3.5 Common houserules

[8wGremlin]

Do you play with house rules?
If so what are they?

[Gildedragon]

Yeah, a fair few.
Negative energy damage heals undead, positive energy harms them.

[limejuicepowder]

The only virtual automatic house rule I know about is "no xp penalties for multiclassing." This is an answer to your post heading. Some other very common ones are fractional BaB and save progressions.

I personally play with a couple of house rules
-Half Bab to AC as an untyped bonus
-Attacks key off of dex or str
-It's not quite a rule, but I am generally very open to retraining, refluffing, and ignoring alignment restrictions.

I actually have a pretty large list of changes, but I haven't actually played since composing it.

[Invader]

The dodge feat grants a +1 bonus to AC.

A critical hit is just max weapon damage not a multiplier.

Combined skills i.e. spot+listen=perception

[Invader]

Yeah, a fair few.
Negative energy damage heals undead, positive energy harms them.

Isn't this an actual rule?

[limejuicepowder]

Isn't this an actual rule?

There's some questionable RAW language...see: positive energy plane

[Gildedragon]

As a DM I tend not to care for racial barriers to a PrC.
I allow instant skill/feat retraining if they haven't made use of them and realized it was a poor choice.
A +1 natural bonus to rolls if they are quick on the uptake of their turn
Any alignment Warlocks
Raise Reincarnate and Resurrection spells are rituals

[Kane0]

Add wisdom to initiative as well as dexterity

Immediate actions and Attacks of opportunity have been rolled into one kind of action - the reaction. A reaction is an action you take out of your turn once per round.

Swift and free actions have been rolled into minor actions. You get one minor action per turn, and most thigns that were free actions require no action at all

"CMA". Functions like Pathfinders maneuvers. It is BAB + STR + DEX + Size, used for special attacks. It is always an opposed check.

You need spell focus to cast spells of that school of 3rd-6th level, greater spell focus for 7th-9th. Non-full casters do not have this requirement.

A critical hit is double damage on a 20, no confirmation. Weapons with better crit ranges or multipliers are 2.5x damage on a 20. Improved critical, keen, etc increases it by another .5 each and power critical makes a 19 and 20 count as a crit. Nothing can be stacked to more than a 18-20 crit range, but multipliers can be stacked.

If you are in negative HP Healing brings you to 0 HP then adds the HP healed.

You die at negative (level + CON score) HP.

And thats just a few. I've practically rewritten my own 3rd edition.

[Acanous]

Iron Heart Surge removes any (Non-Death) status afflictions, or any spell, Su, or Ex ability with a duration other than Instantanious from the subject. Nothing else.

[ngilop]

healing spells are Necromancy not conjuration.

[Con_Brio1993]

1. No XP Penalties for multiclassing

2. All characters have access to all skills regardless of class (bleh :smallfrown:)

3. Skills have critical successes and failures (I HATE this rule)

[TuggyNE]

Isn't this an actual rule?

Not exactly; instead, positive and negative energy spells and effects all specify individually what happens, and while they're usually pretty consistent, there's some wacky stuff like positive energy being used to damage living things (I wanna say bolt of glory but I'm not sure) and positive energy healing undead (the positive energy plane).

[HalfGrammarGeek]

2. All characters have access to all skills regardless of class (bleh :smallfrown:)

3. Skills have critical successes and failures (I HATE this rule)
Why suffer rules you hate? Or are you not the DM?

[Phelix-Mu]

Hmm, interesting. I like seeing what other people tend to do for house rules. Here are some of mine that come to mind.

1.) Racial bonuses to skills (like elves get a +2 to Spot) mean that that creature has that skill as a class skill for all of it's HD, much in the manner of a racial skill for creatures with racial HD.

2.) If you are burning a feat for Alertness or one of the similar line of feats, be it for PrC entry or skill optimization, then you get to add the skills mentioned in that feat to the list of class skills for all levels acquired after the level you take that feat.

3.) All spellcasting classes have spellcasting based on just one stat. Classes that have two-stat casting don't need additional depreciation (perhaps excepting archivist), especially among my typical group of players.

4.) Availability of some unofficial source classes, chiefly Holy Warrior and Unholy Warrior from Green Ronin, and some of the stuff from Book of Erotic Fantasy.

There is a much longer list of revisions that I am considering, mostly after some of the truly madness-inspiring stuff that is available/unavailable by RAW. I'm into world designing, so I like a challenge.:smallbiggrin:

[Con_Brio1993]

Why suffer rules you hate? Or are you not the DM?

Not the DM sadly.

And because skill crits are so stupid I purposefully try to do outrageous things.

Situation: Talking the evil king out of his quest for conquest?

Roll a 1: Combat begins

2-19: It is the evil king, combat begins and he won't listen.

20: The king gives up his conquest.

It is pretty much always worth trying to do stuff like that in the DM's game.

[AuraTwilight]

typical houserules in my games, in no particular order:

1. All characters can take all skills, unless it makes zero sense like a non-druid taking Control Shape.

2. No XP penalties for multiclassing.

3. No spell components are ever needed except for higher spells like Resurrection, or where the material cost makes sense in an actual, non-punny way.

4. The existence of Fate Points, which are kind of like Action Points except they're a bit more versatile. At each level up, including the first, roll a d6 to determine how many you receive. When a d20 roll is called for, the player may spend Fate points to add a d6 to the roll for each FP used. This must be done before the roll is made. Fate Points may also be used as a general meta-currency. For instance, if a character Reincarnates as something they feel is effectively unplayable or unfun, an FP may be used to 'reroll'. This cannot be used to reroll normal functions such as attack rolls. There is no other means of getting FP, and certain actions may require more than one FP.

5. Encumbrance and weight capacity is not kept track of because seriously who cares.

6. The DM will approve any homebrew, obscure source material, or the like so long as it isn't more broken/cheesy/exploitable than a typical Tier 3 or Tier 2 class.

7. If a character by RAW is meant to receive something negated by the above house rules, "At 7th level, X gets so and such as class skills!" they are instead offered a bonus feat.

8. Finally, Wish must never be used to COMPLETELY screw a character. I don't care what they wished for, they're paying 5000 XP for it. Give them something. Instead of having the million gold pieces drop on them and kill them, or having it appear from a king's treasury and put the party in danger, have a single gold coin explode into millions of pieces of dust....which are now enchanted in a way that provides a net boon, such as turning whatever it's sprinkled on into (fake?) gold.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Isn't this an actual rule?

It's heavily implied, but never stated outright. Not even in libris mortis; the definitive guide to undead in 3.5.

[AntiTrust]

Open Lock and Disable Device in my games are both just Disable Device.

Sorcerers can choose between summon familiar and eschew materials at 1st lv

[rot42]

@Con_Brio1993: I think the 3.0->3.5 conversion took out automatic success/failure for skill rolls. My table has played it that way for years now, so I have not bothered to check lately.


I am not sure how common these houserules are, but some of the more generally applicable ones I have used:

1) The Disable Device skill can be used to open locks.
2) Tomes of {inherent bonus} can be used by paying the difference in price rather than overwriting the lower bonus (i.e. buy a +1 Tome earlier in your career, then later buy a +1 -> +2 Tome for the price of a +2 less that of a +1).
3) Track, Urban Tracking, and Investigate are skill uses available to all characters. This is mainly so I can give exposition even if nobody in the party has built around finding stuff. I would probably add Trapfinding if nobody feels like playing a Rogue-like.
4) Most racial and alignment based restrictions are waived. This goes double for Binders, the class whose fluff is based entirely around the generally Lawful act of making and keeping contracts.
5) The Open Chakra feats come with a bind (there is some debate whether this is a houserule).

[Curmudgeon]

Common house rules cover rules flubs, convenience, neglected weapons, and realism.

Flubs:
Monks are proficient with unarmed strikes.
You can cast Feather Fall (redefined as an immediate action spell) when flat-footed.
No ranged full attacks without provoking attacks of opportunity. Going strictly by the letter of the rules full attacks (melee or ranged) never provoke, but I treat this as just sloppy work by the rules authors. Each ranged shot provokes an AoO.
Rules Compendium mashes concealment and all other miss chances together so they don't stack; however, they provide an out for the DM to modify the miss chance for specific situations. I use that DM option to modify the miss chance to be exactly what it would be without this RC "update".
Bonus damage from the Factotum's Cunning Insight is negative energy damage when used with a spell or effect that deals negative levels or ability damage, making it consistent with the treatment of bonus damage from sneak attack when used with weaponlike spells.

Convenience:

Level 0 spells are always cast spontaneously.
Make Massive Damage saves only when the damage is 50+ and also exceeds half your remaining hit points.

Neglected weapons:

Treat great crossbows (Races of Stone) the same as heavy crossbows for feats and other rules that specify heavy crossbows, since
all the crossbow rules use specifics needlessly:

Choose a type of crossbow (hand, light, or heavy). You can reload a crossbow of that type more quickly than normal.
great crossbows were defined later, after these needlessly specific rules.

Great crossbows remain exotic weapons.
If you like slings: apply the Rapid Reload feat to them, just as you would to a crossbow, for free action reloading. You can also use Manyshot with slings, up to a maximum of four bullets in the sling pouch.

Realism:

Split actual movement around a non-moving move action. Example: move 15' to a door, open it, and then go through the doorway that same round using the rest of your movement. (Or walk and chew gum at the same time. :smallwink:)
Falling damage hits a maximum of 50d6 (for falling 500') rather than the standard 20d6 of the rules for most creatures. The 20d6 limit still applies if the creature has wings.

[Story]

Not exactly; instead, positive and negative energy spells and effects all specify individually what happens, and while they're usually pretty consistent, there's some wacky stuff like positive energy being used to damage living things (I wanna say bolt of glory but I'm not sure) and positive energy healing undead (the positive energy plane).

There's also Chill Touch, which panics undead using negative energy.

Unfortunately, they don't always specify, which leads to a lot of grief with the things that don't, such as Black Sand.

[SowZ]

Not the DM sadly.

And because skill crits are so stupid I purposefully try to do outrageous things.

Situation: Talking the evil king out of his quest for conquest?

Roll a 1: Combat begins

2-19: It is the evil king, combat begins and he won't listen.

20: The king gives up his conquest.

It is pretty much always worth trying to do stuff like that in the DM's game.

Why would you hire a kingdom reknown expert to direct some task, (building the new prison, being a diplomat, etc.) paying him dozens or hundreds of gold when sixteen or so untrained sixteen year olds can typically suceed at the same task superbly!

[Siosilvar]

If I were to run a game at the moment, my list would be something like the following:

All text, in these houserules and the rulebooks, is subject to change. I will attempt to give notice. Debate occurs between sessions, not during; there's only so much playtime per week, after all.
Feats every odd level.
No XP penalty for multiclassing.
Waive RP requirements (including alignment) on feats, PrCs, and such, assuming you can provide sufficient justification.
Free Eschew Materials and Rapid Metamagic for spontaneous casters.
Free Weapon Finesse with no penalty to attack rolls for using a shield. Taking the feat also gives you Dexterity to damage replacing Strength (counting as Shadow Blade from ToB if it's important).
Shield bonuses apply against touch attacks, but not against opponents who are flanking you. If using this rule, enforce the penalty to attack rolls with Weapon Finesse.
Monkey Grip also gives +2 to hit with a larger weapon, effectively negating the penalty for using a weapon one size larger than normal.
Spring Attack allows you to make one move action (in which you must move at least 5 feet) and one standard action at any point during that move. This should obviate Shot on the Run and Flyby Attack.
You can charge to any square adjacent to your target as long as it is in range and you obey all the other movement rules. This should fix the issues with Ride-By Attack.
You can gain the same ability modifier to a check a maximum of once, unless one is in specific use cases only (ex. Hexblade + Paladin, ignoring alignment restrictions, stacks Cha twice to saves against spells and once on other saves). Subject to DM approval.
Sacred and profane bonuses don't stack.
Fix ToB stance progressions: Crusader 2/7/12/17, Swordsage 1/2/5/10/15/20, Warblade 1/6/11/16.
Spell-storing ammunition exists, but is always destroyed on a miss and must each be charged separately. Pay NPC caster cost if you want it charged on purchase.

