Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Sarge 06-22-07, 09:36 AM	General Rules Fighters: Fighters recieve 4 skill points per level instead of 2. This should fix any claim to the fighter being underpowered. Warlock: Banned. It's just too powerful for my tastes. Grapple: There are no opposed grapple checks just an offensive check with a DC of 11 + opponent's grapple bonus. Arrow to the Neck: At any point, the DM may declare any successful attack on a PC or NPC to be lethal. This surpasses all hit point defenses and can lower the target of the attack to -1 hit points or render him dead outright. This gives the campaign a deadly feel where PCs are less likely to bully lesser NPCs because of their high hit points. With arrow to the neck, everything is potentially lethal. Fickle Gods: A divine spellcasters powers are fueled by fickle gods. At any time the caster prays for spells, he may not receive the ones he asked for and instead receive a random spell of the same level. The DM can invoke this rule whenever he wishes. Arcane Backlash: Arcane magics bring with them dangerous forces. Whenever a caster casts an arcane spell, he risks summoning a creature of dark magic. This summons a hostile monster of a CR equal to twice the level of the spell (cantrips summon CR 1), who attacks the caster immediately after the caster's turn ends, gaining surprise. Avoiding arcane backlash requires a concentration check with a DC of 10 + 5 * spell level. Action Point Rules PCs receive a number of action points every level equal to 3 + 1/2 their hit dice. These are not transferred over from level to level and simply reset. Action points can be spent in one of the following ways. Only one may be used per round. Unlike normal action point rules, monsters receive the same number of action points as PCs and may use them as a PC can. Avoid Arrow to the Neck: A character may spend an action point to not die instantly to an Arrow to the Neck attack.The attack still deals double normal damage. If it was a critical, factor the doubling in normally as you would stack any D&D multiplication. Get the spell you wanted: A character may spend an action point to negate a use of the fickle gods rule, getting the spell he wanted instead of a random spell. Alter Treasure: A character can spend an action point to change any magic item found into another magic item of equal or less cost. Alter Monster: A character can spend an action point to replace a monster he is facing with another monster of the same CR of the character's choice. Quad damage: A character can spend an action point to deal quadruple damage for a duration of 1 round.
Xaer 06-22-07, 11:20 AM	I won't argue the warlock point, but the others... Arrow to the Neck is just silly. That's just outright telling the players: I can kill you if you do something outside the normal. It's a railroading tool, and a bad one at that. Discourages players as well. The fighter problem won't be solved by skill points. Besides, unless you increase the class skill set, thats 4 ranks/level to be spread among seven skills; that's not very useful at all. The fighter problem stems from the fact that bonus feats become less useful as the game goes on, because you've already grabbed the ones you want for fighter. Arcane Backlash suffers from a problem I see too much: The DC of X+(5*level). By ninth level spells, that's a good DC55, something no level 17 caster can handle. Make the DC match the level up pattern, with a 10+(2*level). That way, a level 9 spell has a DC of 28, still high enough to cause failure, but with a chance to succeed as well. ------------- Action points: The problem with the "monsters get action points" is that they will only be around for one encounter, thus meaning that blowing all their action points one after another is viable, making monsters significantly harder. Instead, make it to where only enemies like the BBEG or other "major bosses" have action points. Alter Treasure is just kinda silly, if you ask me, especially with wording like that. A fighter could spend an action point to change his badass sword into something else more viable to the situation. Alter Monster... where to start. I suppose you could just make a character immune to fire, deals horrendous amounts of ice damage, and when fighting, say, a blue dragon, action point that into a red dragon. By collaberating with the party to change monsters like that, and then setting up the party to face that threat and that threat only...yeh. Quad Damage: Um... doubleyou, tee, and eff? Alright, example time. Bob the level 1 sorceror is casting magic missle. Normally, this is a pathetic 1d4+1, but he spends an action point to make it 4d4+4. This is an average damage of 14, which hits instantly for no save. This can drop a fighter with 18 CON to zero. Or even better, make a fighter that focuses on increasing crit range of his weapons. Improved critical rapier has a crit range of 15-20X2, or 30%. With quad damage, that changes to a 30% chance to deal EIGHT TIMES DAMAGE! Overkill much?
