We use the following:
1) Vital Strike is usable on an action used to attack. So you can charge, cleave or full attack with vital strike. The extra damage dice only apply to single attack though.
2) Monks are Full BAB and 1D10 and aren't entirely restricted to monk weapons. Monk weapon depend on the order of monk you play. To give an example I have order of Aldori Dueling Monks in Mivon and the Aldori Dueling sword is considered a monk weapon for them. It wouldn't be for monk from elsewhere though they could learn via the faction rules. This appeared to have no impact really other than standard attacks hit better.
3) Rogues get +1 to hit on sneak attacks at 3rd level and with ever other sneak attack dice to max of +5 at higher level. This class feature is called Sneak Attack Precision. It applies to the Ninja as well but not any other class that gets sneak attack. This fixes the problem with rogues hitting the higher levels.
4) Leadership is not allowed to be taken as feat. It's something you can gain by role playing. Kind of going back to the 2nd edition build a keep and gain follower idea.
5) The feat Clustered Shot has -2 to hit on it. Found in previous games that once you had clustered shot you used it 100% of the time as it had no downside.
6) At level 8 and 16 instead of adding 1 to one stat we allow you to add 1 to 2 stats. These always eased the agonizing over raising that 13 to 14 when you focusing on you high stat.
7) You can swap 1 weapon focus for another weapons at odd level ups(3,5,7,...). This applies to chains as well. So swapping weapon focus affect specialization and greater weapon focus. We found sometimes you just want to change and this allows that.
Standard 4d6 method can result in someone being screwed over by bad luck.All this arguing over whether low or high point buy is bad and wrong is the reason why the Standard 4d6 method is greatly superior.
Discuss.
I find the it worse than that. 4D6 end up with lot of games that have one with the equivalent of 40 point buy that shows up right along that person the rolls nothing higher than 12. Makes rolling bad even worse.
John, the fact that you have to make choices with a lower point buy is the POINT of a lower point buy. You can't just grab every feat that interests you without trading off something else.
Some people consider that sort of rigor and discipline to be a FEATURE not a BUG.
Standard 4d6 method can result in someone being screwed over by bad luck.All this arguing over whether low or high point buy is bad and wrong is the reason why the Standard 4d6 method is greatly superior.
Discuss.
Eh, that's pretty much eliminated by the way we do it. Up to 3 re-rolls allowed, take the highest (ex. somebody rolls a 10, 10, 12, 8, 4, 12 they can re-roll), with one final GM roll if all the rolls come out s+@&ty.
Very rarely results in someone having terrible stats, though sometimes results in a rethink of character concept (if you wanted to play a MAD class but only had 1-2 stats above 10, you probably wanna swap 'em around to make a caster or summat).
It's worked well so far, and I find it a lot more fun. I just find it funny that anything "videogame-y" gets jumped on as bad and wrong on these forums half the time, and Point Buy is probably the most videogame-y way to pick stats.
Well, there’s a difference between house rules and campaign set up.
A house rule is the triple 20 insta-death rule as mentioned. (I hate this rule. I once spend a week drawing up a PC for a very involved intensive RPing game we had, with emails, telecons, etc. First combat, monster got 20/20/20 my guy died. No more.) We have a guideline: No more than one summoned critter, cohort, etc per PC at a time. Same for bad guys. Few other actual rules that change gameplay.
HP rolls have a minimum, d6 is 2, d8 is 3, d10 is 4.
Campaign set up is “No evils” , “20 pt build, but nothing below 10 unless racial” and so forth. We ban Synthesist Summoner ( as the rules are too complex) and master Summoner (see above). No guns. Several others.
You do know that a regular summoner from a pretty early level on can pool his HP with his eidolons as well, and just take the hitpoints you cause him to lose on the eidolon and the other way around, if necessary?Close but I'm reading it now and it doesn't say it works the other way around.
Starting at 1st level, a summoner forms a close bond with his eidolon. Whenever the eidolon takes enough damage to send it back to its home plane, the summoner can sacrifice any number of hit points. Each hit point sacrificed in this way prevents 1 point of damage done to the eidolon. This can prevent the eidolon from being sent back to its home plane.So the summoner can heal the eidolon this way but as mentioned before all you have to do is focus the summoner and you bring the eidolon down since he has no self healing.
My bad, that only comes at level 14 with life bond.
