| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
These are the house rules in effect in my games. I would appreciate it if people read and critiqued them to assess their fairness.
.
.
.
.
.
Materiel from the Core Rulebook, Advanced Player's Guide, Ultimate Combat, and Ultimate Magic is available.
From the core races, humans, elves, dwarves, and gnomes are allowed. Halflings do not exist in my campaign setting, and half elves and half orcs are merged into a more general hybrid race that can reflect most core race crossbreeds.
Orcs are allowed.
Amalgams are allowed. See the link below for an explanation of what these are.
The racial fluff and mechanics listed in this thread are those used in my campaign settings. (Can you guys tell me if you think hybrids are too weak? I think they might be.)
Aasimar, tieflings, sylphs, oriads, undines, ifrits, and fetchlings are allowed. Remove the stat penalty if playing one.
Humans do not have a monopoly on crossbreeding. Hybrids do not have to have any human ancestry at all, and neither do amalgams, aasimar, tieflings, sylphs, oriads, undines, ifrits, and fetchlings. Their ancestry can be that of another race or races. This decision has no effect on the class features of those races. It effects character appearance, culture, and backstory only.
I have ordered but not recieved a copy of Bestiary 3. Once I recieve it, races from that book will be reviewed to see if they should be allowed. Catfolk will probably end up allowed based on what I've heard about them second hand.
From the third party supplement Psionics Unleashed, everything except the races is allowed. Psionics is considered a form of wizardry in my campaign setting.
Of these archetypes, the following are allowed: The Ragechemist (replaces Paizo version), The Bateleur, The Rocker, The Growler, The Master of Many Shapes, The Braggart, The Bravo, The Gloriosus, The Pistol Spade, The Gunmage, The Gun Tank (replaces Paizo version), The Titan Mauler (replaces Paizo version), The Crossbowman (replaces Paizo version), The Kenshi Ronin/Errant Swordsman, The Dandy, The Saboteur, The Gun-Fu Master.
Guns are allowed. They use alchemical powder instead of black powder, are breech loaders, and are not rendered useless by moisture, but are otherwise handled as per the core rules. I use the emerging guns rules, with guns being manufactured by some, and available if one knows where to look and has money, but generally seen as inferior to bows and are rare in the hands of adventures and soldiers. Gunslingers and gun archetypes are allowed, early firearms (that load by unscrewing a breech block) are available, advanced firearms are not. Use core rules prices. The materiel from Grit and Gunslingers is allowed.
Alignment is not used. Alignment subtypes like good, evil, law, and chaos exist for outsiders and spells, but don't affect a mortal character. Spells or effects that require alignment either work or don't work, depending on what the GM thinks should happen in the specific situation. Paladins and antipaladins can smite anything. Paladins have codes of conduct, but they are not connected to alignment. They are still expected to do good (though they can be either for or against law or have a more moderate opinion on the issue), but the GM decides what is good, not an alignment system.
Anyone who has detect [evil] or detect [good/law/chaos] gets a bonus feat instead. Alignment detecting effects are not allowed.
In my campaign setting the gods are poorly understood by mortals, and people aren't even sure if god is the correct term for them. There also happen to be thousands of them. Polytheism is more common than monotheism, and religion is highly complicated. Character religion is handled by the player, not the GM, and the GM does not provide a deity list. There is a small list of major religions (so far, it has 1 religion), but players are free to make up their own religions and deities for their characters to adhere to. Characters from classes that can have any domain, such as Clerics, can choose whatever domains they want instead of working off of a list of domains by deity. It is possible to be a Cleric, Oracle, or Inquisitor, or Paladin who doesn't follow a specific deity.