Tomkin 06-22-07, 01:49 PM	Where to start... Arrow to the neck is, as has been said, ridiculous. It's basically saying, "oh, I'm the DM so I can kill you whenever I want, no save". Fickle gods is the same thing. "Grr, I am the Dungeon Master! Don't mess with me or I will cause you to prepare nothing but Deathwatch, Delay Poison and Remove Disease!" As for Arcane Backlash? Geez, if you're going to nerf spellcasters at least do it well. Statistically, a first-level wizard has a 50% chance of summoning something strong enough to easily take him out (since the demon has surprise) every single time he casts a spell. In that case, he'd be better off shooting at stuff with his crossbow. I would never play in a campaign where any of these houserules were in effect. In the hands of a vindictive DM they could ruin the game easily.
Rhialto 06-22-07, 02:06 PM	Arcane Backlash: Arcane magics bring with them dangerous forces. Whenever a caster casts an arcane spell, he risks summoning a creature of dark magic. This summons a hostile monster of a CR equal to twice the level of the spell (cantrips summon CR 1), who attacks the caster immediately after the caster's turn ends, gaining surprise. Avoiding arcane backlash requires a concentration check with a DC of 10 + 5 * spell level. With that difficulty check, the caster really has no excuse to be surprised by the demon materialising. :D
eamon 06-24-07, 04:58 AM	The problem with "arrow to the neck" is that it's unclear when it kicks in - what should the players avoid doing to avoid triggering it? If you really want to do something like this you're probably better off making coup de grace easier (for instance a move action to prepare and a standard action to execute so that guards and other can hold people at "gunpoint"), but even then... Arcane Backlash is also unmanageable. Finally, your action point rules don' make sense when it comes to roleplaying - how does it make sense to just replace one monster with another - and of the players choice??? That's just crazy. The action point rule about treasure will reduce believability, but it's a little better; you might talk it away as simplifying treasure buying and selling and making treasure lists. Frankly, the only rules useful here is the fighters-receive four skill points rule, and it's not really necessary ;-), and the grapple-is-aggressive rule (be careful though, unlike many rules which reduce randomness, this one probably doesn't benefit the party, but rather big huge grappler-monsters)
True Cavalier 06-24-07, 05:48 AM	That's good, why don't you sum that all up in one rule. Just tell your players: "I can change your spells as I like, I can kill you when I like, and I've screwed over wizards. Wanna play?". And you are giving them a bunch of action points to negate the penalties you are giving them at will? That may seem encouraging but it feels kinda stupid. I wouldn't. PS How do monsters use Alter Monster? Do they alter themselves, or the party of PCs? :P
Sarge 06-24-07, 08:56 PM	I see some of you seem to be confused a bit, so let me explain. I incorporate Arrow to the Neck because I want to run a more lethal style of game where the PCs can't just walk all over peasants and other lesser creatures. With Arrow to the neck, it's much easier to keep PCs in line and prevent them from getting too powerful. I think every DM should use some variant of Arrow to the Neck, otherwise their game can devolve into madness. After all, without the threat of death, how do you control the game? About the arcane caster hits, I don't feel like the nerfs are that bad. I mean, so what if you accidentally summon a hostile monster while casting a magic missile, it's actually a benefit because you're creating more stuff for your party to kill and that means more XP. You have to look at things from that perspective and you'll see that it's a balanced rule. Also, the Alter Treasure use of action points only works when you first find a treasure object, so you can't use it on your own equipment once you've had it a while. I don't think it'll be that big a deal, mostly it just lets people get better treasure if they don't like what's being offered and if people get too greedy, then I can just kill em off with arrow to the neck because they'd have burned all their action points on treasure and won't have any left over to prevent the arrow. As you can see, this is a balanced solution and I've thought of everything. Anyway, I hope that clears some things up for you and gives you all better perspective on where I'm coming from. Thanks for the responses, keep 'em coming!
