[3.5] Possible Problems With These Houserules?

[Delandel]

So I'm going to be running a campaign that starts goes from lvl 1-20, Age of Worms. I was wondering if I could get critique / suggestions from these houserules.

I also have the "Races of" books, but I'm not too familiar with the material and I don't know if they have any red flags in there. Well, I know of the good ol' venerable dragonwrought kobold feat, but that's about it.

Any critical power imbalances that will potentially arise with this ruleset? I hope I'm not swarmed with a bunch of lion-totem variant barbarian applicants!

Houserules:

1) Core (including PHB2) / Complete / Spell Compendium / Magic Item Compendium / Races allowed.

2) Stay away from stinky cheese spells, feats, and variants. It sounds very arbitrary, I know, but what I mean are those huge red flags that everyone is aware about.
Examples of stinky spells: Alter Self, Polymorph, Celerity
Example of stinky variant: Abrupt Jaunt wizard variant

3) Monks get full BAB progression.

4) Druids must take the shapeshift variant in PHB2:
Lose: Animal Companion, Wildshape
Gain: Unlimited Swift Action Shapeshift
More information: PHB2 pg.39
If you're interested in playing a druid but don't have this book, PM me.

EDIT: Psionics in, free eschew materials out.

[Pharaoh's Fist]

Houserules:

1) Core (including PHB2) / Complete / Spell Compendium / Magic Item Compendium allowed, no psionics
Why no psionics?

[Doc Roc]

You might inspect the test of spite ban/fix list for things you consider relevant or useful. I've been running it pretty extensively, and playing in games using it, and it's not perfect but helps some. Basically, there's a lot of stuff that should be on your list which isn't.

[Myou]

1 & 2. Pretty standard.

3. Not a problem.

4. Just don't mix this with the Chaos Monk from Dragon Magazine. :smalltongue:

5. I use this myself.


No problems here.

[Curmudgeon]

{Scrubbed. Please don't link to copyright infringing sites.}

[Delandel]

I'll probably allow psionics. I don't allow it for now because I'm not familiar with the material. Alot of people talk it up as being very balanced though, so I'll give it a shot. I'd need help with balancing it though -- I know there's an ability called metamorphosis, which mimics polymorph, obviously a no-no in my books.

I see nothing wrong with the Craven feat, it might help bridge the gap a little with uberchargers, but I'm hesitant to opening the doors to material I'm not familiar with.

Tidesinger, your list is quite thorough, but I'm not sure how much is relevant to my needs, especially when I've restricted so many books. Some things are interesting though -- you make all clerics cloistered but i'm not sure why, you ban domain wizards and focused specialists which is good, arcane archers can use crossbows, did I miss anything else?

I dunno anything about this chaos monk class. Did I make the monk a little too good compared to barb / fighter if I give them full BAB?

[Myou]

I dunno anything about this chaos monk class. Did I make the monk a little too good compared to barb / fighter if I give them full BAB?

Not at all. The chaos monk is just one of those stupid Dragon magazine thing that should be ignored. It lets you roll a dice (d8 I think) to decide how many attacks flurry gives you.

[Delandel]

I guess my list is pretty much ready to go then. I have one final question though:

Should I allow the "Races of" books? I don't know too much about them, my concerns are having broken stuff and/or comparatively too powerful stuff to the other allowed books.

[Keld Denar]

Cloistered Cleric + lack of DMM: Persist means that clerics are forced more in to a pure caster role, and less of a "I do EVERYTHING better than you, +1" role. Keeps the 'zilla out of CoDzilla, essentially. Clerics are still full casters, but they aren't 24/7 fighters on top of that. Lowered armor/weapon proficiency, smaller HD, and stunted BAB go a long way toward keeping the cleric from stepping on everyone else's toes.

EDIT:
Races of: books are pretty balanced, and include a lot of fun stuff. RoDestiny has Able Learner, a great feat, but not OP. Also the Illumian race, which are really versatile and fun. Races of the Wild, I don't think there is ANYTHING broken in that book. Races of Stone has Goliaths, which, while strong, have an LA of +1 which kinda hurts. It also has Shadowcraft Mages, which are only really obscene if you use a REALLY lax reading of what qualifies as a wiz/sorc spell. Otherwise, they are mostly glorified blasters. RotDragon is not too powerful, either. Barring some limited Versatile Spellcaster shananigans, and regular abuse of the Greater Mighty Wallop spell with other sources of size stacking, its really not bad and the kobold stuff in it is just plain fun. Plus, lots of love for the oft maligned sorcerer!

