PDA

View Full Version : Requesting feedback on house rules for 3.5 game.



WhiteHarness
2011-03-22, 09:32 AM
I am preparing to run an "E6" campaign for a few friends. They prefer the 3.5 edition of the game, and have requested that the campaign be run with those rules.

My problem is that I do not care for vanilla 3.5 and have to house-rule it to death in order to make it palatable to me.

A list of the house rules I would have to put into effect:
1. The game with be run as an "E6" campaign.
2. Armour Class wins ties, not the Attack Roll.
3. The Armour as DR rule from Unearthed Arcana is in effect.
4. The Class Defense Bonus rule from Unearthed Arcana is in effect, but re-skinned as a Competence Bonus, allowing it to stack with the reduced Armour Bonus from Armour as DR.
5. The only books allowed are the PHB, DMG, MM, PHB II, and Races of Stone.
6. The only classes allowed are the NPC classes from the DMG: Warrior, Adept, Aristocrat, Expert, Commoner. I think nearly every role in heroic fiction can be defined by those. I might be persuaded to allow certain additional spells for the adept.
7. Humans only.
8. The "Non-Elite Array" will be used to determine ability scores, i.e. 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, and 8, arranged to taste.

Would all that even work together? Is this campaign even remotely playable, or should I just try to convince them to switch to something like GURPS or find another DM?

Aergoth
2011-03-22, 09:37 AM
Have you considered the Generic Classes from UA?

Veklim
2011-03-22, 02:51 PM
I must say I agree with Aergoth, the UE generic set is remarkably versatile, certainly works for the game, they're as much or as little as you choose to allow the players. Muchos choice sir!
I find it best to do a simple point-buy system, gauge the power of the campaign by assigning between 60 and 80 points, and upper and lower caps on ability scores. The non-elite array is just 63 points given an upper and lower cap of 13-8.
Like the choice of books, any reason why the other Races books aren't allowed?
Other than that, sounds spot on fine to me. WARNING, watch out for certain spells which may/may not screw the armour/DR thing. Stoneskin might need addressing, etc although I do not know enough of the system to have a reliable opinion thus far.


Would all that even work together? Is this campaign even remotely playable

Answer:
Yes.

This is all just my opinions, ignore if you wish!

Ashtagon
2011-03-22, 03:02 PM
I am preparing to run an "E6" campaign for a few friends. They prefer the 3.5 edition of the game, and have requested that the campaign be run with those rules.

My problem is that I do not care for vanilla 3.5 and have to house-rule it to death in order to make it palatable to me.

A list of the house rules I would have to put into effect:
1. The game with be run as an "E6" campaign.
2. Armour Class wins ties, not the Attack Roll.

Makes no real difference to balance.

3. The Armour as DR rule from Unearthed Arcana is in effect.

There's a thread on homebrew armour as DR that's active right now. It may help you see where balance problems may arise.

4. The Class Defense Bonus rule from Unearthed Arcana is in effect, but re-skinned as a Competence Bonus, allowing it to stack with the reduced Armour Bonus from Armour as DR.

Sounds reasonable. In an e6 campaign, very likely won't make much real difference.

5. The only books allowed are the PHB, DMG, MM, PHB II, and Races of Stone.

Why Races of Stone? It just seems like an odd exception. And given the game is humans only, what exactly are you taking from that book?

6. The only classes allowed are the NPC classes from the DMG: Warrior, Adept, Aristocrat, Expert, Commoner. I think nearly every role in heroic fiction can be defined by those. I might be persuaded to allow certain additional spells for the adept.

Monsters are balanced against somewhat tougher PCs than these. Expect high casualties.

7. Humans only.

Sure, why not.

8. The "Non-Elite Array" will be used to determine ability scores, i.e. 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, and 8, arranged to taste.

Mangles
2011-03-22, 04:35 PM
The only trouble I would have is taking an NPC class. They are very boring classes to take. I suggest following Aergoth's advice on this one. You can even find the online here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/genericClasses.htm).

wayfare
2011-03-22, 05:51 PM
I think you've got some good stuff here. I love teh UA armor rules + Defense bonuses. In my experience, they make for very evocative, fun play.

There are a few class things you might want to consider:

Aristocrat is a solid class choice for a skill-based game.
Expert is really going to shine, especially if they can benefit from UMD
Im not too certain how the adept will fare, but I think well.

Problems develop when you consider the Warrior and Commoner classes.

The Warrior has all the problems of the fighter, but without the bonus feats or hp to make it playable. You might just consider allowing the fighter in to sub for the warrior. I really don't think that a few feats will break the game, and it will make combat much more playable.

