Houserule feedback

[Alabenson]

I've been attempting to gather a list of houserules I use, and would like to hear what the playground thinks of them. I'll be including a short explanation regarding my reasoning under the banned / DM approval lists.

The following items are completely banned:
Books:
Weapons of Legacy
This is the only book Wizards ever put out that I actively despise. Crunchwise, there is no part of this book I would ever consider using in my games.
Base Classes:
Divine Mind, CW Samurai, Truenamer
I consider banning these to be doing a service to my players. While in theory they can be optimized to useful levels, in practice its far better to play virtually anything else.
Prestige Classes:
Planar Shepard, Prestige Bard, Prestige Paladin, Prestige Ranger
Planar Shepard is easily the most hideously broken thing ever printed by Wizards. Whereas other powerful prestige classes require some effort to become problamatic, Planar Shepard would require effort to not be problamatic.
As for the others (Prestige Bard, Prestige Paladin and Prestige Ranger), they just bother me for some reason.

The following items/concepts are allowed, but only with DM approval:
Dragon Magazine / The Dragon Compendium
I have two reasons for this. Reason number one is Dragon Magazine contains some of the worst balance issues outside of core. The second reason is that that I don't have ready access to these sources, and thus would want an opportunity to familiarize myself with the material before allowing it in my game. Rather that ban the material outright, I simply ask that I be given the opportunity to look it over beforehand.
ACFs for Tier 1 and Tier 2 classes (includes variants such as focused specialist)
In general, these classes are powerful enough as written. Unless there is a compelling need for an ACF for a specific character concept, I would prefer that these classes be played as written.
Evil Characters
Evil characters can either be a compelling roleplay concept, or a major source of game disruption. Until I know that a PC will fall into the former catagory, I would prefer to avoid evil characters altogether.
Races outside of the PHB and Eberron CS (including subraces)
There are a handful of races/subraces that I consider particularly problamatic and would rather avoid if possible(e.g. Water Orc, Strongheart Halfling, Whisper Gnome, etc.), outside of these permission would almost certainly be given.
Homebrew
On one hand, I like homebrew. On the other hand, a great deal of homebrew is poorly designed or capable of breaking the game in ways the creator failed to predict (much like official content now that I think about it). Thus, before I allow a specific bit of homebrew in my game, not only would I like to review it, but I would also prefer to have it reviewed by a third party (such as the playground) to catch anything I might miss.
Unearthed Arcana
There is a great deal in this book that I like (such as the paladin variants), and a few things that I'm less fond of.
Leadership
This is primarily based on party size; in a small group, Leadership can be a good way to fill a needed party role. In a larger group, it just creates a hassle for everyone else.

General Houserules:
Stats are rolled as 5d6b3. If the result is 8 or less, you may roll 4d6b3 and take the higher result. (Note that I am very lenient with regards to rerolling stats if the dice decide they hate you)

When rolling Hp, if the die roll is less than half of the average, the player may reroll and take the higher of the two results.

Ability increases now work the following way: At 4th level and every eight levels after that (12th, 20th, etc.), the player increases any two abilities by 1 each. At eighth level and every eight levels after that (16th, etc), the player increases all of their abilities by 1 each.

Fractional BAB and BSB

Multiclassing penalties are ignored.

Any Class with dual-stat casting are changed to single stat casting, using the stat which originally determined their max spell-level as the primary casting stat.

Higher level spell slots gained via feats (such as Precocious Apprentice, Heighten Spell, Earth Power etc.) may not be used to qualify for prestige classes.

Items may not be used to meet prestige class requirements.

Ability score qualifications for feats must be met sans any magical bonuses, excepting inherent bonuses.

Attempting to gain wishes from evil outsiders is not recommended.

The Spells Known/Prepared for NPC creatures with spellcasting (including creatures summoned/called by the PCs) will be determined by the DM.

If a character initiates an infinite loop, they will be spontaneously removed from the multiverse. No save.

Sorcerers now use the Favored Soul spells known table.

Warlocks may now use eldritch blast as an attack action instead of a standard action.

The spell shivering touch now allows a Fortitude save to negate.

The entities created by the spell simulacrum do not gain the spell-like or supernatural abilities of the original creature.