Am I forgetting anything?

[sofawall]

I guess my list is pretty much ready to go then. I have one final question though:

Should I allow the "Races of" books? I don't know too much about them, my concerns are having broken stuff and/or comparatively too powerful stuff to the other allowed books.

I'd like you to address Pharoah's question.


Why no psionics?

[Myou]

I'd like you to address Pharoah's question.

He already did.


I'll probably allow psionics. I don't allow it for now because I'm not familiar with the material. Alot of people talk it up as being very balanced though, so I'll give it a shot. I'd need help with balancing it though -- I know there's an ability called metamorphosis, which mimics polymorph, obviously a no-no in my books.

[Volkov]

By no psionics do you even include the spell-like abilities with a different name that mind flayers, aboleths and such have?

[Delandel]

Wow, quite a buzz when I mentioned the "no psionics" thing. It's like I shot someone's puppy.

When I said "no psionics" I meant "no Complete Psionics book." It's not because of a seething hatred for that material, it's just because I'm not familiar with that stuff and therefore not a good judge of 1) balance 2) the player doing something wrong.

Spell-like abilities are fine cause I already know what they do. But like I said, I'll look it up.

[DragoonWraith]

I'll probably allow psionics. I don't allow it for now because I'm not familiar with the material. Alot of people talk it up as being very balanced though, so I'll give it a shot. I'd need help with balancing it though -- I know there's an ability called metamorphosis, which mimics polymorph, obviously a no-no in my books.
If you've ever played a video game that used Mana/MP, then you pretty much know the system already: you get a certain number of Power Points (read: Magic Points) per day. They refresh after 8 hours of rest (and 15 minutes of something, IIRC), and you use them to "manifest" "powers" (read: cast spells). The number of power points that you have is based on your class, in some cases your race, and your relevant ability score (Int for Psions, Cha for Wilders; forget what PsyWars use).

The Psychic Warrior, Psion, and Wilder all get a certain number of Power Points from being a given level, along with a certain number of Powers Known. None of them are like the Wizard or Cleric (knowing a ton of spells but only being able to prepare a small subset each day), they all are spontaneous with a limited list of spells they have chosen to know. Psions and Wilders share a spell list (like Wizards and Sorcerers), but Psions must specialize and when they do so, they add a few extra spells to their spell list from their specialty. Wilders have a special mechanic that allows them to Augment more than they normally would, but it hurts them.

Augmentation is the big thing, it's the reason why Psionics is more balanced than spellcasting and it's also the reason that a lot of people think it's completely broken. Augmentation allows you to spend extra power points on a power to improve it in some way. So Mind Thrust is a 1 PP power that deals 1d10 damage [Mind-Affecting]. For each additional power point you spend, it deals another 1d10 damage (2d10 for 2 PP, 3d10 for 3 PP, etc). The key is you may never spend more PP than your Manifester Level. Unless you're a Wilder, and then you can only spend a few more PP and it costs you, or you have the Overchannel feat, which is similar but generally hurts even more than the Wilder's ability.

This is critical, because otherwise you could Mind Thrust at level 5 for 40d10 damage or something. Yeah. And Mind Thrust is a 1st level power; higher level powers could be worse. So make sure you always remember that rule.

The reason this makes things more balanced is because you need redundant powers less. Mind Thrust is a 1st level spell, but it doesn't have a maximum damage - other than your Manifester Level. So if you Augment it, you can do 20d10 damage at level 20 - even though it is a "1st level" power, augmented that much it's a good attack. You don't need Ray of Frost/Scorching Ray/Disintegrate for ever-increasing damage; it's built-in.

This means that losing manifesting advancement doesn't hurt nearly so bad as losing spellcasting advancement, as long as you can keep your Manifester Level up (yay Practiced Manifester). And in turn, it means that PrC's can lose Manifesting progression without killing your character.

And they do. All of the 3.5 Psionic PrC's lose progression at first level (except the Elocator, who loses at 2 instead, but has Dodge/Mobility/Spring Attack as requirements, which sucks, and CPsi's Anarchic Initiate... but you shouldn't use CPsi anyway, it's a terrible book. If you have it, allow the Soulbow, and basically ignore the rest of it).

