House rules list

Post/Author/DateTimePost
#1

stargazer_dragon

Jan 17, 2011 5:24:07		Listing my houserules to both keap track of a updated list as well as get feadback so to further fine-tune them. Many are still experimental


 Added numbers to the house rules so that they can be used to refer to the rule rather then quoting the whole rule.



--Edit 2)removed recharge rules for racial powers- added new rest house rule
Edit 3) removed daily recharge, changed encounter roll to end of turn.
--Edit 1) humans no longer get a aditional +2 floating stat- humans +2 floating stat +1 defences and bonus feat has proven multiple times to make up for a single +2 racial stat in MOST situations even being better in SOME situations. (Humans get a single +2 flaoting stats before hosue rule gave them two +2 flaoting stats wich proved unbalenced.
---edit updating the rules dropping a few off the list and adding a ** to the rules that  need testing still.


House rules


 **1)-- Racial stats: instead of getting +2 to two different racial stats you get +2 to your choice of the listed racial stats and +2 to a stat of your choice. 

 **2)--Extended rests: Players gain the benifits of a extended rest after every 4 encounters, they no longer gain any benifit from a extended rest other then being rested. 

 **3)--Recharging Encounter powers: Encounter powers become- recharge 6 rolled at the End of turn. (Power points are recharge 6 for a single power point)

 4)--Multi-class heal powers: instead of a healing power usable once per day when taking a healer multi-class feat , I allow it used 2x a day once per encounter.

 5)--Languages: I like every monster to have it's own language so I great greatly expanded the language list -the current language list serves as racial common for the listed monsters. 

 6)--AOE powers: AOE powers use a single roll for damage and attack ( 1 roll for attack, 1 roll for damage) this has made combat a lot faster and players so far have absalutaly loved it. It has further brought AOe attacks crit hit crit fail perfectly in line with all other types of attacks.

 7)--Critical fail: Crit fail attack provokes a OA (ranged crit fails have a chance to hit a near by ally)

 8)--Pasive skills:  We roll a D10 + passive score instead of a D20 for these. Implimented these becouse often players didn't like that there roll were worse then there passive making is often poinless to even activly roll. I have someone on watch ask me often if they could just use there passive score, players have so far realy liked the change

 9)--Potions: None heal potions don't use surges.  Healing potions allow the players to spend a healing surge and gain there healing surge value +1d6 per teir. May only benifit from 2 healing potions per encounter.  Regeneration and potion other then healing potion with a healing typed effect function normaly.

10)--Magic gear: Removed limit on how many magic gear powers can be usedPer day. I think essentials got rid of these officialy anyhows.

11)--Assasins Shroud: Assasins  shrouds only get removed if the PC missed on the attack, ((may still alter this further as we flesh it out)

**12)--Minions: Auto-damage effects  (that don't require a action) such as auras require a attack roll to effect minion, Attack=highest ability modifier + 1/2 lvl + weapon or impliment bonus + feat bonus like impliment focus VRS Whatever defence seams most relivent, often fortitude or reflex. player rolls once each round to effect all minions in area.

13)--Residium: Magic gear requires residium as the component, residium can be found much the same as adamantine. (rare and hard to find but possible). I also grant 50% residium refund when disenchanting, allowing players to be able to get a bit more and be able to make the gear they want. (normal gear often sells in my games for 50% of what it is worth unless theres a reason for it to sell for more or less) Residium is a rare metal as such can't normaly be purchased so is only obtained by finding it or making it.

14)--Magic gear brakage: Bad things happen when a magical iteam is broken in my game unless the proper steps have ben taken to disenchant it. When something magical breaks it explodes doing 1d10 damge per 2 lvl burst 1 per 5 lvl of the gear, so potentialy a lvl 30 magical ring that broke could do burst 6 +30 vrs reflex attack that did 15D10 magic energy damage. this happens very rarely though

15)--Small size: We removed the effects of small size on weapon. We did this becouse a small sized weapon weilder was weaker then a small sized impliment weild and weaker then a medium sized weapon weilder. It just made no sence to take something away from only weapon weilders who are small sized and not give them anythong back besides a few couple feats. (small sized feats only work when weilding a weapon that a small sized char normaly could weild)
__________________________________________________________
I look forward to further input that might help smooth these houserules out a bit.

