That one I don't like: If you go and stick your sword into some guy, he'll know where you are and turn towards you instantly, so you don't get to hide again.
And you may as well forget about the silencer, they're too cheap not to get. But sniping (shooting from hiding) is not just about sound - it's about knowing which direction the arrow came from and looking that way.
It shouldn't be too easy to keep shooting at someone from hiding from 10 feet away without him getting to know where you are.
Shadowdancers can do this without any real problem. -20 hide check normally to avoid detection from ten feet away. With max skills in stealth, a small size shadowdancer breaks 30 before even rolling. Does that mean you don't get his direction? No. And thanks to the new rules you can stop him with a torch or some happy sunshine.
The silencer is too cheap not to get, but how many people are going to remember to get one? Only the guys who want to shoot while stealthed.
And in some cases, like shanking a giant, he may not turn towards you, and instead just try to step on you. He ignores the perception check and stomps down into your 10x10 foot area, if you want an opportunity attack, you'll lose your stealth in all likelihood.
And -5 to stealth from ten feet away is bad, they have no penalty at all to detect you and you have a penalty to avoid detection. And if they detect you it's a five foot step to a full attack from them.
You mean the stuff about the process taking rolls and costing time and money? That's not a house rule, it's the rule.
Not requiring wizards to spend time and money on this is a house rule.
With some optimizers apparently it is. One of the assumptions on the Wizards boards was that the wizard could get whatever spells he felt like getting. Which is dumb because the one DM I met who let you do that would kit out his NPCs with your spells if you were really broken with your abilities.
I was also being slightly sarcastic because of how apparently few people do this because they don't want to restrict the poor wizard. Oh the poor wizard, with his free feats and Batman like abilities in 3.5.
Can you run that one past me again? I'm not quite following. I'm not quite sure what spells you're talking about.
There is a touch of idiocy that gives you a 1d6 penalty to int, wis, cha.
There is ray of enfeeblement that gives you a 1d6+1/2 level (fort half) penalty to strength.Neither can decrease your scores below 1
And there is feeblemind, which reduces your Int and Cha to 1 and makes you unable to use magic (will save negates the whole thing, arcanists get -4)
I'm not sure which spells you changed and how you changed them.
Those were the spells I meant, just for some reason with synonymous adjectives.
They're old houserules from 3.5 now, thanks for updating me. I'm glad someone in either the playtesting or design team corrected that broken spell before it hit publication.
I hate tracking wand charges, so one house rule I always use is to the way wands operate. A wand has a charge die instead of a fixed number of charges. The charge die starts at d20 for a fully charged wand and goes down to d8. Every time you use a wand you roll the charge die. If you roll a 1, the charge die is permanently downgraded (d20 - d12 - d10 - d8). If you roll a 1 on the d8, that is the last charge for the wand.I find the rule dramatically decreases bookkeeping, causes the players to be more liberal with their wand use, and does not slow play appreciably.
Neat idea! Ticking off charges like ammunition makes the wand seem less magical. To make it even more unpredictable, you could roll a final d6 to see what happens:
1. Fizzles
2. Works normally
3. Breaks and misfires (random target)
4. Fizzles and recharges to d8
5. Fizzles and recharges to d10
6. Surges (adds Maximize Spell and Widen Spell metamagic)I deeply dislike this idea based on luck. When I drop the gp to craft a wand, I really want to be sure I can depend on it... otherwise I'd UMD scrolls.Oh well. A lot of people liked wild mages, who made every spell you cast unpredictable. This only affects the final charge of the wand, so it's just a little fun that you don't normally have to worry about.
A wand normally has 50 charges when created. Assuming you rolled each charge die as many times as the number of sides on the dice (20 + 12 + 10 + 8) that would equal 50. The odds of rolling anything but a 1 on d20 nineteen times in a row are about 37.7%. However there's a 22.6% chance that you could get 10 extra charges out of that first d20, and an 8% chance you could get all 50 charges just out of the first d20. At the risk of a fizzle or two at the end you might even extend the life of the wand well beyond its last charge. It's a gamble that could pay off.
OOOOH! If you like wild mages I have something great for you a friend made... send me an email kakarasa at gmail dot com, along with anyone who wants a nifty wild mage toy. It's a 10000 item lookup program. You type the number result of 4d10 and it tells you the effect.
In my most recent game, I used community dice rolls for ability scores, and no rolling for hitpoints (ever).
The community dice rolls basically boils down to rolling a series of sets of ability scores (if the players like rolling, they get to each roll a set), usually "4d6 drop lowest".
However, anyone can pick any set of ability scores rolled. This means if one person rolled really well, everyone can have that set too.
It's mostly about keeping things equal between the players. Of course, different builds have different needs, so not everyone picked the proverbial "best" roll (the one with the highest stat), esp if they are playing a MAD class.
