with nothing more than a whispered word. So why should he be scared of even a powerful orc fighter. Also look at the flip side of that, who's scarier, the 4ft tall armoured axe wielding nutter how can't run as fast as you, or that rather old gent who's stood at the back grinning as though he's perfectly safe dispite all these weapons are flying about... i mean sure that big orc chiefs axe is pretty sharp, but look at that tapped ugly goblin thing with glowing blue eyes and lightning crackling on its fingers stood next to him. Personally i find that the players create their own "blooded" tests in their head, i always do it to myself when taking my characters into fights. I know what my character can do and i know what he can take in a fight, if i see an armoured fighter swinging for 40 damage without a crit i often think, erm, i reckon i'll let someone else deal with that. When we fight mindflayers the entire party scatters, no point in making it easy to grapple you to death. When we fight a dragon, everyone scatters, someones gonna get the breath weapon no point in waiting to take it in the face. Anything that you add like this actually causes detriment to the players, since most npc's are "one shot characters" in that they encounter the PC's and die its ok if one of them gets shaken and isn't as effective, but when the PC's have these tests every fight eventually someones gonna fail at a bad moment, and its gonna result in a fudged roll or a player death. Making them shaken for the entire fight seems a bit much, even if your scared at the start of the fight you tend to either get over it after a few seconds or just get pasted. I'd be tempted to have it similar to the Hold Person effect, and have them re-take the save every round on their turn to see if they can snap themselves out of it. And as a final thought for you, does it matter if the wizard has a -2 penalty on his to hit rolls, saves and checks if he can still blast out spells, i don't think shaken is really the condition you want to give for being that scared as a shaken wizard is just as effective as a non shaken one... The brave wizard stands at the rear of the combat and says <brave voice> "i magic missile the orc!" The shaken wizard trembles at the rear of the combat and while peeing his pants cries <scared voice> "i magic missile the orc!" oddly enough they both do d4+1 damage :)
Pz.Az.04Maus 12-14-05, 04:36 PM	I don't run anywhere near that many fights, and my current campaign is more role-playing oriented, so it will actually be ten to twelve sessions before the two unblooded character's become blooded. Later I intended to add a second layer to the Blooded rules that simulate post-traumatic stress and the emotional deadening the accompanies a life of combat. The "point' of these rules is to add a layer of psychological realism to the game. They are an experiment. Any non-arcane-magic-using-characters (cleric, monk, rogue, etc.) of 2nd level or higher with an adventuring background will be considered Blooded. Any arcane-magic-using-characters (wizards, sorceror) of 3rd level or higher with an adventuring background will be considered Blooded. Characters with non-adventuring backgrounds (a 5th level wizard who gained all his XP through study, training, and research) would not be blooded. This sounds great! Hope this goes somewhere. Although I would say that there is something weird about the Fort. Save being the roller, but I get the general idea. It's the Brain trying to surpress the body, which is a physical object. As a physical object, the brain should naturally have to take care of the feelings/fear. Its a natural action that the body must take in a natural situation; thats all I can think of. But, meh. Good work anyhoo.
loaba 12-14-05, 04:40 PM	HOUSE RULES These seem fine to me, I don’t think I’ve ever formally named a campaign, so nice touch there. CHARACTER CREATION Roll 4d6, reroll any 1's, and drop the lowest die. Record this number. Repeat six times, and arrange to suit. Character's may have at most one 18, two 17's, and two 16's (before applying racial modifiers). Remove ability points until the character is in compliance. The total attribute modifiers of a 1st level character may not be more than +18 (after racial modifiers). Remove ability points until the character is in compliance. Players may select from all races listed in the Player's Handbook. Players may also select genasi (all types), aasimar, tiefling, and orc as player character races. Players may select from all Core classes listed in the Player's Handbook. Classes not listed in the PHB may not be selected, with the exceptions of Bounty Hunter (C&P), Favored Soul (CDiv), Scout (CAdv), and Swashbuckler (CWar). Psionic characters, other than the Soul Knife, are subject to DM approval. Rolling method is cool and lots of folks go this route. My only real problem with this is that invariably someone rolls crap and everyone else gets really good results. That is one of the reasons I like PB, puts everyone at the same power level while still allowing for personal customization. I expect a 50PB would be about for the power level you want. Modifying the natural rolls is kind of weird; do you raise the rolls of the folks who weren’t as lucky? Why cap their total mods? That seems unfair to the player who rolled well and elected to play something other than Human or half-Elf. MULTI-CLASSING I disagree on disallowing characters to freely multi-class in and out of Barbarian. I think you’re not considering the Barbarian Sorcerer who dips in and out of each class at opportune time during the life of the character. Also, are you saying that Fighters are always civilized, that they can never come from the “wildlands”? Barbarian is a class, nothing