               Side notes



  •  My battles tend to be harder then there cr do to combat tactics, I also commonly use harder battles so the few extra uses of daily and racial powers won't hurt the game much.

#2

Krusk

Jan 17, 2011 10:34:23

I liked the ones I did not mention.


3-B- Recharge encounters every round = lots of die rolls every round will bog things down.

6- Dislike this. The draw to me of AOE powers is being virtually gaurenteed of hitting at least one guy, even if my die suck that night.

7- Boooo. I shouldn't need to elaborate and doing so will off topic flame war you.

8- Passives are supposed to be something you as the DM have, and use. You shouldn't ask "hey whats your passive insight? oh ok cool. nothing seems up". It should be "As he talks, john something seems up to you, like maybe he is hiding something". 

12- Have you considered giving minions a saving throw vs auto damage? No one likes auto damage killing minions, but asking for an attack roll seems annoying for players.

14- This seems like one of those "It never happens so why bother including rules" rules.

#3

slobo777a

Jan 17, 2011 10:38:36 		Most of these house rules are convenient boosts or simplifications to the PCs, but are applied fairly evenly.

On rule 6, my group actually played our first game with AoE needing a single attack, and it does make larger area powers somewhat swingy. The whole party got hit by a blast 5 critical in one case, and very nearly TPK'd in what should have been a simple fight as a result.

As so many of the rules favour the PCs, you should take a look that encounters are still balanced and fun to play. Depending on how the group plays, you may need to adjust difficulties to prevent previously balanced encounters becoming too easy.

I kind of agree on Passive Perception, the game balance point is wrong IMO in that you already know that your passive has not worked then your chance of success is at best 50%. I reckon on dealing that by being generous with +2's for active use (either via aid another or situational bonus), rather than house-ruling the ability. In addition I often run with slightly higher DCs than suggested (to balance out my generousity for active attempts) - which I guess is a house rule, although an informal one.

#4

Crimson_Concerto

Jan 17, 2011 11:31:29
1)-- Racial stats: instead of getting +2 to two different racial stats you get +2 to your choice of the listed racial stats and +2 to a stat of your choice. (Humans get a extra floating +2)

To balance out this extra boost that you're giving to humans, I suggest that you remove their racial defense bonuses.
#5

stargazer_dragon

Jan 17, 2011 13:35:53 		rule 6 we added to save time and in the 14 encounters that have ben run since the players have absalutaly loved it. The wizard very much enjoys that he rolls just once and eather misses or hits, rolling 4+ times was slowing the fight down and driving him crazy, flavor wise it make sence a Critical hit with a AOE power means the player (or monster) managed to place it well so that it's max effect is felt by all, fluff asid since fluff is opinion sensitive. Think my players would be prety upset if I tried to remove number 6, though it does have potential bad effects so far it has ben well received, though I have concidered making it a single attack roll for the players only since the rolls against players is much less in number and aoe attacks are also more rare for monsters then for pcs that have a wizard in them not sure though but for sure players would skin me if I whent back to book on it.

Krusk Rule 8 does not replace passive skill use only assures that active skill use improves your chances, As it is if you activly search theres a 50% chance of getting worse then if you just casualy (passivly) looked around. The way I house ruled fixes this. If there passivly using the skill I use there passive score by book, However if there activly looking I have them roll a D10 and add that to there passive score meaning active use is ALways better then passive.

12) I did concider saves but the problem with saves is that it does not count the players attack bonuses nor the monsters defences, a LVl 1 minion would be just as resistent to the auto damage as a lvl 30. So we use a single roll at the begining of the round, still working on a way to better handle the issue, thought of making auto damage take 2 rounds to kil minion but that adds to much tracking and seams to ruin the powers, still tring to figure out a way to deal with minions and auto damage effectivly.

7) without the chart so far players enjoy the attack of oportunity when a monster fumbles and havn't minded suffering when they fumble after all there are normaly more monster then pc's so I fumble way more often then they do, as for unfare for ranged people yes and no ranged attacks might not suffer the attack but also don't benifit when a monster fumbles. so far players have enjoyed it but will test further when I finish the chart I am working on, This rule is GREATLY simply up to personal prefrence of players and DM's

14) This is very rare and basicaly next to never happens so not needed but the presence of it on the players mind keaps them mindfull that it can happen so on those super rare times that it does they don't get upset becouse they knew already that it was possible. Again though this is more a DM controled cinimatic thing more then anything as such realy does not need a rule, but again I feal it's better with a rule the players can grasp rather then just poof it happens and players like what why how.