I also have a set of rules for firearms in d20, but I'm not quite satisfied with them yet, and it's geared toward modern campaigns more. Interestingly, given the statistics I have, d20 Modern seems to have gotten quite a bit right already: AC 10 base, +4 cover bonus, -4 penalty for nonproficiency, 10-11 HP and 2d8 damage rifles* matches up fairly well. Most of the rest is just modeling automatic fire, sights, and so on in a fun and vaguely accurate way.

*The rifles in question are probably .223 (basically 5.56x45 NATO) police-issue carbines, given context. I can't find the source again to confirm; should've had that saved.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

No MultiClass Penalties

You can choose some extra class skills that fit your character concept at level 1.

Consolidated Skills; Stealth, Perception, Disable Device, Athletics, Acrobatics.

Several ToB maneuvers are given a lot of wiggle room to be badass,

Some Low to mid level battle field control spells have been nerfed to be less effective against powerful opponents. With a DC 30 Strength check breaking out of web is a free action. Sticking Cloud has to be in the square your head is in to provoke a save other scent based attacks get similar treatment.

There's no such thing as low level Adult Elves or Dwarves though many have atrocious builds power wise like Commoner/Expert or Wizard/Rogue/Fighter.

[willpell]

I use a lot of houserules and am pretty conservative. Here are the ones I can think of which aren't specific to my campaign world, but are going to apply in all games I run henceforth unless I decide otherwise.

* Any class choice which would result in a penalty to future experience gains is disallowed altogether, except by express GM permission.

* Half-elves and half-orcs gain bonus skill points as do humans. (They do not gain a feat.)

* All halflings are Strongheart Halflings, but many of them spend their bonus feat on a Halfling-only feat called "Lightfoot", which grants a +1 to all saving throws.

* The Favored Soul does not have Knowledge: Arcana as a class skill, but rather Knowledge: Religion.

* The Monk gains his final bonus feat at level 5 rather than level 6.

* The Divine Mind's Wild Talent is replaced with Hidden Talent, a feat that is not otherwise available, and thus the Divine Mind has one known power and two PP to manifest it with starting at 1st level. The Divine Mind's Psychic Aura at level 1 takes 1 minute, not 1 hour, to switch. Divine Minds do NOT need to match the alignment of their deity as clerics do (they are actually *imagining* that the deity empowers them, rather than it actually doing so; deities IMC have nothing whatsoever to do with psionics).

* The Totemist gains his second chakra bind, and the class feature "Totem chakra bind: +1 meldshaper level", at level 5 rather than level 6.

* A character with ranks in Truespeak may substitute a Truespeak check for the 20% failure chance when attempting to cast a spell while deafened. The DC for this check is 10 plus the spell level (and thus failure becomes impossible with a check total of +19); if this is too difficult the character may still roll the 20%.

* The Improved Shield Bash feat allows you to gain the +1 AC of a Buckler even while fighting with that arm, despite the fact that the Buckler doesn't actually bash.

* Craft Staff has Craft Wand as an additional prerequisite.

* You can't sleep in a Rope Trick because you have to actually keep holding onto the (seemingly infinitely-long and stretching through nothingness) rope after climbing up into the extradimensional space, which doesn't offer anything you can use as ground.

* The Virtue spell (Cleric 0, Paladin 1) grants +3 temporary hit points rather than +1.

* The Hold Portal spell adds +10 rather than +5 to the DC to break open the door.

* Body Adjustment is a Level 2, not Level 3, power on the Life Mantle list.

* Psionic Freedom of Movement is a Level 4, not Level 5, power on the Freedom Mantle list.

* Defensive Precognition's +6 pp augmentation option allows you to manifest as an immediate, not swift, action. Ditto for Thicken Skin.

* If you choose "electricity" when manifesting an Energy Retort, the retaliation bolts get a +3 bonus on their to-hit roll if the target is wearing metal armor, as is true of Energy Ray.

* Because my game does not use psionics/magic transparency, I ruled that Psionic Major Creation can create Cold Iron, unlike the Major Creation spell.

* The Diadem of Purelight soulmeld creates a light so mystically benevolent that it does not trigger the light sensitivities of orcs, drow, and similar subterranean creatures.

* The Blackguard counts Paladin (fallen) levels as well as Cleric levels toward the strength of his Aura of Evil. Paladin levels which are traded in for blackguard levels are not counted this way (though the resulting blackguard levels are).

* Rakshasas are Chaotic Evil by default.

* "Blues" are not blue, do not gain a power point, and do not have a level adjustment; they are simply a strain of goblinkind which favors intellect over nimbleness, much as the Sun Elves differ from typical High Elves.

* If anything alters your Dexterity modifier during combat, your position in the inish roster rises or falls accordingly. If you raise an opponent's Dexterity so that his Initiative rises higher than the action you do this on, it just means he is the next to act; you can't make him miss his action for the turn this way.

[SowZ]

I use a lot of houserules and am pretty conservative. Here are the ones I can think of which aren't specific to my campaign world, but are going to apply in all games I run henceforth unless I decide otherwise.

* Any class choice which would result in a penalty to future experience gains is disallowed altogether, except by express GM permission.

* Half-elves and half-orcs gain bonus skill points as do humans. (They do not gain a feat.)

* All halflings are Strongheart Halflings, but many of them spend their bonus feat on a Halfling-only feat called "Lightfoot", which grants a +1 to all saving throws.

* The Favored Soul does not have Knowledge: Arcana as a class skill, but rather Knowledge: Religion.

* The Monk gains his final bonus feat at level 5 rather than level 6.

* The Divine Mind's Wild Talent is replaced with Hidden Talent, a feat that is not otherwise available, and thus the Divine Mind has one known power and two PP to manifest it with starting at 1st level. The Divine Mind's Psychic Aura at level 1 takes 1 minute, not 1 hour, to switch. Divine Minds do NOT need to match the alignment of their deity as clerics do (they are actually *imagining* that the deity empowers them, rather than it actually doing so; deities IMC have nothing whatsoever to do with psionics).

* The Totemist gains his second chakra bind, and the class feature "Totem chakra bind: +1 meldshaper level", at level 5 rather than level 6.

* A character with ranks in Truespeak may substitute a Truespeak check for the 20% failure chance when attempting to cast a spell while deafened. The DC for this check is 10 plus the spell level (and thus failure becomes impossible with a check total of +19); if this is too difficult the character may still roll the 20%.

* The Improved Shield Bash feat allows you to gain the +1 AC of a Buckler even while fighting with that arm, despite the fact that the Buckler doesn't actually bash.

* Craft Staff has Craft Wand as an additional prerequisite.

* You can't sleep in a Rope Trick because you have to actually keep holding onto the (seemingly infinitely-long and stretching through nothingness) rope after climbing up into the extradimensional space, which doesn't offer anything you can use as ground.

* The Virtue spell (Cleric 0, Paladin 1) grants +3 temporary hit points rather than +1.

* The Hold Portal spell adds +10 rather than +5 to the DC to break open the door.

* Body Adjustment is a Level 2, not Level 3, power on the Life Mantle list.

* Psionic Freedom of Movement is a Level 4, not Level 5, power on the Freedom Mantle list.

* Defensive Precognition's +6 pp augmentation option allows you to manifest as an immediate, not swift, action. Ditto for Thicken Skin.

* If you choose "electricity" when manifesting an Energy Retort, the retaliation bolts get a +3 bonus on their to-hit roll if the target is wearing metal armor, as is true of Energy Ray.

* Because my game does not use psionics/magic transparency, I ruled that Psionic Major Creation can create Cold Iron, unlike the Major Creation spell.

* The Diadem of Purelight soulmeld creates a light so mystically benevolent that it does not trigger the light sensitivities of orcs, drow, and similar subterranean creatures.

* The Blackguard counts Paladin (fallen) levels as well as Cleric levels toward the strength of his Aura of Evil. Paladin levels which are traded in for blackguard levels are not counted this way (though the resulting blackguard levels are).

* Rakshasas are Chaotic Evil by default.

* "Blues" are not blue, do not gain a power point, and do not have a level adjustment; they are simply a strain of goblinkind which favors intellect over nimbleness, much as the Sun Elves differ from typical High Elves.

* If anything alters your Dexterity modifier during combat, your position in the inish roster rises or falls accordingly. If you raise an opponent's Dexterity so that his Initiative rises higher than the action you do this on, it just means he is the next to act; you can't make him miss his action for the turn this way.

You can tie the rope to yourself so you won't fall. If that is too uncomfortable, a good use rope check means you can fashion a sort of seat/hammock that you lash yourself to. Disallowing that wouldn't seem to make any sense in keeping with what the ability does.

[Eurus]

There's also Chill Touch, which panics undead using negative energy.

Unfortunately, they don't always specify, which leads to a lot of grief with the things that don't, such as Black Sand.

Not necessarily a contradiction, just really weird. Seems closer to the kind of effect you'd get from Turning, which is positive energy, rather than Rebuking -- but then, Turning and Rebuking in connection with negative and positive energy were always a little weird, because why does it only affect undead in such a specific way as opposed to the normal effects of cure/inflict stuff?

Pathfinder tried to fix this with Channel Energy or whatever, which isn't a bad idea. It also fixes some of the issue with Turn Undead being almost a free win button against certain encounters (and exceedingly powerful in undead-heavy games by extension) and utterly useless in others.

EDIT: If you want to nerf Use Rope, just make it minute-per-level or something. Or remove it entirely. It's nearly useless aside from as a safe hiding spot, and arguably overpowered at that particular function.

[willpell]

You can tie the rope to yourself so you won't fall. If that is too uncomfortable, a good use rope check means you can fashion a sort of seat/hammock that you lash yourself to.

It's infinitely long and stretched between two nothings, so there's not enough give to do that. And anyway, try sleeping with your entire body dangling from a rope tied around some part of yourself. At the very least I'd require an impressive Constitution check to get any rest at all; you're lucky if I don't make you Fortitude save against blood pooling in your extremities and making you go numb or something. (What numbness would actually do in game terms I'm not sure; at least it'd be a morale penalty on physical actions.)


EDIT: If you want to nerf Use Rope, just make it minute-per-level or something. Or remove it entirely. It's nearly useless aside from as a safe hiding spot, and arguably overpowered at that particular function.

It's not "nearly useless", it's the ultimate enabler for a 15-minute adventuring day, starting at level 3. Besides I think the image of clinging to a rope over a vast yawning gulf is awesome. It's based on a movie poster. With my nerf, "all" the spell does is let you hide with virtually no chance of detection while a patrol passes by or a monster falls asleep or something. This is more than useful enough; the spell doesn't need to double as a cut-rate Magnificent Mansion.

[SowZ]

It's infinitely long and stretched between two nothings, so there's not enough give to do that. And anyway, try sleeping with your entire body dangling from a rope tied around some part of yourself. At the very least I'd require an impressive Constitution check to get any rest at all; you're lucky if I don't make you Fortitude save against blood pooling in your extremities and making you go numb or something. (What numbness would actually do in game terms I'm not sure; at least it'd be a morale penalty on physical actions.)

Bring a hammock. Lash it to the rope itself with something sticky and a use rope skill. If the rope has enough friction and strength to allow climbing up and down, it has enough friction and surface for an adhesive and a good strong tie to hold a persons weight. 8 tons of weight is certainly strong, and the rope itself probably has the same friction of the rope before the spell was cast. You could, arguably, tie a hammock loop in the rope beforehand. It can be infinitely taut, that doesn't preclude things being tied around 'it' with the aid of glue.

[willpell]

Bring a hammock. Lash it to the rope itself with something sticky and a use rope skill. If the rope has enough friction and strength to allow climbing up and down, it has enough friction and surface for an adhesive and a good strong tie to hold a persons weight. It can be infinitely taut, that doesn't preclude things being tied around 'it' with the aid of glue.