Xaer 06-24-07, 11:03 PM	Once again, where to start... You just explained Arrow to the Neck as a copout and railroading tool. Both are bad! How to keep the characters in line? Remember that while the PC's are strong, someone will always be stronger. They're attacking innocent villagers? Send out the captain of the guard, along with a regiment of 12 other guards. Suddenly the PC's are in a battle with a guy several levels higher than them, and with several other guards to wail away at the PC's(Not to mention the mass of peasants that would be attacking the PC's as well). And what if the PC's are doing this in a very small town where noone can hurt them? News travels, and the king would hear of it. The PC's would come to regret it REAL fast when they see wanted posters around the next town they come to. The arcane casting problem doesn't arise from the idea, the idea is okay, though it'll take some persuasion with the players. The problem is the ridiculousness of the DC. The best a player can have on concentration at level 1 is a +8, and with a DC of 15, that's a 35% chance to cause the failure. Harsh, but managable. At 17th level: The best a player could get(with a tome+5 to CON, CON+6 item, and all the stat points into CON(AKA, NOT GOING TO HAPPEN)) is a +32. with the DC of 55, that is... a 0% chance. Only on a natural 20 will the spell work correctly, and that's if we... overlook that the caster put all his stat points into CON to get his concentration that high, and therefore doesn't have enough in his casting stat to cast 9th level spells. Lower the DC. Please.
Talisman 06-25-07, 12:00 AM	I see some of you seem to be confused a bit, so let me explain. I incorporate Arrow to the Neck because I want to run a more lethal style of game where the PCs can't just walk all over peasants and other lesser creatures. With Arrow to the neck, it's much easier to keep PCs in line and prevent them from getting too powerful. I think every DM should use some variant of Arrow to the Neck, otherwise their game can devolve into madness. After all, without the threat of death, how do you control the game? You mean "without the threat of arbitrary, no-rules-necessary, because-I-say-so death"? Without the threat that the GM might simply decide to murder my character with no rolls, no rules, and no reason? With storytelling. With roleplaying. With honesty, and a group that trusts me as a GM. With a group that understands the concept of "I'm the GM, and this needs to happen." With a good understanding of how to make an opponent that can kill the PCs without using arbitrary house rules. This rule totally devalues every single combat ability a character possesses. When the GM can arbitrarily decide that any successful attack can "render [a PC] dead outright," the only stat with any value is how many APs you possess, since they're the only means of defeating this power. These are the same APs you must spend when the GM arbitrarily decides to screw with your spells because he can. Again, no reasons. No rolls. Just "The gods decided they hate you. Instead of cure light wounds you get deathwatch." About the arcane caster hits, I don't feel like the nerfs are that bad. I mean, so what if you accidentally summon a hostile monster while casting a magic missile, it's actually a benefit because you're creating more stuff for your party to kill and that means more XP. You have to look at things from that perspective and you'll see that it's a balanced rule. No, it is not. It is a bad rule. A PC wizard has, at minimum, a 35% chance to summon a hostile monster. (Does the spell go off successfully, or does this nerf the spell?) 90% of the time, said caster will be casting a spell in combat, where a single extra monster (right in the caster's face, no less!) can make a big difference. ...As you can see, this is a balanced solution and I've thought of everything. That is quite possibly the most arrogant statement I've ever read here. Any GM who honestly believes that they've "thought of everything" reveals their lack of mastery of the game. If you believe this, why are you asking for advice? You can never think of everything. Never. The only house rule I like here is "fighter skill points." All the rest are either overpowered (i.e., quad damage--play a TWF character and watch the fun) or arbitrary and sadistic (arrow to the neck, fickle gods). In summary, arcane casters are screwed because every time they use their primary class feature, they run a better than 1/3 chance of conjuring a monster that gets a free attack on them. Divine casters are screwed because they get the spells they want only when the GM decides to allow them. Combat characters are screwed because anyone, anywhere, can arbitrarily kill them with a pointy stick, regardless of toughness, combat ability, etc.