At 14th level, a summoner’s life becomes linked to his eidolon’s. As long as the eidolon has 1 or more hit points, the summoner is protected from harm. Damage in excess of that which would reduce the summoner to fewer than 0 hit points is instead transferred to the eidolon.
Magic item shops generally don't exist, aside from those who craft potions and some utilitarian scrolls. You usually need to contract with a caster to craft a specific item by order.
I like the idea of no magic shops but the difficulty I have is where do the PCs sell magic items then? If you have no one selling them then obviously there is no one buying them. If there was market of people buying magic items shops would exist to buy magic items. Just makes things difficult when you've sold tons of magic items to the local shop keeper, why wouldn't he start selling them?
One solution I've been toying with is magic is limited. If you want more powerful magic created you need to supply less magic items to extract the magic to create the more powerful ones. This means players would be able to sell the items but they wouldn't remain to be sold again but the demand for minor magic would be there allowing them to be sold.
|
Here's an excerpt of what I send out to my players before a campaign - some are house rules, some are just clarifications as to how I see things in the game that I wrote down because of loooong arguments:
Character Death – If you die and decide you don’t want to be raised in-game (through a raise dead spell or something similar), you may create a new character that is one level below the character that died.
Charging – I go with the 3.0 rules for charging. That is, you don’t necessarily have to charge directly at the creature. You may end your charge at a square where you may hit the creature, not necessarily directly at the creature. So you could end up to the right or left of it.
Undead – Undead do not need to use Perception to see creatures. Most of them have no eyes. They detect life and death. They can feel where a creature is by detecting its life or its undeath, similar to Tremorsense. So don’t try to sneak up on a lich, even if you are invisible and super sneaky. Or even a skeleton. It knows you are there.
Invisibility – Invisibility is not fool-proof. Think of it as the camouflage that the Predator has, where if you reeeeaaally look, you would be able to see someone. So all it does is add a +40 to your Stealth check, or +20 if you move. It does allow you to be Stealthed without cover or concealment, but each time you move, you have to make another Stealth check at +20 to see if you are being Perceived. The +20 and +40 include footprints, cold breath, and the other stuff that might cause an invisible creature to be Perceived…with the exception of certain times, such as walking across a shallow lake, wherein the GM might give the Perceiver a circumstance bonus. Also, if you shoot an arrow at an invisible creature and hit them, the arrow is destroyed. You cannot determine the location of an invisible create by looking for arrows stuck in it. Also, invisibility goes away after your first attack, not after your first standard action.
Alignment - Just because someone pings on the detect evil/good radar, doesn’t mean that that person has actually done an evil/good act. In my worlds, things are not so black and white. Alignment is not only what you have done as what you want to do. I want to be a good person, therefore I ping as good. I want to be evil, so I ping as evil – even if I have never done evil – due to fear of repercussions, etc. I don’t really care, so I ping as neutral. If a paladin kills someone because they ping as evil, with no proof that they have ever done evil…that’s evil! Goodbye paladin powers!
Paladins – Lawful good; anti-paladins can be chaotic evil or reflective of their (evil) deities. See the codes in the deity books for paladins/anti-paladins. No neutral deities.
Take 20 – Sometimes I will say, “You cannot take a 20.” Most of the time it will be because you failed a skill check of some kind and want to try again. If that is the case, just assume that whatever it is that you are trying to do, you sucked hard at, and will fail at it. You had a chance to do it, but you blew it, and no matter how hard you try, you won’t be able to do it. In game terms, just assume that either the DC is too high for you, or that there was no reason for the check in the first place. For example, if I say, “Roll a DC 20 Perception check to see if you find anything in the room,” and you roll an 18, you don’t find anything. However, if you had succeeded, you would have found the +5 Adamantine Full Plate of Gender Switching. If you then say, “Well, I want to take a 20,” and I say that you can’t, that means that the Full Plate was never there to be found in the first place. You had a chance to find it, but didn’t, so now the Full Plate was never there. I won’t always say you can’t take a 20, but when I do, it is because I want it to be a chance that you do something…not a sure thing.
DR- So I don’t have to remember another rules set, DR is only overcome by what it says after the slash. So even though you are fighting a werewolf with a +5 dagger, it still has 10/silver.