more. I think you might be putting to much stock into class names. Characters can’t multi-class into Paladin? Funny thing here, I always thought it was a natural progression for a Fighter or Barbarian to find religion as it were, and to then multi-class into Paladin. I guess I think of ‘em as something like converts (who are almost always quite zealous). I agree with your idea of class mentoring, but I disagree with the mechanics you have laid out. My own group has a much less formal arraignment. Typically we say that you can only pass on what you have already learned, so a 2nd level Fighter 2 couldn’t do more than 2 levels of teaching. Also we tend to gloss over downtime, because that’s really something we don’t want to play through in a session. CHARACTER DEATH I agree with most of this. Difference is that we typically like to keep the party at the same level, so new characters often times come in at the same level as the rest of the party. Also we follow the rules for res (which include the level loss). NEW RULES: BLOODED The following house rules apply to all characters. Blooded characters are characters who have seen combat and discovered the true test of their mettle. Unblooded characters have never truly faced their fear of death, and are more easily intimidated by violence. Any class with a Good BAB is automatically blooded at first level. Any class with an Average or Poor BAB is automatically unblooded at first level. A morale check is a DC 15 Fortitude Save. If the check succeeds, there is no effect. If the check fails, the character is shaken for the remainder of the combat, and 1d10 minutes following the combat. Unblooded characters must make a morale check at the beginning of each initiative. Unblooded characters must make an additional morale check each time they witness a fellow PC fall unconscious, die or when they perform a stabilize action, and at the DM's discretion. Characters who roll a natural "1" on a morale check are panicked instead. Characters who roll a natural "20" on a morale check become blooded. I wouldn’t use this; I see no reason to have it in the game. Player knowledge does translate to character knowledge and actions. I know my Wizard only has 4 or 5 hit points and I know what that means in terms of survivability within the game. My wizard doesn’t know what hit points are, but he is capable of comparing himself to the party fighter. My wizard is quite aware the fighter can take more punishment in melee combat then he can. That’s the rationalization of player knowledge and how it affects character action. I don’t need another rule that makes my already weak-melee character even weaker. If I want to have my wizard break form and go on the melee offensive, that’s my choice and the Core rules pretty well dictate that I will get my head handed to me as a result. What your Blooded rules do is hamstring the courageous caster who might need to take some emergency actions in a dire situation.
Gailbraithe 12-14-05, 05:58 PM	These seem fine to me, I don’t think I’ve ever formally named a campaign, so nice touch there. I started doing it when I found myself running three campaigns at once. Helps keep my NPCs and notes organized. Rolling method is cool and lots of folks go this route. My only real problem with this is that invariably someone rolls crap and everyone else gets really good results....Modifying the natural rolls is kind of weird; do you raise the rolls of the folks who weren’t as lucky? I have the same problem with random gen. For example, when my players rolled up their new PCs using this method, one rolled 18, 16, 16, 16, 14, 13 (+16), and another managed 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 7 (+2). This is where the caps came in originally. Once I saw aaron's rolls though, I instituted a new House Rule immediately, which goes after the maxium TAM statement, and states: The total attribute modifiers of a 1st level character may not be less than +8 (before racial modifiers). Immediately reroll attributes. That seems to have fixed the problem. That is one of the reasons I like PB, puts everyone at the same power level while still allowing for personal customization. I expect a 50PB would be about for the power level you want. My players hate point buy, so I don't use it. As frustrating as I find randgen (for balance reasons), I tend to agree with them that it doesn't "feel" like D&D if you don't roll stats. This system of mine, which I freely admit is a bit schizo, satisfies my players need to roll their characters up, and satisfies my desire to see some balance between PCs. Why cap their total mods? That seems unfair to the player who rolled well and elected to play something other than Human or half-Elf. I discovered it encourages players to put a low stat into their penaltied atribute to really push the negative modifier. Which has the pleasent effect of enforcing the stereotypes of the races (Elves are frail, dwarves are dour, halflings are puny). I disagree on disallowing characters to freely multi-class in and out of Barbarian. I think you’re not considering the Barbarian Sorcerer who dips in and out of each class at opportune time during the life of the character. Also, are you saying that Fighters are always civilized, that they can never come from the “wildlands”? Barbarian is a class, nothing more. I think you might be putting to much stock into class names. Any player can make a Fighter, give him some points in Knowledge (Religion) and call him a "paladin", and any player can make a Fighter, give him a few points in Survival, take the Illiterate flaw, and call him a "barbarian". But the Barbarian PC class, like the Paladin PC class, is something more than just a "wilderness warrior". He is a paragon, in this