| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've been working for the last few months on a very modest 3PP product about house rules. Each house rule includes a "pro" and "con" discussion to give GMs (and groups) an informed basis on whether to adopt it or not. I thought it might be good if I preview one each week or so on the forums here, as I always appreciate hearing from other posters and having a self-imposed weekly deadline will make it more likely that I finish! I don't make any pretensions that these ideas are brand new. Below is the first one.
1. ON-TIME XP BONUS: If a player turns up on time for a session, his or her character receives a 5% bonus to any experience points earned in that session.
PRO: Everyone’s late to a game once in a while, but some people are late to a game a lot. It’s no fun having everyone sit around the table surfing their phones and waiting ten or twenty minutes past start time for someone to arrive. I once had a player who was routinely a half-hour late to each session-—without even offering an excuse! The benefit of an XP bonus for being on-time to a session is that it gives players who are routinely on-time a reward, and gives players who are less reliable an incentive. A 5% bonus for a session isn’t huge, but sometimes the smallest in-game advantage will be enough to change a player’s behaviour.
CON: If you don’t have a problem with lateness, you don’t need this solution. If everyone routinely shows up on-time anyway, then a 5% bonus is just levelling everyone’s characters slightly faster. In addition, there’s no guarantee that a 5% XP bump will be enough to change anyone’s behaviour (“slacker gonna slack”). Last, it introduces another element of record-keeping (though an easy one) for the GM and you might get players trying to justify their lateness with varying degrees of legitimacy.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Roll for hit points, if below average for the die, get the average of the die.
Pros: PCs are durable, so the GM can take the kid gloves off.
Cons: PCs are durable, so they might not feel the peril.
Another issue with the 5% bonus is that you can end up with pcs on different levels very easily.
Roll for hit points, if below average for the die, get the average of the die.
Pros: PCs are durable, so the GM can take the kid gloves off.
Cons: PCs are durable, so they might not feel the peril.
Sorry, to clarify: I already have a list of fifty, so I'm not asking for new ones (there are lots of threads for that), but instead feedback on the ones I place here. Thanks!
Another issue with the 5% bonus is that you can end up with pcs on different levels very easily.
Is that inherently a bad thing? If you are running a west marches style game, this is perfect (and something i'll probably institute in the future.) Can we get a few more to parse tonight? One isn't going to do it for me and these guys are gonna keep posting their own house rules lmao.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another issue with the 5% bonus is that you can end up with pcs on different levels very easily.Is that inherently a bad thing? If you are running a west marches style game, this is perfect (and something i'll probably institute in the future.) Can we get a few more to parse tonight? One isn't going to do it for me and these guys are gonna keep posting their own house rules lmao.
Ha, okay--since you asked so nicely. Here's # 2:
2. NEW PCS GET WEALTH EQUAL TO PARTY AVERAGE: After the campaign begins, if a player has to introduce a new PC because their former PC died or otherwise became unavailable, that new PC will have starting wealth equal to the “buy” value of the magic items of the other PCs in the party, averaged by the number of PCs.
PRO: The official “Wealth by Level” rules can be a real windfall for a new PC, and can sometimes serve as an incentive for a player to let a PC die! The reason is that many adventuring parties do not ruthlessly collect and sell every piece of available loot, and thus their wealth will eventually fall below Wealth by Level. In addition, much of the loot may come in the form of equipment that a PC can make some use of but that is not of an ideal type. It can be sold, but most PCs will still end up, after several sessions with a bit of a grab-bag of items that will be different than the ones they would have purchased for themselves.
The best way to think of this potential problem is through a real-life analogy. Imagine that, over the past twenty years, I’ve lived in the house. I’ve bought some furniture over the years—some of it I still like, some of it was good at the time but no longer really in the style of what I like. I’ve also inherited some furniture from a family member, and although it’s serviceable it’s not quite to my taste. The sum total value of my furniture is $ 20,000. In contrast, today my brother is given $ 20,000 in cash to buy furniture for his new house. Which of us is going to end up with the most appealing set?
In game terms, an example is my character Lady Sarabian. I’ve played her since she was Level 1 and now she’s Level 9. She has an assortment of minor magic items, but nothing above +1 because she just has never had enough disposable cash. She’s also spent a lot of money in the campaign for disposable items, paying NPCs for healing and services, and so forth. If I were to introduce a new PC and suddenly have a whopping 46,000 gp to play with, I could easily outfit a character much, much better than Sarabian!
By pegging new PC’s wealth to the average of the other party members, a GM ensures that the new PC is viable without unduly rewarding the player for getting a PC killed.
CON: For (good) players, losing a character sucks. Months or even years can be invested in building a character’s storyline. When a PC dies, so does all of the knowledge they’ve gained, all of the contacts they’ve made, all of the reputation they’ve earned, and more. As one player told me, the extra gold that comes by using Wealth by Level is at least some balm on the wound of having to make up a new PC.
