| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1SenevriAug 23, 2007 15:44:41 | Not all of these have been tested in practice, and I'd like to hear your opinion. A lot of them come from a sort of a "consensus" I've seen on these boards for what is good and what isn't, so I'm sure some of you have already tested these ideas out in gameplay... house rules House Rules: - Fighting Recklessly: When performing the Attack or Full Attack action, you may take -4 to your AC, increase melee damage by 2. This effect lasts until you declare it ends, for a minimum of 1 full round. Rules lifted from Saga System: I haven't tested all of these, yet... - Skill Focus is now +5 instead of +3. - At first level, you gain thrice twice your maximum class dice, to which you add your CON modifier, instead of the normal max die + con. - Skills are now Trained or untrained, and ranks are half your level, while trained skills are half level +5. --- Okay, below is what I though... but currently I'm testing Pathfinder skills. those look nice. skill stuff Iffy... I'd rather not have to edit the charsheet too much, and I like making the players use skills. - Putting on point in Hide or Move Silently also increases ranks in the other skill - Putting one point in Search, Spot or Listen also increases ranks in other two - Disguise and Forgery, ditto |
| #2arderkragAug 23, 2007 15:55:17 | Just curious, on the penalty to ac/bonus to damage - why make the penalty -4 when it only gives +2? I would make it one for one. |
| #3SenevriAug 23, 2007 16:11:27 | Because Defensive Fighting gives you a -4 penalty to attack for +2 to AC. Symmetry. Admittedly, a proper skill can increase that to +3, so maybe there should be a way to do that here, too. Perhaps having 5 ranks in... Jump? |
| #4jamesmay1983Aug 23, 2007 16:25:45 | Nice house rules. I might use some of them in some of my new games. Goodwork, ~JM |
| #5SenevriAug 23, 2007 16:44:21 | Nice house rules. I might use some of them in some of my new games. Thank You. |
| #6zombiegleemaxAug 23, 2007 19:24:15 | Some of these seem nice to me, but I'd really like to hear what people have to say about Reducing Die Rolls. |
| #7arderkragAug 23, 2007 22:25:58 | Because Defensive Fighting gives you a -4 penalty to attack for +2 to AC. Symmetry. Ah, Ok. As for increasing it, I'm not really sure what skill to go with. maybe use a skill trick (see Complete Scoundrel) to do that. |
| #8jutonAug 24, 2007 19:05:14 | My one problem is with the change to iterative attacks. It would seem to demand people use flurry or TWF because of so much extra damage. At higher levels this will really nerf melee characters and to be honest they really don't need a nerf. |
| #9SenevriAug 25, 2007 1:29:24 | My voice is going sore from repeating "TWF, Flurry and extra attack from Haste function as normal" --- albeit I'm not sure if having it work the way you think it does, is a bad idea. After all, TWF has been, up 'til now, been the red-headed stepchild of the fighting styles. It's not like everyone and their brother has access to flurry, either. As for a nerf -- well, certain good damage-dealing builds do certainly do less damage. However, if a player isn't a master optimizer, chances are they'll hit better and do more damage, actually. Optimization is _still_ a good idea, it's just harder to shoot yourself into the leg. Also, the better hit chance can, if you so wish, turn into more damage via power attack. Having a large critical idea also increases in importance. I AM considering increasing the to-hit bonus from having more iterative attacks to +2 per attack instead of +1 per attack. Not sure yet. |
| #10NightshadeAug 27, 2007 16:50:03 | I actually think that having Spot / Listen and Move Silently / Hide as different skills makes a lot of sense. Spot / Listen use different senses. And circumstances or injuries could temporarily or permanently alter their usage. Example, if you lose one eye in a fight and you've no cleric around, your spot would be severely hindered but your listen would not be. Likewise, if you've just been attacked by a Sonic weapon or monster, your eyes are fine but your ears are another story. Move Silently / Hide definitely involve different knowledge bases. You can be sneaky in moving around your mom's house but not know much about how to successfully hide yourself in the wilderness (camoflage), for instance. Move silently in the wilderness however is comparable to moving silently in your mom's house. But knowing how to Hide in the wilderness isn't going to be worth squat to moving silently in your mom's house. Two skills that really ought to be rolled into one are Open Lock and Disable Device. After all, a Lock IS a device. You can disable it's purpose, that is Locking, by unlocking it. Seems silly that they're two different skills. Also, why does Track use the Survival skill. Shouldn't it use the Search skill??? You are searching for tracks, right. For discrepencies in the landscape. Anyway... |
