On one hand there's many times I've been incredibly frustrated by house rules and on the other hand I've seen some cool stuff too.
One house rule that comes to mind that I don't like, my GM runs a natural 1 ends all further attacks in a full attack. So if you have 3 attacks and roll a 1 on the first, you fumble and end your turn (we don't run critical fails either).
On cool house rules, one friend runs a fortune deck, where everyone draws a card at the beginning of the game and it has various effects from good to painful. You could possibly get something like +1 AC, Will Save, attack, etc and that stays with you for the entire session or inversely -1 to one of your stats. Additionally it also contains special 1 time use powers or abilities that can be activated through the game session.
Personally I regularly run a week's downtime between chapters and use a modified profession system to encourage players to take up professions. Basically a day's effort (12 hours) is a d20 + profession = gold. So a player with +7 in Baker would earn +7 gold on top of his d20 roll for a day's effort. A natural 20 lets them roll a % they add that percentage on their earnings.
Before Paizo's perception, we had Perception in 2nd Ed. It was something like INT and WIS divided by 2
In pathfinder we also use the crit and fumble decks for named enemies. In fact, we go out of our way for particularly tough enemies that get away to name them. That way, when they come back we can use the decks against them! :D
As far as House Rules Ruining the game? No. Every game that I have been in they have enhanced it.
Now, I have heard of a game where a GM just decided that every player would get a Gun whether they wanted one or not (guns are common). The GM liked the gunslinger I guess. Not all the players wanted to have a gun and it turned out to be a short lived game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've found house rules to be a necessity to create the type of environment that is desired.
As far as good house rules - we've changed flank to a condition, so that someone that is flanked is flanked for anyone attacking them, melee or ranged.
I can't think of a really bad house rule, as our group basically all agrees on house rules beforehand.
One house rule that comes to mind that I don't like, my GM runs a natural 1 ends all further attacks in a full attack. So if you have 3 attacks and roll a 1 on the first, you fumble and end your turn (we don't run critical fails either).
Have you considered asking your GM to rescind that rule?
The one that came up recently I can think of is the dm allowing a bbeg to use a her point to return to max hp. Combat went hours. I don't think we've ever been allowed to do that.
Eek! I'm SURE players must have asked about that one!
On one hand there's many times I've been incredibly frustrated by house rules and on the other hand I've seen some cool stuff too.
Yup, as with everything, it all depends on how well the house rule is thought-out, executed, and received by the players.
I once brewed up what I thought was a pretty cool set of social combat rules, but after trying it in play two or three times, my players made it clear that they hated my rules! They didn't ruin the game though, because I tossed the idea after that.
House rules are great that way -- if they turn out badly, you (the DM) can just toss them! They're not like laws, where repealing a mistake requires a lengthy and elaborate legal procedure.
By and large house rules are by group consensus, so overall I don't think they hurt the game, but some are quite non-sensical.
I had a DM who ruled that rogue sneak attack only occurred on the first hit (first attack roll)/ per combatant and never afterwards. So a rogue would only ever get one sneak attack on a target per fight. Talk about breaking a crippled kid's arms.
@Snorri--Felix told me to tell you he looks forward to seeing you at Karak-Kadrin, and Herr Gurnisson said you still owe him a dozen flagons from your last drinking contest.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
We use hero points to play a prop...
Jumping out a 3 story window - play a prop for a cart full of hay to land in.
In a tavern brawl and want to swing across the room on a chandler - pay a hero point to play a prop.
In a chase through town and you want to slow the bad guy down pay a hero point for crates of chickens and water melons, and guys moving a stained glass window across the street.
We use hero points to play a prop...
interesting concept. I like that
Brox: but HE lost!!!
Augh! He's saying something about greenskin tossing, I think he's swearing right now...Eye of Grungni or somesuch, and now he's gone straight to Khazilid...I have no idea what he saying, but he seems kinda miffed. Gonna walk out now while I still have legs...
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In my experience, almost any house rule (even a bad one) is fine if you're informed of it before character creation and the beginning of the game. You can plan around it and manage things okay.
House Rules you're suddenly told about during play? Almost never a good thing. Too much bait and switch in practice, even if it was a god house rule in theory.
And that dichotomy is why I have an eight page house rule document.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And that dichotomy is why I have an eight page house rule document.
Only eight pages? Bah, unless that's in 6 point font, you're in the minor leagues. ;)
Fumbles? Blecch. These nerf martials quite badly in the higher levels, exactly where fighters need a boost, not a nerf. Bad idea.
