Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 canuk Oct 28, 2009 18:52:39	So our Dm has these 2 house rules that I'm not sure about. One if we roll 3 twenties it's instant kill Two we use a mana system instead of preparing spells. I'm just wondering what you guys think of these rules
#2 greygrendel Oct 28, 2009 18:54:58	1)  20s auto hit and possibly critical.  That should be enough.  Otherwise that time's going to come when you kill Orcus with one hit, or a goblin minion kills your level 29 killing machine with one lucky roll. 2)  How exactly does that equate to At-Will, Encounter, Daily powers or is this not a 4E campaign.
#3 canuk Oct 28, 2009 18:55:56	Oh yeah sorry it's 3.5
#4 erato Oct 28, 2009 20:18:38	The first rule introduces more randomness to the game. Randomness applied to both PCs and NPCs will almost always work against the PCs, because the PCs are the ones who're supposed to survive the battles - if they have a sudden stroke of luck, it just means they kill a monster/NPC faster than they would otherwise, while an NPC getting lucky can mean the permanent (and very un-climatic) death of a PC, which forces the player to make a new character. If the rule is only used for PCs, it's not inherently problematic, but it depends on your taste. For some, killing an enemy through sheer unbelievable luck is great (one of the groups I play in still sometimes talk about the time the paladin rolled 4 20s and killed a dragon in one round), but for others, resolving a big battle like that is a huge anti-climax. It all depends on your personal taste. As for the mana system, I personally prefer it over vancian casting, but it can make casters (even more) overpowered. Without any information about which system the DM is using, I can't say if this will be the case here.
#5 Philip Oct 28, 2009 21:37:46	Rolling 3 20's in a row with balanced dice will happen 1/8000, but 1/400 on crits since you already rolled the first 20.  So it is unlikely to happen.  Though it will probably happen more against pc's, since there are usually more enemy attacks.
#6 Krusk Oct 28, 2009 23:26:31	1- Would annoy me greatly. Probably not enough to make me walk, but would cause me to ask about other rules, and consider the rule strike 1. 2- See Psionics.
#7 i_roll_ones Oct 29, 2009 0:11:41	1. 3 twenties is going to be a bit rare. I wouldn't assume it'll be an issue, but it seems like an odd house rule. I would also be wary if NPCs could do it, mostly because natural 20 kill rules always slays a beloved character, because Murphey is a vengeful god full of hate. 2. What is this system like, and what casters is he allowing? I am assuming you don't prepare spells, either, so I wonder how this will be balanced in terms of Sorcerer vs. Wizards etc.
#8 Damon_Tor Oct 29, 2009 1:57:57	The first rule introduces more randomness to the game. Randomness applied to both PCs and NPCs will almost always work against the PCs, because the PCs are the ones who're supposed to survive the battles - if they have a sudden stroke of luck, it just means they kill a monster/NPC faster than they would otherwise, while an NPC getting lucky can mean the permanent (and very un-climatic) death of a PC, which forces the player to make a new character. Right. To make a real-world comparison, that stringray rolled triple 20's against Steve Irwin.  Everyone is like "???"
#9 slobo777a Oct 29, 2009 5:17:46	A 1-in-8000 chance is not really worth the ink/column space to argue over. It might happen once during an entire campaign. Many much higher chances of instant death or other bad things can happen in a 3.5 game with more frequency. Mana systems vary. Some add some nice flavour to spellcasting. Typically though they make spellcasters more flexible, which is not an area that 3.5E needs priority work on.
#10 johnnii Oct 29, 2009 6:01:41	Cool rules with the Mana system. I wanted to implement one myself when I was playing 3.5 back in the day, but it was quite a hassle to rework so many Classes. I'm quite curious how exactly he has done it, and especially how he has balanced the Wizard against the Sorcerer.
#11 _jayne_cobb_ Oct 29, 2009 8:30:08	The "three 20's = death" rule is one I've seen before. It is a terrible rule, and one I've luckily not played under, but it is not unique to your situation. Mana systems are not inherently bad, but the D&D rules are not built around them. Such a system takes a great deal of time to balance correctly and, but adding increased versatility to casters, further widens the melee/magic power gap. My feeling is that these rules seemed like a good idea to the DM but he's not fully considered the ramifications not adequately playtested them.