shout27 06-25-07, 02:10 AM	everything but fickle gods is dross, and even that is borderline baloney. have it only affect Clerics who don't choose a particular deity and simply disallow them from spontaneously converting prepared spells to Cure spells. thus they aren't really forced to deal with religious practices, yet they don't get the extra oomph clerics under a deity possess.
Sarge 06-25-07, 03:32 PM	With a good understanding of how to make an opponent that can kill the PCs without using arbitrary house rules. Sounds like a lot of unnecessary work. If you want to kill a specific PC, why bother going through the trouble of writing up some super monster. Might as well just save yourself some trouble and just declare them dead outright. Plus, it's more fun killing 'em with a common rat than some great wyrm. This rule totally devalues every single combat ability a character possesses. When the GM can arbitrarily decide that any successful attack can "render [a PC] dead outright," the only stat with any value is how many APs you possess, since they're the only means of defeating this power. Not true. AC still prevents the attack, as does displacement and other forms of concealment. The attack must be successful to die from an arrow to the neck. That limits things considerably. It encourages PCs to use cover and concealment much more than they normally would. Also, sword and shield is a much more popular style. These are the same APs you must spend when the GM arbitrarily decides to screw with your spells because he can. Again, no reasons. No rolls. Just "The gods decided they hate you. Instead of cure light wounds you get deathwatch." It's purely flavor, the gods of the campaign world are actually like that. Sometimes they put their worshipers through hell to test them. No, it is not. It is a bad rule. A PC wizard has, at minimum, a 35% chance to summon a hostile monster. (Does the spell go off successfully, or does this nerf the spell?) 90% of the time, said caster will be casting a spell in combat, where a single extra monster (right in the caster's face, no less!) can make a big difference. But it's extra XP. It's not as though you're not being compensated for the monster appearing. It just means that you level faster and that can be a good thing. You have to be careful when you cast spells, but that's alright, because wizards can carry crossbows too (or even longbows if elven). The only house rule I like here is "fighter skill points." All the rest are either overpowered (i.e., quad damage--play a TWF character and watch the fun) or arbitrary and sadistic (arrow to the neck, fickle gods). I don't worry about people abusing quad damage, because it just means that they have fewer action points left over to stop an arrow to the neck. Everyone loses initiative sometimes and without the action point, they can't stop themselves from getting arrow'd. So sure, they can go to town on some monsters for a couple battles, but eventually they'll get killed, so everything balances out. It's just like psionic novas, eventually you run out of power points and get killed. As you can see, it's a delicate balance which may not be immediately obvious. The addition of one seemingly broken ability, quad damage, is balanced out by Arrow to the Neck. I've always felt that Arrow to the Neck should be core. All DMs use it, yet it never seems to make its way into the rulebook. I guess the designers feel that people can imply it from Rule 0, but I'd like to see it more explicitly stated in the PHB or DMG. Being that it is such an integral gaming concept, it's sad to have to spell it out in house rules. In summary, arcane casters are screwed because every time they use their primary class feature, they run a better than 1/3 chance of conjuring a monster that gets a free attack on them. Divine casters are screwed because they get the spells they want only when the GM decides to allow them. Combat characters are screwed because anyone, anywhere, can arbitrarily kill them with a pointy stick, regardless of toughness, combat ability, etc. What you seem to be saying is that everyone is equal. It sounds like my house rules are quite balanced.
True Cavalier 06-25-07, 04:26 PM	100% of people here say Arrow to the Neck is a terrible idea (to put it politely) and you still argue that it should be core? Why even put PEACH on the title, then? Just use the rules as they are. I would hate to be in your game, though.