3) will talk more about this after tonight when I tested it further, this way I can have better feadback from the players and talk from experience rather then speculation

#6

stargazer_dragon

Jan 17, 2011 13:40:14
I'm ambivalent on most of these, but Rule 6 is absolutely terrible. In addition to completely invalidating certain powers and feats, it'll make things extremely swingy and also overpowers all types of accuracy-boosting effects (which are already very very good).




how so, I mean you roll once and act as if you rolled that for ever attack. a miss does suck more so does a hit but feat wise a +2 against all foes or a +2 against all foes rolled seperatly is still a +2 to the attack no stronger or weaker, if a feat says against the first target or soemthing then it would still just be applied against the first target. Maybe I have overlooked soemthing could you give a more specific example of how this invalidates any powers or feats or makes acuracy boosting things more powerfull so I could adress the issue directly. Maybe I have overlooked something that has not yet come up.
#7

Crimson_Concerto

Jan 17, 2011 14:03:06
Disagreed. The state of the metagame is such that humans' floating stat and bonus feat are not appreciable benefits in the majority of cases, so they do not compensate for their lack of a second +2.

I don't think that they do, or else I would have recommended their removal instead of the removal of their racial defense bonuses.

Humans are a very special and awkward balancing case. We can assume that their bonus at-will power is about equivalent to a racial encounter power, and I'm of the opinion that their bonus trained skill is about equivalent to the racial skill bonuses granted by other races. This leaves us with the bonus feat and racial defense bonuses to consider. Further considering how races with both of their ability score bonuses going towards ability scores that modify the same defenses deal with that issue by granting a racial defense bonus, it's no stretch to conclude that the human defense bonuses are there to balance out their not getting a second ability score boost. After that, a bonus feat is about equivalent to sum of what other races get for their racial features, meaning that it isn't an appreciable benefit to the same degree that other races' combined racial features aren't appreciable benefits, which is true to an extent.

The reason that humans didn't get two ability score bonuses like other races with their initial release was that they were released with only 7 other races, meaning that the Human would then have exclusive access to 23 of the 30 possible ability score bonus combinations. This would not be good. It's not nearly that problematic anymore to give them two because they'd only have access to a single unique ability score combination, but giving them that for nothing would be a mistake. Considering that they are currently a balanced race without that bonus, it would make them significantly more powerful than other races to get it for nothing.
#8

Crimson_Concerto

Jan 17, 2011 16:01:22 		Racial feats shouldn't be taken into account when balancing racial stat blocks. Racial feats should be taken into account when balancing racial feats. If a race gets crappy feat support or feat support that's too amazing, that's certainly a balance concern, sure, but it's not the sort of balance concern that should should actually have any effect on how the race's basic racial stat block compares to other races' racial stat blocks. The correct response to crappy feat support is to add better feat support, not to make a race's racial stat block overpowered compared to other races' racial stat blocks; that just results in an overpowered racial stat block.
#9

dieffenbachj

Jan 17, 2011 16:11:58

15)--Small size: We removed the effects of small size on weapon. We did this becouse a small sized weapon weilder was weaker then a small sized impliment weild and weaker then a medium sized weapon weilder. It just made no sence to take something away from only weapon weilders who are small sized and not give them anythong back besides a few couple feats. (small sized feats only work when weilding a weapon that a small sized char normaly could weild)



An unnecessary rule. Small creatures--Halflings and Gnomes--are better than Medium creatures. They make up for their lack of awesome weapons with other abilities. Halflings are fantastic skirmishers, and have a racial power with unprecedented value to almost any class or role.

Gnomes, likewise, lack weapon damage but have astounding abilities: they get a per-encounter invisibility spell, they can make Stealth checks at the start of the encounter even if surprised, and illusions don't work against them. They may suck with weapons, but that's hardly the point; they rock at everything else.

Small creatures are good at some things, bad at others; that's true for all races. Half-orcs are amazing strikers, horrible casters; Half-elves are great diplomats and leaders, but have no strength bonus nor any racials to improve melee combat. You don't need to balance Small size any more than you need to balance half-elves or half-orcs.
#10

Krusk

Jan 17, 2011 16:15:00

12) I did concider saves but the problem with saves is that it does not count the players attack bonuses nor the monsters defences, a LVl 1 minion would be just as resistent to the auto damage as a lvl 30. So we use a single roll at the begining of the round, still working on a way to better handle the issue, thought of making auto damage take 2 rounds to kil minion but that adds to much tracking and seams to ruin the powers, still tring to figure out a way to deal with minions and auto damage effectivly.