#12 MrCustomer Oct 29, 2009 13:47:33	The first rule is on page 28 of the DMG as a variant rule. It also states that such rules makes combat more deadly for the PCs, "Since the PCs win most fights, a rule that makes combat more random hurts the PCs more then it hurts their enemies" I would suggest you ask the DM to reread this rule and take note of the fact, that while it can be fun and climatic to score the instant kill, that it ultimately will work against the players. As a side note, most DMs that I have seen using this system ignore it when it applies to the PCs facing an instant death for just this reason, to prevent a rather unclimatic death of the PCs. The second rule is rather complicated, and it would require an extensive rewrite of the system. There are many issues that would crop up. For starters the advantage that Sorcerers have, being able to cast spontaneously. Does his system illiminate that advantage (ie allow wizards to spontaneously cast their spells or memmed spells)? this would also make wizards more powerful as they learn spells earlier then Sorcerers and learn more spells then Sorcerers. Point out to the DM that such changes makes casters more powerful then they already are, and that they already are too powerful.
#13 nikitadarkstar Oct 29, 2009 14:49:14	1 = I wouldn't have a problem with if it only applied to PC's.   2 = I'm in a campiagn with a mana system myself, as a wizard and I have to say I love it (ok so who dons't love pretty nasty power?), but yes I do also agree that wizards and sorcerors become quite powerful with mana instead of the normal system, but it balances out by if you miss your DC check with 10 or less (and pass a control check) you take double mana drain (losing 1/3rd of your mana points, which only regenerates during sleep, to one messed up spell is nasty) or if you mess up really bad the spell blows up in your face.   But I agree it really does depend on how your mana system works, it can be horribly overpowered if done in the wrong way, or much more fun to play with if done the right way.
#14 canuk Oct 29, 2009 18:28:57	About the triple twenty rule it has happend around 2 or 3 times in so far 10 missions
#15 LordOfWeasels Oct 29, 2009 22:43:58	About the triple twenty rule it has happend around 2 or 3 times in so far 10 missions That's about right. 1/8000 per roll, but *how many* attack rolls per combat?  Assume 100 attack rolls in a combat, and triple-20 is 1.3% to come up, per combat.  5 Combats per "day",and you've got a 7.1% chance of it coming up per Extended Rest.  Consider a level as three "Extended Rests" worth, or 15 combats of 100 attack rolls each, and you've got a 19% chance of it coming up per level. 1/5 levels, a freak roll kills an enemy instantly, or, far more likely, kills a PC instantly. Now, consider 10 adventures, 10 levels, and you get a mere 15% chance of it *never* happening.  The odds of it happening 3 times is over 60%. This is an event that will *always* be uninteresting and anticlimatic, which your GM has, assuming truly random, truly fair dice, virtually guaranteed will come up at least once a Tier, and all of this is assuming *only* 100 attack rolls per combat which is a very low number when you combine 5 PCs and a large set of possible monsters. This rule sucks.  It has no redeeming features and it's sole effect is to kill a combatant, most often a PC, in a boring way.  You should not use it and your GM is bad at math *and* gaming if he thinks it's interesting or fun.
#16 MrCustomer Oct 30, 2009 12:04:54	My current group plays with the triple 20s rule, but we have agreed that while it poses a risk, the group likes the fun factor it adds to combat, we also use the Critical Fumble rule when natural 1s are rolled with various results (iving attacks of opportunity to the enemy, dropping weapons, hitting an ally with a ranged weapon or having a weapon fail catastrophically such as a bow having it's string snap) We also use the Critical Hit Deck by gamemastery, which adds a fun ellement to it. I opt out of instant killing the PCs with the triple 20s though, and instead just have them suffer hordes of damage, maximum double damage ussually or some other effect, such as knocking them out 1d6 rounds. I really just do whatever occurs to me at the time, which the players seem to like, even when I am particularly evil.
#17 GMforPowergamers Oct 30, 2009 16:58:38	I have played under tripple 20 rules before...I HATE THEM... NEVER AGIAN!!!!!   I died at level 12 in 3.5 when in the first round of combat 1 of 12 archers that fired on us (Needing 19's to hit me) got lucky... I have also seen the tarassque taken down, and once a god by these rules...
