You may either roll 1d100 for a 40% chance to prevent death, and instead simply suffer some sort of permanent injury, or spend a hero point to cheat death and take a injury.
If you crit, you can make a skill/ability check to do something awesome and/or make a Combat Maneuver, instead of dealing double damage.
Combatants can perform feat attacks but with the critical fail being 1-5. If you take a Improved Combat Maneuver feat, you pick two instead.
You may spend 2 skill points to get a proficiency. Likewise, you may spend 4 skill points to get a Improved Combat Maneuver feat.
You may shatter your shield to ignore a single attack.
If you roll a 1, you can either have a optional very bad thing happen to you (My choice) and gain half a hero-point, have a attack of opportunity to you, or roll an amount of d100s equal to your class level, and if you roll 1 on all of your die, then you’ll suffer a critical fumble, and I will draw from my Critical Fumble deck.
You get a bonus feat per level, but must spend a feats to gain any level of spellcasting beyond one (So a wizard must spend his fourth level feat to gain second level spellcasting, sixth for third, and so on.)
If you are attacked at any point after you cast a spell, you must roll concentration, and if you fail, you may make three choices: Spend a hero point, have your effective CL be reduced by half next spell you cast, or roll concentration again, and if you fail, you roll 4 d10s (Treating 10s as 0s), then a effect from this list happens, or you may spend a hero point to avoid it. The effect lasts 2 hours unless specified otherwise You may spend a hero point to have this happen to an opponent spellcaster, or to yourself, rolling 5 d10s and taking whichever combination of numbers you prefer.
Fighters, after level 5, gain 1 out of combat feats every even class level. Fighters may take 10 on any action in combat.
Every classes default skill points are increased by 2.
Everyone gains 1 “Flavor” Skill point, to be put in a profession, a perform (If not bard).
How do these house rules sound?
Your house rules should depend on what your goals are.
It would be easier to respond to this if the rules were numbered, but i'll answer as if they were. Also, it's always hard to critique house rules without having played at your table, and those at your table are the most important people to okay the house rules with.
1. This doesn't sound bad, though I wouldn't have them take an injury if they spent a hero point.
2. I'd be wary of this, you might see a lot of crit-fishing maneuver builds. I'd swap it to "if you roll a natural 20 and confirm the critical".
3. I don't understand what is meant with this. What is a feat attack?
4. With the buff of skill points this doesn't seem unreasonable. Count on every melee character using a falcata, though.
5. Sounds reasonable. Note that before they get magical shields, they will use mending to have a fresh shield every fight. Not that this is problematic, just better to be aware beforehand so you're not caught by surprise and feel it's cheesy.
6. Fumbles tend to be more annoying than fun, at least in my experience. This is something you should double and triple check with your group that they will enjoy it.
7. This doesn't sound like a horrible quick'n'easy remedy for the m/c disparity, if you encounter a lot of it. When you say one bonus feat per level, do you mean they get one feat per level or one feat on even levels and two on uneven levels?
8. This seems overly complicated. I just wouldn't bother with it. The bonus feats for low- to non-casters should already do a good job at evening out the playing field.
9. What is an "out of combat feat" and how is that defined? Not a fan of that kind of loose ruling. Also, can they take 10 from level 1? Then count on a lot of dipping. Also, "any action in combat" seems far to vague - if the cleric gives them a smack, can the fighter then take 10 on the bluff check? It's better in that case to say that they can take 10 on attack rolls, for example.
10. Good rule. I'd not give it to wizards, that's nitpicking.
11. Also a very good rule. I'd add Craft to the list of flavor skills too.
Your house rules should depend on what your goals are.
The goal is to buff melee characters, and somewhat nerf-casters, but not particularly heavily.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with Gaberlunzie on all of his points.
Crit failures and successes are bad. Do not do it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Your house rules should depend on what your goals are.The goal is to buff melee characters, and somewhat nerf-casters, but not particularly heavily.
In that case, don't do critical fumbles. They really hurt martials. If you want to buff martials, why not allow the maneuvers from Dreamscarred Press's Path of War?
It would be easier to respond to this if the rules were numbered, but i'll answer as if they were. Also, it's always hard to critique house rules without having played at your table, and those at your table are the most important people to okay the house rules with.
1. This doesn't sound bad, though I wouldn't have them take an injury if they spent a hero point.
2. I'd be wary of this, you might see a lot of crit-fishing maneuver builds. I'd swap it to "if you roll a natural 20 and confirm the critical".