Talisman 06-25-07, 05:03 PM	Sounds like a lot of unnecessary work. If you want to kill a specific PC, why bother going through the trouble of writing up some super monster. Might as well just save yourself some trouble and just declare them dead outright. Plus, it's more fun killing 'em with a common rat than some great wyrm. Fun for whom, may I ask? Oh right: the all-powerful GM. Generally, as a GM, I don't set out to murder a specific PC. If I want to challenge the PCs with the threat of death, I will design an opponent who is a true challenge. If the PCs roll poorly or use bad strategy, some may die. I would never play in a game where the GM explicitly reserved the right to arbitrarily murder my character with no rolls. But it's extra XP. It's not as though you're not being compensated for the monster appearing. It just means that you level faster and that can be a good thing. You have to be careful when you cast spells, but that's alright, because wizards can carry crossbows too (or even longbows if elven). The point you seem to be ignoring is that, ultimately, there is no way to avoid summoning a monster. Let's break it down: 1) Party is in combat. Wizard decides to cast a spell to help out. 2) Wizard automatically fails his check, since there's literally no way to succeed (not even a natural 20 is an auto-success on a skill check). Monster appears. (Does this nerf the spell? You don't say) 3) Monster gets a surprise attack on the wizard. You don't specify where the monster pops in, but the impression is that it's fairly close to the wizard. 4) In addition to whatever threat the party was facing, they've now got a monster gnawing on their wizard. No matter how you slice it, someone has to use a precious combat action (that's one less action aimed at the "original" bad guys) to kill the wizard-summoned monster. 5) Wizard, trying desperately to stay alive, cast a spell to kil the monster. Another monster is spawned. 6) Repeat, ad nauseum. I've always felt that Arrow to the Neck should be core. All DMs use it, yet it never seems to make its way into the rulebook. I guess the designers feel that people can imply it from Rule 0, but I'd like to see it more explicitly stated in the PHB or DMG. Being that it is such an integral gaming concept, it's sad to have to spell it out in house rules. No GM that I know (10, myself included) would even consider such a wretched rule. It is bad on so many levels that it's not even funny. What you seem to be saying is that everyone is equal. It sounds like my house rules are quite balanced. "Screwed equally" is not the same as "balanced." Your houserules arbitrarily punish the PCs for using their class abilities, which is "balanced" by giving them crazy, reality-warping abilities. Oh, and they can't use their crazy, reality-warping rules because they need to hang on to APs to keep from being arbitrarily screwed for the GM's amusement. These rules strike me as being the work of an incompetent GM. Instead of crafting interesting, challenging opponents, create an "arbitrary, instant death" rule. Instead of dealing with clerics' spell selections, they are arbitrarily punished by the very gods they serve for no apparent reason. Instead of dealing with the firepower of arcane casters, they are punished for using their primary class feature with a steadily-escalating stream of impossible-to-avoid monsters Phrases like "it's more fun killing 'em with a common rat than some great wyrm" make it clear that you are in this for your enjoyment, and the player be d*mned. D&D is, and RPGs in general are, cooperative games. The players are not there to be abused for the GM's entertainment; they are there to have fun. I also find it interesting that you put "PEACH" in the thread title, and a total of 7 people (100% of those who replied) have informed you that these rules are bad, broken, and will drive your players away. Your response is to defend your rules, not to consider the possibility that you might be mistaken. I suggest you write stories, as it is obvious that you are in gaming for your own pleasure, not the shared pleasure of a true RPG experience. I'm done here.