Spellcasting services – Unlike what the book says, if you want to hire a spellcaster to cast a spell for you, it will at a MINIMUM cost the same as the cost of an equivalent scroll. That does not include the cost of getting the spellcaster to travel, etc. If you want a high level wizard to cast a high level spell in a dungeon that takes a week to get to, not only would you have to pay for the spell (scroll cost), you would have to pay for two weeks of the wizard’s time (which would probably be a lot).
Healing and Scars – This is more for flavor, but when you are healed magically, the magic simply speeds up the natural healing process. So you will have scars and stuff. Especially when you are knocked out (0 hp or more). When you are brought to below 0 HP and survive, you will roll to see where your scar is and write down what kind of scar it is, depending on what you were fighting and how it was hitting you. There should be a spot on your character sheet that keeps track of your scars, essentially listing each time you were brought to near death. For every two VISIBLE scars you have, you take a +1 circumstance bonus to Intimidate, and a -1 to Diplomacy.
This goes for losing a limb as well. If you lose a limb (or eye) and you get restored, the limb (or eye) will be maimed and scarred. It will have no in game penalties, it just looks super gnarly, and counts as a visible scar.
Torso – 1-60
Crotch-61-75
Neck-76-85
Head-86-100
If you are brought below 0 HP, healed, then brought below 0 HP again in the same combat, you would receive two scars, or three, or however many scars that correspond to you falling in battle.
Groups of creatures (Mobs) – I use the mob rules from DMs Guide II. Basically, creatures can form a mob that functions similar to a swarm. So if you are a 15th level fighter and you see 60 goblins running your way…you might be boned. In theory, yes, you could hire 200 bums and mob a dragon…however, good luck getting those bums to charge a dragon for 2 silver.
Animal companions for druids and rangers – You can release animal companions from service whenever you want and then do your 24 hour ceremony. For instance, if you enter a new terrain type and you want to pray for a more appropriate animal, such as when you are traveling at sea for a couple of months, you may release the old companion with no hard feelings. However, you just pray for nature to provide you with a new companion, which means the DM gets to decide what shows up for service. You can pick the animal companion you have at level one, but any other time is DM’s choice.
Monks – The character class “monk” is essentially a priest of Irori. So they would come from and/or be trained from those temples of Irori only. Also that means that there are no clerics of Irori. Other followers of different gods also have monks, however they are the reading kind, not the punching kind.
Falling damage – increased from 1d6 to 1d12. You can really land wrong. Also because d12s are lonely.
Spell Components – Assume you have a spell pouch that contains the components you need for your spells. If there is a gold cost, just deduct that much from your treasury (as though you bought the 500 gp diamond back in town). In an emergency, for instance when a character dies, and your group does not have 5,000 gold in your stash (having spent it all on magic items), a character can sacrifice a magic item worth at least as much as the spell needs in order to cast the spell. Essentially, the magic item becomes the component or focus needed for the spell.
Identifying Items – Unless you can identify the item’s magical properties, the properties will not function. I know that seems counter-intuitive, but it just makes it easier for me to not keep track of something the players might be using without knowing what it is. You can know that the item is magical, but unless you do a successful spellcraft check or someone shows you how to unlock the magic of the item (such as a shopkeeper), its power remains dormant. Of course, if it is something obvious like a glowing sword, the glowing will work, but not any other powers.
I don't like low point buy because it encourages (almost forces) dump stats. Every fighter int he world having a 7 charisma is just lame. Likewise, the non-dumper getting beat down by the dumper just because he's slightly more charming is also lame.Why do you assume that "low point buy" (your words, 15 points is not considered "low" by the GAME DESIGNERS who, you know, DEFINE THE TERMS of the game) "almost forces" dumping stats?
I'll tell you what's lame, it's not that every fighter has 7 cha, it's that every fighter HAS TO HAVE 20 str. That's what's lame. Since the only reason the 7 cha is needed is so the fighter can have 20 str, I'm forced to assume that you believe every fighter has to have 20 str.
It's the insistence on 20 str that is the problem Vestrial. Because if you could live with 18 str, you wouldn't be "forced" to "dump stats.
My druid's highest attribute score pre-racial adjustment was 16 and her lowest was 10. After racial adjustments she started play with an 18 in her prime stat, wisdom. Her second highest stat, 14, went into dex because she wanted to be an archer. She has been a quite powerful character. The idea that you have to have a 20 in your prime stat at level 1 is a fallacy that drives this notion that you have to dump stats with a 15 point buy. You only have to "dump stats" if you insist on pumping up your other stats.
