Makes me wonder if maybe yanking the d20 out and replacing it with 2d6 in some areas might not be a good idea. (Obviously numbers will need adjustment to compensate.)Use 3d6, no need to adjust... Full rules here.
I prefer 2d10 if players express dissatisfaction with the linear nature of the d20.
I prefer 2d10 if players express dissatisfaction with the linear nature of the d20.Makes me wonder if maybe yanking the d20 out and replacing it with 2d6 in some areas might not be a good idea. (Obviously numbers will need adjustment to compensate.)Use 3d6, no need to adjust... Full rules here.
Much flatter bell curve. I can see that.
I've played HERO system for almost 30 years - I am intimately familiar with the odds frequency of the 3d6 bell curve. It's almost instinct with me.
Someone linked an alternate 2d20 system at one point and now I've lost the link. Does anyone know to which page I'm referring?
I do prefer 3d6 over d20 in fact I even took the bell curve for my game system, though it uses a variety of dice sizes based on stats, but still, it maintains the bell curve.
3D6 unadjusted does not work for combat because acidic burst only happens on a crit. 2D10 does work for this. Unfortunately, I prefer to not eliminate dice types.
Sometimes, to speed combat, a player or GM will put the hit and damage dice in the same hand when they roll. This "Fist full of dice" method speeds things up. The crit. dice are all ready laid out and only require scooping them up and rolling them.
3D6 unadjusted does not work for combat because acidic burst only happens on a crit. 2D10 does work for this. Unfortunately, I prefer to not eliminate dice types.
Sometimes, to speed combat, a player or GM will put the hit and damage dice in the same hand when they roll. This "Fist full of dice" method speeds things up. The crit. dice are all ready laid out and only require scooping them up and rolling them.
You must have missed the part bout the new crit ranges in the rules I linked... Threat range 20 would be 16-18, that happens 4.6% of the time, so not much of a decrease.
But yeah I can see your point about the Fist full of dice, been known to roll to hit and damage at the same time my self.
You could still use 3d6 for skills while keeping 1d20 for combat... Just a thought.
I've toyed with having sorcerers cast all their spells like spell-like abilities. This is always seemed to fit better with the flavor of the sorcerer. I never understood why they needed rest or had to perform the other components if their power was, in fact, innate to their blood or force of persona. It'd also make them markedly different from wizards rather than just "spontaneous and no spell book." It'd require SPAs to work a little special for them in that they just get a number of SPA slots they can then fill at the moment of casting and allowing metamagic to work with SPAs for that class.
How do you make this work with current classes or do you eliminate some in favour of others? I really want to understand how you made this work.I remember when this thread was about house rules--ah, those were the days.Getting back on thread then...
MY House RulesAll magic users are spontaneous casters.
No adjustments needed to any classes.
Each class has its own unique abilities that still distinguish them from each other.which classes do you think would need alteration?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another house rule I implemented a while back, though I bet some other people might have mentioned it or use something similar.
Taking ranks in linguistics does not automatically grant you knowledge of a language. Instead, the process of learning a language is divided into 3 steps:
1) Step one – basic. Upon taking 1 rank the player learns enough of the language to convey basic needs, simple requests and understand slowed speech, basic grammar. Generally, the PC can speak only speak 3-4 word sentences, without blabbering nonsense. The player needs to roll Linguistics DC 15 to get information out of a casual conversation or convey something more complex than “I am hungry”.
2) Step two – intermediate. The player can take 10 on most language checks to speak or read, but complex, fast and special-themed conversations, or conversation during combat still would require a roll to speak or understand the language.
3) Step three – advanced. The Player adds the language into his languages known.
The player can begin learning a new language before finishing learning the last one, but they still need to spend full 3 ranks on a language to learn it. Exception: the linguistics rank spent on level 1, before the adventure starts, provides a full language known.
IRL learning languages takes a lot of time, so this is a good alternative, IMHO. Players make use of language spells and skill moth often.
