Because Area of Effect spells, because flanking, because reach ..."How many can I get with my fireball while avoiding my allies?"
"I move to flank."
"Is he in my reach?"
No grid needed.
Yeah, I'm sure that's going to be completely accurate ...
Yeah, I'm sure that's going to be completely accurate ...Because Area of Effect spells, because flanking, because reach ..."How many can I get with my fireball while avoiding my allies?"
"I move to flank."
"Is he in my reach?"
No grid needed.
reach, flank and AoE are relatively easy to play even in mind's eye theatre.
The most likely inconvenience of map-less are more along the lines of "you mean this room was that small all along?", or "I had to spend two rounds running here, how come he can charge me already?", or "that's not how I had imagine the terrain at all when I took that action last round" etc.
No system is perfect; you'd be trading one inconvenience for another as TOZ said.
I would say, offer the option at creation. "You can swap out for healing spells, or for a domain, not both domains".
Having not played/GMed with either, why the hate for Summoners and Gunfighters?
Opinions I've gleaned from this thread:
Summoners:'overpowered' and 'destroys a campaign'. Why?
Gunfighters: I agree they don't fit the theme of many campaigns, but why do some think they're overpowered?
On a side note, I'll be borrowing the 'natural 20' critical initative idea (getting a full round action if you had surprise already or a normal surprise action if you didn't).
Never mind, a search on the forums answered my questions. (and its too late to delete my post, which I don't want to steer the thread off-topic)
The most likely inconvenience of map-less are more along the lines of "you mean this room was that small all along?", or "I had to spend two rounds running here, how come he can charge me already?", or "that's not how I had imagine the terrain at all when I took that action last round" etc.No system is perfect; you'd be trading one inconvenience for another as TOZ said.
Half of those can be fixed easily by just garbing a sheet from a notebook with square lines and in 30 seconds giving them a simple overview of the place and it's features. No need to bust out the grid and minnis/tokens, use dots and letters. This is pretty much half-way between a grid and a all-in-head and most are happy. Especially me, who doesn't want to buy a mat and prints out A4, A3 paper with large squares for grids...
Half of those can be fixed easily by just garbing a sheet from a notebook with square lines and in 30 seconds giving them a simple overview of the place and it's features.
The most likely inconvenience of map-less are more along the lines of (...)
Indeed, experience and/or skills with narration and/or schematic drawing solve all of these issues. But map has the advantage of immediately setting the same sense of proportion and distance for every player.
Using hexes has been something ive been considering for a while. But there have been some questions i couldnt figure out. How do you handle larger creatures and the space they occupy as well as areas of effect?I replaced the square grid with hexes. It makes movement easier and more organic and elimnates the screwy rules about reach weapons.
I am considering several systems to replace most magic items that grant static bonuses (i.e. the Big 6), but haven't settled on the system yet.
My approach as DM is "The first hex doesn't count." So a Large creature, for example, occupies seven hexes -- one central 'free' hex, and six adjacent hexes. Each size category adds an additional 'layer' of adjacent hexes.
And it works the same way with AoEs. A fireball, for example, has one central free hex and then four layers of concentrically adjacent hexes. (One layer per 5 ft. of radius.)
Cone AoEs are a bit quirky, but really shine on the hex map. A cone of cold, for example, is simply a triangle of hexes, with 12 hexes on each side. (One hex per 5 ft. of range.) Here's the quirk: Because of the geometry of hexagons and how combat positioning operates, I allow the caster to place the cone's origin corner in an adjacent hex or inside of his own hex. (Obviously, the caster is undamaged by a cone corner placed in his own hex.) This allows cones to retain the flexibility they have in the square-world, while benefitting from the simplicity of the hex-world.
There are also some very good creature size and spell area templates in the 3.5 version of Unearthed Arcana. You may be able to find those templates somewhere online. I used those to create monster bases and spell templates.
For monsters, I just place the base under miniature to make it perfectly clear which spaces the creature occupies. I also like having full-sized spell templates for quick measurement so that we don't have to count out the area every time a spell is cast.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I use mats and minis because I like them. As a kid I played with action figures a lot and roleplaying lets me play with toys and pretend that they are doing things without feeling too much like a man-child.