| #11fallenangel359Aug 27, 2007 23:19:33 | you could look at how d20 starwars saga does it... 1/2 level added to damage rolls... well in DND it won't be quite that effective, due to a higher powerlevel... but a 1/1 ratio wouldn't be bad |
| #12rhialtoAug 28, 2007 2:33:15 | Meh. Who cares if the GM is not giving away magic items monty haul style, when he's giving the same benefits automatically as an intrinsic feature of levelling up anyway. |
| #13Ra-TielAug 28, 2007 7:00:42 | I actually think that having Spot / Listen and Move Silently / Hide as different skills makes a lot of sense. [...] There has been lots of debate about this topic on the boards. And I must say, ruling those into one skill solves more problems than it creates. For one, does it really make that much difference if you say "you heard something over there" when making a Listen check, compared to "you think you noticed something over there" when making a "Perception" check? Often, it boils down to making twice the number of rolls necessary, as the PCs are in trouble if they fail either Hide or Move Silently. The situations where it is really necessary to differ between those two (acoustic and optical sense) are not that numerous, I think. Also, making a single "Perception" skill solves the problem of characters being unable to smell, feel, and taste. Or would you create different skills for those? ;) And there are cases in which some sort of these perceptive abilities are necessary, for example
These situations cannot be resolved with the current skills system, only at most be approximated with a basic Wis check (which also makes no sense). |
| #14SenevriAug 28, 2007 7:15:21 | What he said +1Spot / Listen use different senses. And circumstances or injuries could temporarily or permanently alter their usage. Example, if you lose one eye in a fight and you've no cleric around, your spot would be severely hindered but your listen would not be. Likewise, if you've just been attacked by a Sonic weapon or monster, your eyes are fine but your ears are another story. Well, there are some spells which specifically hinder the other, so you'd still be okay if you happen to rely on the OTHER skill. Do note, you cannot lose an eye in DnD. Move Silently / Hide definitely involve different knowledge bases. You can be sneaky in moving around your mom's house but not know much about how to successfully hide yourself in the wilderness (camoflage), for instance. Move silently in the wilderness however is comparable to moving silently in your mom's house. But knowing how to Hide in the wilderness isn't going to be worth squat to moving silently in your mom's house. ..Does anyone ever take one of these skills without taking the other? If you have 'em , you max 'em. Otherwise you don't take them. Yes, thematically they're separate, but that's not how it works in actual gameplay. you could look at how d20 starwars saga does it... 1/2 level added to damage rolls... It's not enough, unfortunately. Not even close. A fighter should be capable of doing around 100 hit points each round, to stay competitive at those levels. That averages to an increase of +5 points of damage per level... however ,that number is by no means absolute. Some fighters do about 40 points, others do 400. Some hit one opponent with that force, others share the damage upon many others. 89% of statistics are made up on the spot. Meh. They shouldn't care --- so much for magic items! What you're referring to is actually for a no-magic game, without any access to magical healing, either. Also, do try to keep in mind, the game ís built on the assumption the players have certain amount of magical items available. It's either magic items, or intrinsic stat boost - or only using custom-built monsters. |