Just no. Whatever nonsense you try to cobble together, I'll find an excuse to veto it. The bottom line is, a level 2 spell does not allow you to secure perfect safety while getting a full night's sleep after going nova against every single encounter. This is a destructive paradigm and I will not allow it.

[SowZ]

Just no. Whatever nonsense you try to cobble together, I'll find an excuse to veto it. The bottom line is, a level 2 spell does not allow you to secure perfect safety while getting a full night's sleep after going nova against every single encounter. This is a destructive paradigm and I will not allow it.

Sure, but as a player I want the spell banned outright or be given a time limit in minutes as opposed to just being told not to think out of the box to utilize one of my tricks efficiently. Especially since for this one, it isn't nonsense or a stretch at all. As written, there is just no reason a rope trick couldn't be slept in. It will break my suspension of disbelief if you tell my that my 18+ Int wizard can't think of a way to do it even though I can think of it.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Bring a hammock. Lash it to the rope itself with something sticky and a use rope skill. If the rope has enough friction and strength to allow climbing up and down, it has enough friction and surface for an adhesive and a good strong tie to hold a persons weight. It can be infinitely taut, that doesn't preclude things being tied around 'it' with the aid of glue.

The argument doesn't hold water anyway since you can pull up the end of the rope sticking out of the pocket dimension. It's not suspended between two infinitely distant points, it's anchored to one infinitely distant point and dangling out of the hole in space-time that the spell created. Haul a simple collapseable frame into it, tie off and unroll your bedroll.

I just rule that there's an uncomfortable, supernatural chill that, while posing no threat and causing no great discomfort, still prevents resting in the extradimensional space.

It's not strictly necessary though. It's difficult, but nowhere near impossible to find a rope-trick. Anyone that can produce the effect of detect magic and can track can find it. Track until the trail simply disappears in an area where that can't be reasonably explained, then scan with detect magic. When you find the aura of the pocket, build a roaring fire under it and wait.

[Ashtagon]

You can tie the rope to yourself so you won't fall. If that is too uncomfortable, a good use rope check means you can fashion a sort of seat/hammock that you lash yourself to. Disallowing that wouldn't seem to make any sense in keeping with what the ability does.

My fix for the rope trick spell is to reduce the duration back to 1e/2e norms (that is 10 or 20 minutes per caster level, instead of the 3.x era 60 minutes per caster level).

That's enough to function as a panic-hideout and set an interesting ambush, but unless you are ridiculously high level, not enough to spend a night in. That said, I kind of like the idea of making it so the extra-dimensional space has no "floor".

[Mithril Leaf]

Jeez, remind me to play a psion in your campaigns, they get a better and more clearly worded version of rope trick.

[Pickford]

It's heavily implied, but never stated outright. Not even in libris mortis; the definitive guide to undead in 3.5.

From the Glossary:

PHB pg. 310:

negative energy: A black, crackling energy that originates on the Negative Material Plane. In general, negative energy heals undead creatures and hurts the living.

PHB pg. 311

positive energy: A white, luminous energy that originates on the Positive Material Plane. In general, positive energy heals the living and hurts undead creatures.

The obvious implications are: If the spell doesn't say otherwise, positive good, negative bad (for living) and vice versa for undead. If the spell says something different, that trumps.

Incidentally, Chill touch specifically doesn't damage the undead, just panicks it. More like guidelines than actual 'rules' you see.

Edit: Oh right the topic, our only real homebrew rule seems to be crit checks are automatic successes....I feel this risks seriously devaluing some of the improved critical feats by giving them to everyone for free...but it also makes things like keen rapiers potentially amazing.

[Pickford]

Common house rules cover rules flubs, convenience, neglected weapons, and realism.

Flubs:

Monks are proficient with unarmed strikes.

Uh, see improved unarmed strike...(also, the monk class entry) This is already the case, monks don't take a negative to hit and don't even provoke aoo.


You can cast Feather Fall (redefined as an immediate action spell) when flat-footed.

Free actions can be taken even during the surprise round (assuming you're the flatfooted one) and Feather Fall is a free action to cast already.


No ranged full attacks without provoking attacks of opportunity. Going strictly by the letter of the rules full attacks (melee or ranged) never provoke, but I treat this as just sloppy work by the rules authors. Each ranged shot provokes an AoO.

The rules indicate ranged attacks always do. If you're reading the chart on 141 you should note the full attack says No because a full attack doesn't provoke the aoo, but the 'type' of attacks used may.

i.e. Say you have 3 attacks (+15/+10/+5) If you are holding a bow and fire it at someone next to you, you'd provoke an attack. If you then drop the bow and quickdraw a sword for the remaining two attacks, neither would provoke a further aoo (assuming the enemy either declined to use it earlier or had combat reflexes to have more possible aoo's) because they are melee attacks which don't do that. If you did 2 melee, then threw a shruiken (ranged) that last attack would provoke. If all three were ranged, all three would provoke (though normal players would only have the 1 possible aoo to use).

Similarly, if you did a full attack where you bull rush someone, trip, grapple, disarm, and/or sunder (all types of melee attacks) you still provoke an aoo because each of those melee attacks themselves specifically provoke aoo.

[CommanderCronos]

Its good to see so many interesting house rules, heres some of mine:

DM allows skil points to be allocated as the player chooses. He says this is to show how the character has progressed. instead of having to spread them out you could lump them on a few skills and just say that you have focused on them as he learned and not on other things. i means you can be really good at some stuff but not at others. Players choice.

No multiclass penelty pretty common from what ive seen.

Assassins can be any aligntment DM thinks that anyone with a strong enough ideal can be an Assassin.

Half elves get more Human and Elf bonuses our Half elves essentially get half of both races bonuses. Off the top of my head its something like +1 Dex, -1 Con. Bonus feat at lvl 1. Bonus skill points at starting. resistant to sleep and enchantment. Stuff like that.

Spells dont require material components but if you use them the spell is stronger helps speed up the game since you don't have to keep track of stuff like that unless you really want to.

I'm sure there are others but I cant remember them all just now.

[Pickford]

I use a lot of houserules and am pretty conservative. Here are the ones I can think of which aren't specific to my campaign world, but are going to apply in all games I run henceforth unless I decide otherwise.

* Half-elves and half-orcs gain bonus skill points as do humans. (They do not gain a feat.)

* The Hold Portal spell adds +10 rather than +5 to the DC to break open the door.

So basically you remove the -2 int penalty from orcs? Half-elves already get enough bonus skills that it takes at least 2 levels for humans to have more skill points.

The hold portal change is a horrible idea. At level 1 a player can, at best, have a 20 strength for a +5 modifier. Breaking a 'wooden' door is a DC 18, normally hold portal would make this a DC 23, so if the PC has a <+3 Str modifier they are incapable of breaking down the door. At +10 DC a 1st level player could NEVER break down such a door held by a 1st level mage.

Incidentally, the spell also would lock the door at a DC 25...which would mean a rogue with max ranks (4) and a +4 dex bonus (+5 halfling) would have only a ~1/4 chance of opening the door. (unless of course the lock was a nicer quality...in which case it would be completely impossible).

So yeah...that's alot worse than rope trick.

[Kasbark]

I use a looong list of houserules that changes the game quite a bit - here are some of them:


No full attack action. You can all the attacks your BAB and number of weapons allow as a Standard Action.

Combat maneuvers (trip, disarm and such) are limited to x uses/day. They now add their ability on top of damage, and all allow for a save to ignore the effect.

Sunder lowers an affected targets AC by 2 for the remainder of the encounter (because destroying peoples weapons is boring for both players and enemies - mostly for the players though)

Flanking adds +2 to hit and damage.

Many conditions have been nerfed. For instance, Blind causes you to suffer 50% miss chance and loose your Dex bonus to AC - but you do not have to guess where your enemies are before attacking. (it's been refluffed to making your almost blind, seeing everything in a blur)

[Eurus]

It's not "nearly useless", it's the ultimate enabler for a 15-minute adventuring day, starting at level 3. Besides I think the image of clinging to a rope over a vast yawning gulf is awesome. It's based on a movie poster. With my nerf, "all" the spell does is let you hide with virtually no chance of detection while a patrol passes by or a monster falls asleep or something. This is more than useful enough; the spell doesn't need to double as a cut-rate Magnificent Mansion.

...That's what I said. It's overpowered if used in that way, and if you nerf that part of it out, it's useless. So I'd really just remove the spell altogether or ask players not to take it (which is perfectly legitimate; there are a few spells that I flat-out ban, anyway).

The ability to hide extradimensionally with it is... maaaaybe useful. Needing to climb up the rope means it requires prep time, the entrance can be spotted with See Invisibility, and noodly-armed wizards can barely climb in the first place, heh. But if it sees use, fair enough.


EDIT:


Its good to see so many interesting house rules, heres some of mine:

DM allows skil points to be allocated as the player chooses. He says this is to show how the character has progressed. instead of having to spread them out you could lump them on a few skills and just say that you have focused on them as he learned and not on other things. i means you can be really good at some stuff but not at others. Players choice.

If that means removing the level-plus-three cap on how many ranks you can have in a skill, bear in mind that it screws up a lot of prestige classes and feats that were designed with skill-based prerequisites to prevent characters from getting them at low levels.

[willpell]

Sure, but as a player I want the spell banned outright or be given a time limit in minutes as opposed to just being told not to think out of the box to utilize one of my tricks efficiently. Especially since for this one, it isn't nonsense or a stretch at all. As written, there is just no reason a rope trick couldn't be slept in. It will break my suspension of disbelief if you tell my that my 18+ Int wizard can't think of a way to do it even though I can think of it.

You might as well say you should be able to cast Fireball and spread the heat wider so that it makes an entire inn comfortably warm without damaging anyone. Spells having narrowly restricted effects, even if logically they could be applied otherwise, is part and parcel of Vancian casting. A spell is designed to do one specific thing (or a small handful of specific things). If you want to do something innovative, you have to use the rules for researching a new spell, and it will be leveled and priced by the DM according to how potentially powerful it is, using existing spells (that the DM regards as balanced) as a guideline.

In general I disapprove of all McGuyvering in my game, as it's a way of "gotchaing" the GM and screwing up his plans, which is not good behavior from a player. But if someone uses mundane equipment in a surprising but logical way and manages to get out of a situation that I thought was inescapable, well, that's my fault for not making it inescapable enough, and if there's no good argument for why it shouldn't work, it'll work. But with magic, logic is not required, since the whole point of magic in the first place is to throw logic out the window. You do NOT, ever, get to circumvent the impossibly complex and nebulous rules governing the supernatural; that is the entire point of the word Arcane. (Divine magic, likewise, does not get to circumvent the will of your deity or "force".)

These are Tier 1 classes that can potentially snap the game into a billion little broken-in-half twigs. I have zero sympathy for anyone who thinks I'm being too harsh on them. Play a Rogue or a Fighter, and I'll let you get creative so that you have some hope of beating CR-appropriate or even above-average encounters, which the rules won't let you succeed in because they were written for the benefit of casters. Play a caster, and be glad that I let you keep some of your overpowered toys. I could just restrict the wizard and cleric classes to NPCs, since they tend to dominate every campaign anyway.


Half elves get more Human and Elf bonuses our Half elves essentially get half of both races bonuses. Off the top of my head its something like +1 Dex, -1 Con. Bonus feat at lvl 1. Bonus skill points at starting. resistant to sleep and enchantment. Stuff like that.

Sounds like half-elf is the god-race in that game, since it gets everything a human gets at level 1 (except 1 point of CON), and a few bennies on top of it. Losing out on the extra skill points later, and the ability to multiclass in a few unusual ways, is a pretty small tradeoff.


Spells dont require material components but if you use them the spell is stronger helps speed up the game since you don't have to keep track of stuff like that unless you really want to.

This is an absolutely fascinating idea which I may steal. In general, I love anything that makes magic more complicated and spooky, instead of just being an "I win" button that works with clockwork precision. Nothing magical about that.


So basically you remove the -2 int penalty from orcs? Half-elves already get enough bonus skills that it takes at least 2 levels for humans to have more skill points.

