Post/Author/DateTime	Post
jnrhayz 03-11-05, 02:47 PM	I figured I would post these and get some feedback. I created most of these, but I stole some from other people that I liked also. I would appreciate any constructive criticism. These are my basic rules for my games: We will use the point buy system. The starting amount is 37. *37 allows for a strong build. I believe the characters are heroes and are above common stats.* All characters gain maximum HP at each level. *Your enemies will also gain high hit points and once again the characters are heroes and above common folk.* No psionics. *I do not have the book and it enters a level of complexity to the game I do not want to deal with at this time.* Alignment: All characters must be on the same alignment axis (good vs. evil). Neutral characters are permitted upon DM approval. No new players may be neutral. *This is to prevent unnecessary group conflict.* Any race, class, feat, skill, or spell from PHB, DMG, Complete Fighter, Complete Divine, Complete Adventurer, and Complete Arcane is legal. * I believe this gives freedom to the players. Everything else must be approved by me.* All characters start with max cash for purchasing equipment. *I begin most games at 1st level and none of the standard equipment is broken (much).* All characters must have a history or amnesia and a personality outline. *I want a background. It will be used to add depth to the story, but I don’t want a book.* Lawful characters must develop a code of personal honor that is dm approved BEFORE the start of the campaign. *Moral issues will come up and this reduces DM/player conflict.* Nothing is inherently fair game to kill if it is sapient. *There is nothing that is always evil or always good. This means no killing Orc babies.* You level when I feel like it. *while I try to follow the experience charts as much as possible, I also take into count good role-playing, and the storyline.* EDIT*** Changed inherently fair game to kill rule to remove intelligence guideline and use correct terminology. Edit[2]*** Elminate limiting saves rule.
steenan 03-11-05, 04:24 PM	I like most of your house rules, I use quite similar when I'm a DM. However, there are a few that don't look good. 1. 37 point buy - it's extremely overpowered. Giving so many points reduces the freedom of choice in creating character - one cannot decide, which stats they want high and which stats low, because all stats are high... It's best to use 28-32 points. 2. Giving full HP to characters and monsters may be good, but only if you know all it's consequences: -all fights will take longer (more HP, same damage) -damage dealing spells will be weakened (casters have same number of spells per day, but need more of them to kill the same monster) -size of hit die will matter more (so, constitution bonus will matter less); on average, there are 2 points of difference between d8 and d12, but when you take max values, the difference if twice that. 3. Defining "sentient" as "int 6 or higher". It's quite possible (not very probable with 37 point buy, but anyway...) for a character to have less than 6 int (it's equivalent of IQ less than 80). Do you think killing retarded people (for example, a PC barbarian) is OK? 4. Also to the same house rule as 3. Aren't all your celestials good and all your fiends evil?
DM Zoc 03-11-05, 04:25 PM	Good rules, all of them. My take on it: The characters will be significantly stronger than the default, but you as DM can make sure that everything remains suitably challenging. I've seen too many campaigns broken up from alignment conflict, and new campaigns start up frequently enough that a loved character concept will always get played, eventually. Far too often do Lawful types turn up to be serial killers. An understood code of conduct would make things much easier. I always have thought that saves were unreasonably high in general. My only issue comes with your last point, which I have quite a lot of experience with (as a player). It does not suitably account for experience costs or bonuses. There are quite a few spells which require EXP components, and this system of levelling denies their use (when EXP only comes in chunks of 1000, then 2000, then 3000, etc. it means that spending 10 xp on a spell puts you an entire level behind; alternatively, if the DM tries to compensate by letting that character get the 10 xp back after the very next session, it's entirely too arbitrary such that it never mattered whether you spent 10 xp or 50 xp or 100 xp). This means that favored classes are fairly meaningless, and the biggest bonus of Item Familiars is also gone (and the penalty for a familiar being killed is either much better or much worse). It means that item crafting is always a bad idea, because you never "catch up" as you would in a normal XP game. In general, it creates a lot of headaches. I much favor a system where the DM hands out arbitrary xp based on how well the session was played: challenges overcome, demons battled, staying in character, etc. This way, even if the DM never has to deal with the math, the player can benefit/suffer from experience bonuses/penalties in a reasonably fair manner.