| #15Ra-TielAug 28, 2007 7:34:50 | [...] They shouldn't care --- so much for magic items! Not necessarily. I find it really bad design, that some classes can go by without almost any equipment (most prominently druid, cleric, monk), while others are completely useless without their signature gear (tm) (almost any close combat class like fighter, barbarian, paladin, knight, etc, but to a lesser extend also the wizard in regard to his spellbook). My dream for 4e would be that all characters can get along without magic items, from level 1 to 30. However, magic items would make the game more interesting and make it a bit easier for the heroes. |
| #16davidwlDec 29, 2007 2:47:45 | A few thoughts from an armchair CO person: Saga System skills gives a big perk to: Human Paragon or Factotum + Able Learner *2 starting HP gives a big perk to: 1 level dip at the beginning for HP OR Necropolitans Reducing Die Rolls => Feats / abilities that let you attack more often become *much* more powerful. Master thrower? Speed enhancement? Etc. Since I like my skillmonkey spellcasters, I'd be more likely to play: Old Necropolitan Wizard 3/Human Paragon 17 w/ Able Learner The Necropolitan template will, at 3rd level, give the character 24 extra hit points. Human Paragon with Able Learner will give 10 extra skills as class at full rank. A few thoughts. Your house rules actually don't seem bad to me, but I think it is really hard to make rules that are unbreakable. Best, David |
| #17RelicDec 29, 2007 6:56:08 | *2 starting HP gives a big perk to: I believe the bonus hit points are for 1st-character level, not 1st-class level. The same concept as the x4 bonus to Skill Points in D&D 3.x now... you only get that x4 bonus at 1st-character level. I could be wrong but I do not think I am. |
| #18DarkRhystarDec 29, 2007 11:31:08 | A few thoughts from an armchair CO person: You cannot take more than 3 levels of any Paragon class. |
| #19davidwlDec 29, 2007 17:45:04 | You cannot take more than 3 levels of any Paragon class. I know - I mistyped ... I meant to say human Paragon 3/Wizard 17. Still, the point comes through. Best, David |
| #20DarkRhystarDec 29, 2007 17:48:26 | I know - I mistyped ... I meant to say human Paragon 3/Wizard 17. Fair enough. |
| #21SenevriDec 29, 2007 18:28:25 | Paragon + Uncanny Trickster? In any case, I have a veteran player whose full attack with haste is currently: +32/+32/+32/+32/+32/+27/+27/+22, each hit doing 2d8+2d6+20 points of damage. You can believe, it takes a while to resolve his attacks. T_T Damage would be 8x36, on average presuming all hits, or 288. As we're working with base attack, his would be simplified to: +34/+34/+34/+34, 2d8+2d6+4d6+40, or 238 avg, at a better chance of doing damage, also better over DR. Now, this is still quite a few rolls, but not as horrible as it would have been. Damage goes down a bit, admittedly. Now, without the simplification clause, we could easily just grant one roll at +39 to hit, but how would one determine damage? If we're going by base attack one option would be to give 4x15+2x10+5 as a bonus, and having the final damage rolled as 2d8+2d6+7d6+105, which is significantly lower, and reduces the importance of weapon used significantly. Under this rule, Haste would add +2 to hit and 1d6+15 to damage, instead. Hmm. This interpretation is not without it's charm, but something needs to be done about the base damage. perhaps those with 6 BAB would get to add their weapon damage twice, those with 11 would get triple weapon damage, and those with 16 would get quadruple? This would nerf having multiple attacks somewhat, as you'd get no such extra benefit from there, but would this be equal to always hitting with 2/3/4 attacks? ( single-wielding fightery type. ) |
| #22slapstick87Jan 02, 2008 16:05:46 | Any more luck with tweaking the "Reduced Die Rolls" idea? I like the idea a lot, and it's been stuck in the back of my mind the last 6 months or so. If you get it right I'd be thrilled to hear about it. - Slapstick |
| #23uamdbJan 07, 2008 10:04:04 | I have played in games where you got double max hit points at first. It did nothing to game balance. Unless you think a Goblin no longer able to kill a wizard in one hit unbalancing. I don't like the idea of having Spot/Listen and Hide/Move Silent rolled into one skill each. This is just my personal opinion. I have had characters that had the two skills at different levels. Mainly because I had to spend points into other skills to qualify for PrC's. In real life, people hear and see differently. Some people are able to sneak around but can not hide worth a darn. I know D&D is a game, and it uses rules that does not make sense in real life for simplistic sake. Reckless Fighting is just Power Attack toned down. Given the choice I would just take Power Attack. Dueling Feats, I see nothing wrong with them. |