I give everyone a mulligan a night. One free reroll on any die roll they want, no questions. I do this for those moments where players are ready to do something awesome but tend to whiff on their rolls, it allows them to save face, reroll for lethal damage, or even just pass that skill check they're really invested in.
Man if I had a nickel for every time I was like "I'm going to try to do <Insert stupid but awesome sounding action here>" and then whiffed I'd have a decent sum.
I like that rule.
Just let me grapple the flying thing. =(
I know most of my players would hold onto that mulligan for a saving throw, so I'd either need to forbid it from Saves, or allow one specifically for a Save and one forbidden from being used on a Save.
Actually, so far most of the time it's been used on skill checks and attacks. It's their mulligan, as I said no questions asked. They only get the one so they can save now and fail later, no reason to think "Now" is the worst thing that can happen.
Rewrites for Evasion and its ilk...because they don't make a great deal of sense to me.
Evasion: A character that has the Evasion ability can avoid even magical and unusual attacks with great agility. If she makes a successful Reflex saving throw against an attack that normally deals half damage on a successful save, she may elect to move up to her normal movement speed to in order to leave the area of the attack, and thus take no damage from it. This movement may provoke attacks of opportunity. In the following round, she must act as if she has expended a move action to begin her turn. Evasion can be used only if the character is wearing light armor or no armor. A helpless character does not gain the benefit of evasion.
Because the feat is called Evasion, you know...not Inexplicable Invincibility. :)
You make a fair point, although I tend to think that the trade off is well worth it, and keeps high-reflex characters "on their toes", where they're supposed to be. I think "screwing them out of it" might be overstating the case a bit.
Any combat is about choices and consequences, from my perspective. Giving the move away for free is exploitable, and many players will quickly figure that out once they see it work on a grid with multiple opponents...especially once they realize that they can use that evasion move to flank an enemy for their allies.
I'd happily trade a move action (and by extension the ability to take a full attack action) in exchange for avoiding death by AoE. On the other hand, there are circumstances where getting that full attack action in the next round is important enough to take my half-damage licks and keep fighting.
That's the trouble with house rules though...what you perceive as unfair thievery, I perceive as a sensible compromise fix for a game mechanic that feels all wrong (to me). From where I'm sitting, Evasion just doesn't make a lick of sense unless the character physically moves out of the AoE, and that movement has to come at some sort of cost, or it just replaces one inexplicable thing with another.
TOZ, what do you mean, exactly? Is there empty space for me to 'evade into' within a fireball or a stinking cloud?
Not trying to argue there, just wanting to understand your point.
Gotcha, thanks for the clear up.
I had been implementing Imp. Evasion just that way on a failed save. I'll have to kick the no-cost move on a successful save idea around a bit. I'm wary about adding too much utility without a clear cost, but two feats may turn out to be a high enough cost.
Not sure what would be done about arcane familiars though...throwing in a free move action for them at first level might be too much, but then there's not a lot of opportunity to exploit it that early either.
I shall have to ponder.
In many of the games I've been in, when bad dice luck happens, the GM rolls a hidden, and asks the player if they want the GM roll. When I was GM, I let the lucky roller at the table roll the secret roll. I have a small measure of infamy as I fumbled 2 true strikes in a roll at a convention. I pushed the D20 deep in a trash can and sent it to an eternity in a landfill.
Evasion, also consider the possibility of cover rather then getting out of the area, except for spreads, most aoe spells only hit line-of-sight from the origin thus anything behind cover is safe.
I do agree that some spells make sense to not fill the entire square, but others don't make sense that way, particularly bursts.
I would make it so the movement of improved evasion can go full movement and count against the move action of the next round, only go half speed and counts as the swift and 5' step for the next round, or if the player only moves 5' then it count against the 5' step.
And instead of needing to get out of the aoe, finding cover should also be acceptable.
Definitely thinking of doing the 'spontaneous casters only' option myself. I've found third-party replacements for most everything that would need a replacement.