In general, also, higher level powers aren't nearly as strong as higher level spells. Look at the 9th level power list - there aren't many, most of them require XP, and several take ages to use. They're often one-time things, rather than battle tactics.

[rezplz]

I think you're forgetting the most important house rule. All gnome paladins get a +10 to all of their ability scores ;P! Come ooooon, it's balanced. Riiiight? ;D


In all seriuznez, they all seem fine to me. Only one that I might see as a bit iffy is the free eschew materials. Casters are plenty powerful, but one of their weaknesses should be in a grapple, because they need to do a grapple check to get their material components. Take that away and it's just a concentration check, which should be easy enough. ;P

But yeah, it's not exactly game breaking or anything, so I'm not too worried about it.

[Jalor]

If you're already banning Polymorph effects, you don't need to worry at all about Psionics. It's a wonderfully designed system.

Some people find the power Schism to be broken, but it requires the Psion to be the psionic equivalent of an Enchanter, and that means "useless against Constructs and Undead, not to mention everyone with Mind Blank". Also, they end up burning through tons of PP.

[Keld Denar]

but you shouldn't use CPsi anyway, it's a terrible book. If you have it, allow the Soulbow, and basically ignore the rest of it).
But...but...but...Link Power! So good! Basically, a required feat for most PsyWars. Fun, balanced, and good. One of the few gems in that book. Oh, and Illithid Grapple. Because EVERYTHING is better with tentacles...


Some people find the power Schism to be broken, but it requires the Psion to be the psionic equivalent of an Enchanter, and that means "useless against Constructs and Undead, not to mention everyone with Mind Blank". Also, they end up burning through tons of PP.

Action economy abuse is only an Expanded Knowledge feat away...

[Delandel]

Wow, I just got tons of useful advice. Thanks everyone.

I also like this cloistered cleric variant. It would help neuter the mighty CoDzilla, and I've already had my way with the druid. Sadly it's in Unearthed Arcana, another book I don't know much about, but I do know that I hate flaws. Tough call, should I allow it and just ban flaws, or are there other nasties inside? :smallfrown:

[Hawriel]

I see no problem with your house rules. I also dont care about psionics.

I do have one question. Why do you have a problem with alter self? I honestly do not see how this can be over powered.

[Faleldir]

Make Two-Weapon Fighting and Rapid Shot usable with a standard action.

[Eldariel]

Make Two-Weapon Fighting and Rapid Shot usable with a standard action.

And trim some feats from those chains (PBS + Precise Shot at least should be combined [or PBS-benefits could be given by default; who does NOT hit better at the range of 30'], and TWF should be rolled into 1 feat in its entirety). Trim some from Mounted Combat while at it (combine Mounted Combat & Ride-By Attack at least), and Spring Attack could lose prerequisites.

Hell, just make a generic "Act on the Run"-feat that eclipses Flyby Attack, Spring Attack, Shoot on the Run, Mobile Spellcasting and all that nonsense and allows a standard action mid-move.

[Keld Denar]

Alter Self is only absurd when you combine it with something that changes your type, like Dragonwraught, Otherworldly, or being a non-humanoid (like Aasimar). Barring that, its just a really versatile spell that can mimic a crappy Fly, a crappy Spider Climb, a crappy Mage Armor+, or a crappy Water Breathing. Its strong because its versatile, but without really broken stuff like Dwarven Ancestor, its just really good, but hardly broken.

[Delandel]

I'd have to double check but to my knowledge, alter self does too much for a lvl 2 spell. I can restrict it though, but meh.

Overhauling an entire fighting style looks like too much houseruling for me though. I agree that TWF is situational, but that's just too many big changes.

[deuxhero]

Even with full BAB monk's still have abilitys that conflict. Swap flurry for skimish damage (see scout, think it is in one of the books you listed) usable only with monk weapons, boost the hit die, give them a base defence bonus (unearthed arcana, in the SRD) equal to a heavy armor class (to deal with their lack of armor+lack of mage armor) and someone MIGHT play as them.



I also like this cloistered cleric variant. It would help neuter the mighty CoDzilla, and I've already had my way with the druid. Sadly it's in Unearthed Arcana, another book I don't know much about

most of UA is in the SRD (including the cloistered cleric)

[Oslecamo]

Action economy abuse is only an Expanded Knowledge feat away...