I've often given players a partial map. It consists of a drawing of one room with the obvious features. You give it to the player who was assigned to mapmaking. It's a non-combat role. As many foes will be hidden at first, figures and battlemats would be ideal, if possible. A pencil partial map is best as changes can be made by the mapper.
|
As a player I've learned to insist on a sketch of the situation, because I often don't understand spatial descriptions without them.
I enjoy grids and tactical maneuvering on them, but they're not a must-have for me. I like to hear in advance from the GM what he plans to do; if he's going gridless I'll choose a build that doesn't rely on clever footwork or area denial.
That may just be worth three feats, but I guess the question is can a Two-handed Weapon user be as effective with the 7 extra feats.2 weapon, imp 2 weap, grt 2 weapon, sup 2 weap, weapon focus, weapon finesse, dex feat. that's 7 and thats if you don't pick up double slice (which would kill your damage if you didn't), two weapon rend, and tow weapon defence. Those would make it 10 feats.Because a 7-10 feat investment shouldn't be better than a 1-3?Well, if I make it non one-handed that would be weapon finesse, weapon focus with a finessable weapon, and new Dex to damage feat. Three feats on top of the three plus two feats. I think that makes it sufficiently weakened, although it would be more meaningful if there was a more undesirable feat tax. weapon focus may be too synergistic to be a tax.First, I think your list is a lot bigger than what a min/maxer would use. Strictly speaking, TWF and Double Slice are the only feats required for a serious TWFer. Improved and greater TWF are nice to have, but most of your off hand damage comes from the first attack, so you don't HAVE to get those. Weapon Finesse, + dex to damage feat on top of that.
Second, Looking at damage is the wrong way to go. Look at the other benefits. We are talking about 4 feats. What do you get for those 4 feats? You get to put a 10 in strength, and dump all your boosts into dexterity. The net result is that a Dex based TWF will have +5 AC(and touch AC), +5 reflex saves, and +5 initiative or more over the strength based Two-hand fighter. There are no feat that the two hand fighter gets that can close that gap. So you end up with a strong damage dealer that also has a high AC, regularly goes first, and regularly makes their reflex saves.
On top of this, certain damage boosts, like bard performance, sneak attack, and paladin's smite evil, work a lot better for TWFers.
Improved initiative +4 init
Lightning reflexes +2 reflexDodge +1 AC(and touch AC)
So with those 3 feats you can close the gap to +1 init, +3 reflex, +4 AC, but that is it. Also, depend on where the Dex fighter puts their strength, they may end up with +2-4 con over the two-hander(24 STR, 14 DEX, 12 Con vs 12 STR, 24 DEX, 14 con).
As a player I've learned to insist on a sketch of the situation, because I often don't understand spatial descriptions without them.
Ditto. I have absolutely no concept of measurements without reference. I can't estimate time, distance, weight, anything.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ditto. I have absolutely no concept of measurements without reference. I can't estimate time, distance, weight, anything.
I can understand them and visualize them fine. However, I tend to take things so precisely as described that I've had attorneys tell me I was being too literal. I've found a scene spoken to me or described in a book, even in great detail, can have multiple logical interpretations. Pictures are just so much easier. Else, those games turn into a game of 200 questions (no typo) about things that seemingly don't matter, and really don't, but help me route out logically what can and can't exist in the scene. Essentially, I force myself to draw the scene correctly by scatter shot questions that usually just end in frustration for myself and the GM.
|
I have an enormous numbers of HR, but here are a few:
"Dimensional Port".
The spell creates a permanent "port" that, if it's location is know by the caster, he can teleport to there as if he was very familiar with the place. Of course, the material components are very expensive and take a while to craft, and the casting time is also onerous. The caster who make the "port" can choose who can use it and who can't. With that there is no need of a interplanetary teleport spell.
I myself HRuled that Teleportation spells (apart from dimensional doors) were widely unreliable the less information or familiarity with the place you were teleporting to (unless it has an Teleport Port, and you know it's location).