Something that can be a problem is that dead PCs can give the party a lot of loot in their own right. It's more likely to be useful than random loot too. Assuming it doesn't get sent to relatives or something, would you count the average party wealth before or after that?
Also, I think some variation on automatic bonus progression solves PFs wealth-dependence a lot better than wealth by level anyway.
Something that can be a problem is that dead PCs can give the party a lot of loot in their own right. It's more likely to be useful than random loot too. Assuming it doesn't get sent to relatives or something, would you count the average party wealth before or after that?
Also, I think some variation on automatic bonus progression solves PFs wealth-dependence a lot better than wealth by level anyway.
This is one I've been play-testing in the Rise of the Runelords campaign I've been running. I've ruled that the calculation is done from the moment the PC dies, so the surviving characters can RP what they do with the dead character's stuff (bury it, take it, etc.) without feeling like it affects how much stuff the new character will start with.
So far, it's been interesting. At some points in the campaign, the new character has actually started with slightly higher than WBL (when the other PCs have been quite acquisitive), but recently they've grown lax and when a PC died, the new PC started with wealth far below WBL. Though I guess that might mean the whole thing works as intended. The one annoying thing is that there's some extra bookwork for me every time a PC dies, because I then have to get the other players to send me a list of their characters' magic items and crunch the numbers.
Anyway, thanks for the feedback so far everyone!
here is my alteration to a very common house rule:
the house rule is the fumble rule. i have met many GM who use this: if an attack rolled a nat 1, the attacker re-roll with same bonus and if he fail to hit (any miss, do not need a 2nd nat 1) then a fumble happen (each gm had his own fumble chart\cards etc).
while i enjoy the fumble rule (my players had a lot of luck with monsters fumbling) i feal like it sometimes goes aginst logic.
since ac tend to be somewhat leveld as you gain levels (depandin on your build) most at levle mosnters ca nbe hit with the same roll (easy to hit with 10+ harder with 15+ and very tough with 17-19). but at the same time characters with higher bab would attack more and roll more nat 1 - getting a chacne to fumble more. take a level 1 unchained monk compaired to a level 16. the late would attack at least 5-6 times moe per round so while the first. if usig flurry would roll a nat 1 roughly once every 10 rounds of full attack fight(he get 2 attacks after all) the later would roll it once every 3-4 rounds. and since the foes ac goes higher as you level he would fumble more!
this actuly mean that the least trained fighter would be less prone to fumble.
and here comes my alteration to the fumble rule.
after rolling a nat 1, even before rerolling to conferm a fumble (or instead, depand on the gm) roll a 100% check with a chance of 5% per bab of attacker to simply miss and not fumble.
so a level 1 full bab class would fumble 95% of the times he rolls a nat 1. while a level 10 only 50% of the times (before conferming). and a level 20 would only fumble 5% of the time.
i set it out per bab since that is what we use to compaire actul progress in fighting ability -as it help hit better and attack more. it difine the better fighter who is less prone to fumble.
|
To 1:
Gifts to on timers, but not xp; a free re roll for example. Hero point or something tasty.
To 2:
Wealth is one bad thing in the game. Is hard plug and play a nice rule. Sometimes 1 died and team take dead man items, then the dead its free money (cause later comes a new pc woth full wbl). I think if a game had more wbl its nice the new one takes more, and if the game havent enought its nice the new one tales less.
I think the average of the team its ok. But maybe must pay all the equip looted from dead man can be nice to the teams wbl
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You big bunch of sissies, you watered down fuss buckets, you yellow and purple pansies...you are being a way to [PC] politically correct with him. "Get medieval on his ass. " to Quote Pulp Fiction here is a way to motivate your player.
Have the group start without the player with a side adventure. A lynch mob grabs his character away from his companions. His character is blamed for the murder of a shop keeper. An obvious case of mistaken identity but the mob will not have any of it. The trial is short, the sentence is quick, and it is immediately carried out. The party can intercede at any time. When the player gets there, announce to him the results of the trial to him. Depending on how harsh you want to be. The results will range from mob apologizing and saying "we almost hung an innocent man.' To the player needs to roll up another character.
To 1:
Gifts to on timers, but not xp; a free re roll for example. Hero point or something tasty.
I like the free reroll idea. That seems like a nice balance.
Here's # 3. As the "Con" indicates, this is a tough one to implement giving that Pathfinder has so many moving parts, and a GM would have to do a lot of work on the fly to adjust things.