Another reason to question "psionic balance". It isn't very usefull to force the psion to specialize when he still can cherry pick the imba powers and then is flinging two or even three powers at turn wich are almost as good as wizard spells. Really there's no purpose nerfing the wizard if you give free reign to the psion.

[ericgrau]

1. Only minor power creep over core since it's all basic WotC stuff. That's fine.

2. Doesn't hurt. These spells add complication at the very least and possible brokenage when misused or abused. The RPGA disallows them purely for reasons of complication and game delay, and their D&D games work just fine w/o them.

3. Doesn't help. Overpowered if you can use the class features properly, still underpowered otherwise. So it just makes the class more of a trap for those who use it wrong. For those who know what they're doing it polarizes the class even more:
"Ah, a humanoid. I out-grapple it, I outdamage it in a grapple, I win. Ah a dragon. Dang, I'm still screwed." Or I'd dip fighter or barbarian, take the class, wear armor and wield a martial weapon, just to be a wise-acre. Full BAB, full saves, SR, feats, etc. Mmm. Who cares about losing flurry and wis to AC now?

4. I dunno.

[Curmudgeon]

Sadly it's in Unearthed Arcana, another book I don't know much about, but I do know that I hate flaws.
Oh, you're missing out on some prime opportunities for evil fun! I tell my players that they can take flaws, but that predisposes me to come up with enemies that just happen to attack their weaknesses. So if they take Shaky (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/buildingCharacters/characterFlaws.htm#shaky), enemies are going be well-equipped for ranged combat. :smallwink:

[oxinabox]

with MiC, think before letting players use it as a magic mart.
some things are good in there, so good you might want to think about them.
eg Strong arm bracers, gives you powerfull built for 6k (IIRC)
Fighters may need it, but does the frenzied orc berserker?

[PId6]

3. Doesn't help. Overpowered if you can use the class features properly, still underpowered otherwise. So it just makes the class more of a trap for those who use it wrong. For those who know what they're doing it polarizes the class even more:
"Ah, a humanoid. I out-grapple it, I outdamage it in a grapple, I win. Ah a dragon. Dang, I'm still screwed." Or I'd dip fighter or barbarian, take the class, wear armor and wield a martial weapon, just to be a wise-acre. Full BAB, full saves, SR, feats, etc. Mmm. Who cares about losing flurry and wis to AC now?
I agree that it doesn't help, but how the hell can you overpower a monk without partially charged wands of Polymorph?


Or I'd dip fighter or barbarian, take the class, wear armor and wield a martial weapon, just to be a wise-acre. Full BAB, full saves, SR, feats, etc. Mmm. Who cares about losing flurry and wis to AC now?
Full Bab = nothing a full fighter/barbarian doesn't have.
Full Saves = decent.
SR = hurts you more than it helps.
Feats = fighters get more and better.
Etc = Slow Fall and Tongues.

A full fighter/barbarian beats fighter 1/monk every time in everything but saves.

[Kallisti]

You've got a pretty good set of houserules here, but if I were you, I'd add a clause about things from other books being allowed with DM approval, on a case-by-case basis, and subject to immediate confiscation if they're abused. There are a lot of cool and balanced options from books other than the ones you're allowing. There are also a lot of unbalanced and stupid ones. Hence: Case-by-case, DM approval, immediate confiscation if abused.


But no, none of your houserules will ruin anyone's fun. Although whoever said the monk still nedds buffed was right. Adding Spring Attack as a bonus feat, Skirmish damage, and pounce might work. Maybe. Monks are awesome, but when they chose the rules for monks over at WotC, they chose...poorly.

[ericgrau]

I agree that it doesn't help, but how the hell can you overpower a monk without partially charged wands of Polymorph?

It's not broken, just too strong. You flat out do more damage than whatever you grapple if it's medium, which basically means you're much stronger than equal CR creatures. But against other things you're still just as screwed as before. Kinda all break, no fix. And damage dealers will likewise still be worse even with full BAB. Unless they pick up a weapon and heavy armor. So that's more bait to the trap for those who try that.



Full Bab = nothing a full fighter/barbarian doesn't have.
Full Saves = decent.
SR = hurts you more than it helps.
Feats = fighters get more and better.
Etc = Slow Fall and Tongues.