H'orcs are still lousy wizards, but yeah part of why I applied that rule to them was to make up for the INT penalty in skill terms, as skill choices are part of what makes any Race Class different from every other Race Class. The rule itself isn't mine originally, it's suggested for H'elves in a sidebar in Unearthed Arcana, and I decided I liked the idea, since everyone says both of these races are bad. If this plus the ability to take multiple paragon classes turns out to be insane, I can change it, but I'll be surprised if this is necessary.

As for H'elves, you do know that their bonus skills aren't ranks? A +2 bonus to Diplomacy rolls is not the same as getting +2 skill points that can only be spent on Diplomacy...the latter allows you to qualify for a PrC or Skill Trick or something. So yeah, H'elves are awesome skills-wise with this rule, but that just means they're worth something; they're still not stronger than humans with their bonus feat or dwarves with their Constitution.


The hold portal change is a horrible idea. At level 1 a player can, at best, have a 20 strength for a +5 modifier. Breaking a 'wooden' door is a DC 18, normally hold portal would make this a DC 23, so if the PC has a <+3 Str modifier they are incapable of breaking down the door. At +10 DC a 1st level player could NEVER break down such a door held by a 1st level mage.

Hold portal is a short-term spell; it goes away in a couple minutes. While it lasts, it ought to actually do what it's meant to do; if the players have a strong-guy in the party they can probably just Sunder the door and get through, and if not maybe they need to get creative with using improvised battering rams for a circumstance bonus, Aid Another, or just look for another way around. At most the wizard gets a ten-minute head start while the players plan how they're going to catch and kill him when the spell ends. All this is compared to Arcane Lock, a 2nd-level skill which makes a door impossible to open except with Knock. I think the change is fair.

[CommanderCronos]

@willpell: Yeah the magic one is good since it allows for the player to choose and can also add abit of flavour n some cases. Regarding the half elves, yeah they are better than the core ones by quite a bit. However our players and DM usually find a way to work things so they are balanced.

another rule we use to streamline crits is Crits are double any physical damage (weapon, Str bonus, Weap Spec. ETC) but elemental damage isnt doubled (ex: the +1d6 dmg from a fire sword) this makes them relativly fast to work out usually. We also dont use Crit confirm, just if you roll in your crit range its a crit. I think that is a fairly common rule though.

One cool trick my DM will use for big battles is that if you summon a monster(s) but dont want to have to micro-manage it all he will judge the general power of the summon and have it occupy and perhaps kill some of the enemies in the battle. Helps summoners types feel cool and take a big chunk of guys on without having to roll every attack. He will sometimes do this with large groups of NPC soldiers or similar guys in a battle and just roll to see well each side of the skirmish does and hom many men they lose.

[CommanderCronos]

Oh another one he does that i like

Side story lvl ups If our campaign is going to be a long one with a deep plot and epic level ending he does a cool this with side quests. Each character will have a side quest that is RP heavy and very much based on the character concept and flavour. Side quest will last for many sessions and wont take away from the actual story. It will usually happen when the party return to the main area of the campaign they will have a chance to talk to key NPCs and go on side quests to advance their side plot.

They can choose who they do and dont involve from they party in this depending on inter-party relations and such. When they do eventually finish this quest, aside from any interesting items or other rewards they gain due to its completion, they advance 2 lvls and the rest of the party advance 1 lvl. This will usually end up happening aroun the lvl 15-18 mark. This gives the players a huge reason to get involved in the development of a their character in a RP sense and also can help to drive the main story along in some cases. It also gives the DM a way to give the players a Power boost as the campaign begins to get into the more advanced stages which gives him the chance to make the enemies more powerful for some epic fights. This usually means that the end battle or confrontation of each campaign will have everyone on the edge of their seats as it is always an epic battle!!

[Seharvepernfan]

Just check my signature.

[Ranting Fool]

Well me and my players have made a few over the years.

The dodge feat grants a +1 bonus to AC. Is a common one.

No XP Penalties for multiclassing Never really pick this but almost always forget when dishing out xp.

Free Eschew Materials as well as this players can make or buy "Gem dust" so any spell saying it needs "Gem worth X" they can just use part of their dust rather then keeping track of each and every gem.

Bonus Feats every few levels (Sometimes picked by player sometimes picked by Me for actions done so only getting feats that make sense to what the character has done)

Level 3 Dispel Magic doesn't remove spells that have been made permanent only shut them off like magic items.

[willpell]

Mostly I'm going to keep updating my list as I think of or remember new modifications, but for now I'll just add a quick couple I forgot:

* Players start with the maximum possible roll for their Hit Dice as HP. I expect them not to roleplay themselves as being indestructible; they should take danger seriously, but I don't need them getting slain by a lucky crit out of the blue. This never applies to NPCs or monsters, only the heroes; they lead somewhat charmed lives, but they also have more enemies and less hope of anonymity, so it works out for Rule of Drama well enough.

* All players receive an extra "weak" feat, such as Toughness or a skill-pair +2; I will veto selections which obviously serve to qualify for a PRC earlier than is possible, but otherwise the choice is anything which has minimal effect on power but serves to better individualize the character. I'm debating extending this to my NPCs as well, as a lot of them take such feats for flavor reasons and then end up sucking at their actual jobs.

[Curmudgeon]

Uh, see improved unarmed strike...(also, the monk class entry) This is already the case, monks don't take a negative to hit and don't even provoke aoo. I've already checked the rules quite thoroughly, thanks. Improved Unarmed Strike has just two benefits (remove AoOs; lethal damage) and doesn't grant unarmed strike proficiency, nor does it give a bonus to hit offsetting the nonproficiency penalty. Monks lack proficiency with their unarmed strikes.
Weapon and Armor Proficiency

Monks are proficient with club, crossbow (light or heavy), dagger, handaxe, javelin, kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, siangham, and sling.
A character who uses a weapon with which he or she is not proficient takes a -4 penalty on attack rolls. Lacking proficiency with their unarmed attacks, Monks do indeed incur the associated -4 penalty to hit.

Free actions can be taken even during the surprise round (assuming you're the flatfooted one) and Feather Fall is a free action to cast already. Feather Fall was a free action to cast, but that was changed when the rules were supplemented to add swift and immediate actions. From page 86 of Complete Arcane:
Casting feather fall is an immediate action (instead of a free action, as stated in the spell description in the Player’s Handbook), since the spell can be cast at any time.
...
You also cannot use an immediate action if you are currently flat-footed. You can cast Feather Fall at any time — if you're not flat-footed.

The rules indicate ranged attacks always do. If you're reading the chart on 141 you should note the full attack says No because a full attack doesn't provoke the aoo, but the 'type' of attacks used may. Sorry, but that's not a general rule. Here's the only footnote for the Full-Round Action section of Table 8–2: Actions in Combat:
Regardless of the action, if you move out of a threatened square, you usually provoke an attack of opportunity. This column indicates whether the action itself, not moving, provokes an attack of opportunity. The rule which says ranged attacks provoke AoOs is in this table under the Standard Action header, and also in the Standard Actions section of the Combat chapter. That makes it a rule specific to standard actions rather than a general rule. There's no mention of ranged attacks, or special rules regarding them, in the Full-Round Actions section of the chapter. The table spells out provocations separately based on action type, and categorically says that full attacks do not provoke. Without any overriding text, the table is the full and final word on full attacks and AoOs.

I try very hard to read what the rules really say, rather than what people would like them to say. My house rules are designed to address the actual RAW.

[Ashtagon]

RAW says ranged weapon attacks never provoke an aoo.

My RACSD says ranged weapons provoke an aoo. The only exception to this is "pistols" do not provoke an aoo from the creature being attacked. That is, a pistol can be used in melee combat with no special disadvantage or penalty. In typical D&D terms, this covers only the hand crossbow.

I also impose a -4 penalty on Large (in terms of space required to use) ranged weapons being used against adjacent targets. For typical D&D games, this typically means long bows, long composite bows, great (but not heavy) crossbows, staff slings, and slings (they need space to swing). Combined with the provoked aoo, that makes them bad to use in melee.

Short bows, composite short bows, light crossbows, and heavy crossbows provoke an aoo, but don't suffer an attack penalty.

[Person_Man]

A generally run games with a Tier 3 Rule of Cool.

If you want a character that can to do something, we can sit down and make it from whatever sources are available (3.0, 3.5, Pathfinder, 3rd party, magazines, homebrew, etc), as long as the end result is fun, doesn't detract from the overall fun of the other players, and is generally in the ballpark of a Tier 3 character (capable of doing one thing quite well, while still being useful when that one thing is inappropriate). Roughly 90% of the homebrewing I do arises from such a request.

If you really want to play a non-homebrewed Tier 4 or lower build, you can fill in any dead or dead-ish (or just plain weak) level with appropriate abilities from other classes, or you can just expect me to slip you more powerful treasure from time to time.

If you want to play a Tier 1 or 2 character you can do that as well, but you should keep a reasonable spell/power/ability list or expect to encounter a lot more enemies gunning specifically for you.

[Gotterdammerung]

I play a few different games so it can actually get hard to remember all the houseruling. Here are some I can remember.

#1 open lock does not exist, use disable device. Everything you could do b4 with a open lock check you can now do with disable device.

#2 Spellcraft does not exist. Instead replace with the appropriate knowledge check. Example, to identify soundburst cast as a divine spell by a cleric you would use a knowledge religion check.

#3 we have a list of universal skills. They are skills that do not require special training to enhance. Spot, listen, jump for example. No matter what your class list is, universal skills are always considered class skills.

#4 If a race possesses racial substitution levels for a class, add that class to their favored class list.

[Rogue Shadows]

A character in a freefall falls 500 feet (100 squares) in the first round of falling, 1000 feet (200 squares) each round thereafter. They may fall at any point in their turn. Falling is a free action that does not provoke an attack of opportunity.

We once had an entire game of D&D get held up for 45 minutes over an argument about falling, and so ever since then we've imposed this rule on all of our games. To my knowledge, nowhere in D&D is falling speed ever defined, except by feather fall, which for obvious reasons is not very useful.

[yougi]

Here are mine:

- When critting, you multiply before adding your bonuses (you do 2d6 x2 +7 instead of (2d6+7)x2).

- First level HP is Con score + rolled HP, instead of full HP + Con mod. (a Ftr1 with 15 Con would have 15+1d10 instead of 13).

- Monk has d10 HD and full BAB

- Generalist Wizards have a banned school; Specialists have 3

- Dodge is a +1 dodge bonus to AC

- Anyone can power attack at half its value (-2 to hit for +1 damage)

- We use Pathfinder's Paladin and Fighter, and mostly PF's racial bonuses

[Swooper]

another rule we use to streamline crits is Crits are double any physical damage (weapon, Str bonus, Weap Spec. ETC) but elemental damage isnt doubled (ex: the +1d6 dmg from a fire sword)
Uhm... that's not a houserule, unless you mean extra physical damage dice like from sneak attack are multiplied as well... in which case rogue critfisher builds become kind of ridiculous. In standard rules, the base weapon damage die/dice and any solid modifiers (such as strength bonus, power attack, enhancement bonus etc.) are multiplied, but extra damage dice are not.

Some houserules my group uses:

Death occurs at negative Con score hp, rather than -10.
The entire magic system is changed to Ernir's Vancian-to-Psionic (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=194002) rule set (Ernir being a part of my gaming group).
An adaptation of ericgrau's low magic item system (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=134805)
Pathfinder style skills (1 point/rank for cross class skills, max ranks = level, +3 bonus to class skills with ranks in them, slightly altered skill list)
When I DM at least, we use completely rewritten racial traits I made, balanced around what would usually be about LA+1 (I really should post them to the homebrew forum one day...).

[Telonius]

My whole file of houserules is on another computer, but from memory...

Monk gets full BAB, and can self-enchant weapons and armor as though he were a spellcaster of equal Monk level. Everything is proficient in their own unarmed attack. Flurry is a standard action. Remove the alignment restrictions.