Definitely thinking of doing the 'spontaneous casters only' option myself. I've found third-party replacements for most everything that would need a replacement.
In the games I run, all my casters are spontaneous casters. It works well.
My players and I don't care for the memorization system, and I prefer my players to have a more limited list of spells to choose from. Keeps the game flow at a decent pace.
Definitely thinking of doing the 'spontaneous casters only' option myself. I've found third-party replacements for most everything that would need a replacement.
help me out here...
what needs replacing? Seriously I am not seeing it.
|
I'm still looking for a good spontaneous replacement for the Witch, but I do like the Spont-Only concept. Kobold Press' Shaman is a good Spont Druid, and I really like what Paizo did with Sorcerers and Oracles.
Mind, if wizards and sorcerers are both available, as a player I can't resist picking the wizard. Because why would I settle for less spell knowledge than the legal best? I'd only want to play a sorcerer if wizards didn't exist. That's why I'm excited about the Arcanist now.
Casting D-Door is a move action after which an attack my be made.
I'm still looking for a good spontaneous replacement for the Witch, but I do like the Spont-Only concept.
Witch works just fine as-is with just swapping the spells per day list for the Sorcerer's spells-known/spells per day lists.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All Chimpanzees are Chaotic Evil, have STR and DEX of 19, and are proficient with all firearms.
There are packs of Chimps who will terrorize the countryside in my games. The players really shouldn't mess with them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All Chimpanzees are Chaotic Evil, have STR and DEX of 19, and are proficient with all firearms.
The bushmeat trade is clearly not much of a problem in your worlds. I approve.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
They also make their own firearms, booze and cigarettes. However, they are still in the black powder stage. I mean, they're just apes, give them a break.
Definitely thinking of doing the 'spontaneous casters only' option myself. I've found third-party replacements for most everything that would need a replacement.help me out here...
what needs replacing? Seriously I am not seeing it.
I guess it's a matter of technique. I'm not going to spend time redesigning the extant classes, I'm going to ditch the prep casters and replace them.
Oracles replace the cleric.
There's a 3PP Shaman that would replace the druid.
There's a 3PP spontaneous archetype for the Magus, and the Vanguard.
The Paladin I can simply discard.
The Ranger ... I never liked Rangers having spells, so just make the Trapper and Skirmisher the defaults.
The Sorcerer replaces the wizard.
There's a 3PP Hedge Witch that replaces the Witch.
Like so.
Definitely thinking of doing the 'spontaneous casters only' option myself. I've found third-party replacements for most everything that would need a replacement.help me out here...
what needs replacing? Seriously I am not seeing it.I guess it's a matter of technique. I'm not going to spend time redesigning the extant classes, I'm going to ditch the prep casters and replace them.
Oracles replace the cleric.
There's a 3PP Shaman that would replace the druid.
There's a 3PP spontaneous archetype for the Magus, and the Vanguard.
The Paladin I can simply discard.
The Ranger ... I never liked Rangers having spells, so just make the Trapper and Skirmisher the defaults.
The Sorcerer replaces the wizard.
There's a 3PP Hedge Witch that replaces the Witch.Like so.
why replace them at all? The only change is that they do not pre-prep spells.
I only ask this so can get better understanding of your thoughts on this.
If all spellcasters are to be spontaneous casters, to me, that requires the banning of the prep casters. A basic if A, then B.
|
why replace them at all? The only change is that they do not pre-prep spells.
I only ask this so can get better understanding of your thoughts on this.
He doesn't want to take the time to adjust spells per day and spells known while considering how those changes affect the rest of the class features. Much easier just to swap in other fully developed classes that already do what he wants.
He doesn't want to take the time to adjust spells per day and spells known while considering how those changes affect the rest of the class features. Much easier just to swap in other fully developed classes that already do what he wants.why replace them at all? The only change is that they do not pre-prep spells.
I only ask this so can get better understanding of your thoughts on this.
Basically. Or to put it another (probably more honest way), I'm doing it the easy and lazy way.