Taralist 03-11-05, 04:36 PM	As someone who will most likely be playing in your next game (baring death or dismemberment), let me give you some honest feedback. I'm fine with all of them except the multiclass/save thing. I really dont' see the need. Of all of WoTC's talk of balance, the PHB and DMG are probably closer than any other book. I just dont see the reasoning behind this. Also DM Zoc has some good points too. What happens when someone picks up a third class and should take a hit on exp?
jnrhayz 03-11-05, 04:49 PM	1. 37 point buy - it's extremely overpowered. Giving so many points reduces the freedom of choice in creating character - one cannot decide, which stats they want high and which stats low, because all stats are high... It's best to use 28-32 points. The current group is used to high point buys and you get used to modifying things for that. I thought of lowering it to 32, but 5 points will not break my games. 2. Giving full HP to characters and monsters may be good, but only if you know all it's consequences: -all fights will take longer (more HP, same damage) -damage dealing spells will be weakened (casters have same number of spells per day, but need more of them to kill the same monster) -size of hit die will matter more (so, constitution bonus will matter less); on average, there are 2 points of difference between d8 and d12, but when you take max values, the difference if twice that. I like this for all of these reasons, I usually only have one battle per session, so I like it to be a little more than hit and kill. Also, I started the maximum hit die after we had a fighter who rolled so low that at 10th level he had less hit points than the wizard. A side benefit is that the wizard seemed to live longer. 3. Defining "sentient" as "int 6 or higher". It's quite possible (not very probable with 37 point buy, but anyway...) for a character to have less than 6 int (it's equivalent of IQ less than 80). Do you think killing retarded people (for example, a PC barbarian) is OK? Well, I don't allow the negative point buy option(from my understanding, that is an option and not following the normal point buy rules, I will look at that and see if I need to houserule that), so no PC can have a stat less than 6. 8-2=6. I guess my view is more along the lines of Int 3 is pretty much still an animal. I could lower that to 3 or just leave it off, but the point is to not allow stupid killing sprees. 4. Also to the same house rule as 3. Aren't all your celestials good and all your fiends evil? Well, actually...no. Rarely you can come across a fallen celestial or a redeemed fiend. It adds a level of moral complexity that my previous group enjoyed. My only issue comes with your last point, which I have quite a lot of experience with (as a player). It does not suitably account for experience costs or bonuses. I also realized this, and I purchased the Eberron book for this specific reason. I am going to try to implement the artificer rules somehow to make up for spell experience costs. Also, I previously replaced experience costs with rare materials. I removed that as it will probably change. Thank you for all of your advice. I will look at the 37 to 32 point buy and the sentience level. As soon as I get a look at the artificer I will see how well that can replace spell experience costs.
jnrhayz 03-11-05, 04:54 PM	Ah, taralist, I knew you would see this. ;) I'm fine with all of them except the multiclass/save thing. I really dont' see the need. Of all of WoTC's talk of balance, the PHB and DMG are probably closer than any other book. I just dont see the reasoning behind this. Well, the reasoning behind it is precisely the fact that favored class is not too good. You eliminate multiclassing penalties add a few classes and then the saves get out of control. Right now I am examining a bonus skill point per level for taking the favored class, to provide more of an incentive and no penalty. My fear is that then the Human becomes too powerful. Except an extra skill doesn't seem so overpowering. EDIT*** I am posting my bonus skill point variant. As I said before, this maybe stolen from somewhere. When choosing a race/class combination, if a player chooses the favored class of the race as the primary class, the character will receive 1 extra skill point per level. This skill point will no longer be gained if any other class (not prestige classes) exceeds the favored class level. For example, a level 3 Half-Orc barbarian begins to take fighter levels. Once he reaches level 4 fighter / level 3 Barbarian, he no longer receives the bonus skill point. *This promotes the favored class in a positive way. Multi-class penalties are eliminated. This may also provide too many skill points for humans.*