Druids use the shapeshifter variant and get Know (Geography) and Know (Religion) as part of the class list. Ranger and Druid trade animal companions.

Divine Power is on the War Domain list only, not the general Cleric spell list. Nightsticks are one per customer. All Clerics are proficient with their deity's favored weapon. Sense Motive is a Cleric skill.

Paladins must take the alignment of their deity or philosophy. Paladin Code is determined by the tenets of the faith or philosophy; Paladins must act as a shining example of that faith or philosophy.

Rogue gets an Ability at 20. Weapon Finesse has no requirement.

Remove alignment restrictions on Bard and Barbarian.

Wizard feats are crafting or spell mastery only; Sorcerer gains metamagic feats at equal levels. Spontaneous metamagic does not take any longer than regular metamagic.

TWF scales with level. Improved TWF decreases the penalty by an additional 1/1; Greater TWF negates the penalties entirely.

Hide/move silently is merged into Stealth. Spot/Listen is merged into Perception. Balance/Tumble is merged into Acrobatics. Open Lock is merged into Disable Device.

Half-Orcs lose the Int penalty and gain +4 racial bonus to Intimidate. (Orcs also gain +4 to Intimidate). Half-Elves gain either a bonus feat or 1 skill point per level, player's choice.

Several egregious spells and items are nerfed (i.e. Gated creatures won't cast high-XP spells on your behalf) or banned (i.e. no dust of sneezing and choking). Pun-Pun has already ascended and is the game's over-deity of cheese and exploits; he will prevent any similar shenanigans by personal intervention.

EDIT: almost forgot: No such thing as multiclass penalties.

[IdleMuse]

Gestalt, with total tier of included base classes MUST be 8 or higher (dips excluded, to some extent; dipping cleric only to progress its casting elsewhere still counts, for instance). PrCs can be taken at the same level, including theurge PrCs.

[rot42]

One more that I have not yet had a chance to try: all psionic powers gain an augmentation option to increase the save DC by one by spending two power points.

[Phelix-Mu]

Monk gets full BAB, and can self-enchant weapons and armor as though he were a spellcaster of equal Monk level. Everything is proficient in their own unarmed attack. Flurry is a standard action. Remove the alignment restrictions.

All Clerics are proficient with their deity's favored weapon.

Rogue gets an Ability at 20. Weapon Finesse has no requirement.

Remove alignment restrictions on Bard and Barbarian.

Wizard feats are crafting or spell mastery only

TWF scales with level. Improved TWF decreases the penalty by an additional 1/1; Greater TWF negates the penalties entirely.


Nice, a couple of these rather fit my feelings on these matters as well.

I also go by a makeshift brand of polymorph that splits it up into a separate spell for each form, incorporating the limited way in which they tried to do this at the end of 3.5. Shapechange is probably getting removed from the game. Even with the errata, it's a bit of a headache.

Still not sure what to do about metamorphosis, but a similar series of 2e abilities was more along the lines of the Warshaper ability to add in single natural attacks by morphing part of your natural form into claws, fangs, tentacles. Might do something like that.

Polymorph any object is going to replicate all of the listed spells plus a few others, possibly with better target or area. The list that allows the changing rocks to diamonds, people into dragons, mice into chimera, and many even less balanced options is gonna have to go. I may add in an effect that allows for modification of existing items with magic auras, allowing someone to change the slot a slotted magic item occupies, the combination of two existing items into one item, and similar effects. Anything that augments the value of the resulting item will have a gp material component equal to the difference in starting and ending value.

Spell fixes really should occupy a series of other threads. Lots to be said about specific spells being poorly written, or combinations of two or more spells being so exploitable that the game spontaneously combusts.

[Gullara]

My DM in one of my games has a houserules regarding proficiencies that I like.

Exotic Armour Proficiency no longer exists. Exotic Armours are distributed among Light, Medium, Heavy, and Shield appropriately.

Exotic Weapon Proficiency also no longer exists. Instead PCs may pay a trainer to teach them how to use the weapon. Presumably this also applies to any other weapon that a particular class isn't proficient with.


He also altered the crafting rules, but I'm less clear on those. I believe it was something along the lines, that rather than the crafting time being determined by silver pieces per day, it is determined by gold pieces per day, thus speeding up the process ten fold.

(Note: I'm not actually familiar with the crafting rules and I'm going off memory with this. If it does sound like it makes sense, that means I probably remembered right. :smalltongue:)

[silverwolfer]

untrained sixteen year olds can typically suceed at the same task superbly!


they think they know everything for a reason

[Asteron]

My DM uses a lot of houserules, most of which are situational. Here are a few of the permanent ones:

-LA is paid off upfront. You start at a lower level and gain xp as if you were that level rather than your ECL.

-All races can use any of their racial weapons as a marshall weapon for free.

-Once a skill is a class skill, it is a class skill forever even if you take a level in a different class.

-No death from massive damage

-Nat 1s on attack rolls means you are flat footed.

-Ability scores are rolled 4d6 drop the lowest. Make three columns of 6 rolls and pick the highest in each row. Makes for high scores, but heroes are supposed to be above and beyond the average commoner... or so the logic goes.

-Use 3.0 haste, heal, and harm. Heal and harm get will saves for 1/2 hp+1d4.

[Ageir]

In my games

+1 dodge ac five every five points in tumble.

Keen and improved critical stack.

Casting classes with two casting abilities choose one.

I've banned dancing shields to make sword and biard more worth while.

I've added keen arrows.

Poison dcs are 10+int modifier.

Halberds. gain a bonus to pull people from horses.

[Con_Brio1993]

Why would you hire a kingdom reknown expert to direct some task, (building the new prison, being a diplomat, etc.) paying him dozens or hundreds of gold when sixteen or so untrained sixteen year olds can typically suceed at the same task superbly!

To the DM's credit, the critical success on a 20 has actually led to some fun stories. Meanwhile the critical failures on a 1 haven't led to any character deaths thankfully, and we haven't yet reached a level where any of our skill modifiers are high enough that a 1 wouldn't be failing whatever task we set out to do in the first place. Maybe he'll change the rules once we get absurd modifiers.

Also at the very least, the "all classes have access to all skills rule" fixes the stupidity of some classes not having spot or listen as a skill.

[Gullara]

-Once a skill is a class skill, it is a class skill forever even if you take a level in a different class.

Ah yes, my DM uses this one too. I quite like that I have to say.

[Story]

How many of your players take a 1 level dip in Factorum at the start?

[Lord Il Palazzo]

Hide and Move Silently are a single skill. Spot and Listen are a single skill. In both cases, having either skill on your class list allows you to treat the combined skill as a class skill.

At character creation, half-elves may choose to either gain a bonus feat at level 1 or get an additional skill point per level (four at first level). They are locked into this decision and cannot change it later.

Natural 1s automatically fail when it's reasonable to do so. Natural 20 automatically succeed when it's reasonable to do so. (I'm trying to get this one changed to at least confirm failures.)

A natural 20 on an attack roll is automatically a critical hit. You still need to roll to confirm on lower critical threats.

For any class that gives a specific bonus feat (Wizard with Scribe Scroll, Swashbuckler with Weapon Finesse, etc.) you may choose a different feat you qualify for if you already had that feat.

When making a full attack, one of the attacks (typically the first) may be replaced with a standard action martial strike.

Plane Shift uses targeting rules similar to Teleport, making it easier to arrive on target at locations you're familiar with, rather than the always-miss-by-5d%-miles the spell gives by default.

No XP. Every so often, when it "feels right" the PCs gain a level. This also means adjusted crafting rules, more costly material components (higher gold costs to compensate for no XP cost) and no XP penalty for multiclassing.

I'm flexible about race and alignment requirements for prestige classes. Give me a good reason your character should qualify or that the class shouldn't be limited to that race/alignment and you're good.

Deathwatch is on no level and in now way an evil spell. Any cleric may prepare and cast it.

I'm sure there are a few more I'm forgetting.

[Asteron]

How many of your players take a 1 level dip in Factorum at the start?

None. We have almost all the skills covered by someone...

I forgot a couple of big ones:

-Keen and Improved Critical stack.

Funnily enough, nobody has gone for 12-20 crits. However, my half-dragon goliath Warblade has a Greathorn Minotaur Greathammer that crits 15-20x4. He tends to crit-kill things when he gets ahold of them...

-You don't confirm a critical hit. A Nat 20 is always a crit. Anything else in your range only crits if your total is high enough to hit their AC.

-Speak language, decifer script, and forgery all fall under the Linguistics skill.

One is eluding me right now... I'll try to post it once I remember what it is.

[Phelix-Mu]

I've already checked the rules quite thoroughly, thanks. Improved Unarmed Strike has just two benefits (remove AoOs; lethal damage) and doesn't grant unarmed strike proficiency, nor does it give a bonus to hit offsetting the nonproficiency penalty. Monks lack proficiency with their unarmed strikes. Lacking proficiency with their unarmed attacks, Monks do indeed incur the associated -4 penalty to hit.


Hmm, seems like an oversight. FAQ has endorsed Improved Natural Attack counting for Unarmed Strike, implying that a monk's unarmed strike can be counted as a natural weapon for the purposes of feats and such. A creature is always proficient in any natural weapon it possesses. If I needed a RAW argument to combat a DM that insisted monk's weren't proficient in their unarmed strikes, that's what I'd use.

As a DM, it's par for the course to accept that WotC, for all of it's competent rules-mongering for MtG, totally and epically fails at editing there own D&D material for internal consistency and completeness. This is self-evident enough that a sentence like "monks are highly trained in fighting unarmed, giving them considerable advantages when doing so" should probably be interpreted to mean "proficient with unarmed strikes." Crazy addiction to RAW is bad for just about every aspect of the game.

[Curmudgeon]

A creature is always proficient in any natural weapon it possesses.
No, that's not correct. Proficiency with natural weapons is a feature of most, but not all, creature types.

Proficient with its natural weapons. If generally humanoid in form, proficient with all simple weapons and any weapon it is described as using.

Proficient with its natural weapons only. A noncombative herbivore uses its natural weapons as a secondary attack.

Proficient with its natural weapons only, unless generally humanoid in form, in which case proficient with any weapon mentioned in its entry.

Proficient with its natural weapons only unless humanoid in form (or capable of assuming humanoid form), in which case proficient with all simple weapons and any weapons mentioned in its entry.

Proficient with natural weapons only, unless generally humanoid in form, in which case proficient with all simple weapons and any weapons mentioned in its entry.

Proficient with all simple weapons and any weapons mentioned in its entry.

Proficient with all simple and martial weapons, as well as any natural weapons.

Humanoids with 1 Hit Die exchange the features of their humanoid Hit Die for the class features of a PC or NPC class.

Humanoids with more than 1 Hit Die are the only humanoids who make use of the features of the humanoid type.
...
Proficient with all simple weapons, or by character class.

Proficient with its natural weapons only.

Proficient with all simple weapons and any weapons mentioned in its entry.

Proficient with its natural weapons only.

Proficient with all simple and martial weapons and any weapons mentioned in its entry.

Proficient with its natural weapons only.

Proficient with its natural weapons, all simple weapons, and any weapons mentioned in its entry.

Proficient with their natural weapons only.

[Phelix-Mu]

Does any feat grant proficiency in a natural attack? Seems like humanoids and monstrous humanoids are non-proficient by oversight again, or because most don't have natural weapons. Should DM assume that natural attacks gained by spells and such are non-proficient unless otherwise stated?

Seems like a fairly obvious and stupid mistake on the part of the writers to make a big deal out of. Anyone that isn't already considering some kind of monk fix, oversights excepted, has probably not looked at the class hard enough.

[Valdis]

A +1 natural bonus to rolls if they are quick on the uptake of their turn


FANTASTIC rule!! Makes people pay attention to what's going on and keeps the game moving.

[Gildedragon]

Another: Forgery is a use of the Craft () skill, and is opposed by appraise or spot checks

[karkus]

and most things that were free actions require no action at all.

What, you mean like talking?

