Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game

Starfinder


Pathfinder Society


Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

House Rules - What have you put together?


Homebrew

51 to 75 of 75 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

One recently inspired by another thread ...

I'm going to make monster immunities more logical. I don't care what type something is, if it has a mind, it's susceptible to mind-affecting stuff. If it has a physical form, it's susceptible to polymorph. And so on.


DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
That is already the rule in the game.

Really? Where?

I've never actually read all the rules. I just assumed they did things like 3,5.


SilvercatMoonpaw wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
That is already the rule in the game.

Really? Where?

I've never actually read all the rules. I just assumed they did things like 3,5.

I think it was in conversion guide...probably would have missed it too if not for that.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
necromental wrote:
SilvercatMoonpaw wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
That is already the rule in the game.

Really? Where?

I've never actually read all the rules. I just assumed they did things like 3,5.

I think it was in conversion guide...probably would have missed it too if not for that.
Core Rulebook pg 577 wrote:


Permanent Bonuses: Ability bonuses with a duration greater than 1 day actually increase the relevant ability score after 24 hours. Modify all skills and statistics as appropriate. This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, and other bonuses. These bonuses should be noted separately in case they are removed.

The exception is the Headband of Vast Intelligence which always has skills associated with it, and therefore it "picks" the skill you gain ranks in for you (and doesn't stack if you already have ranks in said skill).


DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:


Core Rulebook pg 577 wrote:


Permanent Bonuses: Ability bonuses with a duration greater than 1 day actually increase the relevant ability score after 24 hours. Modify all skills and statistics as appropriate. This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, and other bonuses. These bonuses should be noted separately in case they are removed.

I could see myself having read that and not understood it meant "these are restroactive". I've been known to misinterpret things that aren't beaten into my head by obviousness.

Thanks!

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
SilvercatMoonpaw wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:


Core Rulebook pg 577 wrote:


Permanent Bonuses: Ability bonuses with a duration greater than 1 day actually increase the relevant ability score after 24 hours. Modify all skills and statistics as appropriate. This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, and other bonuses. These bonuses should be noted separately in case they are removed.

I could see myself having read that and not understood it meant "these are restroactive". I've been known to misinterpret things that aren't beaten into my head by obviousness.

Thanks!

No worries, it actually took me a little bit of searching to find the relevant text. I remembered it being a big deal in the transition from 3.5 to Pathfinder and then was slowly starting to panic as I couldn't find it explicitly stated anywhere in the PRD.

It took some googling to find the above.


Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:
Except that Regenerate doesn't remove insanity or other such things that Heal does.

True enough! Knock yourself out. I still like the fast healing flavor.


Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
Quixote: ...doesn't changing to a flat cost preclude putting flaming burst on an Amulet of Mighty Fists or with various features that let you temporarily put +N's worth of bonuses on your weapon?

An interesting point, and one that hasn't come up much. When it comes to an item like the Amulet, I'm sure we could work out something reasonable. Maybe a 50% price hike. Or none at all, if the situation is tame enough.

For abilities like the Paladin's, I'd be cool with letting them treat it as an additional +1 on top of the enchantment, if they really wanted it.
The problem is, it's so crap that no one ever wants it.

Can'tFindthePath wrote:
Reading the discussion on elemental burst weapons it occurs to me; why not just make the burst quality the default at +1...And elemental damage becomes pretty useless at higher level...Also, the bane weapon special ability, which grants +2 enhancement and +2d6 damage vs one type, is +1 equivalent.

I've always felt that the standard "+1d6 fire damage/hit" was the staple example of a fair +1 equivalent, so I'd be hesitant to mess with that too much.