A paladin's fall from grace takes a long time, with the character losing paladin abilities for antipaladin abilities one by one as she descends further and further into unacceptable actions, until finally there is nothing left of her paladin abilities whatsoever. The GM decides when a paladin begins to fall, and the GM will not have a paladin begin falling without warning her about her actions so that she may avoid falling, unless she does something extremely evil, like genocide. Redemption works the opposite way, with antipaladin abilities being traded out for paladin abilities one by one as the paladin steadily ascends towards the path of good. I also allow a paladin to be created with some antipaladin abilities for players who want to play a character who does a lot of morally questionable things for what she believes is a good purpose, and who is neither wholly paladin or wholly antipaladin.
The atonement spell does not exist.
Plane shifting spells are not available to mortals, only to outsiders. The PCs may not have them. It is known that planes and outsiders exist, and mortals do interact with outsiders, but mortals have not figured out how to leave the materiel plane. The most that can be done is summoning and communication, and that requires a willing individual.
No time stop, wish, or miracle spells, including limited wish or minor miracle.
Feats are not learned permanently unless they are a prerequisite for a prestige class or granted as bonus feats. With one hour of tactical thought after 8 hours of rest (for spellcasters, this is part of their hour of spell preparation), any character can forget any of their feats that are not a prerequistite for a prestige class or bonus feats and learn another feat in it's stead. If the feat is a prerequisite for other feats, those feats must be forgotten as well. All feat prerequisites must be met to learn a feat. Specific bonus feats (as in, a feature that gives you a specific feat, such as a Ranger getting Endurance) cannot be forgotten, but bonus feats that come from a list (such as Fighter or Sorcerer bloodline bonus feats) can be forgotten, but the feat that is learned to replace them must also come from the list of bonus feats. Unlisted bonus feats (such as the human's) can be forgotten and replaced with any other feat. Ranger combat style feats can be forgotten and replaced with another feat from the combat style list, or the Ranger can forget her combat style and pick a new one. She cannot spend her combat style feats on feats from multiple combat styles. She must have one combat style at a time.
You may reroll a failed knowledge check if you come across a source of additional information such as a book or an overheard NPC comment.
There is no level or stat loss when being raised from the dead. However, it does cause mental stress. Roll a will save (DC 10 + character level + days dead). If you fail, you gain an insanity (3.5 Unearthed Arcana insanity, not Gamemastery Guide insanity). Insanities are not determined randomly. Instead, the GM talks with the player to see which insanity the player is most comfortable roleplaying, and gives the character that insanity. Characters who are raised from the dead have no memory of what happeed to them after they died. The fate of the dead is unknown to mortals.
Sneak attack works differently. For every dice of sneak attack damage a character has, a character instead gains +1 to attack rolls and +2 points of damage. Sneak attack still applies in all the usual circumstances, and "dice" can still be sacrificed for other effects if the character has the ability to do that.
Barbarians are called Berserkers, Ninjas are called Agents, Samurai are called Vassals, and Rangers are called Pioneers. This has no effect on class features, it is a style choice. I don't want to use the term Barbarian, as I feel that, due to some of the fantasy counterpart cultures I use, it could be taken as somewhat offensive (I have lots of Native Americans, Polynesians, and Mesoamericans, and I want many of their NPCs to have levels in the class, but I am not calling them Barbarians), Rangers are an organization and not a class in my world, and, while I have no problem with Asian characters and equipment, I would prefer not to have base classes that specifically say Asian in their names. I feel it discuragous non-Asian characters from taking those classes, and I want every core and base class to be able to be taken by any character of any ethnicity.
All medium armor uses the stats for either hide or breastplate, and all heavy armor uses full plate stats. Armors can still be made out of unusual materiels (such as adamantine or mithril). The reason for this house rule is that there is no reason to wear medium armor that isn't a breastplate (unless you are a druid or first level character) or heavy armor that isn't full plate once you have the gold for it, and I dislike that, so I prefer for medium and heavy armor to have the same stats, with the differences being aesthetic. That way, you can wear chainmail instead of a breastplate or heavy lamellar instead of full plate without being less effective for it.