3. Action Speeds: Many actions take time to complete. The speed of an action is a number that is subtracted from a character’s initiative count. The larger the number, the longer it takes the action to be completed. On a character’s initiative, he or she declares the action and the character is assumed to be in the process of undertaking it, but the action isn’t completed (and has no effect) until the speed-modified initiative count is reached. Light melee weapons have a speed of 1, one-handed melee weapons have a speed of 3, and two-handed melee weapons have a speed of 6. Thrown or ranged weapons have a speed of 4. A character with multiple attacks (whether from iterative attacks, natural weapons, or two-weapon fighting) takes one attack with the listed speed modifier and must then subtract from that modified initiative account the speed modifier for each subsequent attack. Spells that are standard actions to cast have a speed of twice their spell level, spells that are swift actions to cast have a speed equal to their spell level, and spells that are full round actions to cast are not completed until the caster’s initiative result on the next round. If a caster is injured or otherwise distracted while casting a spell, they must make a Concentration check as per the rules or lose the spell. Spell-like abilities and supernatural abilities have an action speed of 5. Activating a magic item as a standard action has a speed modifier equal to half the caster level of the item (rounded down). Movement, extraordinary abilities, free actions, immediate actions, and anything not discussed above have action speeds of zero. A character in the process of undertaking an action cannot take attacks of opportunity or immediate actions. If an action is begun but cannot be completed because of an intervening change prior to its completion, the action is wasted.
PRO: Weapon speeds were one of the most controversial parts of 2nd edition Dungeons & Dragons. Those who liked them, and I was one of them, thought it made perfect sense that someone wielding a dagger should usually be able to stab faster than someone wielding a greatsword, and that both warriors should be able to react faster than a high-level wizard completing a complex incantation to distort reality. Using action speeds adds a whole new layer of strategy (and complexity) to the battlefield. Casters can be disrupted even if someone doesn’t have a readied action done just for that purpose, a sneaky rogue might be able to stab and move out of the way before the lumbering barbarian can bring that axe around, and trade-offs might have to be made between speed, accuracy, and damage output of various options.
CON: Pathfinder isn’t designed for weapon speeds. Even the house rule provided here, designed to mesh with official rules as simply and easily as possible, will create complications in actual game play that will require the GM to adjudicate. Test this idea out in a couple of practice combats before using in a campaign. Action speeds also tilt the playing field a little more towards martial characters because spell-casters have a much better chance of their higher-level spells being interrupted; this could be a pro or a con depending on how you view martial/caster disparity.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And, far simpler and less controversial, is # 4:
4.Players Bring Snacks for Everyone: Each player is expected to bring a snack (a bag of chips, a six-pack of beer, etc.) to each session that is for the entire group. [Alternate version: each player is expected to bring $ 5 each session so that the group can order pizza]
PRO: Whoever is hosting the game (usually the GM, but not always) may feel an obligation out of common courtesy to offer visitors (i.e., the players) drinks and snacks. This is very kind, but the cost of this can add up pretty fast, especially when one player needs gluten-free snacks, another drinks (only) Crystal Pepsi, etc. So in addition to all of the time setting up the game table (and cleaning up afterward), it can be a real burden for the host to accommodate everyone. An expectation that everyone will bring at least something to share is a kindness to the host.
CON: Depending on where the game takes place (such as at a gaming store), this might not be necessary at all. For other groups, it might be simpler for each person to bring whatever they want for themselves, with absolutely no expectation that the host or rest of the group will provide anything.
Here's # 3. As the "Con" indicates, this is a tough one to implement giving that Pathfinder has so many moving parts, and a GM would have to do a lot of work on the fly to adjust things.
3. Action Speeds: Many actions take time to complete. The speed of an action is a number that is subtracted from a character’s initiative count. The larger the number, the longer it takes the action to be completed. On a character’s initiative, he or she declares the action and the character is assumed to be in the process of undertaking it, but the action isn’t completed (and has no effect) until the speed-modified initiative count is reached. Light melee weapons have a speed of 1, one-handed melee weapons have a speed of 3, and two-handed melee weapons have a speed of 6. Thrown or ranged weapons have a speed of 4. A character with multiple attacks (whether from iterative attacks, natural weapons, or two-weapon fighting) takes one attack with the listed speed modifier and must then subtract from that modified initiative account the speed modifier for each subsequent attack. Spells that are standard actions to cast have a speed of twice their spell level, spells that are swift actions to cast have a speed equal to their spell level, and spells that are full round actions to cast are not completed until the caster’s initiative result on the next round. If a caster is injured or otherwise distracted while casting a spell, they must make a Concentration check as per the rules or lose the spell. Spell-like abilities and supernatural abilities have an action speed of 5. Activating a magic item as a standard action has a speed modifier equal to half the caster level of the item (rounded down). Movement, extraordinary abilities, free actions, immediate actions, and anything not discussed above have action speeds of zero. A character in the process of undertaking an action cannot take attacks of opportunity or immediate actions. If an action is begun but cannot be completed because of an intervening change...
I have a thread on this and like 90% of people hate it lmao. I think it's wonderful though. You certainly created a more complex system than mine though.
4. More or less what we do, though one guy brings more because he always needs transport, and another guy brings less because he's an arse. It's a hard one to actually enforce.