As always, I gave the option for doing a 25 point buy as well. Tends to be a little lower in power than the best rolls, but they get exactly what they want.
.
For hitpoints, I dislike the idea of a class having only a "chance" at higher hitpoints. If a d12 hit die is supposed to be a "class feature" for the Barbarian, then why does it allow the option of "rolling poorly" and getting less class-based hitpoints than a Wizard? What exactly did the barbarian training give him then?
The problem, I guess, is that the hit die roll is a one-time event, and only 20 times maximum (likely less in a typical campaign, and even then, the last rolls have minimal visibility). If HD were rerolled every morning, I could see it working a bit better as a rolled thing, but a 20th level barbarian stuck with 20 hitpoints (min roll) vs a wizard with 120 hitpoints (max roll) just doesn't sit right with me.
So instead I give max HD for a number of levels, depending on group size vs difficulty (in this case, I had 3 players in a tough adventure path, so 4 HD maxed).
After which, they get half HD.
Named NPCs (including cohorts from leadership, etc) are given 1 max HD and half HD from that point on.
No-name, straight from bestiary stuff has half-HD (keeps things simpler when running stuff straight from the book).
It gives a fairly large headstart for survivability in the beginning levels (I don't want to have to write in a new character because of a bad/good roll this early in the game, and these players dislike losing their current character concept so early/whimsically), and at later levels the hitpoint boost will either be unnoticeable in the face of huge damage, or bypassed altogether from save-or-suck stuff.
It does make for barbarians consistantly having more hitpoints than wizards, which, besides early level survivability, was the main goal of this houserule.
That wand idea is neat, however I wouldn't apply it to someone who made their wand themselves (or bought one fresh from a store).
As a tool to simulate "unknown charges left" on a random treasure wand, it's a pretty nifty idea. Takes the issue off the DM's hands (for tracking purposes), and as long as you don't mind a minimum of 4 charges on the wand, it's fairly good at simulating the potential random charges on a given wand.
It has the small chance of rolling more than 50 charges... but by the time you get that far into using the wand, would anyone have remembered? The point is, of course, to not actually keep track, heh.
I personally despise those pseudo-luck rolling methods people use.
But if someone really wants to roll the dice, I let him. 4d6 drop lowest 6 times. And you keep the attributes you roll. No re-rolls. Even if you roll nothing but 1s. Even if your character dies and you start a new one. No takers so far. Maybe I should present the option without my Catbert grin. }>
Oddly enough, 4d6 drop the lowest, 6 times is the standard method in my game. Letting them drop the low die and arrange their stats seems to create workable characters. From tolerable to excellent. I'm old fashioned. Nobody tries the PC suicide by stupid action bit either. Karma, you know. The funny thing is, I haven't had any players whine about it. They just roll their dice, and build their characters. Players work around the odd stats, use them as role playing points and tend to adopt a class their stats are OK for. Go figure...
*edit* Oh, and for hit points, the 1st die has to be in the upper half or you re-roll (i.e. a d6 must be 4+, a d8 must be 5+, etc.). After that, good luck.
And as for a house rule: damage adjustments due to strength can't exceed the amount of damage rolled on the die. That is if you roll a "1" on that 1d8 longsword damage you're strength can't add more than 1 to it. This goes way back in my game. I tired quickly of high strength fighters (courtesy of the Greyhawk supplement) auto killing some monsters on every hit. It was like mowing the lawn. Easy and tedious.And yes, it goes both ways -- NPCs are limited on the damage add too.
Hmmm... another house rule that I haven't used in a while but may revive: If you make your saving throw you live. Half damage killing low level PCs who were lucky enough to make their unlikely saving rolls on a fireball (or something similar) always struck me as unfair. Of course, being unconscious, but stable and helpless might not be that much of a gift depending on who wins. I have had a couple of PCs who were left for dead back in the day by the enemy stumble out, stripped of their possessions, and hoping they don't meet something fierce on the way home, like a giant rat. Sadistic, but terribly funny :D
And as for a house rule: damage adjustments due to strength can't exceed the amount of damage rolled on the die. That is if you roll a "1" on that 1d8 longsword damage you're strength can't add more than 1 to it. This goes way back in my game. I tired quickly of high strength fighters (courtesy of the Greyhawk supplement) auto killing some monsters on every hit. It was like mowing the lawn. Easy and tedious.And yes, it goes both ways -- NPCs are limited on the damage add too.
Just a little comment on this one...
I'm guessing that you don't play much high level gaming? It's fine, I personally like the idea of an E6 game myself, however I can see this rule of yours being a little strange when presented in most upper-half of the level spectrums.
What I mean is, a lot of creatures in the higher levels have Strength bonuses that exceed the maximum damage their weapon can roll (especially the ones that use weapons instead of natural attacks). An Astral Deva uses a warhammer or slam (1d8) with a +12 to damage from strength.