All medium armor uses the stats for either hide or breastplate, and all heavy armor uses full plate stats. Armors can still be made out of unusual materials (such as adamantine or mithril). The reason for this house rule is that there is no reason to wear medium armor that isn't a breastplate (unless you are a druid or first level character) or heavy armor that isn't full plate once you have the gold for it, and I dislike that, so I prefer for medium and heavy armor to have the same stats, with the differences being aesthetic. That way, you can wear chainmail instead of a breastplate or heavy lamellar instead of full plate without being less effective for it.
A lot of the rest are more along the lines of your personal stylistic preferences, which require no critiquing. This one is all crunch-based, and it's insightful, to the point, and overall a very slick way to correct what has long been a fairly annoying game design flaw. Well done!
In fact, I'd almost go the next step and make all light armor equal to a chain shirt...
Thanks ^_^
I considered making all light armor work light a chain shirt, but there are reasons to wear something like leather instead of a chain shirt (AC penalties and dex bonuses), so I left light armor as is.
In all objectivity, I have to admit that the part about allowed archetypes is awesome.
You do good work.
Paladins can smite anything? That's an interesting change, but its hard not to criticize something that went from a situational power (albeit one that comes up often enough to be relevant) to an every enemy power.
Are you lowering the power level of the ability to compensate, or increasing the power of similar abilities (Favoured Enemy comes to mind) to compensate in a different way?
Whoever hired you knows that they're doing.
As for other homebrew/3PP, I allow Psionics Unleashed, as it's a wonderfully balanced book and I would like to have Psionics in my campaign setting, I allow Grit and Gunslingers because the Fusilier is awesome, and I allow the Ardwright because I want an Artificer.
Paladins can smite anything? That's an interesting change, but its hard not to criticize something that went from a situational power (albeit one that comes up often enough to be relevant) to an every enemy power.
Are you lowering the power level of the ability to compensate, or increasing the power of similar abilities (Favoured Enemy comes to mind) to compensate in a different way?
No. I'm leaving smite as is other than that it can target anything. In my campaigns, Paladins generally don't end up fighting anything they can't smite, so saying that they can smite anything now doesn't change balance much. They could do that unofficially already.
Like Weables I am too afraid that smite all for Paladins might be a bit too much. I would put some restraints on it (maybe limit it to Aberrations, Dragons, Evil Outsiders and Undead).
No. I'm leaving smite as is other than that it can target anything. In my campaigns, Paladins generally don't end up fighting anything they can't smite, so saying that they can smite anything now doesn't change balance much. They could do that unofficially already.Paladins can smite anything? That's an interesting change, but its hard not to criticize something that went from a situational power (albeit one that comes up often enough to be relevant) to an every enemy power.
Are you lowering the power level of the ability to compensate, or increasing the power of similar abilities (Favoured Enemy comes to mind) to compensate in a different way?
Also, with the way I handle Paladins falling and the fact that it's possible to play a character that has half Paladin features and half Antipaladin features and with the lack of alignment, it's easiest to simply let them smite whatever they are fighting.
Like Weables I am too afraid that smite all for Paladins might be a bit too much. I would put some restraints on it (maybe limit it to Aberrations, Dragons, Evil Outsiders and Undead).
That seems a little weak to me.
What makes it seem like a little much to you?
That seems a little weak to me.
What makes it seem like a little much to you?
I had a delay during writing and posting my concern so I missed your answer to Weables.
I view Smite Evil as ability which is not inteded as generic augmentation to Paladin's combat prowess but as expression of Paladin's role as defenbder against evil. Making it work against everything is somewhat diluting the role of Paladin and a bit unfair towards Fighters, Barbarians and Rangers. I think that Paladin is powerful enough.On the other hand I might be biased due to my party's Paladin crushing all her opposition with insane dice rolls.
I'll consider limiting Smite Evil.