He doesn't want to take the time to adjust spells per day and spells known while considering how those changes affect the rest of the class features. Much easier just to swap in other fully developed classes that already do what he wants.why replace them at all? The only change is that they do not pre-prep spells.
I only ask this so can get better understanding of your thoughts on this.
Ok Maybe I am just getting dense in my old age...
But I do not see why any adjustments to spells known for the Prep casters would be needed. (Heck, with the scribe scroll feat the Wizard is practically already a spontaneous caster).Ok... wait.. I do see one thing that may be an issue for them. 0 level spells since one can cast them with out burning a spell slot. Simplest fix for this is to treat them as a variable "special power" of the class and keep the "prepared" per day limit.
Well, leaving the wizard able to prepare his spells known the same but able to cast from them spontaneously like a sorcerer would leave the sorcerer rather...redundant. It's the same concern people had about the arcanist. Same with the cleric vs the oracle.
I do not see it that way.
Each class has unique features that are exclusive to them.Enough of them in fact to allow them to continue to exist.
For example: A Sorcerer has no need to research to gain new spells (They just intuitively know them)Plus the Bloodline abilities.
Wizards do Research and can discover new spells (But it is a time consuming process), They have the Arcane Discoveries as well.
I fail to see how allowing the Wizard (or any of the other Prep casters for that matter) to spontaneous cast is going to "break" the system.
(Spontaneous casting is just not that huge a variable IMO).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can you understand a GM not wanting those differences in his campaign?I fail to see how allowing the Wizard (or any of the other Prep casters for that matter) to spontaneous cast is going to "break" the system.
(Spontaneous casting is just not that huge a variable IMO).
Sure I can even agree to him not allowing the classes (It is his game world not mine).
I was just trying to understand the thought processes behind such a decision since it is so counter to my own.Additionally, Working under the assumption that my thoughts/beliefs may be just as foreign to others. I thought I should express my thoughts/views on the subject. So that we may continue a rational discourse on the subject. Who knows I may be wrong on just how pivotal Spontaneous casting truly is. (it has been known to happen...)
Lets say you leave the wizard 'as is' but make them spontaneous. Which spells can they spontaneously cast?
Spontaneously cast any spell in their book from a slot of its level or higher, like a sorcerer does from his spells known? (Which is crazy powerful and I wish you the best of luck managing a campaign with this rule in play)
Have 'preparation slots' equal to the Wizard's current spells per day, but also have 'casting slots' of an equal number, using the preparation slots to define the wizard's 'spells known' for that day? (Which is less powerful than the above, but it's still going to make the entire sorcerer class completely pointless, and will still somewhat amplify the Wizard class's total power)
Or some alternative I haven't mentioned?
What I use is...
A wizard may cast any spell he knows but is still limited by his casting slots.Ex: Wally Wizard (3rd level)
Wally Knows:
two 2nd level spells
eight 1st level spells
And All cantrips.
He has to pre-select his Four cantrips (special wizard powers) every morning.
But is able to cast:
two second level spells
and three first level spells
every day.
This method I just described (minus the cantrips rule) is one of the oldest house rules for prep casters (I first laid eyes on/encountered it back in 78)
This (plus the Bloodline powers) still allows the Sorcerer to be "relevant" as a caster class since they are not as limited in their casting.
You are going to have to explain how it amplifies a near limitless casting capability (Scribe Scroll) already inherent in the Wizard class.
|
|
You are going to have to explain how it amplifies a near limitless casting capability (Scribe Scroll) already inherent in the Wizard class.
Mostly because it lessens the chance that the wizard doesn't have the spell he needs to cast prepared at a given time.
Normally, the wizard only has so many spells prepared, and can only cast each one so many times. Under the house rule you mention, he's only limited by the spells in his book, which can grow exponentially. And he can cast them in any combination, the same as the sorcerer.
A sorcerer gets 34 spells known over his career, not counting expansion options.
A wizard gets more than 40, before spending WBL on scribing more..