3. Way, way too complicated and hard to justify. Why would a 5th level aasimar wizard casting daylight do so at a speed of 6 if a spell, 5 if a SLA, or 2 from a scroll? Why would a charge be faster than the second stab (of four, say) using TWF? Can initiatives go sub-zero?
If you take damage equal to 50% of your current hit point total from a single attack, spell, or other effect, you are staggered for 1 round until you are healed any number of hit points from any source. This condition removal applies immediately, meaning if you spend a Standard Action to heal, you regain your Move Action that you originally lost.
Pros: This makes focus fire a little less of a priority, since splitting your focus can result in enemies having reduced effectiveness, even if only for one round, as well as making enemies decide between healing or fighting on. (Same applies for players.)
Cons: This makes automatic or quick healing effects (such as Fast Healing or Lay On Hands) much more potent with their added application, as well as slow or conventional healing effects (such as a Heal Check, Cure spells, Heal spell, etc.) much less practical than they already are.
The Action Speed thing is a throwback to AD&D 2ndEd "weapon speed" rules and was a mechanic I completely ignored DMing from 1984-2000. Complicates and slows things down.
Just spouting my opinion.
3. To simplify, make a table listing every weapon with a draw speed and a use speed. Surprise should not make as much difference in a dungeon when everyone enters a room with at least one weapon ready.
Most of the monsters will be using the same weapon, so just add or subtract the difference to the initiative roll.
GM: What's your weapon speed?
Bow Manny: just 3 because my arrow is already drawn.
GM: The orcs are at 6 so add 3 to you initiative.
All participants stay at their initiative even if they change weapons for simplicity sake.
5. If it crits, it Vits.
If you can threaten and confirm a critical hit with an attack or effect requiring an attack roll that deals hp damage, you can use the Vital Strike feats with it. If it is multiple simultaneous attacks ala searing light, only the first attack benefits.
PROS: simplification of Vital Strike is a Good Thing and encourages characters to use one attack in a round instead of multiple. This makes many monsters' special attacks something of an actual threat to parties slathered in every abjuration under the sun instead of a waste of actions. Also it's a truckload of fun to roll giant piles of weapon/spell damage dice.
CONS: It cuts both ways. Jabberwocks can phaser-death characters with insufficient protection from fire. Rules lawyers tend to hate it as it supposedly says 'martials can't have nice things'. (I disagree, melee martials should be getting lobbed into full attack by their casting buddies as fast as possible before they lend supporting attack spells whilst ranged martials already have access to analogous nastiness such as Clustered Shots and assorted deeds. YMMV.)
|
|
3) very complicated. I think is better (i will try next home game) each player roll 2 initiatives and do 2 actions (1 each initiative) maximun 1 spell per round. Every round roll intiative.
4) Its noce makes pools of money or snacks to everithing, but not everyone gets same posibilities. Anyway a box for donations to game mats or/ and food & drink is good.
|
Roll for hit points, if below average for the die, get the average of the die.
Pros: PCs are durable, so the GM can take the kid gloves off.
Cons: PCs are durable, so they might not feel the peril.
CON: It's the worst of both worlds, in that the PCs who rolled the best over several levels are bored out of their skulls while the PCs who rolled the worst over several levels gets their faces ripped off.
Because if there's anything that'll piss off the martials, it's having fewer hitpoints than the nancyboy bard standing safe in the back.
~ ~ ~
Die-rolling for stat-generation and hit-points sucks, now and forevermore.
"Hey, let's play this game that's incredibly complicated and consumes utterly huge amounts of your free time, but where your alter-ego's fate MASSIVELY rests on just a few INSANELY important but thoroughly random die rolls that none of its class-abilities and carefully-chosen equipment can do anything to mitigate!"
Ugh.
It's like a pestilence festering in a dank jungle that humanity just cannot manage to eradicate.
Roll for hit points, if below average for the die, get the average of the die.
Pros: PCs are durable, so the GM can take the kid gloves off.
Cons: PCs are durable, so they might not feel the peril.
CON: It's the worst of both worlds, in that the PCs who rolled the best over several levels are bored out of their skulls while the PCs who rolled the worst over several levels gets their faces ripped off.
Because if there's anything that'll piss off the martials, it's having fewer hitpoints than the nancyboy bard standing safe in the back.
~ ~ ~
Die-rolling for stat-generation and hit-points sucks, now and forevermore.
"Hey, let's play this game that's incredibly complicated and consumes utterly huge amounts of your free time, but where your alter-ego's fate MASSIVELY rests on just a few INSANELY important but thoroughly random die rolls that none of its class-abilities and carefully-chosen equipment can do anything to mitigate!"
Ugh.
It's like a pestilence festering in a dank jungle that humanity just cannot manage to eradicate.
Actually, this mitigates the martials rolling only 1 through 5 on their d10 by giving them at least a 6 (7 if you're a barbarian).