Limiting Smite evil may not be entirely necessary, an alternative is boosting other similar abilities like maybe doubling the Favoured Enemy choices (get 2 different ones per time instead of one)
I dunno, I dont have much to offer, but the question that occurs to me when I read your campaign rules is why *not* play a Paladin. The class has always been powerful but limited by a strict code and only working vs evil. Removing both of those features feel like they make it a no brainer to play, and no brainers aren't a good idea for game balance.
Have you considered that you may have let your recent play experience flavour these decisions?
The races are broken. Amalgams and Orcs are simply overpowered. Hybrids are just weird (all skills as class skills).
Paladins and antipaladins can smite anything.Ridiculously overpowered. Your explanation makes no sense. How do you avoid fighting golems?
Breaking the alignment system for no particular reason just leads me as a player to avoid any class that deals with a code of conduct.
Alignment doesn't work for me. It's not a bad system, but it doesn't fit my GMing style. I like grey and gray morality, values dissonance, corruption, unclear motives, sympathetic villains, heroes who go too far, and the like a great deal, and D&D's alignment system isn't particularly good for that.
The GM decides when a paladin begins to fall, and the GM will not have a paladin begin falling without warning her about her actions so that she may avoid falling, unless she does something extremely evil, like genocide.How do you commit genocide before the GM is able to warn you about your actions? I don't see why you would let a paladin gain antipaladin abilities instead of falling. That just encourages LUL RANDUM Chaotic Neutral behavior instead of sticking to a code of conduct.
When I say I warn the Paladin, I mean that if they, say, rough up somebody for information or start acting far to aggressively in diplomatic situations, I'll point out that this isn't Paladin behavior. If they do something like genocide, however, I don't feel a warning is necessary, as they should know full well that this is an evil act.
As for letting Paladins gain Antipaladin abilities, I prefer to have Paladins fall slowly rather than suddenly. I think something that major should come with a lot of character development instead of happening suddenly. There are negative consequences, but they aren't mechanical. It's be something more along the lines of another Paladin coming along and trying to redeem the fallen individual or eliminate the threat she poses.
At this point of reading through your post I'm starting to wonder if I'm just being trolled. This reads like something written by someone who has never played the game. I'll just go ahead and stop because I cannot seriously find anything positive about this and I would leave the table if my GM brought out his sexual fetishes like this.
...
I don't want to use the term Barbarian, as I feel that, due to some of the fantasy counterpart cultures I use, it could be taken as somewhat offensive (I have lots of Native Americans, Polynesians, and Mesoamericans, and I want many of their NPCs to have levels in the class, but I am not calling them Barbarians), Rangers are an organization and not a class in my world, and, while I have no problem with Asian characters and equipment, I would prefer not to have base classes that specifically say Asian in their names. I feel it discuragous non-Asian characters from taking those classes, and I want every core and base class to be able to be taken by any character of any ethnicity....
It's a style choice. I'd rather leave ethnicity out of the class names and have the classes be neutral in that regard, and I really don't want to use the term Barbarian. My campaign setting deals extensively with Native American culture, and I don't feel comfortable using what word because of this.
Limiting Smite evil may not be entirely necessary, an alternative is boosting other similar abilities like maybe doubling the Favoured Enemy choices (get 2 different ones per time instead of one)
I dunno, I dont have much to offer, but the question that occurs to me when I read your campaign rules is why *not* play a Paladin. The class has always been powerful but limited by a strict code and only working vs evil. Removing both of those features feel like they make it a no brainer to play, and no brainers aren't a good idea for game balance.
Have you considered that you may have let your recent play experience flavour these decisions?
It's not that. It's that I'm pulling alignment because it doesn't fit the gray morality I'm so fond of, and I saw smite anything as a possible way to compensate. I think I will rethink that particular decision.
The races are broken. Amalgams and Orcs are simply overpowered. Hybrids are just weird (all skills as class skills).
I was worried about this. Hybrids concern me the most, as they seem like they may be a bit underpowered. Could you post why they are overpowered so that I can address the issue?
Power level should be, by the Advanced Race Guide playtest, at 14 points do to the lack of stat penalties.