[Noctani]

I am surprised to hear anyone else uses that rule.

+2 untyped bonus on attack roles if action is decided in the first 5 seconds
+1 untyped bonus on attack roles if action is decided in the first 10 seconds
-1 untyped modifier on all rolls if action is takes over a minute
-2 untyped modifier on all rolls if action is takes over three minutes
In the case of summons or non rolls the monster or effect will be weaker.

Ability roll 1d4 +2d8 + 1
You may also add 2 ability points once all scores are rolled to any one ability score or two points in 1.

When a player rolls a 1 they must reroll. If they beat the check, the second time the player adds the 1 to their roll. If they fail to beat the check its treated as a critical failure.

Once a class skill, always a class skill.

If a player has two forms of SR from racial or class features. The player may add half of the SR from one feature to the other.

Any special grapple techniques that does not add damage can be used without the feat at a -4.
Any special grapple class feature that does not add damage can be used at a -8 if it doesn't require a special type of body.

Celerity is banned.
Mighty Whallop is banned.

A player may side out any one class skill for another at level 1. This shows the players individuality and desired progression if he chooses to express it, with minor exceptions. A druid for instance won't be taking disable device.

Prestige classes and feat requirements are guidelines. There are only archtypes. So skill requirements for prestige classes are debatable. If a player has met the role playing requirements, and it makes sense, then they do not need to meet all requirements. But the DM has the final say.

Feat example:
Throat punch requires sneak attack. But there is no reason a monk, fighter, or barbarian shouldn't be able to sacrifice certain abilities to do the same. The DM has final say of course.

[willpell]

Also at the very least, the "all classes have access to all skills rule" fixes the stupidity of some classes not having spot or listen as a skill.

Why is that stupid? Some classes are trained to intensely scrutinize their surroundings for potential dangers, and others are not. The wizard has his nose in a book or his head in the clouds all the time; he's not scanning the horizon for suspicious flickers of movement. I do agree that several classes should have it and don't, but others shouldn't. And I like the extra bit of flavor you gain from some classes having one but not the other.

[sabelo2000]

healing spells are Necromancy not conjuration.

Oh THANK YOU I miss that from 2nd Edition. I use that rule myself.

[willpell]

Crazy addiction to RAW is bad for just about every aspect of the game.

May I sig this?

[Phelix-Mu]

You most certainly can.:smallcool:

[jaynus006]

Just a few we play with

No xp penalty for multiclass (seems noone likes that)
Feat every 4 levels (whenever you would also raise an attribute)
When adding templates ignore racial HD and their benefits and just add level adjustment (always requires approval)
If its on your characters class list a skill never becomes cross class again even if you change class.
You may chose instead of rolling to deal average damage, if you do you add +1 dmg/die (so 1d6=4 avg damage) this cuts a fair bit of rolls out. People have option to roll (casters like chucking handfuls of dice)
All attacks have to be rolled at once, so a 20th fighter rolls 4 d20, a grapple check rolls 2 d20. We have a lot of color coded d20s
No spell that raises the dead causes a lost level instead lower spells require ritual casting times and higher costs.
No XP cost for crafting, no magical crafting feats (replaced with check DC's for creating magical items)
Weight and load is pretty much ignored, if you don't abuse it I won't enforce it (no pulling two anvils out of your leather backpack) exceptions for things like swimming in full plate.
No Leadership
All social skills have been changed up and are all treated as skill+X, where X is situational. A bluff about an unimportant event would use the players bluff skill +10 and be opposed by a sense motive + 0 (as the lie doesn't affect the listener) Diplomacy/Intimidate is treated the same though they are not allowed to get extreme. You can't kill a mans family and turn him into a fanatic no matter how diplomatic you are.
No crit confirmation roll, 20 auto hits, 1 fumbles and can hit anyone you currently threaten.

[Pickford]

Hold portal is a short-term spell; it goes away in a couple minutes. While it lasts, it ought to actually do what it's meant to do; if the players have a strong-guy in the party they can probably just Sunder the door and get through, and if not maybe they need to get creative with using improvised battering rams for a circumstance bonus, Aid Another, or just look for another way around. At most the wizard gets a ten-minute head start while the players plan how they're going to catch and kill him when the spell ends. All this is compared to Arcane Lock, a 2nd-level skill which makes a door impossible to open except with Knock. I think the change is fair.

Touche, however Arcane Lock actually does what you just turned hold portal into (with a few slight differences, but the one I'm trying to highlight is the DC)

PHB 200-201
Arcane Lock - Abjuration Sor/Wiz 2
"An arcane lock spell cast upon a door, chest, or portal magically locks it. You can freely pass your own arcane lock without affecting it; otherwise, a door or object secured with this spell can be opened only by breaking in or with a successful dispel magic or knock spell. Add 10 to the normal DC to break open a door or portal affected by this spell. (A knock spell does not remove an arcane lock; it only suppresses the effect for 10 minutes.)

PHB 241
Hold Portal - Abjuration Sor/Wiz 1
"This spell magically holds shut a door, gate, window, or shutter of wood, metal, or stone. The magic affects the portal just as if it were securely closed and normally locked. A knock spell or a successful dispel magic spell can negate a hold portal spell. For a portal affected by this spell, add 5 to the normal DC for forcing open the portal."

To the point, 5 DC remains huge, effectively giving a 1st level character the power of a 3rd level character. It's like letting someone move laterally with levitate (i.e. making it into fly).

[Pickford]

I've already checked the rules quite thoroughly, thanks. Improved Unarmed Strike has just two benefits (remove AoOs; lethal damage) and doesn't grant unarmed strike proficiency, nor does it give a bonus to hit offsetting the nonproficiency penalty. Monks lack proficiency with their unarmed strikes. Lacking proficiency with their unarmed attacks, Monks do indeed incur the associated -4 penalty to hit.

You're right that monks don't have a weapon proficiency for unarmed combat in their listed weapon proficiencies on PHB 40. Then again, there 'is' no unarmed combat weapon proficiency in the game. There's only Improved Unarmed Strike.

3 items of evidence:
1) PHB 41: "Unarmed Strike: Monks are highly trained in fighting unarmed, giving them considerable advantages when doing so. At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat...Usually a monk's unarmed strikes deal lethal damage, but she can choose to deal nonlethal damage instead with no penaltyon her attack roll. She has the same choice to deal lethal or nonlethal damage while grappling (see page 156)"

The first sentence says Monks are trained in fighting unarmed as a class feature. PHB 96 "Improved Unarmed Strike-General: You are skilled at fighting while unarmed." - If this isn't the definition of being proficient, nobody is proficient at anything. Simple, Martial, and Exotic weapon prof feats all indicate the feat user knows how to use the weapon selected. But to continue with Improved Unarmed Strike:

Benefit:You are considered to be armed even when unarmed..."
Normal: Without this feat, you are considered unarmed when attacking with an unarmed strike, and you can deal only nonlethal damage with such an attack."

Interestingly, this is the potential source of an -4. (see point 3 below)

2) Earlier on that same page we see that the D&D designers clearly believe Monks don't take any -4 penalty to fighting unarmed. From the flurry of blows entry: "For example, an 8th-level monk could make two attacks with the quarterstaff (one with each end) at a +5 attack bonus and one with an unarmed strike at a +0 attack bonus, or she could attack with one end of the quarterstaff and one unarmed strike at a +5 attack bonus each, and with the other end of hte quarterstaff at a +0 attack bonus." Table 3-10: The Monk indicates an 8th level monk flurry of blows at +5/+5/+0. The example (and another slightly earlier about a 6th level monk (who flurries +3/+3) being able to unarmed at +3 for both clearly indicates the writers did not believe there was a bonus.

3) For the final nail in the coffin of this utterly idiotic concept: PHB 139

Under the 'Standard Actions' section:

"Unarmed Attacks: Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:

Attacks of Opportunity: Attacking unarmed provokes an attack of opportunity from the character you attack, provided she is armed. The attack of opportunity comes before your attack. An unarmed attack does not provoke attacks of opportunity from other foes, as shooting a bow does, nor does it provoke an attack of opportunity from an unarmed foe. You provoke the attack of opportunity because you have to bring your body close to your opponent. An unarmed character can't take atatcks of opportunity (but see "Armed" Unarmed attacks, below).
"Armed" Unarmed Attacks: Sometimes a character's or creature's unarmed attack counts as an armed strike. A monk, a character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat (page 96), a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell, and a creature with claws, fangs, and similar natural weapons all count as being armed. Note that being armed counts for both offense and defense. Not only does a monk not provoke an attack of opportunity when attacking an armed foe, but you provoke an attack of opportunity from a monk if you make an unarmed attack against her.
Unarmed Strike Damage: An unarmed strike from a Medium character deals 1d3 points of damage (plus your Strength modifier, as normal). A Small character's unarmed strike deals 1d2 points of damage, while a Large character's unarmed strike deals 1d4 points of damage. All damage from unarmed strikes is non-lethal damage. Unarmed strikes count as light weapons (for purposes of two-weapon attack penalties and so on).
Dealing Lethal Damage: You can specify that your unarmed strike will deal lethal damage before you make your attack roll, but you take a -4 penaltyon your attack roll because you have to strike a particularly vulnerable spot to deal lethal damage. If you have the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, you can deal lethal damage with an unarmed strike without taking a penalty on the attack roll."

I highlighted that last sentence for your elucidation. Unarmed Strikes from a monk require no attack penalty.


Feather Fall was a free action to cast, but that was changed when the rules were supplemented to add swift and immediate actions. From page 86 of Complete Arcane: You can cast Feather Fall at any time — if you're not flat-footed.

Hrm, didn't consult the spell compendium...is there any reason the distinction would ever matter?


Sorry, but that's not a general rule. Here's the only footnote for the Full-Round Action section of Table 8–2: Actions in Combat: The rule which says ranged attacks provoke AoOs is in this table under the Standard Action header, and also in the Standard Actions section of the Combat chapter. That makes it a rule specific to standard actions rather than a general rule. There's no mention of ranged attacks, or special rules regarding them, in the Full-Round Actions section of the chapter. The table spells out provocations separately based on action type, and categorically says that full attacks do not provoke. Without any overriding text, the table is the full and final word on full attacks and AoOs.

Beg your pardon? From the D&D 3.5 Errata for the Player's Handbook:

"Errata Rule: Primary Sources When you find a disagreement between two D&D (R) rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct. One example of a primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over a table entry."

Bolded for emphasis.

You know, since it doesn't mention ranged attacks, we must safely assume, by this moon logic, that it is 'impossible' to even use a ranged attack, after all...it doesn't say it.

However that would be silly. "Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack: After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out. If you've already taken a 5-foot step, you can't use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action."

Guess what that means: The chart is indicating that choosing to do a full attack (i.e. more than just 'one' attack which would itself provoke an aoo prior to your even 'doing' it) doesn't provoke aoo. Melee attacks, Ranged attacks, Unarmed attacks, are all 'types' of attack that can be undertaken within the Full Attack Activity. It is the things you may do within that full round action which provoke aoo, not the full round action itself.


I try very hard to read what the rules really say, rather than what people would like them to say. My house rules are designed to address the actual RAW.

The actual RAW indicate ranged attacks cause aoo and that one can do all their attacks only if they use a full attack action. (i.e. if you want to 'move' you don't get to do more than either another move or a standard action)

[Ashtagon]

Regarding monks, I rule that all creatures are automatically proficient with their natural weapons, which includes unarmed strikes.

Of course, mere "proficiency" with an unarmed strike isn't much to write home about. Useful ability with unarmed combat is in the realms of an EWP or monk class features.

[Pickford]

Regarding monks, I rule that all creatures are automatically proficient with their natural weapons, which includes unarmed strikes.

Of course, mere "proficiency" with an unarmed strike isn't much to write home about. Useful ability with unarmed combat is in the realms of an EWP or monk class features.

The difference is without improved unarmed strikes your default damage is non-lethal, and if you try to deal 'actual' damage you take the -4 attack penalty.

Edit: And the whole provoking aoo and not getting aoo on people in return.

