Obtuse Old School Rules Updated / Converted to PFRPG


Conversions

1 to 50 of 104 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Disclaimer: I don’t actually use any of these, but I always thought it would be fun to see them make a comeback.

Do you remember some of those horribly obtuse rules from earlier editions that nobody used? Well, here they are again for Pathfinder! Feel free to comment or improve, and especially add to if you can remember some more that I have forgotten.


Armor bonuses VS Weapon type

Some armor is better at deflecting some damage types than others. I have opted to present optional armor rules for both increased AC and DR. I recommend using only 1.

Example: Warrior with 10 dex is wearing chainmail. Base AC is 16. VS a longsword or an arrow, the AC increases to 18, but a mace hits on AC 16.

Padded: +1 saves vs cold effects; +1 AC vs Bludgeoning / DR 1/Slashing or Piercing
Leather and Studded Leather: +1 AC vs Piercing / DR 1/Bludgeoning or Slashing
Chain Shirt: +2 AC vs Slashing / DR 2/Bludgeoning or Piercing

Hide: +2 AC vs Piercing and Bludgeoning / DR 2/Slashing
Scale mail and Chainmail: +2 AC vs Slashing and Piercing / DR 2/Bludgeoning
Breastplate: +2 AC vs Slashing and Bludgeoning / DR 2/Piercing

Splint mail: +3 AC vs Piercing and Bludgeoning / DR 3/Slashing
Banded mail: +3 AC vs Slashing and Bludgeoning / DR 3/Piercing
Half-plate: +1 saves vs AoE damage dealing effects; +3 AC vs Slashing and Bludgeoning / DR 3/Piercing
Full plate: +2 saves vs AoE damage dealing effects;+3 AC vs Slashing and Bludgeoning / DR 3/Piercing


Weapon Types and Initiative

Some weapons are faster than others. Whenever a character attacks, lookup their weapon speed. The attack is initiated on the characters initiative, but does not land until the initiative minus weapon speed. This might allow a combatant to dodge out of the way if their initiative comes between. This does not apply to AoO. Reach weapons gain an additional weapon speed modifier, as do weapons not medium sized.

Example: Warrior A on initiative 16 swings a greatsword at a rogue. The blow does not actually land until initiative 13. If the rogue went on initiative 15 or 14, he could take a move action to end his turn outside Warrior A’s threat range, negating the attack. However, the rogue may still provoke an AoO, which would hit immediately.

Unarmed Attacks: WS +0
Light Melee Weapons: WS +1
One-Handed Melee Weapons: WS +2
Two-Handed Melee Weapons: WS +3
Reach Weapons: WS +1 for every 5’ range increment to target

Thrown Ranged Weapons: WS +1
Simple Ranged Weapons (Crossbow, sling, etc.): WS +2
Complex Ranged Weapons (Bows, etc.): WS +3

Larger Weapons: WS +1 for every size increment above medium
Smaller Weapons: WS -1 for every size increment below medium, minimum +0


Spell Casting Times and Initiative

Some spells are quicker to “cast” than others. Any spell with a casting time of 1 standard action has it’s effects go off the casters initiative minus spell casting time. The casting time of a 1 standard action spell is equal to it’s spell level. Spells with a casting time of 1 swift action, including those cast using the Quicken Spell metamagic feat, have a casting time of +0. Spells with a casting time of more than 1 standard action are unaffected by casting times. Counterspelling is a special action that has no casting time.

Example: Wizard A is casting an Ice Storm spell (4th level) on initiative 16. The spell effect will go off on initiative 12. Rogue B on initiative 15 sees the spell has been cast (DC 20 perception check?) and double-moves next to the enemy caster, reasoning that the caster would not drop the spell on his own head. Warrior B on initiative 14 sees the spell has been cast (DC 20 perception check?) and double-moves away from the combat, attempting to leave the incoming AoE. Cleric B has Dispel Magic memorized and correctly identifies the spell with a spellcraft check on initiative 13. Cleric B decides to counter-spell, which goes off immediately. If successful, the spell effect is countered. If not, the spell goes of normally on initiative 12.


Mirror, Mirror wrote:
Weapon Types and InitiativeReach Weapons: WS +1 for every 5’ range increment to target

Including whips?

Fantasy Hero does have options for weapon type vs. armor type.

Sovereign Court

Remember when one inch indoors was different then one inch outdoors? Well with exceptions to magic of course.