The spell spiritual weapon now uses the caster’s casting stat to determine its attack bonus.

The effects of the maneuver iron heart surge will be determined on a case-by-case basis.

The extra turning attempts granted by nightsticks do not stack.

Players are asked to refrain from attempts to break or intentionally disrupt the game. Basically, please don't be a jerk.

[limejuicepowder]

The group of people that I play with used to basically do what you do with ability roles: 4d6b3, and we were very lenient for bad rolls. Eventually though, it got to the point where if we didn't have uber rolls, we re-rolled xD. Now we just get a superelite array: 18 16 16 14 12 10 - and we can move individual points to boot (drop the 14 to a 12 to make one 16 an 18, etc).

Personally, I am loath to change any class features in favor of making the class more powerful: warlock and sorcerer changes, I'm looking at you. This extends to when I play as well; I feel like I'm cheating if I use houserules to make a character good. So while I can see why you would make such a change (esp for the poor warlock), I still wouldn't do it.

'Sides that, we pretty much use all of those same rules - not the spell changes (it hasn't been necessary), but everything else in some form or another.

[Big Fau]

Quick point of order: WoL is regarded as underpowered, and the Druid variant in PH2 is considered more balance than the normal Druid.

[Alabenson]

Quick point of order: WoL is regarded as underpowered, and the Druid variant in PH2 is considered more balance than the normal Druid.

I'm aware that most of WoL is underpowered (with the exception of Legacy Champion which has the opposite problem), I banned it because its clunky, awkward, and generally not worth the expenditure of effort required on the part of either the players or the DM.

Also, the Druid variant in PH2 is one of the Tier 1 ACFs I'd approve almost immediately (note that the ACFs are under DM approval, not banned).

[jiriku]

Overall, these look like well-considered and reasonable house rules. I use many of them myself. The buff to the sorcerer spells known list is not really needed. The restriction access to ACFs for T1 and T2 classes seems a bit out of place, especially since you're already buffing the sorcerer and allowing a broad variety of prestige classes that would improve such classes far more than any ACF could. For example, saying yes to incantatrix but saying no to swapping your wizard bonus feats for fighter bonus feats seems a bit arbitrary.

[MukkTB]

Some I have minor disagreements but nothing that wouldn't let me sit at your table. Although if my friends were along I could see us declaring we were a group of evil merchants just to make life hard.

Rolling stats is a pain. The situation where everyone rerolls until they have massive stats is not desirable. I feel that the game is fundamentally more fair off a point buy system. Its not a problem though.

[Sitzkrieg]

I personally don't have a problem with evil characters as long as the party is okay with it, but that's a matter of personal taste. Otherwise, I agree completely with almost every rule you have. The rules seem very open-minded and supportive of players playing what they want, while putting reasonable restrictions in place. Variant races like Water Orc and Whisper Gnome have always bugged me too. You've also done a good job of heading off most of the popular (and trite) exploits from these boards. (I'm looking at you, Shivering Touch.)

If you wanted to be more aggressive with houseruling, I'd look at polymorph and diplomacy fixes like Rich has, but the last rule might cover most of that.

[ILM]

They all seem pretty vanilla; there's just one I'm confused about: full attacks with eldritch blasts? Not too sure about that. For some reason I'm thinking about a Rogue/ Warlock with enough sneak attack dice, some Hellfire for kicks (also Binder or Stronheart Vest), and a bunch of debuffing feats, applying them to pretty much every enemy in range in one round. Who cares about penalties for iteratives when you're making touch attacks?

[Teron]

Rogue and warlock add d6's at basically the same rate (only rogue makes them conditional), so I don't see the problem there. The houserule just takes a non-glaivelock's damage from laughable to passable. What debuffing feats did you have in mind?

As for criticism, I've got nothing major, but I don't really see the point of the change to dual stat casters -- personally, I like casters caring about more than one mental stat, and they're certainly not weak as is (and even less so with your houserule on ability increases). I'd also advise figuring out at least rough guidelines on what Iron Heart Surge can do so your players have something to go on when deciding whether to take it.

In any case, it's all pretty reasonable.