A full fighter/barbarian beats fighter 1/monk every time in everything but saves.
Meh, it's bad strat to heal during combat anyway except during emergencies. And monks can run and tumble away if there is one. Just about everything else is out of combat when you can lower your SR. Oh, and SR is uber vs. opponents' abilities, so yeah it's worth it. Fighters may get more feats, but that's about it, so it's a lousy comparison. Might as well say rogues are bad skillmonkeys b/c fighters beat them at riding. A better apples to apples comparison might be to a ranger (i.e., multiple abilities, not 1 focus), who gets outshined or matched in almost every way.

[PId6]

It's not broken, just too strong. You flat out do more damage than whatever you grapple if it's medium, which basically means you're much stronger than equal CR creatures. But against other things you're still just as screwed as before. Kinda all break, no fix. And damage dealers will likewise still be worse even with full BAB. Unless they pick up a weapon and heavy armor. So that's more bait to the trap for those who try that.
The point of grapple is not damage; you can do far more damage with a full attack than you can with a grapple. I agree that it doesn't save the class much, but I fail to see how it can be too strong.


Meh, it's bad strat to heal during combat anyway except during emergencies. And monks can run and tumble away if there is one. Just about everything else is out of combat when you can lower your SR. Oh, and SR is uber vs. opponents' abilities, so yeah it's worth it. Fighters may get more feats, but that's about it, so it's a lousy comparison. Might as well say rogues are bad skillmonkeys b/c fighters beat them at riding. A better apples to apples comparison might be to a ranger (i.e., multiple abilities, not 1 focus), who gets outshined or matched in almost every way.
Start of combat, you see monsters coming, wizard casts Enlarge Person/Fly/Haste/Greater Heroism/whatever on you, SR screws it up, monsters eat you, you lose. There are plenty of situations where you want buff spells right before or during combat, and it just doesn't work because of SR. Running away is not a great solution when you probably have a cleric or fighter decked out in heavy armor in your party.

And the SR you get is certainly not "uber vs opponents' abilities." Anyone who really needs it can get past SR easily, even in core. Spell Penetration and Greater Spell Penetration already provides +4, which a core offensive caster probably has, while your support wizard or cleric probably doesn't. Add in splatbooks and Assay Spell Resistance or True Casting makes your SR a non-factor.

You're using hyperbole; I'm saying that fighters are better than your weapon-wielding armor-wearing monk because fighters can do far more damage and have more survivability, and the same can be said of barbarian. Nearly all of the monk's class features are worthless or nearly so, especially if you go against what the class is supposed to do, hence why you really shouldn't try to make a "fighter" out of a monk.

[Bandededed]

It's not broken, just too strong. You flat out do more damage than whatever you grapple if it's medium, which basically means you're much stronger than equal CR creatures.

Assuming that equal CR creatures, for you, are medium, and there is only one of them OR they are below your CR and there is only one per PC and each keeps theirs completely occupied, then grappling is a great tactic, especially for monks. Otherwise you're working a losing battle.


But against other things you're still just as screwed as before. Kinda all break, no fix. And damage dealers will likewise still be worse even with full BAB. Unless they pick up a weapon and heavy armor. So that's more bait to the trap for those who try that.

Note entirely true, because +5 BAB means that you do hit more often. Other common fixes for Monk misses are to allow them enchantable gauntlets or hand wraps and still deal their unarmed damage, or that amulet from Savage Species (3.0, I know) that allows them to enchant it and have those enchantments carry over to their natural attacks (ie, their unarmed strike).



Meh, it's bad strat to heal during combat anyway except during emergencies. And monks can run and tumble away if there is one. Just about everything else is out of combat when you can lower your SR. Oh, and SR is uber vs. opponents' abilities, so yeah it's worth it.

Well, it's a bad idea to heal for 1d8 + level when your opponents are dealing 40 ~ish damage a round, but if your party's cleric is dropping a heal on you... And minor correction, SR is uber vs. opponents' abilities that both target SR and don't have a bonus higher than your SR, and any opponent that has spells to cast at you, will.

[RagnaroksChosen]

im a huge fan of the shapechanger variant.

How ever I'm also a huge fan of having an animal companion... more so then the shapechanger variant...

I would allow them the choice. just my 2 cp

[ShadowsGrnEyes]

looks pretty good to me.