6- I misunderstood how these worked. I thought you had players rolling a passive score with a smaller die. Not rolling the d10 and adding the passive mod. In that case that seems like a good idea.


12- keep in mind that monsters are scaled so that PC's of the approperiate level hit them 50% of the time. (Ideally) So (idealy) it should have the same frequency. Auto damage klls 50% of the time. Benefit is that 1d20 check 10+ is much faster than doing an attack roll, compare to approperiate defense. Especially when considering that these powers typically hit lots of people. (You go to one attack roll, so that could help).


Racial Stats- For what its worth, in my home games anyone can pick a single +2 to any stat. Strong Dwarves, Hardy Dwarves, Wise Dwarves whatever. If you want to play the dwarven rogue who has become weirdly archtypical, Agile Dwarves are now an option. Racial traits, feats, and paragon paths provide differences.



#11

dieffenbachj

Jan 17, 2011 16:20:13
dwarven rogue who has become weirdly archtypical



I know, right? I don't get why that's such a thing now. I never have thought of dwarves as sneaky or subtle, and yet, popular build?
#12

Crimson_Concerto

Jan 17, 2011 16:33:49
An unnecessary rule. Small creatures--Halflings and Gnomes--are better than Medium creatures.

I completely disagree. The small size weapon restrictions and limitations are an entirely unnecessary nerf, and small creatures are balanced just fine without it.

They make up for their lack of awesome weapons with other abilities.

This is not actually true, but even if it were, it would be bad design. The entire reason that racial penalties were supposed to be thrown out rhis edition is exactly because they're impossible to balance properly in a game where every race is intended to be able to make a competent member of any class. A race that balanced bonuses with penalties is a race that people will use to play characters that ignore the penalties as much as possible and make maximum use of the benefits. If it were true that the small size weapon restrictions and limitations were balanced out by their more powerful racial features, then Small size implement-users would be racially overpowered because they would be completely ignoring that penalty.

Halflings are fantastic skirmishers, and have a racial power with unprecedented value to almost any class or role.

The Halfling racial power is no more powerful than any other racial power.

Gnomes, likewise, lack weapon damage but have astounding abilities...

Gnomes would also be balanced without the small size weapon restrictions and limitations. They get more significant racial features than other races because their speed isn't as high, not because of their Small size or the weapon nerfs that come with it.

Small creatures are good at some things, bad at others; that's true for all races.

But no other race is penalized for playing against type.

Half-orcs are amazing strikers, horrible casters

Half-Orcs are perfectly acceptible casters. Swift Charge may be useless to them, and that is a design problem, sure, but it's not a penalty and isn't as problematic as a penalty.

Half-elves are great diplomats and leaders, but have no strength bonus nor any racials to improve melee combat.

Half-Elves are perfectly competent members of STR-primary melee classes. They have no penalty at all to playing them, and they don't even have the HAlf-Orc problem of not having one of their racial features apply. Not getting a bonus is not the same as getting a penalty. Besides, plenty of STR-primary melee classes appreciate the CON boost or even a CHA boost depending on what their secondary ability score is.
#13

dieffenbachj

Jan 17, 2011 16:41:39
An unnecessary rule. Small creatures--Halflings and Gnomes--are better than Medium creatures.

I completely disagree. The small size weapon restrictions and limitations are an entirely unnecessary nerf, and small creatures are balanced just fine without it.

They make up for their lack of awesome weapons with other abilities.

This is not actually true, but even if it were, it would be bad design. The entire reason that racial penalties were supposed to be thrown out rhis edition is exactly because they're impossible to balance properly in a game where every race is intended to be able to make a competent member of any class. A race that balanced bonuses with penalties is a race that people will use to play characters that ignore the penalties as much as possible and make maximum use of the benefits. If it were true that the small size weapon restrictions and limitations were balanced out by their more powerful racial features, then Small size implement-users would be racially overpowered because they would be completely ignoring that penalty.

Halflings are fantastic skirmishers, and have a racial power with unprecedented value to almost any class or role.