If you compare house rules to duct tape, I knew a DM once who ran a game that was the equivalent of a rusty el camino held together by the stuff. He had used first ed. as a base, mixed in some AD&D, and a sprinkling of 3.0. It wasn't really worth learning his arcane rules systems though, because it was nearly impossible to get a character to survive through the ten or so sessions it would take to reach third level. He once had a lightning bolt trap in a narrow hallway with ankle deep water. Of course, house rules indicated that the narrow space prevented avoiding the lightning, and that being in water made it do more damage. Since the apl was 2, it was a tpk.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The worst one I ever saw was during a 3.5 game several years ago when our DM decided that Magic Missiles could miss, wouldn't allow our monk to level because he was too anti-combat and could never be attacked(pact of peace, serenity etc or whatever they were called. Basically lu tze from discworld). The GM Thought the monk was broken.
Also iirc we just rolled 1 d20 for everything and he randomly decided if we hit, crit or missed and how much damage we'd done from that 1 roll. And he had issues with one of our party playing a baby dragon to the point where he ignored them. Dunno why he ever let them play one tbh.
Though the main reason he pretty much rail roaded us constantly and made rules up out of thin air so we couldn't do much was because he wanted to run Legend of the Five Rings instead of 3.5
On one hand there's many times I've been incredibly frustrated by house rules and on the other hand I've seen some cool stuff too.
One house rule that comes to mind that I don't like, my GM runs a natural 1 ends all further attacks in a full attack. So if you have 3 attacks and roll a 1 on the first, you fumble and end your turn (we don't run critical fails either).
On cool house rules, one friend runs a fortune deck, where everyone draws a card at the beginning of the game and it has various effects from good to painful. You could possibly get something like +1 AC, Will Save, attack, etc and that stays with you for the entire session or inversely -1 to one of your stats. Additionally it also contains special 1 time use powers or abilities that can be activated through the game session.
Personally I regularly run a week's downtime between chapters and use a modified profession system to encourage players to take up professions. Basically a day's effort (12 hours) is a d20 + profession = gold. So a player with +7 in Baker would earn +7 gold on top of his d20 roll for a day's effort. A natural 20 lets them roll a % they add that percentage on their earnings.
I really like house rules and the enormous potential behind them. Because if you put your mind to it with your friends, you can do a better job than the professional game designers. There is a great liberation in that, and it is also democratic.
Buuut, then there is the case of house rules used to punish players or make things worse because the dm felt like it. So as came up recently, and some of you will already know, a dm deciding that a dead cloaker in a grapple with a player can suffocate them, and the rules on suffocation can be ignored leading, to the character suffocating in just a few rounds and unable to escape from the dead creature's embrace. That s*$%s me, so much so I started a thread, lol.
For house rules again, I've seen some great stuff done with weapons unlocking feat like abilities, each tailored to a weapon type. And proficiency in a weapon giving you a whole lot more.
If you compare house rules to duct tape, I knew a DM once who ran a game that was the equivalent of a rusty el camino held together by the stuff. He had used first ed. as a base, mixed in some AD&D, and a sprinkling of 3.0. It wasn't really worth learning his arcane rules systems though, because it was nearly impossible to get a character to survive through the ten or so sessions it would take to reach third level. He once had a lightning bolt trap in a narrow hallway with ankle deep water. Of course, house rules indicated that the narrow space prevented avoiding the lightning, and that being in water made it do more damage. Since the apl was 2, it was a tpk.
I'll use that lightning bolt trap in ankle deep water... for high level players.
I just posted this on DM UTB's thread, but here's another one about house rules. So, I'll just drop this podcast here too.
You are spreading your pods! lol
|
Fumbles? Blecch. These nerf martials quite badly in the higher levels, exactly where fighters need a boost, not a nerf. Bad idea.
I havea solution for that. Full BAB classes must roll another 1 to confirm a fumble. 3/4 BAB classes fumble if they roll a miss on their confirmation roll. Half BAB classes auto-fumble on a natural 1.
Of course, multiclassing f~%*s this up.
Fumbles? Blecch. These nerf martials quite badly in the higher levels, exactly where fighters need a boost, not a nerf. Bad idea.I havea solution for that. Full BAB classes must roll another 1 to confirm a fumble. 3/4 BAB classes fumble if they roll a miss on their confirmation roll. Half BAB classes auto-fumble on a natural 1.
O
No, that just makes it less likely for a martial to fumble. They still will. Whereas a Wizard casting Fireball can't fumble.
Again, this nerfs martials.