I've also felt like energy resistance isn't so incredibly common, even at higher levels, to merit a little fire and lightning worthless. It's not useful against every opponent, but that's the whole point of elemental damage anyway.
I think the Bane enchantment is much more restrictive; the odds of running into something that's vulnerable to cold damage are much, much higher than running into something that...just isn't a specific creature type.
But yeah, they're not great. Maybe even 10,000gp is too much. If you just have the bare minimum +1 flaming weapon, it's the same price as before. Maybe 7,500 or 5,000gp...


Quixote wrote:
Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
Quixote: ...doesn't changing to a flat cost preclude putting flaming burst on an Amulet of Mighty Fists or with various features that let you temporarily put +N's worth of bonuses on your weapon?

An interesting point, and one that hasn't come up much. When it comes to an item like the Amulet, I'm sure we could work out something reasonable. Maybe a 50% price hike. Or none at all, if the situation is tame enough.

For abilities like the Paladin's, I'd be cool with letting them treat it as an additional +1 on top of the enchantment, if they really wanted it.
The problem is, it's so crap that no one ever wants it.

Can'tFindthePath wrote:
Reading the discussion on elemental burst weapons it occurs to me; why not just make the burst quality the default at +1...And elemental damage becomes pretty useless at higher level...Also, the bane weapon special ability, which grants +2 enhancement and +2d6 damage vs one type, is +1 equivalent.

I've always felt that the standard "+1d6 fire damage/hit" was the staple example of a fair +1 equivalent, so I'd be hesitant to mess with that too much.

I've also felt like energy resistance isn't so incredibly common, even at higher levels, to merit a little fire and lightning worthless. It's not useful against every opponent, but that's the whole point of elemental damage anyway.
I think the Bane enchantment is much more restrictive; the odds of running into something that's vulnerable to cold damage are much, much higher than running into something that...just isn't a specific creature type.
But yeah, they're not great. Maybe even 10,000gp is too much. If you just have the bare minimum +1 flaming weapon, it's the same price as before. Maybe 7,500 or 5,000gp...

personally i find the enchantments that add elemental damage to not be worth it, so many things at mid and late game have energy resist 10 to at least 2 elements if not flat out immunity to it


Quixote wrote:
Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
Quixote: ...doesn't changing to a flat cost preclude putting flaming burst on an Amulet of Mighty Fists or with various features that let you temporarily put +N's worth of bonuses on your weapon?

An interesting point, and one that hasn't come up much. When it comes to an item like the Amulet, I'm sure we could work out something reasonable. Maybe a 50% price hike. Or none at all, if the situation is tame enough.

For abilities like the Paladin's, I'd be cool with letting them treat it as an additional +1 on top of the enchantment, if they really wanted it.
The problem is, it's so crap that no one ever wants it.

Can'tFindthePath wrote:
Reading the discussion on elemental burst weapons it occurs to me; why not just make the burst quality the default at +1...And elemental damage becomes pretty useless at higher level...Also, the bane weapon special ability, which grants +2 enhancement and +2d6 damage vs one type, is +1 equivalent.

I've always felt that the standard "+1d6 fire damage/hit" was the staple example of a fair +1 equivalent, so I'd be hesitant to mess with that too much.

I've also felt like energy resistance isn't so incredibly common, even at higher levels, to merit a little fire and lightning worthless. It's not useful against every opponent, but that's the whole point of elemental damage anyway.
I think the Bane enchantment is much more restrictive; the odds of running into something that's vulnerable to cold damage are much, much higher than running into something that...just isn't a specific creature type.
But yeah, they're not great. Maybe even 10,000gp is too much. If you just have the bare minimum +1 flaming weapon, it's the same price as before. Maybe 7,500 or 5,000gp...

You could also make its bonus-equivalence fractional. While Paizo sticks strictly to integers, nothing in the formulae breaks for fractions. E.g. if 'burst' is a +0.5 bonus then a +1 flaming burst weapon's price is 2000 gp * (2.5 * 2.5) = 12,500 gp. (This is something I've been thinking about for a while; your comments on the low worth of bursting have pushed me over the edge to actually try it.)