I will comment on only races of the dragon as i'm most familiar with 2 imbalances in that book.

Dragonborn: the ability to have a breath weapon that they can use once every 1d4 rounds and that they can choose the energy type of each time the use it. . . that is a bit OP compared to other races. . . considering its more powerfull than entire class features(see dragon shamans breath weapon) and gets bigger with their hit dice.
Dragonborn get that with no level adjustment. . .

Spellscales. Personally I totally adore them as a race. Blood quickenings however can be a touch broken depending on the class played.

As for the other races books I have no idea as to how balanced they are.

[Godskook]

Note entirely true, because +5 BAB means that you do hit more often. Other common fixes for Monk misses are to allow them enchantable gauntlets or hand wraps and still deal their unarmed damage, or that amulet from Savage Species (3.0, I know) that allows them to enchant it and have those enchantments carry over to their natural attacks (ie, their unarmed strike).

Isn't that how it already works?

This metal glove lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes. A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#gauntlet)

[oxinabox]

oh, Races of the Wild;
Raptorians: talk to you whole party before allowing one PC to play one.
lvl 1: they can glide
lvl 5: they have limitied flying
lvl 10: they can fly allday.
Combine that with ACF fighter: fly in medium load
and Improved flight fear: get fly speed good (instead of average)
and you've got a race the is flying all the time, with hover.

this isn't actually that OP.
by lvl 10, maybe ther wizard casting fly on the whole party all the time.

I have a lvl 8 warlock that flys all the time.
but still someof your players may feel that raptorians are OP, so it's best to get that out before any conflict happens

[Pharaoh's Fist]

Isn't that how it already works?

It's debated because you're using a gauntlet instead of your fist.

[PId6]

looks pretty good to me.

I will comment on only races of the dragon as i'm most familiar with 2 imbalances in that book.

Dragonborn: the ability to have a breath weapon that they can use once every 1d4 rounds and that they can choose the energy type of each time the use it. . . that is a bit OP compared to other races. . . considering its more powerfull than entire class features(see dragon shamans breath weapon) and gets bigger with their hit dice.
Dragonborn get that with no level adjustment. . .

Spellscales. Personally I totally adore them as a race. Blood quickenings however can be a touch broken depending on the class played.

As for the other races books I have no idea as to how balanced they are.
Dragonborn breath weapons are not overpowered at all. The damage is exceedingly weak at high levels, compared to spells or full attacks, and dragon shaman is actually a very weak class (and it's not true besides; the dragon shaman's breath weapon damage is higher, though only slightly). I would pick the flight over breath weapon any day. If anything, the dragonborn is overpowered because it boosts Con and its stat boosts stack with the base creature's, letting you get very high melee stats. But IMO it's not that much better than a human anyway except in a few specific instances.

As for spellscales, they're actually slightly underpowered because of the Con penalty. Blood Quickenings aren't that strong in comparison to bonus feat and extra skill points. 90% of the time, a human is just better.


Isn't that how it already works?

This metal glove lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes. A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#gauntlet)
Nope, because monks aren't proficient with gauntlets. I guess you can dip for it, but it's still a bit ambiguous.

[Curmudgeon]

It's debated because you're using a gauntlet instead of your fist.
There shouldn't be any debate about it. Monks aren't proficient with gauntlets, and gauntlets don't hold weapon enhancements in 3.5 D&D.

However, the Necklace of Natural Attacks (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20060707a) is rules legal, and was reprinted for 3.5 in the link. So just use it. It's got the same cost, and avoids argument.

[PId6]

However, the Necklace of Natural Attacks (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20060707a) is rules legal, and was reprinted for 3.5 in the link. So just use it. It's got the same cost, and avoids argument.
If you use with with unarmed strikes, does unarmed strike count as a single natural weapon? What about if you use TWF with unarmed strikes?

[Godskook]

Monks aren't proficient with gauntlets

What would that matter? It says that guantlets are treated as unarmed strikes, so why would it matter if a monk was proficient with it to be able to add his monk's unarmed strike damage to the guantlet's enhancements? Sure, he'll take the -4 for non-proficiency, but that's a separate issue.


gauntlets don't hold weapon enhancements in 3.5 D&D.

Yes, yes they do. Check the SRD and the DMG. They're even in the random magic item generation tables.