Would a better system be barbarians roll 1d4+8, martials 1d4+6, medium BAB roll 1d4+4, and squishy casters roll 1d4+2?
EDIT:
I play 5th Edition for the most point now, and I always choose the average hit point option over rolling, and usually the standard array for ability scores (14 (23 from belt), 8 (10 from ioun stone), 13 (16 from race and feat), 10, 15 (16/20 from race/leveling), 12). I play a hill dwarf cleric 14 with the Resilient (Constitution) feat, so my Constitution is 13 + 2 (race) + 1 (feat) for a total of +3. I get 9 hit points each level (5 average + 3 Con + 1 race). I'm pretty tanky (AC 22 from +1 full plate and +1 shield), so I'm usually on the front line, tanking and buffing and healing. It's a very well balanced party of 6 (cleric (life), blaster wizard (divination), rogue (arcane trickster) switch-hitter, ranger (hunter) archer, two-weapon fighter (eldritch knight), and barbarian (berserker)). Almost everyone has spells (except the berserker) AND martial ability (except the wizard), so we can use flexible tactics.
Would a better system be barbarians roll 1d4+8, martials 1d4+6, medium BAB roll 1d4+4, and squishy casters roll 1d4+2?"Better" is don't roll at all.
-- 20pt-buy initial, full HP 1st-level, half-round-up thereafter.
For all that PFS is often claimed to get wrong, that it did just perfect.
A lot of tables use that chargen method. It gets boring after a while though.
Sometimes it's fun to not be able to go "I can swim through the lava because I have enough HP" and have a little extra risk. Yes, I know that's an extreme example, but still.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sometimes it's fun to not be able to go "I can swim through the lava because I have enough HP" and have a little extra risk. Yes, I know that's an extreme example, but still.
That is why there are lava sharks and magma kraken.
|
|
A lot of tables use that chargen method. It gets boring after a while though.Would a better system be barbarians roll 1d4+8, martials 1d4+6, medium BAB roll 1d4+4, and squishy casters roll 1d4+2?"Better" is don't roll at all.
-- 20pt-buy initial, full HP 1st-level, half-round-up thereafter.
For all that PFS is often claimed to get wrong, that it did just perfect.
(How is it boring? You can start with a 20 if you want, or four 14s, a 17 and a 5 in +2/-1 race, or 14,14,13,13,12,12.
~ ~ ~
"Billy? You get 30pt buy. Dave gets 25, Mike gets 20, Sue gets 15, and...waddya know, Jim starts with fours 13s and two 10s. Ok, everybody; make characters. We're gonna have tons of fun in 'Grove of the Tendriculos'!"
Yeah...thought not.
-- Everybody hates die-roll generation when it's described that way.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A lot of tables use that chargen method. It gets boring after a while though.Would a better system be barbarians roll 1d4+8, martials 1d4+6, medium BAB roll 1d4+4, and squishy casters roll 1d4+2?"Better" is don't roll at all.
-- 20pt-buy initial, full HP 1st-level, half-round-up thereafter.
For all that PFS is often claimed to get wrong, that it did just perfect.
(How is it boring? You can start with a 20 if you want, or four 14s, a 17 and a 5 in +2/-1 race, or 14,14,13,13,12,12.
~ ~ ~
"Billy? You get 30pt buy. Dave gets 25, Mike gets 20, Sue gets 15, and...waddya know, Jim starts with fours 13s and two 10s. Ok, everybody; make characters. We're gonna have tons of fun in 'Grove of the Tendriculos'!"
Yeah...thought not.
-- Everybody hates die-roll generation when it's described that way.
Diff'rent strokes for different folks.
Editing to clarify: it gets boring because point-buy is predictable. Then people make optimization guides, those guides and characters first become amazing, then 'gold standards', then expectations.
For organized play it's the only way to play fair. For everyone else, mileage will vary. Sometimes it can be fun just to mix things up. Sometimes this is randomized ability score determination. Sometimes the GM says, "You know what, go nuts, all 18s, have fun!" There's not supposed to be bad-wrong-fun playing any game for entertainment. Especially not something as commitment-intensive as a ttrpg.
My thread has been hijacked by pirates, but I'm prepared to repel boarders! Anyway, here's the real # 5:
5. Longevity XP: A character gains bonus XP equal to 1% times the number of levels that character has been played.
PRO: As an example, a Level 1 character gets a 1% bonus to XP. A character who has been actively played from Level 1 all the way to Level 10 gets a 10% bonus to XP. A new PC who debuts at Level 10 only gets a 1% bonus until it reaches Level 11, in which case it’ll get a 2% bonus.