Unless you still allow the 1.5x from twohanded bonus, which involves a lot of on-the-fly-math headaches as players start breaking down their damage with each swing.
Even at beginning levels, a barbarian raging, with high starting strength, will rarely see the full benefit of his class feature.
The math of the game has changed from earlier editions, so I'm not sure if that houserule isn't hobbling people unneccesarily (I'm more concerned of bestiary creatures with somewhat useless strength scores, since that would make my job as DM harder).
If it's working for you though, your mileage must by varying. ;)
I've never liked the idea of someone just jumping into a new class with the multi-classing rules, so to represent at least some kind of training and dedication to the new class, I have PC's declare that they are going to be taking their next level in a new class before gaining half the experience neccessary to go up to their next level. So if a character wanted to go from being a Fighter 3 and take his 4th character level as his first class level in Wizard using the fast track experience table, he would have to declare his intention of being a wizard by before he gained 10,750 xp. Then, when he does reach the half-way point between experience levels he gains an Apprentice level of the new class (3.0 DMG converted rules) that finally turns into a regular level once the character has earned enough experience to go up a level.
I've never liked the idea of someone just jumping into a new class with the multi-classing rules, so to represent at least some kind of training and dedication to the new class, I have PC's declare that they are going to be taking their next level in a new class before gaining half the experience neccessary to go up to their next level. So if a character wanted to go from being a Fighter 3 and take his 4th character level as his first class level in Wizard using the fast track experience table, he would have to declare his intention of being a wizard by before he gained 10,750 xp. Then, when he does reach the half-way point between experience levels he gains an Apprentice level of the new class (3.0 DMG converted rules) that finally turns into a regular level once the character has earned enough experience to go up a level.
I actually used to do this as well. Everybody thought it made sense. We also had the "mentors" from IIRC the DMG II. It made a lot of sense that they couldn't just suddenly know magic, even as an apprentice, so the master basically gave them initial training and "homework". They got the +0 class level of apprentice and when they leveled up they had "completed their homework". It actually was an invaluable tool as a GM because it opened up a whole bunch of adventure seededs, but as one player put it "this kinda feels like being in the mage's guild in Morrowind".
I'm *playing* a Wizard and I like this rule. One of the best roleplaying opportunities for my Wizard PC was finding a new mentor and Wizards' school, something he *had* to do to have anything resembling good spell selection at a decent scroll/learning price.
My house rule for wizards is making them play by the rules. See all that stuff under "Spellbooks"?
That's why my wizard keeps his Diplomacy maxed (and a CHA of 12) and generally works for older, more powerful wizards. Sucking up saves him money on buying scrolls.
But thank you Paizo for making scribing costs scale a little better.
Just a little comment on this one...
I'm guessing that you don't play much high level gaming? It's fine, I personally like the idea of an E6 game myself, however I can see this rule of yours being a little strange when presented in most upper-half of the level spectrums.
Pretty much. It's a long climb up in my game. My current batch of players are 8th to 11th after about 4 (active) years of play. There is a lot of role playing and intrigue in the game as well as adventure. It soaks up time often without huge experience awards. The social contacts, allies and information gained is, imo, just as valuable. I have had higher level games, but the sweet spot for fun games seems to be mid to upper levels (6-12) and my higher level games were pre 3E. A little variation in weapons choice and increases in damage bonuses allowed for magic weapons generally takes care of it at this level. And yes, it originated back in 1976 when the Greyhawk supplement was the new thing :)
I've never liked the idea of someone just jumping into a new class with the multi-classing rules, so to represent at least some kind of training and dedication to the new class, I have PC's declare that they are going to be taking their next level in a new class before gaining half the experience neccessary to go up to their next level. So if a character wanted to go from being a Fighter 3 and take his 4th character level as his first class level in Wizard using the fast track experience table, he would have to declare his intention of being a wizard by before he gained 10,750 xp. Then, when he does reach the half-way point between experience levels he gains an Apprentice level of the new class (3.0 DMG converted rules) that finally turns into a regular level once the character has earned enough experience to go up a level.I actually used to do this as well. Everybody thought it made sense. We also had the "mentors" from IIRC the DMG II. It made a lot of sense that they couldn't just suddenly know magic, even as an apprentice, so the master basically gave them initial training and "homework". They got the +0 class level of apprentice and when they leveled up they had "completed their homework". It actually was an invaluable tool as a GM because it opened up a whole bunch of adventure seededs, but as one player put it "this kinda feels like being in the mage's guild in Morrowind".
Ditto on this one. I always hated sudden direction changes in class. My players have to plan ahead of time and prepare to take the new class. I think it helps maintain suspension of disbelief and provides a lot of side quests, role playing opportunities etc.