[Curmudgeon]

If you use with with unarmed strikes, does unarmed strike count as a single natural weapon? What about if you use TWF with unarmed strikes?
Unarmed strike is a single natural weapon. The feat is Improved Unarmed Strike, not Improved Unarmed Strikes.

Whether you can use two-weapon fighting with unarmed strikes is an independent question, without an easy answer. Regardless, you'll spend only half as much on a Necklace of Natural Attacks as you would enhancing two gauntlets.

It says that guantlets are treated as unarmed strikes, so why would it matter if a monk was proficient with it
That's not actually what it says; it's really not clear at all.
Gauntlet

This metal glove lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes. A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack. The cost and weight given are for a single gauntlet. Medium and heavy armors (except breastplate) come with gauntlets. Gauntlets have a listed damage of 1d3 for medium size on the Weapons Table (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#weaponDescriptions). This is a different value from a Monk's unarmed damage. Given the otherwise exception, it's supportable to maintain the text and table are not in disagreement; you get the weapon damage listed, and as a weapon it's not on the Monk proficiency list. But other than those things, you treat it as an unarmed strike, which means you don't threaten with a gauntlet unless you have Improved Unarmed Strike. Oh, and since gauntlets are parts of armor in addition to being weapons, it's easy enough to claim that Monks lose their class abilities when wearing them.

See why it's just simpler to use the Necklace of Natural Attacks?

[Godskook]

You know what, I'm moving this to its own thread.

[Myrmex]

Alter Self is only absurd when you combine it with something that changes your type, like Dragonwraught, Otherworldly, or being a non-humanoid (like Aasimar). Barring that, its just a really versatile spell that can mimic a crappy Fly, a crappy Spider Climb, a crappy Mage Armor+, or a crappy Water Breathing. Its strong because its versatile, but without really broken stuff like Dwarven Ancestor, its just really good, but hardly broken.

Or give you an awesome combat form, or make you count as a tiny creature (diminuitive with shrink person).

It gives far too much for a level 2 spell.

[Faleldir]

with MiC, think before letting players use it as a magic mart.
some things are good in there, so good you might want to think about them.
eg Strong arm bracers, gives you powerfull built for 6k (IIRC)
Fighters may need it, but does the frenzied orc berserker?
Strongarm Bracers only add a small amount of damage; a better example would be Steadfast Boots.

[Keld Denar]

Or give you an awesome combat form, or make you count as a tiny creature (diminuitive with shrink person).

It gives far too much for a level 2 spell.

Changes in size never stack. You can't Enlarge yourself, then Alter Self to become Huge and you can't Reduce yourself and Alter Self to become Fine or Diminuative.

As far as combat forms...well, if you are talking about natural attacks, in the case of Alter Self, most cases a caster would be better off wielding a 2handed weapon than what forms you get with AS (Polymorph gets forms with better NAs, but AS does not). So, the primary reason to cast AS is to get Natural Armor, which is mostly Troglodyte or Tren forms without type changing shananaigens, and given that Tren are non-amphibious aquatic, would involve holding your breath. So, turning into a Trog or Tren would make you pretty resiliant, and you could potentially win an encounter JUST because of the misses generated by AS, but you could also win because you Blinded a foe with Glitterdust, or because you had too many Mirror Images, or because you spent the whole fight Invisible while summoning stuff. Plus, NA doesn't affect your touch AC, so determined foes could grapple you, or trip you to negate some of the bonus, or whatever.

Yea, its versatile, but for the number of different things you could use it for, and the number of them you get in a day. You can't swap forms at will for the duration like Shapechange, so if you cast it to take Trog form for combat, you can't become a Tren or Triton to breath water, or Raptoran or whatever for flight, or something else with a burrow speed, or something else with a climb speed. Also, especially at low levels, the duration is rather inhibitive, and at higher levels, you'd get more out of spending slots having See Invis up all day than you would from 5 points of NA in most cases. Yea, its versatile, yea, its pretty good, but barring type change shananigens, its not stronger than Glitterdust, or Mirror Image, or Invisibility.

At least not in my opinion.

[ericgrau]

EDIT: Response removed to keep this from becoming a monk debate. I will say contrived situations don't count, and that my statements held true in general. How about we agree that a full BAB monk's attack is still weaker than normal, as are his physical defenses, so the fix is just more bait to the trap for those who use monks to deal damage.