[ILM]

Rogue and warlock add d6's at basically the same rate (only rogue makes them conditional), so I don't see the problem there. The houserule just takes a non-glaivelock's damage from laughable to passable. What debuffing feats did you have in mind?
Yeah, but rogues don't make touch attacks by default. I'm thinking all the feats where you exchange dice for debuffs: staggering strike, sickening strike, aleval school, the one that makes charisma damage, and so on. Mind, it's probably not the worst thing you can do with that houserule, it's just the first that came to me.

[Alabenson]

Yeah, but rogues don't make touch attacks by default. I'm thinking all the feats where you exchange dice for debuffs: staggering strike, sickening strike, aleval school, the one that makes charisma damage, and so on. Mind, it's probably not the worst thing you can do with that houserule, it's just the first that came to me.

While I'll conceed your point that the eldritch blast rule could be used to significantly increase the power of an optimized warlock, I'd like to ask you this:
Would the resultant warlock be substantially more powerful than a Tier 3 class optimized to the same extent?

[docnessuno]

ACFs: I like them, and don't like to remove options from the players unless they are broken ones.

Races: Outside of water orcs and few oter races/templates wich are quite unbalanced (examples: lolth-touched, marrowlurk, feral if counting class levels) i don't like veto on races, except for motivations such as "doesn't fit the setting".

Stats: I'm a big fan of point buy. Can be adjusted to reach the exact power level you aim for and it's fair for everyone.

HPs: i usually use this rule: if you roll less than half of your HD, you get half HD.

shivering touch: A save to negate makes it a waste of a spell slot. An house rule i use is that any spell inflicting an ability penality has a save (fort or will) to halve it.

Warlocks: I do think this ups the power levels of warlocks a bit too much. I prefer just giving them constant eldritch blast progression (1d6/2 levels)

Pretty much agree with everything else.

[Keegan__D]

Definitely a set of houserules I'd sit down for, but I agree with others that the sorcerer really doesn't need more spells known. They get a much better list than Favored Soul and have a few more options in ACFs.
With the kind of stats rolled from that, you may as well just give them a massive point buy, or just 5d6 drop 1. It will take less time and it will be more customized.

Also, these are already rules I think.
"Ability score qualifications for feats must be met sans any magical bonuses, excepting inherent bonuses."
"Items may not be used to meet prestige class requirements."

[Tyndmyr]

Aright, this will be a detailed point for point feedback with summary at the end. Feel free to skip to the end of the quotes if that's all you want.


I've been attempting to gather a list of houserules I use, and would like to hear what the playground thinks of them. I'll be including a short explanation regarding my reasoning under the banned / DM approval lists.

The following items are completely banned:
Books:
Weapons of Legacy
This is the only book Wizards ever put out that I actively despise. Crunchwise, there is no part of this book I would ever consider using in my games.

It's a fairly terrible book. I don't outright ban it, but I certainly don't include anything from it, and will recommend strongly against it. I wouldn't hold this against you at all.


Base Classes:
Divine Mind, CW Samurai, Truenamer
I consider banning these to be doing a service to my players. While in theory they can be optimized to useful levels, in practice its far better to play virtually anything else.

I actually really like the Truenamer. I'd lobby for an exception. Playing at tier 3 levels of optimization, I can easily play a solid, useful party member with this class, and have made such chars before. Likewise, CW Samurai is not as bad as it's made out to be in extremely low wealth campaigns(much like VoP). Again, I would prefer providing advice over straight out banning.


Prestige Classes:
Planar Shepard, Prestige Bard, Prestige Paladin, Prestige Ranger
Planar Shepard is easily the most hideously broken thing ever printed by Wizards. Whereas other powerful prestige classes require some effort to become problamatic, Planar Shepard would require effort to not be problamatic.
As for the others (Prestige Bard, Prestige Paladin and Prestige Ranger), they just bother me for some reason.

Not even close. My ban list consists of Tainted Scholar, Beholder Mage, and Illithid Savant. Any of those could utterly crush a Planar Shepard. It's very powerful, yes, but it is not so powerful that it should reside alone on the "banned for being too strong" list.

And "just bother me for some reason" is not a legitimate reason for a ban. I'd want something rather more specific.