I can only see someone taking the commoner class for RP reasons -- there are no mechanical benefits for doing so. If your party is not RP heavy, don't expect this to be used.

You might want to consider letting the Gleaner class that used to be up on the Gaming section here in your campaign. Its basically druid meets adept.

Hope this helps!

Mayhem
2011-03-22, 06:43 PM
I've tested armour-as-DR with class-based defense and it works though I personally don't like the UA defense progression.
I find high AC+high critical chance beats damage output. So sword&board in, greataxe out.
The adept spell list means there aren't any spells available to PCs that will upset the balance. So be careful with monster spells, especially 3rd level ones. Standard d&d monsters/PCs start to get out of hand around CR7, so this is especially problematic in a low-powered game. Groups of monsters that equal to CR7 are fair game though.
But yeah, it will work.

Also link (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Random_Ability_Order) to random ability score order for extra fun. :smallwink:

If you want some fun with armour, you could have a look at my armour system (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=191562). Lots of variants. Cut it to suit, or alternatively tell me how to cut it for you.

WhiteHarness
2011-03-23, 07:26 AM
I will look into the generic classes, but if they are what I think I remember that they are, the players might be a little put off by them.

The point about the Warrior vs. the Fighter is a good one.

I guess I am not married to the "humans only" idea. I just don't want to see anything too weird or "out there." I like the standard set of Tolkien-esque fantasy tropes.

I am also considering using the Defense Roll rule presented in the DMG. I'd like that; it would make it feel a bit more like the attacked character had some sort of say in his/her own defense rather than just an arbitrary "you're hit/not hit" as usual.

There are also some optional rules regarding masterwork weapons and armour presented in a Dragon Magazine from three or four years ago that I like...

I included Races of Stone solely for the existence of the Heavy Armour Optimization feats.

As is likely obvious from my house rules selection, I am concerned that D&D does not represent armour as being sufficiently effective and have chosen to implement rules which, I feel, correct this inadequacy. I am aware that my rules could result in a man in full plate armour with a shield and careful feat selection having an AC of 24+ in addition to DR 4/- fairly early in the campaign. This may be swinging the "armour effectiveness" pendulum too far back the other direction, but I think it will work if I control access to the best armour until higher levels. This will be a low-magic campaign, and magic items will not be plentiful; a masterwork item will be thought of as a pretty substantial prize.

I don't think that the average front-line combatant having an AC of 20 or so plus DR 2/- at first level is going to break things. Maybe I should make the characters roll for hit points (or take an average) instead of granting the maximum at first level in order to offset the high defenses. What do you think?

Aergoth
2011-03-23, 08:37 AM
So if the problem is with the races being weird, simply say "Core Races Only, no monstrous". This limits your players to those originally presented in the PHB, which is quite sound. Once you start dabbling around with other sourcebooks and monstrous races you've got a few more balls flying around and it can become a wee bit difficult to keep track of.

The generic classes are an interesting dilemma. It gives you as the DM a little more control over what the players can do, since you can disallow certain problematic features, while the players get to customize their classes beyond the normal.

Veklim
2011-03-23, 08:43 AM
I will look into the generic classes, but if they are what I think I remember that they are, the players might be a little put off by them.

I see your point but they are as much or as little as you choose to add or subtract, and you only need refer to the same 2 pages of the book for all of it, for economy alone it is rather useful.


I guess I am not married to the "humans only" idea. I just don't want to see anything too weird or "out there." I like the standard set of Tolkien-esque fantasy tropes.

If you want to restrict races, then do so, even a wizard (let alone an adept or UE spellcaster) would only start having trouble with the upper limit of spells at level 11 (assuming the 13 Int initially with the 'non-elite array'), so most racial stat adjustments are not neccessary for a rounded group, I personally love human characters.


I included Races of Stone solely for the existence of the Heavy Armour Optimization feats.

Why not go through other suppliments, and chose maybe a feat or two from ones you like. Make a limited list of 'restricted feats' and use the "You may like this..." option with the players. keeps it simple and removes an almost completely superfluous book.

One thing I would suggest is a house rule of mine, you cannot roll less than your con mod for hp. A mage with 12 con could still only get 2 hp, true, but if a fighter has 14 con then he'd always have a minimum of 4hp.

The AC issue isn't an issue in my eyes, nothing wrong with AC 20, DR 2/- at 1st lvl, in fact that's just a warforged with adamantine body and a reasonable dex. Just be prepared to increase the challenge if the players resist too much. That's just in-game tweaking though dude, not an issue.