[Random832]

I also like this cloistered cleric variant. It would help neuter the mighty CoDzilla, and I've already had my way with the druid. Sadly it's in Unearthed Arcana, another book I don't know much about, but I do know that I hate flaws. Tough call, should I allow it and just ban flaws, or are there other nasties inside? :smallfrown:

UA doesn't attempt to present a coherent system - you have to pick and choose what to allow. In particular, you shouldn't use Gestalt unless you want to have everyone (all PCs and all PC-class-based NPCs) use it.

[jiriku]

+1 to Kallisti's suggestion to conditionally allow anything with your approval. This encourages player creativity while reserving your right to apply The Boot.

Cloistered Cleric is a VERY fun class to play (I won't play regular clerics any more, gimme that cloister, baby). I've never encountered balance issues with it. Variants that give classes the ability to do something other than stomp face are almost ALWAYS good for the game.

Flaws WILL encourage your players to powergame. In my experience, they're never used for the original intended purpose, which is to create deeper and more interesting characters. Instead, they're just a crutch for greater mechanical advantage.

[Jalor]

Another reason to question "psionic balance". It isn't very usefull to force the psion to specialize when he still can cherry pick the imba powers and then is flinging two or even three powers at turn wich are almost as good as wizard spells. Really there's no purpose nerfing the wizard if you give free reign to the psion.
If you're really worried about Schism, just ban it. It's still only one power, unlike Wizards who need 50% of core spells banned to be balanced.

Also, why are we trying to fix Monks when Tome of Battle exists? You've probably heard horror stories about ToB being game-breaking, but that's only true if you twist RAW into a loophole no DM would allow. The only thing in ToB that actually deserves banning is White Raven Tactics, because WotC doesn't actually know how their own rules work. Everything else in the book is balanced and makes melee fighters actually interesting and playable without being munchkin-y.

[Myou]

Also, why are we trying to fix Monks when Tome of Battle exists? You've probably heard horror stories about ToB being game-breaking, but that's only true if you twist RAW into a loophole no DM would allow. The only thing in ToB that actually deserves banning is White Raven Tactics, because WotC doesn't actually know how their own rules work. Everything else in the book is balanced and makes melee fighters actually interesting and playable without being munchkin-y.

I agree completely. :smallsmile:

[Bandededed]

How about we agree that a full BAB monk's attack is still weaker than normal, as are his physical defenses

He will be weaker than most characters still, as has been noted. I'd still try playing it, but that's beside the point.

Sorry, Delandel, for the partial threadjack.

Your houserules, to me, seem fine and dandy, but I agree with the above posters suggesting allowing anything, on the condition that they come to you with it first (and I do mean literally bring the book and show you, or let you borrow it if necessary).

[cfalcon]

When I said "no psionics" I meant "no Complete Psionics book." It's not because of a seething hatred for that material, it's just because I'm not familiar with that stuff and therefore not a good judge of 1) balance 2) the player doing something wrong.

I've had both these issues in the past. I eventually sat down and did the study. There are still somethings that are silly and need to be houseruled (wall of energy, sonic, doesn't have the caveat that it damage creatures, unlike wall of fire, spell), and a couple of the abilities that allow a bunch of stuff to happen in one round. It's nothing ultimately out of line, you just need to be familiar with it. Overall, it's fine.

I have it in the campaign world I ran last (and am preparing to run more in), but my next one will probably not have it just because I don't like having a separate magic concept beyond the divine and arcane already defined (I can definine psionics as arcane, but it's clear it's a different beast flavorwise). Unless I actually find a player that wants to play it, which is the other problem: the other players don't like psionics and it sort of ruins their vision of a fantasy world, even though I tried to tie it into a society that is not based on history.

Overall, you won't regret including it from a power perspective, but it's just as easy to not.

If you blanket allow prestige classes and such, you are also responsible for fitting all of them into your world. Does a green meteor *really* help the few Green Star Adepts out? That sort of thing. But if you ignore the ones your players aren't about, then this is fine.

[deuxhero]

However, the Necklace of Natural Attacks (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20060707a) is rules legal, and was reprinted for 3.5 in the link. So just use it. It's got the same cost, and avoids argument.

Did it just explicitly suggest giving your natural attacks the throwing enchantment? "Suck on my missile punch!"