The following items/concepts are allowed, but only with DM approval:
Dragon Magazine / The Dragon Compendium
I have two reasons for this. Reason number one is Dragon Magazine contains some of the worst balance issues outside of core. The second reason is that that I don't have ready access to these sources, and thus would want an opportunity to familiarize myself with the material before allowing it in my game. Rather that ban the material outright, I simply ask that I be given the opportunity to look it over beforehand.

Reasonable. Dragon Comp is actually not at all bad, but in the unlikely event I wanted to play something from there, your wording indicates you'd be ok with me just loaning you my copy. No problem there.


ACFs for Tier 1 and Tier 2 classes (includes variants such as focused specialist)
In general, these classes are powerful enough as written. Unless there is a compelling need for an ACF for a specific character concept, I would prefer that these classes be played as written.

*shrug* Focused specialist is sometimes overrated. People rather frequently underestimate the impact of banning three schools and say things like "just use scrolls" for a class that doesn't have UMD as a class skill. I would lobby you to reconsider this, though I can see certain ACFs needing banning or changing due to power level(*cough* abrupt jaunt)

I generally ditch my familiar on some ACF or another. I just kind of dislike familiars.


Evil Characters
Evil characters can either be a compelling roleplay concept, or a major source of game disruption. Until I know that a PC will fall into the former catagory, I would prefer to avoid evil characters altogether.

The only E alignment I play is LE. While TN is my most common alignment, I'd likely lobby for allowing LE in general. There is no reason at all why a player should seek to be disruptive to the game, even if his char is LE. Such a char should be expected to be fairly pragmatic, and have very good reasons for evil actions taken, not "for the lulz" or for poorly thought out short term gains.


Races outside of the PHB and Eberron CS (including subraces)
There are a handful of races/subraces that I consider particularly problamatic and would rather avoid if possible(e.g. Water Orc, Strongheart Halfling, Whisper Gnome, etc.), outside of these permission would almost certainly be given.

Human is the best single race. Those particular races are most certainly not the most exploitable. I would lobby for their inclusion as options, but this would not stop me from playing if not. I'd guess more than half of my chars have been human 'cause it's good, it's easy to RP, and it's basically always allowed.


Homebrew
On one hand, I like homebrew. On the other hand, a great deal of homebrew is poorly designed or capable of breaking the game in ways the creator failed to predict (much like official content now that I think about it). Thus, before I allow a specific bit of homebrew in my game, not only would I like to review it, but I would also prefer to have it reviewed by a third party (such as the playground) to catch anything I might miss.

Completely rational. I won't even bring up homebrew as an option unless requested by someone else, and would support even stronger anti-homebrew stances such as "nothing from D&D wiki is allowed, ever".


Unearthed Arcana
There is a great deal in this book that I like (such as the paladin variants), and a few things that I'm less fond of.

Eh. There's enough variants that this is most peoples opinions on it. Without more specifics, I'm inclined to agree on general terms.


This is primarily based on party size; in a small group, Leadership can be a good way to fill a needed party role. In a larger group, it just creates a hassle for everyone else.[/SPOILER]

I almost invariably avoid it. Even when playing at extreme op levels, I hate managing stats for familiars, summons, cohorts, all that jazz. The *only* time I would consider it is if there is a passive, purely non-combat role that needs to be filled, such as "party item crafter" for some setting reason.


General Houserules:
Stats are rolled as 5d6b3. If the result is 8 or less, you may roll 4d6b3 and take the higher result. (Note that I am very lenient with regards to rerolling stats if the dice decide they hate you)

I normally prefer pb, but assuming I get to use this fairly generous stat rolling method and can assign my stats...I'm pretty ok with it. The large number of die rolled and specific reroll rules means variation will be minimized, and the high stats are fairly MAD friendly.


When rolling Hp, if the die roll is less than half of the average, the player may reroll and take the higher of the two results.

This rather devalues hp damage in general. Might devalue con a touch. Would advise taking average instead of rolling as an option, but would not strongly concern me.


Ability increases now work the following way: At 4th level and every eight levels after that (12th, 20th, etc.), the player increases any two abilities by 1 each. At eighth level and every eight levels after that (16th, etc), the player increases all of their abilities by 1 each.

Am ok with it. Probably better for MAD classes, isn't really going to hurt SAD classes at all. In fact, I actually kind of like this.