| #24toastedamphibianJan 14, 2008 16:08:56 | Reckless Fighting is just Power Attack toned down. Given the choice I would just take Power Attack. Fighting Defensivly is just Combat Expertise toned down. Given the choice I would just take Combat Expertise. |
| #25SenevriJan 15, 2008 12:18:24 | I don't like the idea of having Spot/Listen and Hide/Move Silent rolled into one skill each. This is just my personal opinion. I have had characters that had the two skills at different levels. Mainly because I had to spend points into other skills to qualify for PrC's. In actual gameplay, there are few cases where you only use one of spot/listen. However, when you're sneaking, you ALWAYS use both, and you ALWAYS use both of spot/listen to counter that. It simplifies sneaking enough to be worth it, really. The biggest issue is character sheets, actually. T_T Reckless Fighting is just Power Attack toned down. Given the choice I would just take Power Attack. It's not a feat, and you're giving up AC instead. quite different. |
| #26SenevriJan 20, 2008 6:40:52 | *edit* Suggested changes to Reducing Damage Rolls: The bonus amount is, in fact, added to every extra hit gained via feats or class abilities. When wielding a weapon two-handed, it is instead doubled. When using a weapon single-handedly with a shield, You add 1 + 1 per 4 points of extra damage to your Shield AC. When using a single weapon, which isn't the unarmed strike, and nothing in the off-hand, you add 5ft to your movement for every 5 points of extra damage. You can add the same amount to your reflex save. --- I forgot what I originally meant to write here.... T_T |
| #27jeffgreeleyJan 20, 2008 19:20:44 | I have played in games where you got double max hit points at first. It did nothing to game balance. Unless you think a Goblin no longer able to kill a wizard in one hit unbalancing. The issue here is not whether people see or hear differently, its applied game mechanics. If you use the logic of different senses being different skills, why is search different than spot? One is looking for something, the other is noticing something out of the ordinary. In my experience people who will notice something out of the ordinary generally can do so regardless of what sense they use, they are just generally more alert. As far as hiding and moving silently, they are generally used together, even in real life. You have to stay quiet and hidden, to be effective whether you're sneaking up on someone, or trying to hide from someone. |
| #28SenevriJan 21, 2008 2:11:30 | How would you rate the following feat: One Shot, One Kill Prerequisites: Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Improved Critical on a ranged projectile weapon. Benefit If you spend a Full Action aiming, the next round as a standard action, you may fire a single arrow, which deals damage as if you'd hit with two arrows. For each extra attack, you gain another arrow's worth of damage. However, all attack roll penalties ( such as from Rapid Shot ) apply cumulatively. Normal: You could just have done two full attacks... |
| #29davidwlJan 21, 2008 19:35:57 | How would you rate the following feat: It's interesting, but probably too powerful for just 1 feat ... it gives anyone with sniper skills massive ability to take out opponents that normally would have slaughtered them. My 2 cents. Best, David |
| #30SenevriJan 22, 2008 7:34:22 | It's interesting, but probably too powerful for just 1 feat ... it gives anyone with sniper skills massive ability to take out opponents that normally would have slaughtered them. Indeed. OTOH, you just spent a round doing basically nothing - but that's not a downside when sniping, really. I'd say that if the sniper, er, snipes, the others will notice that something is up. However, this does HP damage, which has it's ups and downs. The other way to snipe involves certain spells and sufficient SA dice and Death Attack. Maybe I should increase the time needed to observe to 2 rounds. It still is a decent sniping feat, but you won't be doing it every other round. Hmm. As far as damage goes, this does significantly less than simply rapid shotting away for two rounds, so I figured it would be okay. OTOH, if someone picks this they're already a focused sniper. A prerequisite of BAB +12 might work - at those levels, things have so much HP, there's still a distinct possibility of them surviving. In general, as a global house rule I guess it's a bit too strong. Might be fine for a custom PrC capstone ability, for an example. |