That was always an interesting thing to see, since it helped ranged weapons seem more properly dangerous at the longer ranges.

So outdoors your 5' becomes 15' for ranged weapons, magic is still in 5' increments outside.

That might be a bit much though...


Fun!

I have actually toyed with some of those rules myself.

Perhaps instead of modifying the AC for Weapons vs. Armor type, they gain a DR versus that type of Weapon.

(Remember Full Plate is Plate over Chain over Padding.)

I would also like to see a return of Ring Mail, Banded, etc.

Chainmail DR2 vs. Slashing.
Padded DR2 vs. Blunt

I'm working Weapon Speeds into my Silhouette ruleset, which I hope to have time to work on soon.


Morgen wrote:

Remember when one inch indoors was different then one inch outdoors? Well with exceptions to magic of course.

That was always an interesting thing to see, since it helped ranged weapons seem more properly dangerous at the longer ranges.

So outdoors your 5' becomes 15' for ranged weapons, magic is still in 5' increments outside.

That might be a bit much though...

OMG, I DO REMEMBER THAT! What a pain if you were firing down the great hall, out the door, and into the incoming barbarian hordes...


CourtFool wrote:

Including whips?

Yeah, whips too. Now we know how the Spartan jumped in and cut off the guys arm before the whip landed...


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Xaaon of Korvosa wrote:

Chainmail DR2 vs. Slashing.

Padded DR2 vs. Blunt

I like that. I may have to do the same thing. It makes different armor types have different appeal besides just AC.


What? Armor reduce damage? Sacrilege!


How about pummeling rules with a chance to knock your opponent unconscious?

Or dealing nonlethal damage to dragons has a chance to subdue them (because of their pride)?

Or psionic rules where a 1st level character can turn a creature into a slave ("Robot") via Id Insinuation?


Ah. The combat matrix. I should see if I can find that and summarize how it worked (or somehow turn it into some sort of algorithmic progression.) Basically, not only did certain weapons work better against certain armors, certain attack bonuses (well, essentially) worked better against certain AC totals. If I can find my 1e AD&D Player's Handbook somewhere...


hogarth wrote:
How about pummeling rules with a chance to knock your opponent unconscious?

Ooh, maybe a fort save DC 5+nonlethal damage taken that round?

hogarth wrote:
Or psionic rules where a 1st level character can turn a creature into a slave ("Robot") via Id Insinuation?

I prefer the 3rd level psion with disintegrate (Morgan actually had that build...)


Racial Class Level Restrictions! Yay!


CourtFool wrote:
Racial Class Level Restrictions! Yay!

Hmm...

No class level restriction for your favored class (or classes), but otherwise capped?

Except for humans, of course, who HAVE no level caps!

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Morgen wrote:
Remember when one inch indoors was different then one inch outdoors? Well with exceptions to magic of course.
Mirror, Mirror wrote:
OMG, I DO REMEMBER THAT! What a pain if you were firing down the great hall, out the door, and into the incoming barbarian hordes...

Well, there were valid reasons for that, if you started with outdoor-scale combat rules and wanted to use miniatures in the narrow confines of an underground complex.

And, as an archer in real life, I'll concur with the rules. Archery is a question of parabolic trajectories. The maximum distance an arrow will travel under a 10-foot ceiling doesn't compare with regular ranges outside.


Here's my favorite: any caster taking even 1 point of damage while casting loses the spell. No save; no Concentration check.


Chris Mortika wrote:
And, as an archer in real life, I'll concur with the rules. Archery is a question of parabolic trajectories. The maximum distance an arrow will travel under a 10-foot ceiling doesn't compare with regular ranges outside.

I hear a motion for 1/3 range increments indoors for parabolic trajectory weapons (i.e. Bows). Do I hear a second?


Kirth Gersen wrote:
Here's my favorite: any caster taking even 1 point of damage while casting loses the spell. No save; no Concentration check.

That did seem to slow the munchkins down a bit.


Kirth Gersen wrote:
Here's my favorite: any caster taking even 1 point of damage while casting loses the spell. No save; no Concentration check.

Ooh, the pain, I remember you so well. Actually, my DM kept that rule till 3.5, so the suffering was long indeed...


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Mirror, Mirror wrote:
I hear a motion for 1/3 range increments indoors for parabolic trajectory weapons (i.e. Bows). Do I hear a second?

So seconded!