[HalfGrammarGeek]

Feat every 4 levels (whenever you would also raise an attribute)
Does this replace or supplement the usual feat/3 levels?

[Jon_Dahl]

Yes, I have many houserules.

1. You don't have to confirm criticals.
2. I use my own critical hit & fumble charts. In case of criticals, the size of the weapon is important. In case of fumbles, many factors are important, but a dexterous fighter with a light weapon is pretty much on the safe side.
3. Single-class fighters are able to pass up rolling from a fumble chart (once per day at 5th-level and +1 per day per every 5th level beoynd 5th level).
4. No bonus languages due to high intelligence.
5. If you have additional attacks due to high BAB, you must wait until everyone has acted before you can perform the additional attacks. If more than one have additional attacks due to high BAB, there will be turns in taking them (in normal initiative order).

We have played like this for 85 sessions and these houserules work like a dream, so it's safe to say that they are 100% playtested.

[Ashtagon]

The difference is without improved unarmed strikes your default damage is non-lethal, and if you try to deal 'actual' damage you take the -4 attack penalty.

Edit: And the whole provoking aoo and not getting aoo on people in return.

RAW states unarmed strikes provoke aoo because of the type of weapon, not because of any weapon proficiency issue. Similarly, they inflict non-lethal damage because of the type of weapon, not because of any proficiency issue. The non-proficiency rule causes a -4 attack penalty, but has no effect on damage lethality type or aoo provocation.

I consider the monk's unarmed strike to be a different kind of "weapon" from the normal "unarmed strike", sort of like how "karate chop" is different from "punch".

[willpell]

When adding templates ignore racial HD and their benefits and just add level adjustment (always requires approval)

Several templates become less useful if you do this. Half-Celestials for instance get a slew of SLAs based on their HD.


Of course, mere "proficiency" with an unarmed strike isn't much to write home about. Useful ability with unarmed combat is in the realms of an EWP or monk class features.

EWP? Why is that applicable here?

[Pickford]

RAW states unarmed strikes provoke aoo because of the type of weapon, not because of any weapon proficiency issue. Similarly, they inflict non-lethal damage because of the type of weapon, not because of any proficiency issue. The non-proficiency rule causes a -4 attack penalty, but has no effect on damage lethality type or aoo provocation.

I consider the monk's unarmed strike to be a different kind of "weapon" from the normal "unarmed strike", sort of like how "karate chop" is different from "punch".

Well it is in the sense that it deals lethal damage by default than a non monk (even one who also has Imp. Unarmed Strike and can deal lethal damage with no -4).

Yeah, it's provokes aoo because it's not an armed attack. Any armed attack doesn't automatically provoke unless it's ranged and you threaten the user.

Also, the monk entry indicates there's no attack penalty for monk unarmed attacks. (see the two examples of a 6th level and 8th level monk using various attack types).

[Ashtagon]

EWP? Why is that applicable here?

I've adapted the 2e martial arts system into a series of feats that allow you to have a variety of "unarmed strikes".

Think of the RAW "unarmed strike" as "amateur brawling". Then you might add "EWP (thai kick boxing)" as a feat, which (drawing numbers out of a hat) does 1d8 lethal bludgeoning damage, requires your legs to be free, and grants +2 on checks to bullrush your opponent. Or you might take "EWP (karate)", which does 1d8 lethal bludgeoning damage and grants +2 on sunder attacks against wood or ceramic objects.

Having those two feats would in effect give you three options (brawl-punch, kick-box, and karate chop) when you want to perform an "unarmed strike".

[Curmudgeon]

Does any feat grant proficiency in a natural attack? Not most of them, but Simple Weapon Proficiency will grant proficiency in the special case natural attack of unarmed strike. There's also a partial workaround if the creature has more than 2 natural attacks.
Benefit: The creature’s secondary attacks with natural weapons take only a -2 penalty. That's an absolute number, inclusive of all penalties (including nonproficiency). That fixes all the secondary natural attacks, but not the primary natural attack. If the creature also uses iterative attacks (and thus doesn't get to use a primary natural attack), then this is a complete fix. Shifter Multiattack does the same thing for Shifters, without requiring as many natural attacks.

Seems like humanoids and monstrous humanoids are non-proficient by oversight again, or because most don't have natural weapons. Should DM assume that natural attacks gained by spells and such are non-proficient unless otherwise stated?

Seems like a fairly obvious and stupid mistake on the part of the writers ... Once again we've got a reason for a house rule to fix a flub in the RAW.

[Ashtagon]

RAW humanoids have: "Proficient with all simple weapons, or by character class."

So provided they have at least one level of humanoid (in additional to class levels), they gain simple weapons proficiency automatically. 1 HD humanoids (such as us) lose out.

[CommanderCronos]

Oh someone mentioned leadership and it reminded me of a rule we tend to use for it if the player wishes.

Instead of gaining followers the player grants a bonus to people in his party or people who consider him to be leading in a task This starts off as a +1 at lvl 6 (if this is when the feat is taken) then another +1 every 4 lvls (lvl10 +2, lvl14 +3, Lvl18 +4...etc) this bonus counts towards AC, Saves, BA and skills. Also depending on the character who has the feat other bonuses may be granted. For example Cleric = +HP when being healed by him. Arcane caster = some SR. Rouge = Bonus on skills. Fighter = Bonus to damage. etc...

I have used this variant to great effect with my last char who was a cleric/warlock/eldritch disiple/fighter when the party ended up in the mid 20's in lvl and practically saved the world lol. My cleric was majorly focused on keeping my team alive and buffing so this worked well for him and the aprty really appreciated it.

[Curmudgeon]

Beg your pardon? From the D&D 3.5 Errata for the Player's Handbook:

"Errata Rule: Primary Sources When you find a disagreement between two D&D (R) rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct. One example of a primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over a table entry."

Bolded for emphasis.
I'm not sure what you're getting at, as I already pointed out there's no text which disagrees with the table. There's a rule about ranged attacks provoking; this rule is specific to standard action attacks. There's a table entry saying full attacks do not provoke (without specifying whether those are melee or ranged attacks). No disagreement here.

And while you can (in some cases) decide after an attack whether you're making it as a standard action or as the beginning of a full attack, you aren't required to do it in that order, or even always allowed this option. In particular, if you're going to be using two-weapon fighting rules (necessarily as part of a full attack), you must include the TWF penalties starting with your first swing. It's not legal to hit as a standard action (no TWF penalties) and then decide to use a full-round action for the rest of the TWF attacks.

[willpell]

I've decided on a couple more house rules to include - one I've definitely adopted and one I'm considering, and will also note one that I used to use but have drifted away from with greater experience.

* I used to double all experience points, before I figured out that leveling up doesn't really take as long as I thought. If I decide it is in fact taking too long, I may reinstate the doubling rule. Since I apply WBL pretty strictly, this probably involves just giving the players a pile of gold every time they level up so that they don't fall behind.

* I am very strongly tempted to reduce the inherent squick factor of mind-affecting powers (eg Mindrape) by saying that a victim who is unconscious no longer automatically counts as willing.

* The one actual rule for this update: Use Magic Device and Use Psionic Device are replaced with a single skill called Use Mystic Device. I don't use Psionics/Magic Transparency in my game, but it doesn't make sense to me that a player who wants to cheat to activate a magic item needs to do it in a completely different way than if it were psionic, and cannot carry any of his knowledge over between the two tasks.

Previous list:

* Any class choice which would result in a penalty to future experience gains is disallowed altogether, except by express GM permission.

* Half-elves and half-orcs gain bonus skill points as do humans. (They do not gain a feat.)

* All halflings are Strongheart Halflings, but many of them spend their bonus feat on a Halfling-only feat called "Lightfoot", which grants a +1 to all saving throws.

* The Favored Soul does not have Knowledge: Arcana as a class skill, but rather Knowledge: Religion.

* The Monk gains his final bonus feat at level 5 rather than level 6.

* The Divine Mind's Wild Talent is replaced with Hidden Talent, a feat that is not otherwise available, and thus the Divine Mind has one known power and two PP to manifest it with starting at 1st level. The Divine Mind's Psychic Aura at level 1 takes 1 minute, not 1 hour, to switch. Divine Minds do NOT need to match the alignment of their deity as clerics do (they are actually *imagining* that the deity empowers them, rather than it actually doing so; deities IMC have nothing whatsoever to do with psionics).

* The Totemist gains his second chakra bind, and the class feature "Totem chakra bind: +1 meldshaper level", at level 5 rather than level 6.

* A character with ranks in Truespeak may substitute a Truespeak check for the 20% failure chance when attempting to cast a spell while deafened. The DC for this check is 10 plus the spell level (and thus failure becomes impossible with a check total of +19); if this is too difficult the character may still roll the 20%.

* The Improved Shield Bash feat allows you to gain the +1 AC of a Buckler even while fighting with that arm, despite the fact that the Buckler doesn't actually bash.

* Craft Staff has Craft Wand as an additional prerequisite.

* You can't sleep in a Rope Trick because you have to actually keep holding onto the (seemingly infinitely-long and stretching through nothingness) rope after climbing up into the extradimensional space, which doesn't offer anything you can use as ground.

* The Virtue spell (Cleric 0, Paladin 1) grants +3 temporary hit points rather than +1.

* The Hold Portal spell adds +10 rather than +5 to the DC to break open the door.

* Body Adjustment is a Level 2, not Level 3, power on the Life Mantle list.

* Psionic Freedom of Movement is a Level 4, not Level 5, power on the Freedom Mantle list.

* Defensive Precognition's +6 pp augmentation option allows you to manifest as an immediate, not swift, action. Ditto for Thicken Skin.

* If you choose "electricity" when manifesting an Energy Retort, the retaliation bolts get a +3 bonus on their to-hit roll if the target is wearing metal armor, as is true of Energy Ray.

* Because my game does not use psionics/magic transparency, I ruled that Psionic Major Creation can create Cold Iron, unlike the Major Creation spell.

* The Diadem of Purelight soulmeld creates a light so mystically benevolent that it does not trigger the light sensitivities of orcs, drow, and similar subterranean creatures.

* The Blackguard counts Paladin (fallen) levels as well as Cleric levels toward the strength of his Aura of Evil. Paladin levels which are traded in for blackguard levels are not counted this way (though the resulting blackguard levels are).

* Rakshasas are Chaotic Evil by default.

* "Blues" are not blue, do not gain a power point, and do not have a level adjustment; they are simply a strain of goblinkind which favors intellect over nimbleness, much as the Sun Elves differ from typical High Elves.

* If anything alters your Dexterity modifier during combat, your position in the inish roster rises or falls accordingly. If you raise an opponent's Dexterity so that his Initiative rises higher than the action you do this on, it just means he is the next to act; you can't make him miss his action for the turn this way.

* Players start with the maximum possible roll for their Hit Dice as HP. I expect them not to roleplay themselves as being indestructible; they should take danger seriously, but I don't need them getting slain by a lucky crit out of the blue. This never applies to NPCs or monsters, only the heroes; they lead somewhat charmed lives, but they also have more enemies and less hope of anonymity, so it works out for Rule of Drama well enough.

* All players receive an extra "weak" feat, such as Toughness or a skill-pair +2; I will veto selections which obviously serve to qualify for a PRC earlier than is possible, but otherwise the choice is anything which has minimal effect on power but serves to better individualize the character. I'm debating extending this to my NPCs as well, as a lot of them take such feats for flavor reasons and then end up sucking at their actual jobs.[/QUOTE]

[TuggyNE]

* I am very strongly tempted to reduce the inherent squick factor of mind-affecting powers (eg Mindrape) by saying that a victim who is unconscious no longer automatically counts as willing.

It may cheer you to reflect that I, and others, don't consider this a houserule, but simple RAW; valid target for willing-only spells != voluntarily giving up saving throw. :smallwink:

[Newoblivion]

This is my rules as a DM:

you must take at list 3 levels in a class.

You must know about a PRC and you must find someone to teach it to you. There're no prerequists though, apart from RP ones.