Fractional BAB and BSB

Multiclassing penalties are ignored.

I always like seeing these on a house rule list.


Any Class with dual-stat casting are changed to single stat casting, using the stat which originally determined their max spell-level as the primary casting stat.

Good, this mostly helps the T3 casters.


Higher level spell slots gained via feats (such as Precocious Apprentice, Heighten Spell, Earth Power etc.) may not be used to qualify for prestige classes.

Meh. The RAW lawyer in me wants to point out that Sanctum Spell merrily continues to work despite this. The practical side of me points out that I only use early entry tricks in the most high op of games anyway, and it will not pose a practical problem for me.


Items may not be used to meet prestige class requirements.

Ability score qualifications for feats must be met sans any magical bonuses, excepting inherent bonuses.

I recommend against this for the sake of those poor melee folks. It won't actually affect ME any, ever. It just might suck for MAD types or people mixing archtypes in the melee world.


Attempting to gain wishes from evil outsiders is not recommended.

I would honestly be pretty disappointed if Pazuzu was a happy, generous uncle instead of a clever, scheming being of evil out to screw me in the long term.


The Spells Known/Prepared for creatures with spellcasting (including creatures summoned/called by the PCs) will be determined by the DM.

So long as this does not include me, I'm happy. If this DOES include me, I will be very upset, and almost certainly not play. I would only expect this level of control over chars I have complete control over due to say, mental domination, etc.


If a character initiates an infinite loop, they will be spontaneously removed from the multiverse. No save.

Reasonable. I also ban infinite loops.


Sorcerers now use the Favored Soul spells known table.

It's what, a little bit more generous, right? No worries there.


Warlocks may now use eldritch blast as an attack action instead of a standard action.

Wut? This...this is somewhat problematic in the hands of an optimizer. I agree that it's a little bit weak, but it's a touch attack spell. Assume every one of those blasts will hit unless I roll a one, and note that I can work my way into full BaB PrCs if I want to. Also, Hellfire Warlock.


The spell shivering touch now allows a Fortitude save to negate.

The entities created by the spell simulacrum do not gain the spell-like or supernatural abilities of the original creature.

The spell spiritual weapon now uses the caster’s casting stat to determine its attack bonus.

The effects of the maneuver iron heart surge will be determined on a case-by-case basis.

The extra turning attempts granted by nightsticks do not stack.

Players are asked to refrain from attempts to break or intentionally disrupt the game. Basically, please don't be a jerk.

I don't care about any of those...I will just not use them ever. If simulacrum can't replicate spells, for instance, it's basically worthless. There are better ways to do anything else it can do.


Summary: Nothing in here is so bad that I wouldn't play with them, and some of them are quite good. Overall, I give it about a B.

[kardar233]

Keep in mind, without Legacy Champion the damage you'll be getting from HFW is severely lessened, so the impact of Full-Attack Eldritch Blast is not as bad.

And seriously, a well-optimized Warlock should be getting at least one set of full-attack routines with their Eldritch Blast, and using Dragon Magazine material should be able to get two on a regular basis.

[Tyndmyr]

Keep in mind, without Legacy Champion the damage you'll be getting from HFW is severely lessened, so the impact of Full-Attack Eldritch Blast is not as bad.

And seriously, a well-optimized Warlock should be getting at least one set of full-attack routines with their Eldritch Blast, and using Dragon Magazine material should be able to get two on a regular basis.

There's a notable tendancy in D&D to value damage higher if dealt at long range rather than in melee. Being in melee imposes a few limitations on people, and is generally considered undesirable for caster-types. The glaivelock thing does work, but this still represents a notable power boost for the 'lock overall, including fairly unoptimized 'locks.

Additionally, I would not consider the use of dragon magazine material to get second full attack routines to be at all standard.

[kardar233]

I think two blasts at 28d6 beats five at 8d6.

[Krazzman]

Seems completely feasible.

But some questions, what about the Hellfire Warlock and Bind Vestige things to "negate" the con damage and getting even better blasts? Would then the HellfireBlast count as attack or standard action? Would you even allow the class alltogether?

[noparlpf]

Warlocks may now use eldritch blast as an attack action instead of a standard action.

What's an "attack action"?