#18 copycatzero Oct 31, 2009 17:28:31	When we were in 3.*, my group tacitly played under the "three 20s = instant death" house rule from the DMG, but it only came up once, when one of the members rolled three 20s and instant-killed one of the minor mooks... that only had 1 hp left anyways.  Other than that, it never had an impact on our game, but I do acknowledge that, in general, it really favors the monsters more than the PCs. I'd swear there was a spell-point/mana system variant rule for 3.*... I know there was one for 2nd (the Spells & Powers rulebook), but I swear they put it in there for the Unearthed Arcana remake as well. ...loading... loading... loading... Ah, here it is.  Page 153 of Unearthed Arcana.  You still prepare spells, in that it makes up your "Spells Known" list, but you cast from spell points, much like psionic classes use power points.
#19 darkspartan Nov 04, 2009 18:44:26	I've used the triple-20 rule in the past, and it's only ever killed one PC, at the hands of a Goblin that had already had a critical hit applied to it, and was down to 1hp. The person that'd stuck it had buried his weapon in the goblin's chest, and it was played out as the goblin had pulled the weapon (a longsword) out of it's body, and then used it to make a final attack on the Paladin, cleaving her head from her shoulders before itself dying from shock and blood loss.  This was considered a suitably Epic death for the PC in question ( I did try and get out of it, and the second two twenties were rolled in full view of the Players). That character was immortalized in the Game Store where the incident occurred, and the Player made a new character on the spot, and went on to be a major force in the campaign. That Goblin gets well spoken of, to, by the way. It was even Named by the people at the table, and became a sort of mascot for the group after that, as the symbol of Monster Dedication (They had invaded *his* home after all...) Mind you, that was in 3.0... Haven't used that rule in many years.
#20 chaosturtle Nov 06, 2009 1:35:32	I've used the triple 20 rule for about ten years now, and most of my campaigns have the pcs fighting large to huge group of enemies, I can remember it happening two...possibly three times one of which was on an inanimate object, the other on some guy that would have died anyway...and if there was a third it was also on an npc.  I've seen double 20's a few more times, but I doubt in the double digits.   Mana system...really, it depends on how well it's done.  I've tossed the idea around in my head a few times, but never actually made it.  One of the reasons I like the Psion is the PP aspect, and I always thought it'd make more sense for Sorc's/other "innate" caster types have more of a mana pool system.  In my own 100% quasi d20 modern homebrew game the powers of the pcs are based basically on a mix of a mana/pp system, using a power has a base cost then can be augmented further.
#21 RPJesus Nov 07, 2009 0:35:49	2- See Psionics. This.
#22 Ramius613 Nov 13, 2009 2:02:53	No comment on the first rule, since in 3.5 we died enough as it was (eliminated death penalty, and had a rod of resurrection), and our DM had a crit rolling 20. The second rule however, we have never (2e, 3.0, 3.5), until 4e played with memorizing spells.  Our thought was, with the numerous spells at his advantage, what wizard is going to waste a slot to do damage for the off chance that he will need to cast Scry.  Our system is as follows: Wizards & Clerics would have spells slots equal to the number of spells that they could cast per day. They could cast any spell that they knew of that level or lower at any time. With spontaneous casters, like sorcerers and favored souls,  they had a spell point pool.  You had spell points equal to the spells per day times their level. So if a PC had 5 1sts, 3 2nd, and 1 3rd, he had 14 spell points [5 + (2*3) + (1*3) = 14]  that he could use to cast however he wanted.  Yes he could throw 4 fireballs in one encounter, but then he was down to 2 sp for the rest of the day.  I was doing 125 points in magic missile damage every round (Maximized, empowered, twin spell, then a quickened maximized with my haste action) in 3.0 before haste changed it to only 1 spell per turn. Our system was very over powered. Ramius
#23 darksavior Nov 15, 2009 6:19:49	A 1-in-8000 chance is not really worth the ink/column space to argue over. It might happen once during an entire campaign. Many much higher chances of instant death or other bad things can happen in a 3.5 game with more frequency. Mana systems vary. Some add some nice flavour to spellcasting. Typically though they make spellcasters more flexible, which is not an area that 3.5E needs priority work on.   I agree with this entirely regarding the triple 20 rule, really not worth arguing about its so unlikely to happen, but might be spectacular or inconsequential when it does.  There are much more likely things that will kill you off in 3.5 long before this will.  As for him looking for an alternative to using vancian magic, please see 4th Edition for further details.  Not sure if you heard, it killed that sacred cow.  Just fyi.