Even a fighter with 18 strength is likely dumping charisma. Assuming you have 16 strength and a +2 strength racial, then that leaves you with 5 points. If the fighter wants a 14 in con and a 13 in dex or int(to meet various feat prereqs), he is going to have to dump something. the fighter probably wants some wisdom too to make up for his awful will save.
I think the real reason people dump scores is that having a 10 charisma isn't going to make you the face of the party. Diplomacy is still going to be left up to someone with a decent skill pool along with higher charisma.
We used the 4d6, ignore the lowest method, I got real lucky with my half elf sorceress, her lowest stat is a 13 (Str and Wis), plus a 15, two 16s and an 18 (Cha, and I threw in the racial bonus to make a 19)
One of our original party members was a halfling rogue with a 5 Str and, bizarrely, a 7 Dex.
Don't know what the heck he was thinking.
Character Generation
15 point buy
2 traits, which may be re-flavored to fit your character
Average hitpoints per level
General Gameplay
Effects that expand one's critical range stack, linearly (Improved Critical and Keen on a 18-20/x2 weapon results in a threat range of 12-20/x2, for example).
One can choose to take the average on any healing dice while not in combat.
Attacks made while not visible to your target, such as through stealth, are treated the same as attacking while invisible; +2 to-hit, against flat footed AC.
Two-weapon Fighting and Vital Strike are reduced to a single feat that scales with your BAB.
The summoner spell list does not affect the prices of magical items, even those made by a summoner.
Negative hitpoints extend to CON + character level.
Healing spells (including remove disease and the like) are once again Necromancy spells, and Conjuration [Healing] no longer exists.
Spells that create undead creatures no longer have the evil descriptor.
Oh, and if someone tries to over-pay for a wand of lesser restoration or the like, I politely remind them that paladins and rangers exist, and taking crafting feats is common for them. :P
In point of fact, your druid's scores are more min-maxed than I care for, and actually fairly well-illustrate my point. You spent a full two-thirds of your points on wisdom. And you do have a dump stat, by which I mean a stat that is sub human norms. I would prefer players to be able to build more well-rounded characters without gimping themselves in their primary role.
I rolled up my druid, using the 4d6 drop lowest method. I don't recall her raw scores (it was six years ago for Chrissakes) but her highest raw score was 16, her lowest was 10. As I recall I compared her result to a point buy and it matched a 17, but I could be wrong there by a point or two. She mostly had 10s and 11s with a 16 and a 14. Not a terribly unusual result in that method of rolling, a bit higher than average, but that's all.
None of her scores ended up below 10, so I'm not sure where you're getting this "stat that is sub human norms" from.
My point in using her was that she is a pretty good example of what you would call a "low point buy". Most people consider a "dump stat" to be a stat at least below 10, and many consider it to be a dump stat only if less than 8. Since she has no score below a 10, even if she had been a point buy, I don't think she would have a "dump stat". And a 16 is hardly a "max" stat.
If you think scores of 16, 14, 11, 11, 10, 10 are "min-maxed"... (Update, or maybe it was scores of 16, 14, 12, 10, 10, 10... yeah, that actually rings a bell, I remember her results were mathematically interesting to the GM)
Wow. That's all I can say to that.
In terms of house rules the major set I use is my replacement wealth/magic item rules, that can be found in this thread. As I hate the wealth=power issue in pathfinder.
Here are my house rules:
Rule: You have 78 points with which to distribute to your stats on a point-for-point basis. You must buy four of your stats up to 10 and the other two up to at least 8. Once this is done you apply racial modifiers.
Rationale: It keeps the math simple, it's enough to have good stats for MAD classes, and it partially offsets some of the stricter feat prerequisities resulting from another house rule. I treat the APL as +1 due to this stat array.
Rule: Standard races only.
Rationale: I'm running a fantasy game, not Mos Eilsey Cantina: the RPG.
Rule: No evil alignments.
Rationale: You really only see two types of evil characters: annoying, stupid-evil, and entertaining, devious-evil. The former just pisses off the table, while the latter makes me want to play Vampire.
Rule: Humans who have a 10 Intelligence know both Common and their cultural language. If you start with less than a 10 Int you only know your cultural language.