The Halfling racial power is no more powerful than any other racial power.

Gnomes, likewise, lack weapon damage but have astounding abilities...

Gnomes would also be balanced without the small size weapon restrictions and limitations. They get more significant racial features than other races because their speed isn't as high, not because of their Small size or the weapon nerfs that come with it.

Small creatures are good at some things, bad at others; that's true for all races.

But no other race is penalized for playing against type.

Half-orcs are amazing strikers, horrible casters

Half-Orcs are perfectly acceptible casters. Swift Charge may be useless to them, and that is a design problem, sure, but it's not a penalty and isn't as problematic as a penalty.

Half-elves are great diplomats and leaders, but have no strength bonus nor any racials to improve melee combat.

Half-Elves are perfectly competent members of STR-primary melee classes. They have no penalty at all to playing them, and they don't even have the HAlf-Orc problem of not having one of their racial features apply. Not getting a bonus is not the same as getting a penalty. Besides, plenty of STR-primary melee classes appreciate the CON boost or even a CHA boost depending on what their secondary ability score is.



So, basically the summary of your post is "Yes, I agree: they are worse, but only by a little"?

Okay... tell me: what's the difference in weapon damage between a two-handed weapon and a versatile weapon? 1d10->1d8? So... 1 point of damage on average?

1 point of damage is equal to the damage lost by not having a +2 bonus to Strength. The attack penalty is made up for when the gnome gets combat advantage for being hidden, or the halfling gets an extra attack in because he dodged the attack that would have otherwise knocked him out, or he just used his opportunity attack dodging to get into a good flank and gets a +2 bonus to attack.

So again, my point stands: you should no more buff Small creatures for having slightly worse damage than you should buff a half-elf for not having a Strength bonus.
#14

Crimson_Concerto

Jan 17, 2011 16:53:35
So, basically the summary of your post is "Yes, I agree: they are worse, but only by a little"?

No, that's not a summary of my post at all. In fact, I have no idea what you're talking about.

Okay... tell me: what's the difference in weapon damage between a two-handed weapon and a versatile weapon? 1d10->1d8? So... 1 point of damage on average?

The damage isn't the only problem. The lack of weapon options is as well.

1 point of damage is equal to the damage lost by not having a +2 bonus to Strength.

Irrelevant. Not getting a bonus isn't the same as getting a penalty. Besides, if you really want to look at it like that, then both of the small races are 2 damage points behind instead of just 1.

The attack penalty is made up for when the gnome gets combat advantage for being hidden, or the halfling gets an extra attack in because he dodged the attack that would have otherwise knocked him out, or he just used his opportunity attack dodging to get into a good flank and gets a +2 bonus to attack.

Things of the exact same nature could be said for pretty much every other racial feature or power. Dragonborn will be hitting more while they're bloodied, Tiefling will be attacking instead of falling unconscious due to fire damage, Deva can turn missed attack rolls into hits, Longtooth Shifters will deal increased damage while bloodied, Githzerai will be attacking instead of spending yet another turn dominated or stunned, etc.

So again, my point stands: you should no more buff Small creatures for having slightly worse damage than you should buff a half-elf for not having a Strength bonus.

Small creatures are balanced just fine without the small size weapon restrictions and limitations (as evidence by the fact that they are balanced just fine as implement-users). Half-Elves would not be balanced with an additional STR bonus.
#15

thespaceinvader

Jan 17, 2011 17:01:34 		The painful thing for Small characters is that they're limited in large-weapon-using classes.  You can't make a Small barbarian using any of the Two-Handed Reach Weapon powers because (other than the convoluted route of Stout-Handed Staff and Staff Expertise) there just aren't any.  Can't use any bows other than Shortbow and Hand Crossbow.  Can't use any one-handed axe other than Carrikal (which, admittedly, isn't a bad weapon).  Can't use any one-handed hammer other than Throwing Hammer.  Etc.  It's fine if you want to make a Small implement-user.  INdeed, they're pretty optimal for some of them.  ROgues, too.  But want to do something amusing and make a Gnome Barbarian?  You're pretty limited.
#16

stargazer_dragon

Jan 17, 2011 17:49:11 		simpler to just allow small races to use weapons liek any other race.  heres the best reason realy

Assume that all classes are balenced malee and impliment

Ok so why would a small char ever willingly create a barbarian if he must be weaker then any non small barbarian, you just make a rouge or impliment user and be done with it. If a small char is worse at a class then non small chars then there is a unbalence created. you say allow for a small two handed weapon, again now the barbarian is doing D8 instead of D10 D10 instead of D12 is 1 average damage a huge deal no not realy but to players they are often left with a bad tast from being nerfed.