Edit: I'm about to apply a HR to spellcasting, every time a caster wants to cast a spell in combat, he is considered flat-footed, unless he makes an concentration check with a CD equals to 10+Spell Level (Vigorous Motion). Why is that, because i assume the caster is alert and trying to dodge any projectile or swing directed at him, thus moving vigorously to retain his/her dex bonus. If he fails this check, he doesn't loose the spell, but the casting time increases to another round.
About the metamagic rods, i already Hruled that the caster can't never cast a spell that has a spell slot higher than the highest spell slot he could normally cast. (exceptions is UMD and some itens that says otherwise). Tha prevented metamagic rods abuse in my games.
Ditto. I have absolutely no concept of measurements without reference. I can't estimate time, distance, weight, anything.I can understand them and visualize them fine. However, I tend to take things so precisely as described that I've had attorneys tell me I was being too literal. I've found a scene spoken to me or described in a book, even in great detail, can have multiple logical interpretations. Pictures are just so much easier. Else, those games turn into a game of 200 questions (no typo) about things that seemingly don't matter, and really don't, but help me route out logically what can and can't exist in the scene. Essentially, I force myself to draw the scene correctly by scatter shot questions that usually just end in frustration for myself and the GM.
Agreed. The map makes sure that what everybody's envisioning and imagining is, if not identical, at least compatible.
( 4 ) DIPLOMACY: Is a dynamic skill that incorporates relationship and risk vs. reward. I totally lifted this from someone on the boards some time ago and, unfortunately, cannot give them credit.
That sounds like Rich Burlew's variation, found here.
As a player I've learned to insist on a sketch of the situation, because I often don't understand spatial descriptions without them.Ditto. I have absolutely no concept of measurements without reference. I can't estimate time, distance, weight, anything.
Same here. If I get a description of a 20' by 40' by 10' hall with tapestries hanging along the two long walls without at least a sketch, somehow I'll end up imagining a 20' by 10' by 40' ovular cave with caveman drawings on the ceiling.
And it's not because I'm not listening -- I have a great attention span that I love to use. It just somehow...happens.
|
Yeah, I'm sure that's going to be completely accurate ...Because Area of Effect spells, because flanking, because reach ..."How many can I get with my fireball while avoiding my allies?"
"I move to flank."
"Is he in my reach?"
No grid needed.
You trade accuracy for narrative and interesting description. The great thing about mapless is that it encourages the players to ask questions about their environment and the GM to say yes to those questions.
"Is there a vine for me to swing over the brawl?"
"Is there anything nearby for me to chuck with throw anything?"
It really is a massive time saver for high level play.
The great thing about mapless is that it encourages the players to ask questions about their environment and the GM to say yes to those questions.
That's my observation too.
In my experience, the games where the players interact the most with their environment are the games where the environment is the most abstract, such as in a mapless game.
( 4 ) DIPLOMACY: Is a dynamic skill that incorporates relationship and risk vs. reward. I totally lifted this from someone on the boards some time ago and, unfortunately, cannot give them credit.That sounds like Rich Burlew's variation, found here.
Yep, that's the one! Thanks for giving credit where it is due.
"Spiderwebs? Instead of swinging from one, I try to grad a spider and fling it at the enemy."
GM: "Make your grapple check."
You trade accuracy for narrative and interesting description.
No ... having a map lets you do both.
No ... having a map lets you do both.You trade accuracy for narrative and interesting description.
In case you actully have a decent interesting map, made a decent interesting map, have time to make a decent interesting map, or a know how to aquire a decent interesting map and have enought decent maps to last without repeating...
Otherwise wellcome ton Soviet Galrion, where all taverns and dungeons are built with 2-3 same blueprints.Software helps, but truly, it's easier to draw a simple plan to serve the same purpose and describe each room with spasmic hand gestures and pathos. At least it works for me.
Maps are for culminative battles/adventures and overland view, IMHO.
Most of the time my guys do whatever they want and go whereever they please and I just adapt the story on the go.