One more rule I forgot to mention. No communing with deities. I like my deities mysterious and ambiguous.
On the other hand, Clerics can't lose their powers for becoming corrupt. That's a Druid/Paladin thing, and Paladins don't lose their powers, they just slowly accrue evil powers as replacements.
I really like parts of these houserules. Im not sure these complaints about smiting anything are valid. As long as the number of smites per day remains the same, it shouldnt be much different. As far as that goes, these balance issues seem more like stealth flavor issues. Any smite increasing stuff might make it problematic though.
Im not sure alignment detection is equivalent to a bonus feat. You might want to limit it to a specific feat for both classes. As far as religion goes, what happens to favored weapons?
Favored weapons? Pick any simple or martial weapon when creating your church, I guess. Sure, it means every Cleric gets the weapon they want, and I can't see why they wouldn't take a martial weapon, but I don't see that as being overpowered. The Cleric will probably take a warhammer or longsword instead of a mace pretty much all the time unless she wants to go THF, but I don't think that'll unbalance the game at all.
Any smite increasing stuff might make it problematic though.
Maybe that's what they were getting at.
The way you are handling religion is a lot like Eberron. There are Evil clerics in the Church of the Silver Flame. They THINK they are doing good. The deities there are standoffish, too. The celestials & such are what handle any divine interactions, if at all.
Any smite increasing stuff might make it problematic though.Maybe that's what they were getting at.
Oh. Well I didnt realize that. Im not even sure where you can get extra smite per day though.
The way you are handling religion is a lot like Eberron. There are Evil clerics in the Church of the Silver Flame. They THINK they are doing good. The deities there are standoffish, too. The celestials & such are what handle any divine interactions, if at all.
I like Eberron religion, but with a bit more ambiguity (as in, the churches can't even agree on their teachings) and more religious violence.
I like some of your houserules, especially the armor, knowledge checks, and feats ruling, but other things I am not a fan of, such as the complete removal of alignment. Now I'm not criticizing, just saying that I have yet to enjoy any game I've played in that removed alignments, but if your players are having fun more power to you for coming up with all these rules and getting people to embrace them, lord knows I've had enough arguments from my cousins when we play in my homebrew setting and they run into the lack of wizards and nonhuman paladins
|
How do you handle Clerics and alignments? Well, specifically all the alignment based spells? To me, this is the biggest <only really> obsticle to completely removing alignment.
What I typically do is to say that all obvious races/churches/organizations/etc that the faith opposses, count as evil, while only those that are specifically friendly are treated as good for a Cleric's good aligned spells. But it's hard to really balance, as too much oppossing alignment makes those spells really useful or too good, and too little opposing alignment conflicts makes both the class and those spells really poor and not so fun to play.
Leaving it up to the DM, in my opinion, is a terrible idea, because it leaves the players not knowing what to reasonably expect from a 20 level class, which can be devistantingly terrible and not at all fun.
Another thing to keep in mind, this might dramatically alter the way such spells work between the party, which can be very, very bad.
Also, I don't like the Hybrid's all skills are Class Skills. Maybe instead something like the ability to pick any 1-4 Skills? 2 Seems good?
Alignment: I agree that alignment doesn't fit all games that well, but some provision should be made for smite evil / holy word / all the cleric spells that are alignment based.
Races: I'm not sure why you changed all the core races, but it does create some balance issues. The movement types on Amalgams are going to have a HUGE impact on tactical combat. I don't see the changes really adding much to the flavor of the races, maybe just leave them as in the core?
Other things: I aplaud your armor changes and your raise dead rules. I,m not so sure about fluid feats though.
|
|
Also, having reread it, I really like what you did with sneak attack. I'm still iffy on the armor (I like having a lot of different armors, and would actually like more that offer different stats) and the Feats, (which I'd rather play with and see how it really feels before I say).