strenoth 03-11-05, 04:59 PM	actually, I woudl point you to a Different solution: Use the fractional saves varient in UA. slightly weakens taking multiple good saves when multiclassing, slightly strengthens multiple weak saves when multi-classing
Taralist 03-11-05, 05:00 PM	Cool, And I'm fine with the 37 point buy, you know everyone else will be too. (yes we're a greedy lot:)
HailSpork 03-12-05, 06:39 AM	All characters must have a history or amnesia and a personality outline. *I want a background. It will be used to add depth to the story, but I don’t want a book.* You're letting them cop out with amnesia? Maybe on a rare basis... Btw, if anybody does this, do you plan on writing the backstory for them and just not telling them? When taking prestige classes or multiclassing, the saves at first level are +1 and follow the usual progression. *A +2 when taking a new class can develop unreasonable saves.* I also suggest fractional saves. While multiclassing does give you 1 or 2 really good saves, it really kills you with your weak saves, particularly if your second class has the same weak saves (which most prestige classes do). Nothing is inherently fair game to kill if it is sentient (Int. 6 or more). *There is nothing that is always evil or always good. This means no killing Orc babies.* Actually, anything with an int of 1+ is sentient. By the book, anything with an int of 3+ is sapient. Common misconception between the two terms. Anyway, I don't see why you're changing it to 6... You level when I feel like it. *while I try to follow the experience charts as much as possible, I also take into count good role-playing, and the storyline.* We're doing this in one of the games I'm playing in. To allow for crafting or spell components, every character gets craft pool as per artificer (artificers get double) and you can also supplement the xp spending with exotic components, particularly if they're fitting. We just killed a dragon and I plan on using the eyes to permanency a see invisibility.
jnrhayz 03-12-05, 08:49 AM	You're letting them cop out with amnesia? Maybe on a rare basis... Btw, if anybody does this, do you plan on writing the backstory for them and just not telling them? I haven't had a lot of people go this route. If they do, I will usually develop some really screwed up background that influnces the story somehow and then slowly let in unravel. If I am being lazy they just end up being the BBEG's child. I also suggest fractional saves. While multiclassing does give you 1 or 2 really good saves, it really kills you with your weak saves, particularly if your second class has the same weak saves (which most prestige classes do). I looked at the fractional saves, but the good save still starts at 2 1/2 and that is what I am trying to reduce. I like the idea of helping out the weak saves though. I will look into an average fractional save bonus. Actually, anything with an int of 1+ is sentient. By the book, anything with an int of 3+ is sapient. Common misconception between the two terms. Anyway, I don't see why you're changing it to 6... Well, I never claimed to be sapient. ;) Anyway, I have thought of reducing it to 4. The 3.5 system uses even numbers and int. 3 for sapience is a carryover from 2nd edition if I remember correctly (it has been about 5 years now). There is no real reason to change it other than it annoys me. I will probably just remove it (the limit, not the rule). :( We're doing this in one of the games I'm playing in. To allow for crafting or spell components, every character gets craft pool as per artificer (artificers get double) and you can also supplement the xp spending with exotic components, particularly if they're fitting. We just killed a dragon and I plan on using the eyes to permanency a see invisibility. I really like this. You will probably see this stolen and used by me later. :)
Taralist 03-12-05, 12:08 PM	Backgrounds are fine, adds a lot of depth to a character. Personalities, I don't know. I like to develop my characters personality "in game". As you know from my game, sometimes it's hard to stick with the plan with reguards to how someone plans on playing a character. I can give you my plan, but you cant' hold me to it;) Now your making me eager to play again...(thumbing through Complete adventurer) You itching to run? I know what it's like to be a player and have all kinds ideas for a game flooding into your head. We could take a break on my game for a little while (maybe let me run every third session or so, to keep it fresh in everybodys heads) Don't get me wrong, I'm not getting DM burn out or anything, but I have been itching to play for a while now. I like the artificer item creation idea. It certainly beats burning exp. on creating things. oh yeah, I dont' think the int. thing is really an issue. I don't think we have any orc baby killers in the group.