If we are playing in an existing setting and there is actuly a decent local area map, I'd use it.
In case you actully have a decent interesting map, made a decent interesting map, have time to make a decent interesting map, or a know how to aquire a decent interesting map and have enought decent maps to last without repeating...No ... having a map lets you do both.You trade accuracy for narrative and interesting description.
DeviantArt is a good start. Lots of nice fantasy maps you can snag there.
|
|
No ... having a map lets you do both.You trade accuracy for narrative and interesting description.
In my experience having a map just encourages players to think two-dimensionally, and push their minis around the board without interacting or asking about:
- The pile of rope in the corner
- The tankard of strange brew on the table
- What is under the bench?
Also, drawing interesting miniature level maps takes time and causes a loss of momentum at the table. Printing miniature level maps costs money and, again in my experience, doesn't really improve the gameplay.
I'm not saying it's for everyone, but for groups that have a high level of trust between players and GM, give it a go.
And can handle that level of nonvisual spatial orientation.
I can't, but I'm also blessed with having players who will ask about how they can interact with the decorations and such on a map.
The spontaneous magic by domain IS interesting. Love the flavour but the spontaneous casting of heal spells thing was bought in so clerics didn't feel they had to memorise cure spells. It's there to make priests feel like more than healing dispensing machines.
Might think about combining the ideas.
With the preponderance of healing options (wands, potions, spells, natural healing, etc) I don't find it an issue and my players know that healing is the entire parties' responsibility, not just the cleric's.
Now, when one of my players makes a cleric (which, I admit, has been a while) they can be what they want without feeling like they need to be the healer on top of it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
paladins get detect evil constantIncorrect. They get Detect Evil AT Will, which requires at a minimum a move action to use.
Given this is a House Rule thread, I'm pretty sure he's saying it's different in his games.
Recently I have been toying with the idea of rolling the crafting of basic/minor magic items into the craft skills. For example:
- minor potions could be created using Craft:Alchemy
- basic +(1-3) magic arms and armor could be created using Craft:Armor or Craft:Weapons
- minor magic rings could be created using Craft:Jewery
- And maybe certain wondrous items could be created using an appropriate craft skill.
This would leave Rods, Staves, Wands, Scrolls, and most Wondrous Items to require feats to craft the items.
For +X items the it could start at DC 25 for the first +1 to an item and add +5 for each additional +1 and for potions it could start at DC 25 for 0th level spells and +5 DC for each additional spell level.
Part of my impetus for this is to first, reward my players who happen to invest more than a handful of ranks into craft skills, second, to make craft skills more useful at high levels, and third, to incorporate the idea from real world myths that certain craftsman were so good they could craft magic items.
I'm thinking of houseruling cure and inflict spells as evocation. Since you're just zapping something with positive/negative energy.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I make them Necromancy spells, since that's what they used to be and you're manipulating life energy. I could see Evocation making sense, though.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sneak Attack: If a rogue can catch an opponent when he is unable to defend himself effectively from her attack, she can strike a vital spot for extra damage.
The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target.
Targets can only be sneak attacked if they are denied a dexterity bonus to AC or when the rogue flanks his/her target. Stealth does not mean invisibility and does not necessarily make target flat-footed vs character in hiding.
A stealthed character can make a sneak attack on target without the target getting a perception roll if the rogue can 5-foot step and reach said character.
A stealthed character who moves out of cover/concealment to make a stealth attack has to roll another stealth check vs targets perception check. If stealth check fails/or perception check beats stealth check, target is no longer considered flat footed.
A character with ranged linearly across a melee ally combating against an enemy gains flanking on that enemy.
(I put these in place to put down claims that stealth gives ability to sneak attack, a stand I used to stand my ground until someone showed me a post about one of the designers that said something about stealth not breaking until after the attack... which made no sense to me as if someone see the rogue coming out of hiding, I don't care how fast they run, the target can prepare. Unless it's 5 feet or less, then I can see it happening. Also I didn't see how a ranged character cannot be flanking if standing directly behind an opponent even at a distance. As it is considerably harder to deflect or notice an arrow in flight than it is a sword. Since the arrow generally flies way faster.)