Puggins 06-25-07, 05:17 PM	You want a PEACH and then basically dismiss other people's judgments..... ooook.... General Rules Fighters: Fighters recieve 4 skill points per level instead of 2. This should fix any claim to the fighter being underpowered. No it doesn't. The fighter's weakness is not his lack of skills, it is his lack of ability compared to full casters at levels above 6th or so. Warlock: Banned. It's just too powerful for my tastes. No it isn't. A wizard of an equivalent level will make the warlock look stupid in an average dungeon dive. Then again, the wizards in your campaign are mind-numbingly stupid for even trying to use magic, so you've turned a specious opinion into a self-fulfilling prophecy. Grapple: There are no opposed grapple checks just an offensive check with a DC of 11 + opponent's grapple bonus. This isn't too bad in order to speed up the game by the tiniest bit. Arrow to the Neck: At any point, the DM may declare any successful attack on a PC or NPC to be lethal. This surpasses all hit point defenses and can lower the target of the attack to -1 hit points or render him dead outright. This gives the campaign a deadly feel where PCs are less likely to bully lesser NPCs because of their high hit points. With arrow to the neck, everything is potentially lethal. This is horribly, horribly ill-conceived. Any player mature enough to play a flesh-out character would shun a campaign with this sort of rubbish like the plague. It's heavy-handed, un-fun, mean-spirited and incompatible with the spirit of the game. You are taking control of a player's fate from out of the hands of the player. Even though you as the DM always have this power in theory, rarely is it so blatantly flouted as it is here. Anything that turns characters into puppets beholden to the magnanimous DM for their continued survival automatically make the game far less enjoyable. Fickle Gods: A divine spellcasters powers are fueled by fickle gods. At any time the caster prays for spells, he may not receive the ones he asked for and instead receive a random spell of the same level. The DM can invoke this rule whenever he wishes. See above. Players like to be in control of their decisions and their options. Some limited randomness, like the ToB's crusader maneuver refresh mechanic, is tolerable, but this goes beyond variation and lands in the realm of fickleness. Silly. Arcane Backlash: Arcane magics bring with them dangerous forces. Whenever a caster casts an arcane spell, he risks summoning a creature of dark magic. This summons a hostile monster of a CR equal to twice the level of the spell (cantrips summon CR 1), who attacks the caster immediately after the caster's turn ends, gaining surprise. Avoiding arcane backlash requires a concentration check with a DC of 10 + 5 * spell level. This is just plain dumb. a 3rd level wizard with a 14 constitution and a maximum concentration skill has a 55% chance of summoning a hostile MINOTAUR right next to them. Arcane magic in your world isn't a source of power, it's a trapdoor to the Darwin Awards. You wanted PEACH.... I'll give you PEACH. Wipe the board and start from scratch.
Tequila_Sunrise 06-25-07, 05:49 PM	Assuming this isn't just a troll thread: 1. I don't care one way or the other about your fighter and warlock house rules. 2. I've instituted the same grapple rule myself. It may be a good idea to halve all size mods to grapple check, so as to not make grapple monsters inescapable. 3. All your other house rules are completely dependant on how you implement them. The "chaotic neutral" character gets an arrow in the neck when he tries to kill off another party member? Fine. Allow a pit fiend to pop up in the middle of hard fight against the BBEG? I'd quit your game.
Morwen 06-25-07, 06:31 PM	I've always felt that Arrow to the Neck should be core. All DMs use it, yet it never seems to make its way into the rulebook. I guess the designers feel that people can imply it from Rule 0, but I'd like to see it more explicitly stated in the PHB or DMG. Being that it is such an integral gaming concept, it's sad to have to spell it out in house rules. I have never used anything like it, nor have I played under any DM who has. But then again, I don't attempt to kill any specific PCs, as it seems that you do. If one or more PCs die in an encounter of mine, that's just something that happens.
Morwen 06-25-07, 06:35 PM	But it's extra XP. It's not as though you're not being compensated for the monster appearing. It just means that you level faster and that can be a good thing. Except that you summon a monster that has a CR that is equal to your level approximately once for each two spells you cast. For most encounters that are equal to your CR in the first place, two spells is not enough to defeat them. And when you double the difficulty of the encounter, you'll need more spells again, and then again, and so on. It would be very difficult for a wizard in your campaign world to survive even their first encounter. And if you don't survive, you don't get any XP.