jnrhayz 03-12-05, 02:25 PM	Well, as for the saves, I think it would be best to just do nothing. I do not like the fact that you can create an uber save, but everyone is right in pointing out that the other save suffers. I will just have to exploit that flaw rather than develop some vague and confusing rule. Personalities, I don't know. I like to develop my characters personality "in game". I understand that, just look at Trae. What I want is just some kind of way to understand your characters motivations. I have seen too many moral arguments come up in the past because someone was "playing their character" and the DM thought they were just being a bastard. I really don't think that is a problem with anyone in the group now, but people can join in and it is best to cover your bases. This is really just a combination of rules I have used over the past, but I don't think I have used all of them together before and I have never written it all down. After certain recent events, I felt it may be necessary for future play. You itching to run? I know what it's like to be a player and have all kinds ideas for a game flooding into your head. We could take a break on my game for a little while (maybe let me run every third session or so, to keep it fresh in everybodys heads) Are you kidding me, the group would kill me if we tried that right now. We are already arguing over things that could be up to a month or more away in real time. I value my life too much to postpone that. ;) I have been mulling things over though. There are a few other things I plan to post on the board for feedback and then run past the group before I run the game. These are the most important rules though and the ones I am most comfortable with. If you are really getting the itch to play, we could try an alternating schedule, it can't hurt to ask the group. I can really DM at any time. I usually look at what the group builds and then build an adventure around that. I usually use the backgrounds a lot in the game also. It is kind of backwards from the way most people DM, but it works for me. Of course, it usually takes a few sessions to really get into it as I set the stage.
Lord Welkerfan 03-14-05, 06:32 PM	The system for saves I use in my game is to add like saves together. So, if I am a Barbarian 1/Fighter 1, my Fort bonus is +3. Stack levels with like saves (good with good, poor with poor) and then add the good and poor together. To make it even better, implement the fractional saves rule as well.
HailSpork 03-15-05, 01:18 AM	If I'm reading Lord W's post the way I think I am, do you mean that you have X levels of strong saves and Y levels of weak saves for each saving throw? If so, then that's what I was thinking as well. If not, then I'm proposing it now ;)
Enaloindir 03-15-05, 05:13 AM	If you don't like the +2.5 of strong saves under the fractional rules, just rule that the +2 boost can be applied only once (which is what HailSpork and Lord Welkerfan alreayd suggested). If you want a formula for the saves: SAVE = 1/2 x #(strong levels) + 1/3 x #(weak levels) + 2* *only if #(strong levels) is at least 1 e.g., A fighter 2/barbarian 1/cleric 2 has the following saves: Fort: .50 x 5 + .33 x 0 + 2 = 4.50 = +4 Refl: .50 x 0 + .33 x 5 + 0 = 1.67 = +1 Will: .50 x 2 + .33 x 3 + 2 = 4.00 = +4 You can go even further and say that the +2 is a character level feature (like max hp at 1st level) and not a class level feature. This would mean that you only get the +2 bonus for the strong saves of your first class, and just add +1/2 or +1/3 to your strong/weak saves from that point on. e.g., A fighter 2/barbarian 1/cleric 2 who started as a barbarian has the following saves: Fort: .50 x 5 + .33 x 0 + 2 = 4.50 = +4 Refl: .50 x 0 + .33 x 5 + 0 = 1.67 = +1 Will: .50 x 2 + .33 x 3 + 0 = 2.00 = +2 Enaloindir
IceFractal 03-15-05, 05:34 PM	Or you could say that good saves are +2/3 a level, poor saves are +1/3 a level, rounding down. This would give the progression: 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Good +0 +1 +2 +2 +3 +4 +4 +5 +6 +6 +7 +8 +8 +9 +10 +10 +11 +12 +12 +13 Poor +0 +0 +1 +1 +1 +2 +2 +2 +3 +3 +3 +4 +4 +4 +5 +5 +5 +6 +6 +6 Which is the same for poor saves, and starts lower/ends higher for good ones. For multiclass characters, you add up the actual fractions. So, for instance, a Fighter 7/Wizard 5 would have a Fortitude save of 7*2/3 + 5*1/3 = 6 1/3, which would round down to +6.