The purpose of this rule is to reward players for sticking with a character. A lot of gamers have the “oh, shiny!” mentality and can be easily distracted by a new race or class or feat tree. This means some players will plead to introduce a new PC and sideline their current one or not bother having a dead PC raised: all because a brand-new high-level character with new bells and whistles and thousands of gold pieces in magic items is too hard to resist. Obviously, GMs want their players to enjoy the game and play characters they enjoy playing, but this sort of “Gamer ADD” can have serious repercussions to the health of a campaign overall. Deep character development and intricately-woven plot threads can be derailed when a major PC takes an unceremonious exit. In other words, it’s hard to write a good novel if you have to worry that any of the main characters could cease being available to you at any time. XP for character longevity is a very small bonus, and not likely to sway anyone who is deeply infatuated with a new idea, but it is a small recognition, incentive, and token of gratitude for those players who stick with a character and thus help a storyline along.
CON: To many players, losing a character sucks; and, especially at low levels where characters can’t be easily raised, depriving them of an XP bonus could be seen as adding insult to injury. In addition, the GM has to do a little more record-keeping to keep track of how long a character has been played and remember to factor the bonus in every time XP is awarded.
And # 6, which may cause seizures in some readers:
6. XP Penalty Based on Tier: Characters may receive a percentage penalty to XP earned based upon the tier placement of their current class. This category list will be created by the GM based upon perception of strength and available options that may become available in the future. “Tier 1” classes (usually composed of full casters) will receive a 20% XP penalty. Each successively lower tier has a successively lower XP Penalty in 5% percent increments, and bottom tier classes (the Core rulebook Rogue, for example) have no penalty to XP.
PRO: The caster/martial disparity is a long-running concern among many gamers. If you don’t believe it exists, stop reading this house rule now because you’ll just get agitated. If you’re still reading, you might notice that it’s pretty hard to sit a Level 20 Wizard side-by-side with a Level 20 Rogue and see anything remotely balanced by what should be two legitimate choices of gameplay. One of the ways that first and second edition D&D responded to this issue was to have different XP thresholds for each class to level up. Rogues levelled up the fastest, fighters were in the middle, and wizards were the slowest of all. The idea here is that, rather than ruthlessly balance every class with every other class (like fourth edition D&D tried to do), the system can acknowledge that some classes are innately more powerful but counter-balance that fact to some degree by making it take longer for those classes to reach higher levels. This proposed house rule doesn’t go nearly as far as those early editions (wherein a wizard took *twice* as many XP as a rogue to reach level 2), but it does provide just a little bump to help low-tier classes out.
CON: You’ll notice that I haven’t categorized all of Pathfinders 30+ classes into tiers, and instead left this up to the GM. The reason for this is that few things are more controversial than what tiers different classes belong in, and it seemed like a losing proposition. In addition, there are some classes (like the occult ones) that I just don’t have enough experience in to give a credible classification. One can find various sets of tiers (and the resulting argument) online, but no matter what choices the GM makes, some players may get annoyed by getting fewer experience points.
|
|
5) very low diference on xp. But its ok. Cant add anything but give the old characters contacts, allys, hooks, minions,titles, lamds, enterprises... Old ones will be rewarded with background.
6) mmm i did a time slow advancement for full casters. Fast advancement for full martials. The casters still better, but martials being happy with 1 or 2 levels more
6) mmm i did a time slow advancement for full casters. Fast advancement for full martials. The casters still better, but martials being happy with 1 or 2 levels more
I like that idea--just slots the classes into the existing Fast, Medium, and Slow advancement tracks.
5-6: We've given up on having different XP for different characters in a game to avoid punishing people who may be sick, unavoidably occupied by family etc. It happens more as you get older.
Also... the tier difference isn't really changed by a fraction of a level to a level's difference. The Fast/Medium/Slow advancement is larger, possibly large enough.
5. Already agitated. Thought it wasn't enough to be worth the bookkeeping.
6. When the inevitable flame war breaks out I will hide the topic.
Since this topic is becoming a total loss I will suggest my system. Every even level, they can choose a bonus. Thus at 2,4,6,8,10, ect they select from such a table.
1: Ability point bonus: Maximum ability bonus of eight, per ability, including from magic books or wishes. Does not stack with bonus items such as cloak of charisma.
2: +1 to hit and damage from any weapon. Maximum +5. does not stack with enchantment on weapon.
3: +1 to AC. Maximum of +8. Does not stack with item bonus AC including bracers of armor. For fighters it stacks with magic shield bonus.
You know you could just add a bonus of 100* level for decent role playing. Then someone who loses levels to draining or being raised can catch up quicker with side adventures.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Per the old saw 'point-buy is predictable', the last three games I 'rolled' in (LGS open game), I was (converted into point buy) at least 13 points better than anyone else, with the worst imbalance being 53. The players watched me roll in the GM's dice tower the last time, giving me an advantage of about 20 points, on average, on the rest of the table. The power level difference is hard on CR balance, 'player spotlighting', resentment, GM intimidation and other in-game issues. If I can in a roll up game, I try and get the party average in points.