| #31SenevriJan 23, 2008 15:02:00 | I just took a look at Hunter's Mercy, and One Shot, One Kill isn't appropriate at least for my next game. However, something like cumulative +1 to hit when sniping, or 4e-elf like ranged attack reroll might work as a starter. |
| #32uamdbJan 23, 2008 15:35:43 | The issue here is not whether people see or hear differently, its applied game mechanics. If you use the logic of different senses being different skills, why is search different than spot? One is looking for something, the other is noticing something out of the ordinary. In my experience people who will notice something out of the ordinary generally can do so regardless of what sense they use, they are just generally more alert. As far as hiding and moving silently, they are generally used together, even in real life. You have to stay quiet and hidden, to be effective whether you're sneaking up on someone, or trying to hide from someone. Well Search is actively looking for something, while Spot is noticing something. You make a Spot check to notice someone walking down the hall. You can make a spot check to see the key sitting on the desk in plain view. However, you make a search check to find the key underneth the stack of papers. Just because you do two things together normally does not mean you do them equally well. Someone carring a light source can walk quitely, but not hide. Also someone can make lots of noise while hiding in the shadows. Just becuase the two skills are similar and often used together does not mean the are the same skill. If you want to play that way, thats fine. I do not like it being played that way. |
| #33SenevriJan 27, 2008 10:29:31 | Indeed. In fact, Spot, Listen, Search and Sense Motive are all skills which say "Notice something's up" - and from a gamist POV, it makes little sense to keep them separate. Even mechanically, only Search is a skill I'd tie to INT instead. On the other hand, having skill ranks +stat bonus, and varying the stat used can give interesting results. I always liked that in WW's systems. "Fool someone" skills would be Forgery, Bluff, Hide, Move Silently off the top of my head. IF you use saga skills, it's a very good idea to either make training accessible, or to cut down on the skill amounts. A stupid fighter or a sorcerer gets, after all, to only pick a SINGLE trained skill. That being said, I find myself playing more and more customized games, these days: - Even using normal skills, I allow characters to gain 1-2 ranks "free" in-game if they train, up to max of the max ranks available to their class. - I easily allow swapping class features etc. to further customize a character. - I'll probably allow swapping STD actions for Swift actions. Allowing Moves to be swapped would break the game. |
| #34SenevriApr 01, 2008 13:30:12 | I've been thinking of implementing some form of action points... but which type? SRD? SAGA? 4E? *edit2* SRD, Eberron and SAGA use essentially the same rules, so... I'm trying those. Still considering 4e style, though - as it's much much simpler. More powerful too, though. Do I want a stunt mechanism? *edit* This is relevant, because I'm thinking of putting the current Epic game on hold and play low-level for a change, again... I'm thinking of starting at lv 4 with heavily variant rules. |
| #35ragoftagApr 02, 2008 21:55:52 | I just swiped the Hypertextd20 system, added a few uses I've heard of and tossed it into the mix. It works, mainly because I pass the running off onto the players. |
| #36SenevriApr 04, 2008 5:03:04 | A few uses you've heard of? What were those? |
| #37ragoftagApr 06, 2008 22:21:51 | The only one that pops to mind is a point for a natural 20 on a skill check. There were a couple of 'feat enhancers' based on feats that are campaign based. Extra breath attacks, boosts to combat styles, etc. I considered allowing a character to forgo the APs for a maxed out HD of instead of the normal set HP per level, but none of the players were interested. That probably says a lot about how heavily they use AP. I haven't had one level with an AP left! |