Further As I adressed earlier I dislike racial stat bonuses as they also make classes and races linked.  To me small char should ignore there size for weapons and such, and all races should get a +2 flaoting stat. (humans only get a +2 stat but there bonus feat has proven to easaly make up for the single stat loss even allowing humans to optimise better then other races becouse of the feet if chosen right. SO races would get a +2 racial stat and a +2 flaoting stat, Human get +2 flaoting stat and free skills and feats that others don't get.

The two rules combined removes a LOT of the fealing that you goto play this race or that race if your going to play this class, ends up more that any race can be effective at any class. One of the chars I remember most from our games was a Halfling barbarian that one of my players made, he used a cleaver that was as large as he was, was compleatly perfect and most importantly the player absalutaly loved it.

Perhaps it is jst my play style I like players to have as much freedom in there char creation as I can possible give them without killing game balence.



6) for such powers that allow a second roll on a miss, I guess this would be balenced by the player having to make that second roll against a single target, so perhaps the power missed them all they could use the Elvin acuracy feat to get a aditional roll against 1 of the targets, Perhaps they hit everything but the boss they could use the power to roll again against the boss, simple enough fix. DM simply makes the powers/feats work as intended. Again concider the singel roll the same as having rolled the exact same number against every target.
#17

Crimson_Concerto

Jan 17, 2011 23:01:10
Solution there's rather simple, actually: make two-handed weapons available in Small at one die size reduction.

Sure, you could do that, but then small characters still end up with an unwarranted damage penalty. An even simpler solution is to just let small characters wield the same weapons that medium creatures do. Heck, this can even very easily be thematically justified.

Remember back in 3.5 when there were just smaller versions of every weapon at a reduced damage die? That made perfect thematic sense that small creatures would create all of the same weapons that medium creatures do, just appropriately sized for them. There's step one. Step two is to remember the small size attack bonus that small characters used to get back in 3.5 because of differences in perception. It only made sense that if smaller characters were going to get a size bonus to AC for being smaller targets that their perception differences would grant them a size bonus to hit, or else small creatures would have a much harder time hitting each other than medium size creatures would, which would be silly. To solve our problem here in 4E, turn that thematic perception difference into a damage bonus with weapons instead of an attack bonus. Ta-da. The net result is that small characters use weapons identical to those that medium characters use.
#18

thespaceinvader

Jan 18, 2011 3:08:55
The painful thing for Small characters is that they're limited in large-weapon-using classes.  You can't make a Small barbarian using any of the Two-Handed Reach Weapon powers because (other than the convoluted route of Stout-Handed Staff and Staff Expertise) there just aren't any.  Can't use any bows other than Shortbow and Hand Crossbow.  Can't use any one-handed axe other than Carrikal (which, admittedly, isn't a bad weapon).  Can't use any one-handed hammer other than Throwing Hammer.  Etc.  It's fine if you want to make a Small implement-user.  INdeed, they're pretty optimal for some of them.  ROgues, too.  But want to do something amusing and make a Gnome Barbarian?  You're pretty limited.



Solution there's rather simple, actually: make two-handed weapons available in Small at one die size reduction.


Yep, that would be a possible solution for a home game.  Personally, I'd just say 'stuff it' and let small characters use all weapons regardless.  Weapon sizes are a ridiculous abstraction in 4e anyway given that a Goliath can pick up and use a halfling's shortsword to precisely the same effect without any outside alteration, and vice versa, despite the fact that the halfling's shortsword would look like a dagger to the Goliath, and the Goliath's shortsword would look like a bastard sword to the halfling.
#19

stargazer_dragon

Jan 18, 2011 4:27:57
OK, so you are now having to individually consider all accuracy bonuses so that they aren't overpowered. Next you will have to individually consider powers that have various effects based on how you roll against different targets. After that you will have to start re-evaluating controller dailies, which are balanced around the assumption that you will almost never hit all the targets of the power. (Even if the to-hit is unaltered, the total effect does not even come close to evening out because the misses aren't happening now and thus have no effect on this fight.)