Rationale: In my gameworld each nation/culture has its own language, so this is just logical. Also makes players think twice about dumping Int.
Rule: Setting specific spells/feats/traits/etc. are not allowed.
Rationale: Since I run my games in my homebrew world with its own pantheon it doesn't make sense to have the Golarion specific stuff.
Rule: If a feat has an attribute prerequisite, you must meet that prerequiste without counting magical bonuses to the stat in question.
Rationale: This is to avoid awkward situations where you lose access to a feat because your belt/headband got stolen/sundered. And, more to the point, I just don't like the idea of magic items helping you qualify for feats.
Rule: Clustered Shots doesn't exist.
Rationale: Archery is powerful enough as is; it doesn't need a cheap way to bypass DR.
That's all I can think of right now.
It's "Low point buy" because the resulting characters do not feel "heroic" given their ability scores.
Heh, I just have to respond to this...
So, being able to alter the cosmic fabric of reality, summon creatures into existence with a few mumbled syllables, blast raw energy beams in any direction, wield two full-sized swords without cutting off your own ear, heal the sick, create food and water from nothing doesn't feel "heroic"...
Well... That doesn't do it, but a few more points in a few attribute boxes dings the "heroic" meter...
LOL, what a funny world.
I removed alignment completely. It's quite liberating.
I added a "true" alignment so that devils and demons and angels aren't the same alignment as their mortal counterparts.
Every 10 Intelligence above 10 nets you a "take-backsie" on an action. "I'm going to ready that haste instead of casting it so I can hit everyone-- that's a far better idea." We should honestly also do this with Wisdom.
Stat rolls are no longer stat mod + d20, but stat + d20 with the DC increased by 10. We just didn't like that group with a fighter, rogue, barbarian and bard with 12 Int and a wizard with 18 Int rolling to solve a puzzle (DC 20) the group can get a 19 or 20 and succeed, but the Wizard has to get 16-20, so it's likely that after the wizard rolls, and fails, the rest of the party will shotgun roll and one of them will get it instead. It's annoying-- the character's most powerful attribute is just ignored and instead relegated to the luck of the die. This counts for everything-- strength, dexterity... So, now we just roll stat. Now the Wizard has to roll 12 and the others have to roll 18-- and when the Wizard has 22, he has to roll 8, the others have to roll 18, and when the Wizard has 28, he has to roll 2, the others have to roll 18. This makes stat checks something that players want to do because they know their PC might succeed, instead of something they avoid doing because of their high chance of failure.
I removed alignment completely. It's quite liberating.Yes.
I have thought about this, but there is a lot of alignment stuff woven into classes, spells and the like, so I have not pulled the trigger on it.
What I have done is explain that in my world alignment is not absolute, it is a general guide to probable behavior, but not a guarantee of behavior, nor proof of guilt in previous events.
So our paladin will do "detect evil" and see a townsperson radiating a slight bit of evil and will want to "do something about it" and I'll have to say "The presence of evil intent is not enough to prove evil action. All you know is that the person is predisposed towards evil, but they may overcome that predisposition through discipline, training or desire to avoid punishment."
I may get rid of alignment entirely at some point, but so far this "alignment is a continuum, not a bunch of distinct buckets" approach is working.
Arg! Avatar overload! Man I wish I could upload my own avatar so it could be truly unique...
|
I have thought about this, but there is a lot of alignment stuff woven into classes, spells and the like, so I have not pulled the trigger on it.
For the most part my group hasn't bothered with aligned spells and the like, so my 'everyone is treated as Neutral' hasn't come into play much. Nor has anyone wanted to run a Paladin either. *shrugs* Hasn't been an issue so far.
Vestrial, I greatly prefer rolling up my characters to using a point buy system. I like the randomness of it. I'm too old-school I think. I have only used a point buy system myself twice, and both times the 15 point outcome was completely consistent with the dice rolling system as far as I could tell. And again, you have a very funny concept of "min-maxing" if you think a character with those scores is even remotely something anyone would consider "min-maxed". Hell, I don't think most players would consider her scores "optimized" which is well before you get to "min-maxed" range. I'd put her at slightly above average, which fits since a fifteen point buy was originally designed to more or less match the standard die rolling method in terms of average results. All of my characters are rolled up either in front of the GM or we use a secure online dice rolling web page to record and verify the rolls. Not that we don't trust each other, but just to make sure nobody has to worry about being tempted. :)
18 is not the maximum human potential either. Every system I know of allows for a maximum of at least 20 after racial adjustments. It is rare for me to see any first level character these days without a 20 in their primary stat, even with a 15 point buy. With a 25 point buy it's virtually guaranteed.