case a paragon of the untamed man. He is free from the weakness of civilization, and so correspondingly more powerful than any mere warrior. But to invite civilization into his soul, to tame the wild beast he is by learning letters and books, is to invite weakness into his soul. To cut himself off from his own wild nature. And once a man is civilized, there is no going back. The wild spirit is like innocence - once lost, lost forever. The Barbarian is also based on Conan. In Robert Howard's stories Conan was a Cimmerian, and the Cimmerians were mountain barbarians. Below them lived the Vanir, who were also "barbarians", but they were barbarians who traded with civilized nations, who captured slaves, etc. They would have been Fighters, while the Cimmerians, they were Barbarians. When Conan comes down from the mountain, he was a Barbarian. After many adventures as a Barbarian, he becomes a Rogue, and from then on, he is no longer a Barbarian. He still has those mountain grown muscles, but as he gains experience he learns tactics, and how to lead armies, and about fortificatiosn - he gains Fighter levels. Because he has become civilized. I and my players are all Howard fans, I myself am a rather fanatic Howard fan. So, my House Rules on Barbarians reflect my understanding of the original Barbarian from 1st Edition (who could only dual class) all the way through his present incarnation. You are correct that I had forgotten about the Barbarian Sorceror. I actually thought of the other night, but have yet to add "Wild Sorceror" to the New Feats section. I also need to add a line to each of the Wild X feats that mentions that multiclassing via the feat does not grant literacy. Characters can’t multi-class into Paladin? Funny thing here, I always thought it was a natural progression for a Fighter or Barbarian to find religion as it were, and to then multi-class into Paladin. I guess I think of ‘em as something like converts (who are almost always quite zealous). That's a typo. I have no idea why that is there. I agree with your idea of class mentoring, but I disagree with the mechanics you have laid out. My own group has a much less formal arraignment. Typically we say that you can only pass on what you have already learned, so a 2nd level Fighter 2 couldn’t do more than 2 levels of teaching. Also we tend to gloss over downtime, because that’s really something we don’t want to play through in a session. It's based on the Leadership feat. Once a character is capable of leading others, he is capable of teaching others. A second level fighter is still mastering his art, and would only frustrate himself and his student by attempting to teach his art. The method you describe reminds me of a Simpsons episode where Marge claims she'll earn the family extra money by teaching piano. Lisa points out that Marge doesn't play, and Marge exclaims "I only have to stay one lessons ahead of my students!" ;) I wouldn’t use this; I see no reason to have it in the game. I was raised around a group of Vietnam veterans who had all experienced psychological trauma as a result of the war. This turned into an adult fascination with the psychological effects of stress on personality. The blooded rules represent my attempt to bring that interest into my campaign. I've always found the idea the it is left to the players to decide when they are afraid and when they are not rather silly, and I've never understood why the Morale rules (2E) didn't apply to players. If a player believes courage in the face of life-threatening risk is a fundamental part of their character, and don't want to risk finding out their character is a bit of a coward, they always have the option of taking the Blooded feat.
Puggins 12-14-05, 06:41 PM	I think this is a really neat idea, but I might take it a bit further... why is being a fighter, barbarian, ranger or paladin a guarantee that you'll be fine? There are numerous, numerous accounts of frontline soldiers losing their nerve when exposed to their first firefight, I see no reason why the same won't happen with Antocles the Mercenary, fresh out of the military academy with his shiny breastplate and two-handed sword. Why not have ALL characters be at risk until they make a save of 20?
Gailbraithe 12-14-05, 08:55 PM	I think this is a really neat idea, but I might take it a bit further... why is being a fighter, barbarian, ranger or paladin a guarantee that you'll be fine? There are numerous, numerous accounts of frontline soldiers losing their nerve when exposed to their first firefight, I see no reason why the same won't happen with Antocles the Mercenary, fresh out of the military academy with his shiny breastplate and two-handed sword. Why not have ALL characters be at risk until they make a save of 20? Two reasons: 1. It is assumed that all warrior characters have seen combat before the game begins. The defualt presumption, if no other background is provided, is that the PC Fighter trained at the Temple of Torm (which provides free fighter training for all people of all social classes) and served a tour of duty in the summer campaigns against the orcs. With Rangers the default background is that the PC Ranger was trained by an NPC Ranger and spent a summer running sorties against their favored enemy. A Paladin is presumed to have been trained by the Knights of Torm and spent a summer battling undead in the crumbling ruins that dot Impilitur. Barbarians cannot be unblooded, as their Rage ability represents mastery over the instinct in question. 2. All fighters do is fight. Nerfing fighters on the one thing they can do just seemed needlessly cruel. 3. If a player wanted to play an Unblooded warrior, I would let him. I'd wonder - possibly aloud - about his sanity, but I'd let him.