Finally note that under your rule, there is a 5% chance that you crit every target at once. I've had something approaching that good of luck one time in my entire play career (6 crits in 8 rolls), and it was sufficient to win the entire fight in one round. You will be seeing this happen somewhat routinely.

Ultimately, you have made things no less complicated, but worse.



OK, so you are now having to individually consider all accuracy bonuses so that they aren't overpowered.
 No more or less then by book. you make 1 attack roll and that roll is the resoult of your roll vrs all targets. so if you roll a 10 and get a +5 to hit with the power your to hit against all targets is 15 if for some reason you get a +1 vrs say the first target each round then against target 1 your resoult is 16 against all others it is 15 unless theres a reason for it to be difrent. To simplify just pretend you roll the exact same attack against all targets the plusses could be duifrent but the attack roll is used against all targets.

Next you will have to individually consider powers that have various effects based on how you roll against different targets.
  the only powers that come to mind are miss effect powers or powers that tell you to make multiple attack rolls against the target. if the power tells you to make multiple rolls you would still make mulriple rolls against the targets taht need more rolls for whatever reason. if theres a miss effect it still effects all targets on a miss so is just as effective. I realy think your overcomplicating a very very simple rule. but maybe I am still missing soemthing

Even if the to-hit is unaltered, the total effect does not even come close to evening out because the misses aren't happening now and thus have no effect on this fight.)
Assume daily X has a miss effect you argue this isn't balenced becosue the miss isn't hapening any more, however that would assume the attack hit and assume it hit EVERY time the power was used? one day he might hit with the power so the miss effect has no effect the next time he might miss so that power comes in handy. I still see no reason why the power is less efective theres still the same miss or hit chance it is just a more grand hit or miss. also if the targets have difrent defences then a attack might hit some and miss others still, this has already happened often, player hit the minions who were lower lvl but missed the standards just barely so the minions died and the standards took half damage.



Finally note that under your rule, there is a 5% chance that you crit every target at once
yea there is a chance that all monsters will get crited but this balences out that crits over all will happen less, what difrence does it make, say with 10 targets you roll 20 times and once during that time you crit all 10, or in the same number of rounds you roll 200 times and still score a crit against every target just not int he same round.  critting them all at once has a suden impact yes But it is still balenced, more targets potentialy crited at once compared to more rolls each one potentialy a crit,

Think of it this way, 20 round of attack against 20 targets.
Book way you crit 1 time per round
My way you crit everything once soemtime in those 20 rounds.

Again no matter how I spin it, I can't see this as terribly unbalenceing, in fact it brings the AOE powers in line with crit chance of non AOE people making it more balenced

Ultimately, you have made things no less complicated, but worse.
 Again after using this rule for a while now I greatly disagree it has made things a LOT simpler. It has greatly reduced the time combat takes (with a wizards/swordmage hybrid semi focused on AOE) we have a lot of AOE attacks made, and I use a lot of minions (I love them to fill the combat make it feal more grand and make the controler feal very usefull consistently) I mean now he rolls once adds his bonuses and a few seconds later I know who all was hit and who was missed, any single target effecting plus or minuses are very easaly calculated and in seconds all targets are tallied where before he would still have ben rolling attck rolls. seriously, it realy is faster and simpler as long as you don't over complicate a simple thing.

Again the only feats /powers that I have found to be more effective are ones that have a effect only when a AOE power misses all targets, but before these feats were garbage now there prety usefull since it is much more comon to miss all targets. so even this side effect so far has ben more of a improvment then a unbalenceing effect.
Curently players are only part way into lvl 5 maybe after they get into lvl 11+ I will notice further complications
#20

stargazer_dragon

Jan 18, 2011 4:47:29 		So I tried out recharging powers, tonight. The recharging daily power I found was kinda a pain though recharging encounter powers was kinda cool though adds a bit of power to the group, over all though I think I like it and is easier to track then if it recharged after x rounds ro soemthing. though we did swap it to the end of the players turn, Found that the player would roll saves power rechares and junk at the end of there turn and while doing this the next person was walredy starting there turn. At the beginning of the turn it slowed the players turn a bit or just got forgoten.

So over all going to rethink daily power recharges but will test encounter powe rrecharging a bit more as I like anything that keaps the player form having nothing but at wills to use.

might just say screw it and change extended rest so that it happenes during the second milestone reguardless