P.S. Those are in combat rules. So obviously if a character had set up an ambush I'd definitely let it fly.
Why do you hate Rogues?
The system hates them already, you don't need to gang up on the poor guy.
rogue, lots of great builds and options.
*Stifles laughter*
I mostly just hate the idea of a World of Warcraft stealth mechanism. Just didn't make sense.
But the game's stealth is not like that.
You sneak up on someone.
They look around to see if they can find you.
If they don't see you, you are not seen.
If you attack while unseen, they are flatfooted.
You need cover to remain unseen (or magical assistance or darkness).
Compare/Contrast WoW Stealth "I hit the Stealth button and am now invisible temporarily".
However, what you have done is made it impossible to attack from stealth for some reason I can't fathom.
I don't see what doesn't "make sense" about someone breaking from cover, sneaking up on someone, and shanking them while they're still unaware.
Real people do it all the time.
|
|
rogue, lots of great builds and options.*Stifles laughter*
I mostly just hate the idea of a World of Warcraft stealth mechanism. Just didn't make sense.But the game's stealth is not like that.I know it's not. Its not meant to be like that. With the that house rule it ensures it is not like that.
You sneak up on someone.
They look around to see if they can find you.
If they don't see you, you are not seen.
That is right they get a chance to look around. You can't just run from 30 feet without someone having a chance to see you. Totally agree with you.
If you attack while unseen, they are flatfooted.By RAW no, but I guess by RAI I could see that. If character is already in combat and he isn't flat footed anymore. Even if he rogue goes into a room and hides behind the barrel and the target comes in can't immediately see him, he is still on his guard and looking for him.
You need cover to remain unseen (or magical assistance or darkness).Absolutely my point. Unless you can immediately make the attack right after jumping out of cover.
Compare/Contrast WoW Stealth "I hit the Stealth button and am now invisible temporarily".So if I were to take stealth ending when the attack is finished, the rogue could technically run all in a circle around the opponent(within their movement speed of course)and then finish his movement with a sneak attack... Sounds exactly like WoW.
However, what you have done is made it impossible to attack from stealth for some reason I can't fathom.Stealth is not supposed to give you ability to sneak attack.
Being denied dexterity and being flanked opens you up for sneak attack.I don't see what doesn't "make sense" about someone breaking from cover, sneaking up on someone, and shanking them while they're still unaware.I think we are on the same page.
Real people do it all the time.Generally, combat hasn't started yet. LOL!
Some of our House Rules....
Aid Another: Only two are allowed per individual per round. The persons must be next to the one they are aiding (offense or defense, can't be at range, or using a reach weapon).
Counter spelling: This is an immediate action, but at the cost of your standard action the next round. thus only one spell can be countered per round and regenerates when your turn comes up next.
Massive Damage: We ignore this rule
Movement in Combat: Any square costs 5' of movement even diagonals.
Knowledge Checks to ID Creatures: We created a way for this to work that incorporates how badly you beat out the roll by giving you Knowledge points that you can then spend on the creatures stat block to learn various items. In addition, based upon your class you get one piece of info on a successful check.
Drowning Rule: For every 5 points of CON, you gain one additional round after falling unconscious before you drown.
Hero Points and Leveling: You can spend a Hero Point to roll 2 HD for HP taking the best roll. If you still roll very low you can then spend one additional Hero Point to get half of that particular Hit Die.
Seems to me that altering the die used could be an excellent situational variable.I hate it for precisely that reason.I like the idea of the d12 over the d20 in Initiative, because those Initiative modifiers become much more significant.
Well, it makes initiative modifiers more valuable than they already are. That could push things even more in favor of spellcasters, who usually have the highest initiative modifiers next to Dex based characters.
|
Knowledge Checks to ID Creatures: We created a way for this to work that incorporates how badly you beat out the roll by giving you Knowledge points that you can then spend on the creatures stat block to learn various items. In addition, based upon your class you get one piece of info on a successful check.
curious to know more...