Opinions on my idea for house rules. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Opinions on my idea for house rules. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Count Arioch the 28th
04-08-07, 02:58 PM When I was supposed to be working last night, I thought up some house rules that sound like an interesting twist on the game.

Here's the idea, keep in mind that I thought of using all of these in tandem:

1. Use the defense bonus alternate rule from Unearthed arcana, with one change: The class defense bonus does not protect against touch attacks

2. Armor grants damage reduction as presented in the Unerthed Arcana section, except they don't grant an AC bonus at all. Armor wouldn't have +'s normally, instead they would only have non-numerical enhancements (For example, you could have a heavy fortification suit of plate mail, but there'd be no +'s.)

3. Armor bonuses would mostly be absent. Bracers of armor grant armor abilities up to +5. Mage Armor spell is absent. And so forth.

4. Instead of having +'s to weapons, you would simply add your level/4 to your attack rolls and damage with melee and ranged attacks, but not with spells. Weapons could have abilities such as Flaming and Vorpal without any +'s, up to +5. Amulet of Mighty Fists would grant your unarmed strikes abilities such as flaming and such, as unarmed strieks and natural attacks would also get the bonus to hit and damage.

5. Instead of having cloaks of resistance, you would simply get a bonus to all saving throws equal to one-third your character level.

6. I would most likely adjust the treasure per level to reflect the fact that there is a much shorter list of "must-buy" items to waste money on.

My reasoning behind this brainstorm is to generally reduce the number of items that I feel are just boring. A +3 sword is boring, while Grendelbane, the flaming giant bane sword is a little cooler. Likewise, I feel that if there are certain items that a character needs just to be able to play on the same level as the monsters, they should just be given to the players without any DM asshatery screwing them out of it. This way, if the fighter loses his sword, he can pick up a club or axe and still be formidible with it.

Furthermore, I feel that unarmored fighters should have a chance to shine. The barbarian with a loincloth and a battle axe should be just as feasable as the plate-clad knight.

Thoughts?
Patera_Quetzal
04-08-07, 03:06 PM You might borrow someone's copy of Iron Heroes to see some of the things they've done to make characters less dependent upon items. Some solutions they have are quite similar to yours, but taken a bit further. I'm not saying adopt all their rules as-written, by any means; just take them as food for thought.
Vaelan
04-09-07, 04:44 AM I like the rules that decrease the focus on boring magical items.

I don't agree with Class Defense Bonus not helping against touch attacks, though. I think touch attacks could stand to be a bit harder.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Count Arioch the 28th 04-08-07, 02:58 PM	When I was supposed to be working last night, I thought up some house rules that sound like an interesting twist on the game. Here's the idea, keep in mind that I thought of using all of these in tandem: 1. Use the defense bonus alternate rule from Unearthed arcana, with one change: The class defense bonus does not protect against touch attacks 2. Armor grants damage reduction as presented in the Unerthed Arcana section, except they don't grant an AC bonus at all. Armor wouldn't have +'s normally, instead they would only have non-numerical enhancements (For example, you could have a heavy fortification suit of plate mail, but there'd be no +'s.) 3. Armor bonuses would mostly be absent. Bracers of armor grant armor abilities up to +5. Mage Armor spell is absent. And so forth. 4. Instead of having +'s to weapons, you would simply add your level/4 to your attack rolls and damage with melee and ranged attacks, but not with spells. Weapons could have abilities such as Flaming and Vorpal without any +'s, up to +5. Amulet of Mighty Fists would grant your unarmed strikes abilities such as flaming and such, as unarmed strieks and natural attacks would also get the bonus to hit and damage. 5. Instead of having cloaks of resistance, you would simply get a bonus to all saving throws equal to one-third your character level. 6. I would most likely adjust the treasure per level to reflect the fact that there is a much shorter list of "must-buy" items to waste money on. My reasoning behind this brainstorm is to generally reduce the number of items that I feel are just boring. A +3 sword is boring, while Grendelbane, the flaming giant bane sword is a little cooler. Likewise, I feel that if there are certain items that a character needs just to be able to play on the same level as the monsters, they should just be given to the players without any DM asshatery screwing them out of it. This way, if the fighter loses his sword, he can pick up a club or axe and still be formidible with it. Furthermore, I feel that unarmored fighters should have a chance to shine. The barbarian with a loincloth and a battle axe should be just as feasable as the plate-clad knight. Thoughts?
Patera_Quetzal 04-08-07, 03:06 PM	You might borrow someone's copy of Iron Heroes to see some of the things they've done to make characters less dependent upon items. Some solutions they have are quite similar to yours, but taken a bit further. I'm not saying adopt all their rules as-written, by any means; just take them as food for thought.
Vaelan 04-09-07, 04:44 AM	I like the rules that decrease the focus on boring magical items. I don't agree with Class Defense Bonus not helping against touch attacks, though. I think touch attacks could stand to be a bit harder.