I don't know if your splitting the stats into two separate point buys would make any significant difference. It might reduce min-maxing a bit.
I think you and I probably share a similar attitude about how people tend to build characters. The difference we have seems to be that I don't really see the advantage of higher point buys. The GM's job is to run a balanced campaign anyway, so it's like you want to get a bigger paycheck, but if you do, all the prices are going to go up anyway. It might feel better to get that bigger number, but in the end you're only going to get the same stuff for your money anyway.
In short, if any average joe can challenge the 'hero' to a duel of wits/strength/wisdom, etc, he should not have a better than average chance of winning said duel.
Why would you think this? Are you suggesting that every "hero" has to be at least average in every attribute, or they are lacking in heroism?
That's just bizarre. You seem to be suggesting that if some guy off the street can beat the "hero" in a test of wits, then the "hero" isn't really a "hero" at all.
You realize, I assume, that the concept about "average" people in PF and other games is that they have random attribute values themselves. So if the average intelligence is a 10, then when you nab that random person off the street to test against your potential "hero" that random person has a 50% chance of being smarter than your hero. So that makes your hero less heroic?
I just don't get this way of thinking. Besides the fact that the whole of modern culture has been pushing the concept of "flawed heroes" who lack some critical attribute, be it wisdom, intelligence, constitution, whatever for some time now. Heroes are supposed to be flawed, in case you didn't realize that.
House Rules:
15 Point Buy, only one dump stat allowed. If you are not human, half-orc or half-elf, the dump stat goes to the stat your race gets a negative modifier to; humans, half-elfs and half-orcs get to choose their dump stat. A dump stat can only be reduced by 2 points.
Each player gets to choose one of the following at character creation; +3 points for point buy, 2 additional traits (which can be from the same tree as others already chosen) or +600 starting gold.
Each character gets both +1 HP and Skill Point for Favored Class at level 1; if using alternate features for Favored Class, the alternate feature replaces the +1 HP.
An additional skill point, only to be spent on Profession or Craft skills.
Halflings Luck Bonus also includes a +1 Luck Bonus to AC. Halfling gain an additional trait at character creation.
Each player is assigned an extra feat by the GM at level 1, based upon their background and history. These are not combat related feats.
For combat, a natural 20 on the confirmation roll for threats causes maximum damage.
Magical traps, as part of their inherent design, do not detect as magical until triggered (you can't find them with detect magic). A rogue can still spot them with trapfinding, however. I don't like the idea that a magical trap can be bypassed with a cantrip that can be endlessly cast. I stole this one from GM Alexander, =)
|
- If a combatant is flanked, all adjacent opponents are treated as flanking him. I realize this is not RAW and it negates the "Gang Up" feat, but it makes sense to me.
- No evil alignments are allowed.
- No PvP is allowed.
- Not all characters are assumed literate.
- I strengthened several of the monk's abilities. ("And that's all I have to say about that!")
- I have never liked Paizo's taking beards away from dwarvish women. Dwarves in my world are more like Tolkien's or Pratchett's dwarves. It takes a DC 15 Heal or Perception check for a dwarf to determine the gender of another dwarf. A non-dwarf must succeed on a DC 30 Heal or Perception check to determine a dwarf's gender.
- Excessive use of puns may result in the GM's consulting the Wandering Damage Table.
As far as ability scores are concerned, I rather like the risk of luck being involved. After all, luck is the name of the game. May as well get used to dice rolling from day one, character one.
That being said, someone who rolls low for ALL their scores is screwed, and has no fun. So I tweak it a bit:
4D6 x 7, drop the lowest die each roll, drop the lowest score when you're done, assign anywhere you want.
If you want to adjust rolls further to fit prerequisites you want, I do allow an "exchange rate" of 2-for-1.
Considering I grew up in a game where you roll 3D6 x 6 and assign in order, then choose your race and class afterwards based on the minimum/maximums, I feel that's quite generous...
It turns out to be roughly equivalent to a 20 point buy, on average.
- I have never liked Paizo's taking beards away from dwarvish women.