3. I don't understand what is meant with this. What is a feat attack?
4. With the buff of skill points this doesn't seem unreasonable. Count on every melee character using a falcata, though.
5. Sounds reasonable. Note that before they get magical shields, they will use mending to have a fresh shield every fight. Not that this is problematic, just better to be aware beforehand so you're not caught by surprise and feel it's cheesy.
6. Fumbles tend to be more annoying than fun, at least in my experience. This is something you should double and triple check with your group that they will enjoy it.
7. This doesn't sound like a horrible quick'n'easy remedy for the m/c disparity, if you encounter a lot of it. When you say one bonus feat per level, do you mean they get one feat per level or one feat on even levels and two on uneven levels?
8. This seems overly complicated. I just wouldn't bother with it. The bonus feats for low- to non-casters should already do a good job at evening out the playing field.
9. What is an "out of combat feat" and how is that defined? Not a fan of that kind of loose ruling. Also, can they take 10 from level 1? Then count on a lot of dipping. Also, "any action in combat" seems far to vague - if the cleric gives them a smack, can the fighter then take 10 on the bluff check? It's better in that case to say that they can take 10 on attack rolls, for example.
10. Good rule. I'd not give it to wizards, that's nitpicking.
11. Also a very good rule. I'd add Craft...
Well, cheat death costs 2 points, so taking a injury would be reducing the price by half.
2: That is very valid, so let's have it work like that.
3: Attacks that can only be done by taking a feat.
4: Well, I suppose I should probably just not give out falchions, though.
5: Oh, yeah, I completely understand this.
6: Oh, I will, I was just checking to see if this was more bearable than the usual fumble rules. And the goal of it is to make combat more interesting than it would normally be. And I added an option to face my wrath and gain a Hero point, so that's a indirect buff to them. And it also applies to skills, too. Not to mention, as you level up, it becomes almost negligible, so only the option remains to gain a hero point for letting bad stuff happen.
7: Thanks, just want to make sure. It's primarily to grant mundanes more options. And, to be frank, I'm not entirely sure, myself. Whichever one is more balanced, I suppose, the issue is, I'm not sure which is. Though if it's the latter, though, then it's going to be 2 feats per whole spell level.
8: It's primarily to function as the Caster equivalent of a critical fumble. And it makes more sense in action, you basically confirm your critical fumble, then roll 4 d10s. So if you roll a 4, a 10, a 5, and a 6, then you nab the effect from the list. In this case, #4056. So all attacks he makes next turn deal only half damage. Not that difficult.
9: An Out of Combat feat is a feat that is not on the Combat feat list on the OGC. And you're right there, hm... How about, they can take ten, with a penalty equal to how many non-fighter class levels they have. They can take 10 on skill checks, yes. Though how does treating your class level as your roll sound? Not that great, I take it, if a wee bit overpowered.
10: Very valid point, was probably going to do that anyway.
11: Yes, that's a very good idea.
In that case, don't do critical fumbles. They really hurt martials. If you want to buff martials, why not allow the maneuvers from Dreamscarred Press's Path of War?Your house rules should depend on what your goals are.The goal is to buff melee characters, and somewhat nerf-casters, but not particularly heavily.
Well, I did add a caster equivalent, and critical fumbles are not exactly that common.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, I did add a caster equivalent, and critical fumbles are not exactly that common.
It still punishes martials more than casters because martials need to attack multiple times per round to stay useful in a party. That means they are several times more likely to fumble.
I personally really, REALLY don't like that fumble deck. I own one. I tried it for two sessions, one at my game and one at a friend's game. Our groups unanimously agreed it was pretty awful. My character crit herself. When the enemy fumbled, they got an automatic hit.
It's a lot easier for a caster to make a concentration check than it is for a martial to never ever roll a 1 when it's possible to be attacking three+ times per round in very short order.
Oh, I think you might have missed the part where he also rolls 1d100 per class level. So, a level 5 fighter who always full attacks would have a near zero percent chance of fumbling.
Thinking about it, my current method may be too lenient... Maybe have it be based upon your BAB, rather than your CL, so that a wizard is more likely to fumble with a falchin than a fighter. So, with that, a level 4 fighter would roll 4d100s, and if all rolled 1, then he would draw from the fumble deck. A rouge would roll 3, and a wizard would roll 2.
Though, yeah, it is kinda a stupid idea, fumbles. Maybe just have the option of having really bad things happen to you in exchange for a hero point.
Rolling 4d100 is incredibly annoying. It's eight same-shaped dice that has to be kept in pairs.
It's a bad mechanic, straight up. Percentile dice should be avoided in general, and even more so for something as common as a natural one.