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
hogarth wrote:
How about pummeling rules with a chance to knock your opponent unconscious?
Mirror, Mirror wrote:
Ooh, maybe a fort save DC 5+nonlethal damage taken that round?

Love it.


Monks with a flat % chance to cripple the opponent on every successful unarmed strike.


I rather liked the flat % chance of assassinating a target if you were, in fact, an assassin. Set up the right conditions, roll your d% and the target was either dead or takes massive backstab damage.

Oh, that reminds me. Facing rules. Complicated but they make a lot of sense. Easy to deal with using minis too.


Assassins without spells. Wait. Did I just go there?


Gem value upgrades.

It's in the 1st edition DM's guide (which isn't in front of me).

Basically, find a gem, roll a d20. On a 1, it goes down in value by one level and you roll again. On a 20, it goes up in value by one level and you roll again. Different results for anything in the middle (lose half the value, etc).

A 50 gp bloodstone could become a 10,000 gp bloodstone if someone was on a roll (and I do seem to remember hearing a story of a Gygax player who ended up with a million-gp gem due to this rule.


Mirror, Mirror wrote:
CourtFool wrote:
Racial Class Level Restrictions! Yay!

Hmm...

No class level restriction for your favored class (or classes), but otherwise capped?

Except for humans, of course, who HAVE no level caps!

Yes, they do - for monks, druids and bards. While we are at that: anyone for prestige bards needing 5-8 fighter levels and 6-9 thief levels before becoming a bard?

CHA 17 is minimum for paladins.

And no more non-human paladins, or monks. Dwarven Wizards? Don´t even think about it.

Barbarians double their CON hp bonus (I dimly recall a wild elf barbarian I played once (and only once) with 20 hp on level 1...)

Stefan


Different xp progressions for each class!


Kirth Gersen wrote:
Different xp progressions for each class!

3d6 'down the line'


What? No potion miscibility table?

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber
Eric Swanson wrote:
What? No potion miscibility table?

WotC beat you to the punch, April Fools 2006.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dnd/20060401b


Stebehil wrote:
Yes, they do - for monks, druids and bards. While we are at that: anyone for prestige bards needing 5-8 fighter levels and 6-9 thief levels before becoming a bard?

How could I forget!! Bard, the first PrC, back before we even knew what PrC meant...

Stebehil wrote:
Barbarians double their CON hp bonus (I dimly recall a wild elf barbarian I played once (and only once) with 20 hp on level 1...)

This may actually BE a good rage power for temporary hp or something (gain x2 modified con bonus for the duration of the rage)


New one, an old fav, I'm sure...

Dual Class

A character can move entirely from one class to another, forever forsaking progress in the original class. The character retains all his original abilities and gains the abilities of the new class as he levels, as if the character were gestalt. This progress ends when the character reaches his old level, and from then on progresses only in the new class.

A dual class character resets their XP total to zero, but they continue to receive XP as if they were their previous level. The character now gains levels in their new class normally, except they now use a level progression chart one step slower than they started (fast to medium, medium to slow). Once the new levels exceed the old levels, future XP is awarded based on the new levels only, but the progression chart remains the new one. The favored class of the character does not change.

A character cannot dual class if they are on the slow progression chart.


What about the old 1e AD&D ability score tables that set your race and class?

Oh, darn, my Strength is too high to be a halfling. Cross that one off the list.

Of course, that would mean that, as in 1e games where those tables were used, most characters would end up being half-orc fighters because all other races and classes were eliminated by bad rolls. :)

Sovereign Court

Hmmmm, I wonder how the old 1st/2nd edition style of multi-classing would work...

Fighter 1/Rogue 1...

Or the variable tables of experience for the classes. That did help to balance things out a little bit in terms of magic.


Didn't you loose XP for an adventure if you used any of your previous class' abilities?


Morgen wrote:
Hmmmm, I wonder how the old 1st/2nd edition style of multi-classing would work...

Gestalt rules, split the XP between the classes?

Morgen wrote:
Or the variable tables of experience for the classes. That did help to balance things out a little bit in terms of magic.

IIRC, Fighters were fast until 9th, Wizards until 12th, and Rogues until 15th or so. I suppose something could be worked out where the party starts at medium progression, and at a certain point changes? Or just all primary casters use an xp chart 1 step slower than the non-casters? Maybe full casters use slow, partial use med, and non casters use fast? I'm really not sure how to best represent that.

CourtFool wrote:
Didn't you loose XP for an adventure if you used any of your previous class' abilities?