A few of the more prominent ones that we tend to use in my groups include:

+ Passive perception: utilizing the flat bonus unmodified by a d20 roll for noticing basic things about the area/detecting moderately discrete actions before actively looking for them.

+ Heighten Spell as a given: If you choose to cast a spell utilizing a higher-level spell slot, it increases the spell level and thus the save DC accordingly. There's little sense in requiring a feat to pour more effort into a spell when you already possess the extra energy to expend, as far as we see it. And thus a few homebrew feats such as utilizing Heighten Spell to instead increase the CL of the spell being cast.

+ Allowing material from 3.5e: There's just so much of it it's a shame to just ignore it. And so long as the DM can look it over and give approval, it's fair game, so long as it's first-party published and there aren't updated versions for Pathfinder already. The exception being a few spells that were save-or-die that were reduced to save or take massive damage, such as Slay Living. The DM specifically is allowed to grant these to players as a form of "ancient magic" that is not typically obtainable through independent research. Also the ability to reference the 3.5e gods as "old gods" or forgotten deities can be nice flavor.


Angry Wiggles wrote:

I typically run under these rules. After a while, there came to be enough of them that my players wanted indexes and a table of contents so they could find the specific rules faster. They change slightly depending on the sort of campaign being run, especially in the character options section, but these are the boilerplate rules.

I've only ever used these in person, so I'm not 100% on how well they would work in a PBP environment, although I don't see any glaring issues. I may start an interest check thread soon to see if anyone would be interested.

Nice rules set! Just wanted to mention that "Weapon Training - This ability now applies to all weapons in a weapon group" is redundant with the actual rules. That's why the weapon groups were defined in the first place....

Do you have any problems with people spamming Cure Minor Wounds between encounters? Or is that the point?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have weapon specific feats and abilities apply to all weapons in the appropriate weapon group.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Oh, nothing much.


Kirth Gersen wrote:
Oh, nothing much.

Great Gozreh's Gonads!

I don't suppose it's available in a non-Windows-only format?


Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
I don't suppose it's available in a non-Windows-only format?

Click "download" for each document.


Kirth Gersen wrote:
Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:
I don't suppose it's available in a non-Windows-only format?
Click "download" for each document.

Yeah, that gets me Microsoft Word docs. :-( Oh, well.


What format do you want/need them in?


Java Man wrote:
What format do you want/need them in?

Ideally PDF, but Postscript or plain text would be fine. Anything non-proprietary, really. (I'm on a Linux box.)


Open office is a shareware office suite that can open microsoft office files. I would be shocked if there is not a linux compatible version available. Openoffice.org


Java Man wrote:
Open office is a shareware office suite that can open microsoft office files. I would be shocked if there is not a linux compatible version available. Openoffice.org

*facepalm*

I even knew about that, I'd just never had occasion to want it before... work, brain, work!
Thanks :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Most of my house rules have been covered, so I'll just mention the more niche ones.

Strike Back is not a feat. It is a combat option. Anyone can do this.

Reach weapons do not use the ranged weapon cover rules. Polearms are designed to attack past other people. No one should not have to go for Improved Precise Shot just to be able to use reach weapons the way they are intended.

Shield users can still use their shield hand to hold objects. (hold, not wield)

Scarred Witchdoctor uses it's original version.


For ease of use (not that we reference this document much anymore)

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1RsujJTuLW4Y2KRGyD8bs1kAHXjvJDWCIM9QfK594F d4


Question for those of you who use the popular "feats that apply to a specific weapon instead apply to a weapon group" rule: Do you make an exception for natural attacks? It seems to be way more of a power-up for natural attack builds than for manufactured weapon builds.


A common houserule I've seen is trading out both a gun's touch attack ability and their misfire chance.

51 to 75 of 75 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Homebrew / House Rules - What have you put together? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002-2017 Paizo Inc.® | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours, Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM Pacific time.

Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.