While I agree on the optimization point, even a 10 point advantage is massive. As much as I like having a high stat toon, I also know the frustration of playing the 'runt'.
Here's # 7, something that's been around since the dawn of RPGs. I'm including it here for completeness, as we don't really need to rehearse the well-established arguments for and against them.
7. Critical Fumbles: On an attack roll of a natural 1, the attack automatically misses the target and the attacker suffers a critical fumble of a type determined by rolling 1d100 and consulting the table below:
Roll 1d100
1-3 Stumble and off balance, no attack next round
4-5 Hit Ally, Double Damage
6-10 Weapon drops, 1d8 squares, 1d8 (compass) direction
11-15 Slip & fall on ground
16-17 Backpack splits, everything drops to the ground
18-20 1d6 carried fragile items shatter (potion vials, alchemical items, etc.)
21-25 Weapon cracks and gains the Broken condition
26-27 Background Struck, causing inconvenient obstacle
28-30 Off-Balance, All opponents w/ line of sight get attack of opportunity
31-35 Weapon falls & wedged somewhere (DC 20 Str.)
36-40 Hit self/Get Hit, 1d6 damage & lost teeth
41-45 Hit self/Get Hit, 4d6 damage & broken arm (no 2 hand weapons)
46-50 Hit self/Get Hit, 6d8 damage & broken leg (speed=1)
51-55 Blinded by blood or flash for rest of combat
56-60 Hit nearest ally, normal damage
61-65 Hit self/Get Hit in Face--2d6 Charisma damage
66-70 Hit self/Get Hit deaf 1d4 days
71-75 Pathetic Miss, Opponents Mock and They Gain 1d8 temporary hit points
76-80 Slip, fall, and hit head: prone and unconscious for 1d6 rounds
81-85 Weapon destroyed permanently
86-88 Hit self, normal damage
89-90 Hit Self, Double Damage
91-95 Roll Twice
96-98 Hit Ally, Triple Damage
99-100 Hit Self, Triple Damage
PRO: Critical fumbles make combats memorable and exciting. No matter how tough a PC is, and no matter how overwhelming a monster seems, they can roll a natural 1 and disaster can strike. I’ve used critical fumble systems of some type in almost every RPG I’ve ever played, and I’ve never regretted it; even when, as a player, my bard PC literally decapitated himself! With critical fumbles, no combat is routine and no result is pre-determined. The table above is just a sample; there are tons of critical fumble tables out there, and Paizo produces a critical fumble deck.
CON: Some players like to play larger-than-life heroes of legend who can’t possibly miss, and they resent the randomness and fallibility that can come from a critical fumble system.
And # 8.
8. Critical Hits After a critical hit has been confirmed, a player may choose to either do the normal critical hit multiplier of the weapon or instead roll once on the table below.
Roll 1d100
1-3 Normal damage, target knocked prone
4-5 Normal damage, target pushed 1 square (attacker’s choice of direction)
6-10 Normal damage, target disarmed
11-15 Double damage
16-17 Double damage, target deafened for 1d6 rounds
18-20 Double damage, target blinded for 1d6 rounds
21-25 Double damage, target’s hands bruised (-2 attacks, 20% spell failure)
26-27 Double damage, random item on target is destroyed
28-30 Double damage, target shaken
31-35 Double damage, target flat-footed for 1 round
36-40 Double damage, attacker gets an extra attack with same modifiers
41-45 Triple damage
46-50 Triple damage, target stunned for 1d3 rounds
51-55 Triple damage, target reduced to half-speed for 1 hour
56-60 Triple damage, target is dazed for 1 round
61-65 Triple damage, target permanently scarred (-2 Charisma)
66-70 Triple damage, target takes 1d6 bleed
71-75 Triple damage, target goes last in initiative for rest of the encounter
76-80 Triple damage, attacker gets free Intimidate check vs. enemies w/in 30’
81-85 Triple damage, target confused (as per the spell) for 1d3 rounds
86-88 Triple damage, target panicked for 1d3 rounds
89-90 Triple damage, target takes 1d4 Con bleed
91-95 Quadruple damage
96-98 Quadruple damage, target staggered
99-100 Target reduced to -1 hit points and is dying
PRO: Critical hits are fun, but sometimes doing extra damage is either underwhelming (x2 with a dagger vs. a healthy ogre) or overkill (x3 with a greataxe vs. a goblin). Using a critical hit table like the one above adds an extra element of unpredictability and excitement to a battle. That ogre won’t be laughing when he takes quadruple damage and gets staggered! The table above is structured to add an element of decision-making for the player as to whether to take the weapon’s base critical multiplier or to roll on the table. Often, the table will be better, but there’s a chance it could be worse.