If you ever do a PbP here, I'd like to test it out. :)
I'll fix the races. I was worried about their balance, which is part of why I posted this thread. Thanks for doing a breakdown. That'll help me fix them. The reason I went away from Core is that I made some role changes, like the fact that Dwarves don't live underground and nobody is an ancestral enemy of another race, and Gnomes aren't Fey-like. That necessitated some mechanics changes to compensate, and I think I need to go back and redo the changes. Core doesn't fit the fluff, but my stuff is too unbalanced.
Yea, sneak attack had to change. I've always found it a bit underpowered and lacking in precision (it doesn't hit as often as it should), so I decided to make it more accurate but a little less damage. Even with 2 damage instead of 1d6, however, the fact that it'll be hitting a lot more often still means more sneak attack damage will be done by Rogues, but they could use the buff. Plus, it makes the Rogue precision based like it should be. In certain situations it can be the most accurate thing in the party, and I think that's good for the class.
As for feats, I have two reasons for that. First, it gives Fighters a way to shine by making them incredibly versatile without jacking up their power, and secondly I just like the idea of feats being more like spells. It makes martial classes a bit more fun, as they can switch up their tactics to fit individual situations just like a Wizard can.
As for armor, I prefer it to be aesthetic, and the raise dead rules just plain fit my campaign setting, and give everybody a reason to fear death properly, as even true resurrection can leave a person permanently damaged. I much prefer that over the revolving door afterlife. Plus, nobody knowing what the afterlife is even or if there is one, since raised people can't remember what happened after death, makes death mysterious, like it should be.
I found this, which explains how to handle pulling alignment well. I'll use it.
You know fighters can already retrain their bonus feats right? If you wanted to make them more versatile, unsure this is the way to go about it.
You know fighters can already retrain their bonus feats right? If you wanted to make them more versatile, unsure this is the way to go about it.
A couple every once in a while.
I really like the idea of treating feats as spells. It helps Fighters, but that's not my only motive. I want to make characters in general more versatile, and I want to axe feat taxes.
Just be aware that this will also give every caster every crafting feat necessary without having to pay for them. Any downtime day, the caster just switches every feat to a crafting feat (or the specific one, to make the item that day) and crafts whatever they want.
Just things to keep in mind. I dont see that as a huge negative, but you're going to get some weird consequences
Another reason for nor wearing a chain shirt would be its weight.
Just want to add that overall, these houserules look pretty good to me; I'd be happy to play under them.
Though - as pointed out - the races could use some tweaking; maybe replace climb / swim speeds with smaller racial skill bonuses as part of that? Haven't really done a full analysis myself, though I might get to that later...
On paladins and smiting: Compare, for example, the guide archetype ranger. I don't think smite-anything is going to be a problem - though I would say that the bypass-any-DR doesn't apply to mindless targets unless your religion considers that type of thing (typically undead) to be inherently evil. (And if you think, say, all constructs are evil - you'd best RP that and be prepared for conflict with the local wizards' guild...)
Thanks.
I expected the race thing when I made the thread. I'm going back and reconstructing them from the ground up.
Kelsey -- balancing races is tricky. Rather than just provide lists of abilities to suit flavor, you might use something like the Advanced Races Guide to try and keep all the options more or less on even footing. It's a far sight from perfect, but it's better than nothing.
I have the ARG playtest, but I'm using Golden's Guide for this project. I'm also pulling Amalgams. I don't really need that race.
Edit: Eh. ARG playtest it is.
Races redone.
Fetchlings and amalgams are disallowed.
Each elemental Planetouched (Undine, Ifrit, Oriad, Sylph) gets a bonus feat.
Aasimar loses spell like ability and gains a bonus feat.
Tiefling loses spell like ability and fiendish sorcery and gains a bonus feat.
All characters get +2 to one physical ability score and +2 to one mental ability score. Player chooses which scores. Characters do not get stat penalties from race.
All bonuses are racial.