Edit: Do you mean they can get iterative attacks with it?

[fencepainter]

I was wondering why you've decided to do this: "Sorcerers now use the Favored Soul spells known table."

Our group uses this:

SPELLS KNOWN
Level0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
01st 5 2
02th 6 3
03th 7 3 2
04th 8 4 3
05th 9 5 3 2
06th 9 5 4 3
07th 9 6 5 3 2
08th 9 6 5 4 3
09th 9 6 6 5 3 2
10th 9 6 6 5 4 3
11th 9 6 6 6 5 3 2
12th 9 6 6 6 5 4 3
13th 9 6 6 6 6 5 3 2
14th 9 6 6 6 6 5 4 3
15th 9 6 6 6 6 6 5 3 2
16th 9 6 6 6 6 6 5 4 3
17th 9 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 3 2
18th 9 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 4 3
19th 9 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 3
20th 9 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 4

It gives the Sorcerer more spells known, which we like.

[Alabenson]

I actually really like the Truenamer. I'd lobby for an exception. Playing at tier 3 levels of optimization, I can easily play a solid, useful party member with this class, and have made such chars before. Likewise, CW Samurai is not as bad as it's made out to be in extremely low wealth campaigns(much like VoP). Again, I would prefer providing advice over straight out banning.

If a player really wanted to play one of these classes, and knew exactly what they were getting themselves into, then I would probably let them.



Not even close. My ban list consists of Tainted Scholar, Beholder Mage, and Illithid Savant. Any of those could utterly crush a Planar Shepard. It's very powerful, yes, but it is not so powerful that it should reside alone on the "banned for being too strong" list.

As I don't use taint in my campaigns, the Tainted Scholar class is generally not much of a concern. You're likely right about the Beholder Mage and Illithid Savant though.


The only E alignment I play is LE. While TN is my most common alignment, I'd likely lobby for allowing LE in general. There is no reason at all why a player should seek to be disruptive to the game, even if his char is LE. Such a char should be expected to be fairly pragmatic, and have very good reasons for evil actions taken, not "for the lulz" or for poorly thought out short term gains.

I really don't have anything against evil PCs per say, but I've heard too many stories about players using evil alignments as an excuse to disrupt the game to allow them without question.


So long as this does not include me, I'm happy. If this DOES include me, I will be very upset, and almost certainly not play. I would only expect this level of control over chars I have complete control over due to say, mental domination, etc.

I've fixed the language on this rule somewhat, as it may have been confusing. This was meant to keep players from treating summoned/called creatures like backup spell lists.


Wut? This...this is somewhat problematic in the hands of an optimizer. I agree that it's a little bit weak, but it's a touch attack spell. Assume every one of those blasts will hit unless I roll a one, and note that I can work my way into full BaB PrCs if I want to. Also, Hellfire Warlock.

I don't know of any full BaB PrCs that advance invocations, which means every level you take is eldritch blast damage/new invocations that you're losing. As for Hellfire Warlock, I'd rule that you would take Con damage for every attack you make, which would hopefully add back an element of strategy to using the class.
My goal for this rule was to bring Warlocks up to par with what the Tier 3 classes are capable of.

[vageta31]

As for criticism, I've got nothing major, but I don't really see the point of the change to dual stat casters -- personally, I like casters caring about more than one mental stat, and they're certainly not weak as is (and even less so with your houserule on ability increases).


I disagree on this point. The top tier casters wizards/druids/clerics are all single caster stat classes already meaning they already have it easy. By making other caster classes who are already behind in the power curve stick with dual stats, it just seems cruel. Favored soul is weaker than cleric and having to rely on cha and wis while the cleric gets off with only wis seems highly imbalanced. A Favored Soul much like a sorcerer can be more of a divine blaster due to spells known, however it becomes pointless if they can't get their save DC's up high enough to matter.

My DM was running a Favored Soul NPC and had mentioned the dual caster stat sucking and I basically suggested he get rid of it and focus on cha only. He felt guilty at first but after discussing how they're still weaker than Cleric he agreed.

WoTC really screwed the pooch on the casters. Creating the worst 3 offenders in the original PHB that can focus on a single casting stat, then trying to nerf their cousins in later books just made it worse.