CON: A critical hit table like the one above, or like the deck of cards released by Paizo, cause a more “swingy” style of combat. In other words, a weak PC might get *really* lucky and defeat an opponent that really had no business defeating. And because critical hits go both ways, the player of a 9th level Fighter could get quite testy when that goblin rolls two natural 20s to confirm a critical hit with his dogslicer followed by a 99 on the table above. But all’s fair in love and war, and Pathfinder often involves the latter (if not the former).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Critical fumbles suck. They both slow things down and add insult to injury by even further punishing the character for having bad luck. Also, it also only punishes weapon users; spellcasters rarely make attack rolls, so they rarely suffer from critical fumbles.
If you're going to do critical hits, have the confirmation roll also act as the special effect determiner. Confirming with a 2 should be something pretty intense, and confirming with a 19 should be a relatively minor carrier effect, since it's easy to confirm with a 19+.
Rolling to confirm, then rolling to get a special effect, is rolling 3 times for 1 hit, plus rolling damage at least twice. That's a lot of rolling. Combining the confirmation roll with the special effect roll would make things a lot more efficient.
I have a serious question for you: Do all your house rules really, positively add to the gaming experience?
They seem like they add a lot of complexity, as well as consuming a lot of time. Is this a lot of theorycrafting? Or are these rules you use in regular games?
Critical fumbles favour one big swing over a bunch of small attacks; TWF is a terrible idea, high level full BAB characters or worse, monks, are hurting. Also they favour disposable low level characters over high level ones who may have more history in the game, and spellcasters over non-spellcasters. I can't say I'm a fan.
The critical hit table you're using makes a high crit range weapon better than one with a high crit multiplier. Not a big deal but I'd definitely want to know about it before I made a character.
Also as SmiloDan said this adds complexity and time. PF combat can take a lot of time anyway, slowing it down further seems a poor idea.
If fumble rules are going to be used I strongly endorse a confirmation roll like crits. As added complexity appears to be okay with these rules I would say that on the confirmation roll combat expertise or defensive fighting penalties should be counted as bonuses, since cautious fighting should not make fumbles more likely.
I have a serious question for you: Do all your house rules really, positively add to the gaming experience?
They seem like they add a lot of complexity, as well as consuming a lot of time. Is this a lot of theorycrafting? Or are these rules you use in regular games?
The idea with the "plug-and-play" house rules is that groups can pick one, ten, or forty in any combination that they think works best for them. I have used most of the rules I'm proposing (in some form or another) at some point in my gaming past, but certainly not all of them at once. I also freely admit that some are untested, like the weapon speed one (and those are the ones I can use the most help in improving).
Anyway, thanks for the feedback everyone--it helps me out a lot in refining the "pro" and "con" cases. More next week!
And # 8.
8. Critical Hits After a critical hit has been confirmed, a player may choose to either do the normal critical hit multiplier of the weapon or instead roll once on the table below.
Roll 1d100
1-3 Normal damage, target knocked prone
4-5 Normal damage, target pushed 1 square (attacker’s choice of direction)
6-10 Normal damage, target disarmed
11-15 Double damage
16-17 Double damage, target deafened for 1d6 rounds
18-20 Double damage, target blinded for 1d6 rounds
21-25 Double damage, target’s hands bruised (-2 attacks, 20% spell failure)
26-27 Double damage, random item on target is destroyed
28-30 Double damage, target shaken
31-35 Double damage, target flat-footed for 1 round
36-40 Double damage, attacker gets an extra attack with same modifiers
41-45 Triple damage
46-50 Triple damage, target stunned for 1d3 rounds
51-55 Triple damage, target reduced to half-speed for 1 hour
56-60 Triple damage, target is dazed for 1 round
61-65 Triple damage, target permanently scarred (-2 Charisma)
66-70 Triple damage, target takes 1d6 bleed
71-75 Triple damage, target goes last in initiative for rest of the encounter
76-80 Triple damage, attacker gets free Intimidate check vs. enemies w/in 30’
81-85 Triple damage, target confused (as per the spell) for 1d3 rounds
86-88 Triple damage, target panicked for 1d3 rounds
89-90 Triple damage, target takes 1d4 Con bleed
91-95 Quadruple damage
96-98 Quadruple damage, target staggered
99-100 Target reduced to -1 hit points and is dyingPRO: Critical hits are fun, but sometimes doing extra damage is either underwhelming (x2 with a dagger vs. a healthy ogre) or overkill (x3 with a greataxe vs. a goblin). Using a critical hit table like the one above adds an extra element of unpredictability and excitement to a battle. That ogre won’t be laughing when he takes quadruple damage and gets staggered! The table above is structured to add an element of decision-making for the player as to whether to take the weapon’s base critical...
When an enemy got a 1 to confirm, one player derailed the whole game for the night demanding the foe dropped their weapon. I still cry about it. I refused to schedule another game night till he agreed to a normal hit. What will be your response when this happens to you?
Boot that player and move on?
Yeah I just use you take one damage if you fumble it works well for my group.