Yup, until your new class levels met or exceeded your old one. Then you got to use all your abilities freely.


Mirror, Mirror wrote:
Morgen wrote:
Hmmmm, I wonder how the old 1st/2nd edition style of multi-classing would work...
Gestalt rules, split the XP between the classes?

I wondered about the same thing. You could actually use the rules to do that, I think. With the new xp progression, the character would level in both classes at the same time. The character would use the better of BAB and save progressions, but would get the average of the hp of both classes - which is not too bad, given that wizards have d6 with the pathfinder rules. Not quite gestalt rules, but close. It might even be somewhat balanced. A quick glance at the PF xp tables gives the impression that such a character would be two levels behind the other soon, and stay there for the most part. He would be a bit more powerful at low levels, but be lagging behind later. Hmmm... could be worth testing.

Stefan

Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

Bouncing lightning bolts and fireballs that fill an ever larger volume (20 ft radius + 5 ft/2 caster levels?) are a must.

It seemed like fireball rarely got used at our table because it killed the PCs as often as the monsters at higher levels...


Sebastian wrote:

Bouncing lightning bolts and fireballs that fill an ever larger volume (20 ft radius + 5 ft/2 caster levels?) are a must.

I don't know about ever increasing volume, but I DO remember that fireball used to create a static volume of fire, that would proceed to fill whatever area it would fit in. Something like 33,500 cubic feet of fire, IIRC.

And bouncing lightning bolts don't work as well with the new spell description, but if someone has an idea, please post it!


I think that the 1e Elf class should be Pathfinder-ized, for all the people who want a 'gish' class. It would just have to be understood that all elves are gishes, and all gishes are elves.


If i wanted to play a (Red box set D&D) elf: I would just play a Bard.


Dilvish the Danged wrote:
I think that the 1e Elf class should be Pathfinder-ized, for all the people who want a 'gish' class. It would just have to be understood that all elves are gishes, and all gishes are elves.

BLASPHEMY!!! All Gishes are Giths ;)


kyrt-ryder wrote:
Dilvish the Danged wrote:
I think that the 1e Elf class should be Pathfinder-ized, for all the people who want a 'gish' class. It would just have to be understood that all elves are gishes, and all gishes are elves.
BLASPHEMY!!! All Gishes are Giths ;)

Actually, they are from the ODnD, Basic set. So the elf is the original fighter/mage...errr...gish


Eric Swanson wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Dilvish the Danged wrote:
I think that the 1e Elf class should be Pathfinder-ized, for all the people who want a 'gish' class. It would just have to be understood that all elves are gishes, and all gishes are elves.
BLASPHEMY!!! All Gishes are Giths ;)
Actually, they are from the ODnD, Basic set. So the elf is the original fighter/mage...errr...gish

I was joking about the title, not the Fighter/Mage character concept.


kyrt-ryder wrote:
Eric Swanson wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Dilvish the Danged wrote:
I think that the 1e Elf class should be Pathfinder-ized, for all the people who want a 'gish' class. It would just have to be understood that all elves are gishes, and all gishes are elves.
BLASPHEMY!!! All Gishes are Giths ;)
Actually, they are from the ODnD, Basic set. So the elf is the original fighter/mage...errr...gish
I was joking about the title, not the Fighter/Mage character concept.

Ooops, guess I need to pay attention to what was posted. Time for remedial classes, lol.

Sovereign Court

Maybe we could reformat the books so that there was a nice thick DMG and the players had almost no information in their handbook, even to the point where the DMG tells the players to keep their noses out of the rulebook!


CourtFool wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Here's my favorite: any caster taking even 1 point of damage while casting loses the spell. No save; no Concentration check.
That did seem to slow the munchkins down a bit.

I also liked how spells took more than 1 round to cast. Wizards spells were more powerful because they couldn't always get those powerful spells off.


Sebastian wrote:

Bouncing lightning bolts and fireballs that fill an ever larger volume (20 ft radius + 5 ft/2 caster levels?) are a must.

It seemed like fireball rarely got used at our table because it killed the PCs as often as the monsters at higher levels...

Lightning Bolts especially - if you got caught by a rebounding lightning bolt, you had to save twice, and only if both saves succeeded, you took half damage. IIRC, you could set the LBs starting point however you wanted, and if you caught your enemies between two walls, they might have to make multiple saves.

Stefan

1 to 50 of 104 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Conversions / Obtuse Old School Rules Updated / Converted to PFRPG All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.