Concur. My dwarvish women also have beards.
|
Our stat generation used to be 4d6, drop lowest, reroll 1s. That resulted in some impressive supermen running around the world, so we've switched to the 20-point buy.
Natural 20 attack rolls are not just auto-hits; they're auto-crits. Yes, that means that any threat rolled on some weapons is always a critical [bows, for example]. Hasn't unbalanced anything, so far. You can roll to confirm on a Nat 20, but the only thing that can happen is if you roll another Nat 20, the critical multiplier goes up by 1. Had a barbarian roll 3 Nat 20s with a greataxe, and that was pretty epic to describe.
Also, since I have both the Critical Hit and Fumble Decks, we use those, too. Only PCs and significant NPCs get to draw, though. Random Goblin #25 crits with his rusty dagger? Yeah, just roll the extra dice. No draw.
If you drink anything with my name on it [without my permission], your character will encounter a swarm of something. It will be poisonous. It may be incorporeal.
Every 5 minutes that the GM runs late, all players present gain 50xp, unless prior arrangements have been made. Luckily, I also host most of the games, so I'm almost always on time. This rule is primarily enforced when we run our games over Ventrillo & maptools.
Recently, I've started incorporating the Harrow deck into my games. At the start of each session, each player draws one card from the deck. That card may be used once at any time during play to provide a +2 bonus before any d20 roll, or a reroll after the roll. The player must somehow relate the card to the situation at hand. For example, the card is a Charisma card, and the player is making a Bluff check.
Oddly, my players seem to keep forgetting they have their cards, so I have to remind them from time to time that they exist.
Anywho,that's a small sampling of our house rules. Filch whatever seems shiniest.
Our stat generation used to be 4d6, drop lowest, reroll 1s. That resulted in some impressive supermen running around the world, so we've switched to the 20-point buy.
Indeed. If I need impressive supermen because of a difficult campaign, I will alter to:
4D6 x 7, reroll ones, keep rolling 6's (until it's not a 6), drop the lowest die and lowest score, assign as you want.
That can make for some epic scores, but always beware if I do this, the combats and challenges will be just as epic.
|
|
- I have never liked Paizo's taking beards away from dwarvish women.Concur. My dwarvish women also have beards.
Actually, I am the complete opposite in my opinion of this.
I played a female Dwarf, and this bearded women crap got so bad, I had my PC commit suicide.
I now clearly state, prior to joining a game, that I will not play in a game with bearded dwarven women, even if I am not playing a dwarf.
I also will not join a game with Kender, and will leave the room when they are discussed.
- I have never liked Paizo's taking beards away from dwarvish women.Concur. My dwarvish women also have beards.Actually, I am the complete opposite in my opinion of this.
I played a female Dwarf, and this bearded women crap got so bad, I had my PC commit suicide.
I now clearly state, prior to joining a game, that I will not play in a game with bearded dwarven women, even if I am not playing a dwarf.
I also will not join a game with Kender, and will leave the room when they are discussed.
That's a bit extreme, but I guess we all have our tolerance levels. If I had a player feel that strongly about the rules, I'd honestly let him walk out because it seems a bit narcissistic to me.
To be fair to the "older" generation of gamers and fantasy geeks, Dwarven women have had beards for decades until Pathfinder. We're used to reading about it and experiencing it, so it becomes the "norm" for us. It would be like taking away an elf's pointed ears.
As far as Kender PC's, people just flat out play them wrong. They think they need to pickpocket everything every round and justify it. That has led to a lot of animosity about the race. They are fearless, childish, and, yes, kleptomaniacs, but innocently so.
I'll allow Kender play, but I tell them if they steal from party members, they risk death. If they try to whine about "but that's what Kender do" then I calmly explain to them that I've been reading about Kender since before they were born, and they are not petty theives. You wanted the rogue's dagger, you got it. In the neck.
|
|
Actually, you reach a bit back farther, and this "bearded dwarven women" crap was not there.
I blame Discworld, and I dislike those as well.
Also, look in any D&D book, and you will find no pictures of these g$&&*%n bearded dwarven women.
I always put my distaste out there right away. People either respect my feelings, or they don't.
Wow. If one of my players felt so strongly, I would not use that rule, or any other house rule. I would rather lose a detail of my fantasy world than a player.
I now clearly state, prior to joining a game, that I will not play in a game with bearded dwarven women, even if I am not playing a dwarf.
