Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Terraneaux 02-09-06, 04:27 AM	I was wondering if I could get some perspective on some house rules i'm thinking of implementing. Levelling Up: XP will be awarded at the end of each session, and characters will not have to be resting to achieve a new level. I will be using a simplified skill system: skills are considered a class skill for you if any of your classes have it as a class skill. If you have points in a cross-class skill and it later becomes a class skill for you, these points “grow” into full class ranks (double your skill points before applying the new skill points for the new level in which you gained the class skill.) Characters will not have to spend any time training or practicing to learn how to level up, because in my opinion that is what they were doing the level before when they gained all of that xp. Please, however, if you are going to pick up some class that requires a lot of training, such as wizard, spend some time the level before reading up on arcane theory and whatnot. Players gain max hit points at first level and high average at each level after that. Changes to classes: The Fighter and Paladin base classes now gains 4+ Int mod skill points/level. Add profession, listen, and spot as class skills to the Fighter. Add listen and spot to the Paladin’s skill list. The Sorcerer gains 4+ int mod skill points/lvl and gains diplomacy, sense motive, and intimidate as class skills. The Cleric gains sense motive as a class skill. Things that I'm almost certain that I'll add: -Escape Artist may be used to escape the original "making a hold" grapple check -5 ranks in craft(poisonmaking) allows you to use a poisoned weapon without a chance of poisoning yourself. Things That I may or may not add: -explicitly state that the movement an enemy makes into your square or that you make into an enemy's square does not count as movement during the round and does not provoke attacks of oppurtunities. -allow everyone to use two weapons regardless of their dexterity and as if they had the feats Two-Weapon Fighting, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Greater Two-Weapon Fighting, and Perfect Two-Weapon Fighting.
Dhavaer 02-09-06, 05:37 AM	The changes to classes look fine, and the XP rules aren't really detailed enough in the RAW to pass judgement on yours. I'm not too sure about the skills rules; they heavily favour multiclass characters and will make qualifying for prestige classes easier than normal.
Syd_Galion 02-09-06, 09:53 AM	the craft poison making is ok but I would add more ranks maybe 10 or 15 to it this way lv2 pc wont all have use poison. It also takes away from the class/classes? that give you this ability normaly but if your pcs dont care, it's all cool
Angelflesh 02-10-06, 02:55 AM	-allow everyone to use two weapons regardless of their dexterity and as if they had the feats Two-Weapon Fighting, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Greater Two-Weapon Fighting, and Perfect Two-Weapon Fighting. This is absolutley ridiculous. You basically want everyone to be two-weapon fighters, or double weapon fighters, even if they are clumsy oafs with little or no dexterity. Imagine a 400 pound man wielding two longswords, this guy couldn't perform effectively against a more in shape foe, even with proper training. If my Fighter has all those feats, what is the points of any two-handed weapon even existing? Secondly, if you make this absurd addition, what happens to the Ranger's combat style abilities? Also, the Tempest PrC gets rubbed out from doing this. Think about it, a human gets a bonus feat at 1st level in addition to the bonus feat everyone else gewts at 1st level. If he takes his first level in fighter, he gets another extra bonus feat. Now we add your change here, he gets 4 additional bonus feats, even if he meets none of the prerequisites, one of which is an epic feat.
Ghenesh 02-10-06, 08:16 AM	I would certainly add a 4+INT_MOD skill points to Fighter, Sorcerer and Paladin, just to balance them a bit but also cause those are classes that should be more skillful than the prepared spellcasters whom has lived mostly studying/praying. But i'm against to give them new class skills, i know it's quite obvious than a Fighter should be a good guard/sentry... but for some system reason he's not, so i'd leave class skills the way they are. That 5 ranks in Craft(poisonmaking) sounds like synergy to me, if it's go with the flavor of your campaign go for it, it might be a good idea. From my experience is better to get rid of skills synergy, it makes the game more complicated and it has some ridiculous bonuses (like bluff). I think the Escape Artist thing is not a good idea, there's a reason why it takes you a standard action to use Escape Artist to get out of a grapple, and it's because it takes time to make such a complicated escape and should be only made on your own turn. Rewarding XP has always been the ultimate power of the DM, i don't know of any rule to do this, i actually give xp to the players after every battle, trap, dungeon, relevant situation and finally campaign (with a bonus for good character interpretation) as if it was an RPG videogame, and they like it a lot. About spending time to gain a level in a class that requires special training/reqs is always a good idea, specially for Wizard and Cleric. I had a monk friend that was like 3 sessions wanting to take a Kensai level and the DM said he hasn't met the roleplaying requirements yet... so he level up later on. Finally about 2 Weapon Fighting... well, giving those amazing feats for free is just silly, sometimes you have to think System... not Role Playing.
Millennium 02-10-06, 09:32 AM	It's difficult to critique house rules in a vacuum. If you're using the house rules to solve problems that have arisen in your campaign, or if you need new mechanics to fit the flavor of your campaign setting, then they're probably good. If you're abusing Rule 0 with gratuitous houserules, then they're probably not good. Other than that, it's difficult to really say. What problems in your campaign are you trying to solve? I'm particularly interested in hearing about the last two things you've mentioned.