Human
Humanoid
Medium Size
30 ft movement speed
Bonus Feat
+1 Skill point per level
+1 to all saving throws
Elf
Humanoid
Medium Size
30 ft movement speed
+2 racial bonus to saving throws against disease, injested poison, and becoming nauseated or sickened
+10 ft racial bonus to speed when using charge, run, or withdraw actions.
+2 to Perception checks.
Low Light Vision.
Bonus Feat
Dwarf
Humanoid
Medium Size
30 ft movement speed
+4 bonus on Constitution checks and Fortitude saves against fatigue, exaustion, and other effects from running, forced marches, thirst, starvation, or hot or cold environments.
Darkvision 60 ft
Moves at normal speed in difficult terrain that is primarily stone.
Can hold breath for 4 rounds times Constitution score before suffocating or drowning.
Bonus Feat
Gnome
Humanoid
Medium Size
30 ft movement speed
+2 Saving throws against fear and illusions
+2 bonus to two Knowledge skills
Low Light Vision
Treated as small size for the purpose of feat and prestige class prerequisites and mounts.
Bonus Feat
Orc
Humanoid
Medium Size
30 ft movement speed
Bonus to saving throws against poison equal to hit dice.
When an Orc is below 0 hit points but not dead, it may continue to act. If it does so, it is staggered and loses 1 hit point per round. An Orc still dies when it reaches negative hit points equal to it's constitution score.
Low Light Vision
Bonus Feat
Hybrid
Humanoid
Medium Size
30 ft movement speed
+1 Skill point per level
Has two favored classes
Low Light Vision
Bonus Feat
Traits are not used.
Ability scores are 25 point buy unless otherwise specified.
When leveling up, you may either roll HP or just assume an average roll (which is half of the maximum dice roll, not a fraction). It is the player's choice.
Witches have a choice between summoning a familiar and forming an arcane bond. Witch familiars work the same as wizard familiars, as does the arcane bond feature. A witch writes spells in a grimoire, which functions like a wizard's spellbook but holds a great deal of ritual significance to the witch. A witch who loses a grimoire is treated as a witch in another Pathfinder game who has lost a familiar. A witch coven does not need to posses a hag. Bluff is on the list of witch class skills.
Thanks. I like my races a bit similar, because it encourages choosing race based on roleplay desires instead of mechanical desires.
Making all armor either a breastplate or full plate definitely skews encounter customization. Certain types of armors only exist so that NPCs can equip them to regulate their AC to their CR. In addition, it also is there to kind of guide creation.
It'd cause some problems, but it's hard to pin down. Mostly that you'd have enemies who would fall into "AC Camps" of either 14, 16 or 19. Hard to get, say, AC 18 or AC 15, and even harder if you're doing something like "tribal raiders." I want this tribal raider to have 14 AC, since he's CR 1, but he's going to have a Dex of 3. No way to get armor on him now, so his AC is 17. 13 or bust.
This is mostly just internal consistency.
Making all armor either a breastplate or full plate definitely skews encounter customization. Certain types of armors only exist so that NPCs can equip them to regulate their AC to their CR. In addition, it also is there to kind of guide creation.
It'd cause some problems, but it's hard to pin down. Mostly that you'd have enemies who would fall into "AC Camps" of either 14, 16 or 19. Hard to get, say, AC 18 or AC 15, and even harder if you're doing something like "tribal raiders." I want this tribal raider to have 14 AC, since he's CR 1, but he's going to have a Dex of 3. No way to get armor on him now, so his AC is 17. 13 or bust.
This is mostly just internal consistency.
For that, I could go with hide equivalent armor (which could be a battered breastplate or something), and add a point or two of natural armor to get the AC I want. Quick and easy fix to get to a specific AC with medium armor. For heavy armor, equip a breastplate equivalent armor and add natural armor. It counts as medium armor, but all that really effects is run speed, max dexterity, and armor check, which doesn't screw over the encounter balance much. Only max dex has any real effect, and I could take that into account before adding natural armor.
The players don't see the stat blocks during play, so the existence of the natural armor doesn't need to be explained.