Hm...
I now clearly state, prior to joining a game, that I will not play in a game where I am not the king or ruling queen of a large and prosperous nation, even if I'm not playing the king or ruling queen.
|
|
Wow. If one of my players felt so strongly, I would not use that rule, or any other house rule. I would rather lose a detail of my fantasy world than a player.
I now clearly state, prior to joining a game, that I will not play in a game with bearded dwarven women, even if I am not playing a dwarf.
Hm...
I now clearly state, prior to joining a game, that I will not play in a game where I am not the king or ruling queen of a large and prosperous nation, even if I'm not playing the king or ruling queen.
Yeah, I caught that sarcasm.
Not funny.
Hey, I wouldn't be too keen on playing in a game with bearded dwarven females. It ain't right. Doesn't mean I won't try to capitalize and become a king.
Although, bearded dwarven women does open up another method of information extraction, hmm....
|
|
As I recall, my old AD&D book said that most dwarven women had beards, and dwarven men were prone to be "forward in their affections" (or something like that) towards the few who lacked beards. I suppose I could look it up, but (a) my book is down in the basement and (b) it's probably not that important anyway.
I regret that I mentioned this.
|
|
Wow. If one of my players felt so strongly, I would not use that rule, or any other house rule. I would rather lose a detail of my fantasy world than a player.
I now clearly state, prior to joining a game, that I will not play in a game with bearded dwarven women, even if I am not playing a dwarf.
Hm...
I now clearly state, prior to joining a game, that I will not play in a game where I am not the king or ruling queen of a large and prosperous nation, even if I'm not playing the king or ruling queen.
This could work. Your throne name is Louis XVI.
I have a couple:
Weapon Focus does weapon groups like the fighters weapon training.
No evil alignments or chaotic neutral
No Traits
No Leadership Feat (this changes based on campaign)
Paladins can be Neutral Good or Lawful Neutral in addition to Lawful Good.
No Gunslinger, Alchemist or Summoner. (this changes based on campaign)
As word from the Creative Director, the world of Golarion has no bearded dwarven women.
That's Canon.
Canon has no bearing on house rules. If the DM says his Dwarf women have beards, then by the gods, they have beards.
Technically "Canon" (written in an officially licensed Paizo Product) says monks only have 3/4 BAB and d8 hit dice, but many people bump that to full BAB/d10 hit dice.
Canon also states that all the rules are optional and the main point of the game is having fun. I call this "Rule Zero". My rules lawyers call it a "Cop-Out".
Wow. If one of my players felt so strongly, I would not use that rule, or any other house rule. I would rather lose a detail of my fantasy world than a player.
I now clearly state, prior to joining a game, that I will not play in a game with bearded dwarven women, even if I am not playing a dwarf.
Depends on the player. Someone that refuses to join in a game just because of a "flavor text" detail has a higher tendency to be strictly purist, rules lawyer, DM challenging, drama queen, attention whore, or any number of other disruptive behaviors while in gameplay.
I'd rather have them walk out the door prior to character creation to spare myself and everyone else at the table the frustration, unless I knew them to be a great player who simply has a very personal preference. Then I'd work to compromise with them.
Since Kender have actual gameplay implications, I would consider removing that allowance if a player felt strongly enough.
Let's see, my house rules.
3d6 for ability checks, including initiative. Use a d20 for stabilize checks. Use a d20 if I'm too lazy to fairly downgrade a super high DC, like busting open a door. There's no way I'm gonna figure out what the equivalent to a DC 30 is on the fly.
4d6 drop lowest, reroll 1s for ability scores.
Extra feat at first level.
Everyone has Weapon finesse and agile maneuvers for free.
Rogues can choose to use sneak attack or my opportunities aplenty ability.
Monks do their base unarmed damage when doing combat maneuvers.
Everything in APG but summoner is allowed. Some rare exceptions may be made for the summoner. Most of UM is allowed, UC feats are on a "ask me" basis while the archetypes are allowed.
A good portion of the Golarion line material is not allowed.
Almost everything by Super Genius Games is allowed, and most of Rite Publishing is allowed. A lot of Kobold Press is allowed too.
In the future, I'm consider the following:
Manyshot returns to something more like the 3.5 version, where as a standard action you can shoot two arrows. Probably won't have such a steep penalty.