HypnoticMonk 02-10-06, 11:58 AM	Well, to me, I liked most of your rules. I think you have dropped the ball in a couple areas. The whole "everyone-is-an-amazing-two-weapon-fighter" just has to go. No two ways about it. I also have an issue with the skills setup. It can lead to certain abuse. Imagine this : someone chooses all(or mostly) cross-class skills at 1st level. When second level comes around, they pick a class that all those skills are currently a listed class skill. Boing, instant and free skill points all over the place! (Actually this could be done at just about any time. It's just easier to conceptualize at 1st level...)
UN_NO_II 02-10-06, 01:11 PM	allow everyone to use two weapons regardless of their dexterity and as if they had the feats Two-Weapon Fighting, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Greater Two-Weapon Fighting, and Perfect Two-Weapon Fighting. Why? On the face of it, it looks ridiculous that every non combat oriented character has mastered two weapon fighting, when some barely have any weapon proficiencies. And it makes half of all Rangers useless.
Kastas 02-10-06, 03:09 PM	I also have an issue with the skills setup. It can lead to certain abuse. Imagine this : someone chooses all(or mostly) cross-class skills at 1st level. When second level comes around, they pick a class that all those skills are currently a listed class skill. Boing, instant and free skill points all over the place! (Actually this could be done at just about any time. It's just easier to conceptualize at 1st level...) Under his new system in which all cross-class skills can become permanent class skills it wouldn't really be free skill points. Since a cross-class skill costs two skill points per rank, doubling the number of ranks would simply raise the skill to the point it would be as a class skill with an equal investment of skill points. I don't find that particularly unbalancing. On the other hand, I'm going to have to agree with the majority that the house rules regarding two-weapon fighting are unbalanced. Giving players those feats for free would be overpowered from a mechanical perspective and makes little sense from a roleplaying perspective, since using two weapons really is harder than using one.
Surgo 02-10-06, 03:42 PM	If my Fighter has all those feats, what is the points of any two-handed weapon even existing? You haven't played many fighters, have you? You'll be dishing out a lot more damage with two-handed weapons and feats to optimize them (power attack, shock trooper, and leap attack) than you will as a fighter doing two-weapon fighting. Not that I'm saying I agree with the rule, but still. Bad example.
Terraneaux 02-10-06, 05:02 PM	This is absolutley ridiculous. You basically want everyone to be two-weapon fighters, or double weapon fighters, even if they are clumsy oafs with little or no dexterity. Imagine a 400 pound man wielding two longswords, this guy couldn't perform effectively against a more in shape foe, even with proper training. If my Fighter has all those feats, what is the points of any two-handed weapon even existing? Secondly, if you make this absurd addition, what happens to the Ranger's combat style abilities? Also, the Tempest PrC gets rubbed out from doing this. Think about it, a human gets a bonus feat at 1st level in addition to the bonus feat everyone else gewts at 1st level. If he takes his first level in fighter, he gets another extra bonus feat. Now we add your change here, he gets 4 additional bonus feats, even if he meets none of the prerequisites, one of which is an epic feat. Okay, my perspective on it was that while i personally favor the one two-handed weapon fighting style conceptually, mechanically unless you are a rogue or have some other per-attack damage add (besides power attack) two-weapon fighting is very subpar. It requires those four feats and a ridiculous amount of dexterity to achieve basically the same power as a greatsword wielder. The idea was to allow a character to play a two-weapon fighter who was just as combat effective as a two-handed weapon wielder. Since you only get 1.5 times your strength bonus between the two weapons anyway, and only get 1-for-1 power attack on both your weapons, as opposed to the 1-for-2 on a greatsword or falchion.
Seerow 02-10-06, 06:47 PM	If you want to give a boost to TWF, here's what I suggest as opposed to giving it to everyone for free. Two Weapon Fighting remains a feat, and has the normal Dex15 prerequisite, but rather than needing a new feat every few levels, make it scale. For every extra attack in a round you can make with your primary hand due to a high BAB (Note that this is important. When you gave Perfect TWF to everyone, you made Monks incredibly powerful instantly, being able to double their FoB) you may make an attack with your offhand, provided you have an extra 2 dex above 15 for every extra attack. (ie a 20th level Fighter needs 21 Dex to make 8 attacks in a round). All attacks still take the -2 or -4 To Hit Penalty. That should be a more than sufficient boost. If that's still not enough for you, you could introduce Ambidexterity a la Tempest as a Feat.
Terraneaux 02-11-06, 04:26 PM	Seerow, some good ideas. I'm not so much worried about monk's FoB (It only adds one on-hand attack after all, and monks have bad BAB anyway).
Seerow 02-11-06, 09:35 PM	Monks have medium BAB and Flurry gives 2 Attacks. 8 Attacks Per Round IS a big deal when you get it for free.
Malakai_Demonos 02-14-06, 07:40 PM	Giving a person four feats for free is just silly. Why would you even think that. If you really want to make TWF better, just do away with the penalties to hit. That will make many TWF fighters happy. You could also make a feat that allows you to add your full str score to your off hand, that would also be totally awsome. You could also allow TWF fighters who have a high str score to wield a normal one-handed weapon in his off hand with less or no penalties, again freakin awsome. But GIVING anyone 4 bonus feats for free (and one epic) is totally wrong. Before that I thought your ideas for skills was awsome, but how can you think 4 free feats is balanced. Anyways, actual fighters get alot of bonus feats so do not feel bad making them actually take some. And if you are still woried, I don't know, give rogues bonuses to using two light weapons or something.