If you never saw a creature, a spell or any other thing, then you can't imitate it via magic. AKA you can't alter self to a trogolodite if you never had the chance to really see one and learn how it looks like. Or, you can't use shadow evoc to imitate a fireball if you don't have the spell / never saw the spell.

Paladins and Rangers have more spells per day.

Casters can only cast spells or chose spells when they go up a level from the PHB. The only way for them to learn rare spells (from other sources) is by finding books and scrolls in the adventure. (even clerics and druids).

I use the fixes for the Shadowcaster. And he don't suffer the -4 to counter or dispell other magic (truely an idiotic rule).

Negative enery is always good for undead, positive is bad for them.

At the start of the game you can switch any skill you have to another skill as long as it goes with character's story. I never give UMD though, unless the class already have it.

That is it I thihk :)

[SowZ]

Oh someone mentioned leadership and it reminded me of a rule we tend to use for it if the player wishes.

Instead of gaining followers the player grants a bonus to people in his party or people who consider him to be leading in a task This starts off as a +1 at lvl 6 (if this is when the feat is taken) then another +1 every 4 lvls (lvl10 +2, lvl14 +3, Lvl18 +4...etc) this bonus counts towards AC, Saves, BA and skills. Also depending on the character who has the feat other bonuses may be granted. For example Cleric = +HP when being healed by him. Arcane caster = some SR. Rouge = Bonus on skills. Fighter = Bonus to damage. etc...

I have used this variant to great effect with my last char who was a cleric/warlock/eldritch disiple/fighter when the party ended up in the mid 20's in lvl and practically saved the world lol. My cleric was majorly focused on keeping my team alive and buffing so this worked well for him and the aprty really appreciated it.

This makes leadership even stronger now, wow.


I've decided on a couple more house rules to include - one I've definitely adopted and one I'm considering, and will also note one that I used to use but have drifted away from with greater experience.

* I used to double all experience points, before I figured out that leveling up doesn't really take as long as I thought. If I decide it is in fact taking too long, I may reinstate the doubling rule. Since I apply WBL pretty strictly, this probably involves just giving the players a pile of gold every time they level up so that they don't fall behind.

* I am very strongly tempted to reduce the inherent squick factor of mind-affecting powers (eg Mindrape) by saying that a victim who is unconscious no longer automatically counts as willing.

* The one actual rule for this update: Use Magic Device and Use Psionic Device are replaced with a single skill called Use Mystic Device. I don't use Psionics/Magic Transparency in my game, but it doesn't make sense to me that a player who wants to cheat to activate a magic item needs to do it in a completely different way than if it were psionic, and cannot carry any of his knowledge over between the two tasks.

Previous list:

* Any class choice which would result in a penalty to future experience gains is disallowed altogether, except by express GM permission.

* Half-elves and half-orcs gain bonus skill points as do humans. (They do not gain a feat.)

* All halflings are Strongheart Halflings, but many of them spend their bonus feat on a Halfling-only feat called "Lightfoot", which grants a +1 to all saving throws.

* The Favored Soul does not have Knowledge: Arcana as a class skill, but rather Knowledge: Religion.

* The Monk gains his final bonus feat at level 5 rather than level 6.

* The Divine Mind's Wild Talent is replaced with Hidden Talent, a feat that is not otherwise available, and thus the Divine Mind has one known power and two PP to manifest it with starting at 1st level. The Divine Mind's Psychic Aura at level 1 takes 1 minute, not 1 hour, to switch. Divine Minds do NOT need to match the alignment of their deity as clerics do (they are actually *imagining* that the deity empowers them, rather than it actually doing so; deities IMC have nothing whatsoever to do with psionics).

* The Totemist gains his second chakra bind, and the class feature "Totem chakra bind: +1 meldshaper level", at level 5 rather than level 6.

* A character with ranks in Truespeak may substitute a Truespeak check for the 20% failure chance when attempting to cast a spell while deafened. The DC for this check is 10 plus the spell level (and thus failure becomes impossible with a check total of +19); if this is too difficult the character may still roll the 20%.

* The Improved Shield Bash feat allows you to gain the +1 AC of a Buckler even while fighting with that arm, despite the fact that the Buckler doesn't actually bash.

* Craft Staff has Craft Wand as an additional prerequisite.

* You can't sleep in a Rope Trick because you have to actually keep holding onto the (seemingly infinitely-long and stretching through nothingness) rope after climbing up into the extradimensional space, which doesn't offer anything you can use as ground.

* The Virtue spell (Cleric 0, Paladin 1) grants +3 temporary hit points rather than +1.

* The Hold Portal spell adds +10 rather than +5 to the DC to break open the door.

* Body Adjustment is a Level 2, not Level 3, power on the Life Mantle list.

* Psionic Freedom of Movement is a Level 4, not Level 5, power on the Freedom Mantle list.

* Defensive Precognition's +6 pp augmentation option allows you to manifest as an immediate, not swift, action. Ditto for Thicken Skin.

* If you choose "electricity" when manifesting an Energy Retort, the retaliation bolts get a +3 bonus on their to-hit roll if the target is wearing metal armor, as is true of Energy Ray.

* Because my game does not use psionics/magic transparency, I ruled that Psionic Major Creation can create Cold Iron, unlike the Major Creation spell.

* The Diadem of Purelight soulmeld creates a light so mystically benevolent that it does not trigger the light sensitivities of orcs, drow, and similar subterranean creatures.

* The Blackguard counts Paladin (fallen) levels as well as Cleric levels toward the strength of his Aura of Evil. Paladin levels which are traded in for blackguard levels are not counted this way (though the resulting blackguard levels are).

* Rakshasas are Chaotic Evil by default.

* "Blues" are not blue, do not gain a power point, and do not have a level adjustment; they are simply a strain of goblinkind which favors intellect over nimbleness, much as the Sun Elves differ from typical High Elves.

* If anything alters your Dexterity modifier during combat, your position in the inish roster rises or falls accordingly. If you raise an opponent's Dexterity so that his Initiative rises higher than the action you do this on, it just means he is the next to act; you can't make him miss his action for the turn this way.

* Players start with the maximum possible roll for their Hit Dice as HP. I expect them not to roleplay themselves as being indestructible; they should take danger seriously, but I don't need them getting slain by a lucky crit out of the blue. This never applies to NPCs or monsters, only the heroes; they lead somewhat charmed lives, but they also have more enemies and less hope of anonymity, so it works out for Rule of Drama well enough.

* All players receive an extra "weak" feat, such as Toughness or a skill-pair +2; I will veto selections which obviously serve to qualify for a PRC earlier than is possible, but otherwise the choice is anything which has minimal effect on power but serves to better individualize the character. I'm debating extending this to my NPCs as well, as a lot of them take such feats for flavor reasons and then end up sucking at their actual jobs.

I presume the weak feat is expected to be used to qualify for other feats/prcs as long as it wouldn't let them qualify earlier than would otherwise be possible? Also, toughness should die a quick, painful death since Tireless is a thing and while not great is still not horrible.

[Kinsmarck]

My group and I use a few number of house rules, most of which have already been stated here. Nixing alignment and racial qualifications for PrCs, etc. The one that I haven't seen elsewhere, and that others have quirked brows at before, is our tweak of spellcasting requirements for PrCs. Rather than requiring a caster to know and cast spells of the given level (say, 3rd), we simply require them to have bonus spells available for that level. Got a +3 mod to your INT score? Sweet, now you can enter that PrC you've been eyeing.

Of course, this obviously allows for spellcasters to become more powerful and diverse early on, but our group tends to run low-to-mid level games, and we were getting frustrated with our characters never really living up to our images of them by the time the campaigns ended. This way, spellcasters can become radically different from one another much more quickly, and thus become more unique as characters. We don't really have any munchkins among us, which has kept the abuse of this system to a hardly existent minimum.

[tyckspoon]

If you never saw a creature, a spell or any other thing, then you can't immolate it via magic. AKA you can't alter self to a trogolodite if you never had the chance to really see one and learn how it looks like. Or, you can't use shadow evoc to immolate a fireball if you don't have the spell / never saw the spell.


Imitate. Immolate is usually used to refer to setting things on fire, which adventurers are quite good at doing even to things they've never seen before :smallamused:

[SowZ]

My group and I use a few number of house rules, most of which have already been stated here. Nixing alignment and racial qualifications for PrCs, etc. The one that I haven't seen elsewhere, and that others have quirked brows at before, is our tweak of spellcasting requirements for PrCs. Rather than requiring a caster to know and cast spells of the given level (say, 3rd), we simply require them to have bonus spells available for that level. Got a +3 mod to your INT score? Sweet, now you can enter that PrC you've been eyeing.

Of course, this obviously allows for spellcasters to become more powerful and diverse early on, but our group tends to run low-to-mid level games, and we were getting frustrated with our characters never really living up to our images of them by the time the campaigns ended. This way, spellcasters can become radically different from one another much more quickly, and thus become more unique as characters. We don't really have any munchkins among us, which has kept the abuse of this system to a hardly existent minimum.

I'd give equivalent flexibility to martial characters, too, for PRCs. I've actually had much more trouble getting a character concept achieved at low to mid levels with martial characters because dips and PRCs are necessary to get signature attacks and abilities. You may as well cut BAB and skill requirements to get into a PRC in half, that is no more drastic than saying spell level required should be keyed off of Int as opposed to level of casting classes.

[Pickford]

I'm not sure what you're getting at, as I already pointed out there's no text which disagrees with the table. There's a rule about ranged attacks provoking; this rule is specific to standard action attacks. There's a table entry saying full attacks do not provoke (without specifying whether those are melee or ranged attacks). No disagreement here.

And while you can (in some cases) decide after an attack whether you're making it as a standard action or as the beginning of a full attack, you aren't required to do it in that order, or even always allowed this option. In particular, if you're going to be using two-weapon fighting rules (necessarily as part of a full attack), you must include the TWF penalties starting with your first swing. It's not legal to hit as a standard action (no TWF penalties) and then decide to use a full-round action for the rest of the TWF attacks.

No the text says a full attack action. That's not an attack in and of itself, it just allows you to 'make' extra attacks beyond the first. What types of attacks you make is covered under the standard actions.

Furthermore, under the section directly below the full attack action, it describes deciding between an attack or a full attack:

"After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out."

If you were correct this wouldn't be possible because the first attack (if it were ranged) would provoke an AoO before it can be done.

i.e.this:

1) I have a bow and decide to attack you, holding off on determining which it is: If you were right, how do we determine if the threatening player has an AoO if that is required to take place 'before' the Ranged attack if it occurs at all? Answer: There is no way to do this if the Attacking player can choose to determine if they are doing a full/single attack 'after' making the first attack.

2) The text 'does' clarify this: PHB 139 under "Action Types"

"Full-round Action: A full-round action consumes all your effort during a round. The only movement you can take during a full-round action is a 5-foot step before, during, or after the action. You can also perform free actions (see below) as your DM allows. The most common type of full-round action is a full attack, which allows you to make multiple melee or ranged attacks in a single round."

Bolded for the win. The Full attack is an action which enables 'other' actions. It does not itself provoke an attack of opportunity (that would be unfair) but that doesn't mean the things you are allowed to do as a result might not. In the same way that a move action doesn't always provoke an attack of opportunity, but some do. Or the way that some feats remove provocation of attacks of opportunity from specific actions.

[Malimar]

Here are a few of the more interesting ones that I've made explicit:

At each level after first, you gain half your hit die, plus 1, plus your Constitution modifier for hit points.

Epic begins at level 10 instead of 20. After level 10, regular feat slots can be used to acquire [epic] feats. There's no epic spellcasting. You still need to meet any other requirements, e.g., epically high skill ranks (though for people who really want it, I allow a feat that lets you treat a single skill as if you had an arbitrarily high number of ranks in it for the purpose of prerequisites).

Because the revolving door of death bothers me, if a character is resurrected, they immediately age a number of years equal to 1d20 minus their Constitution modifier. (True resurrection negates this effect; the years are added to the base adult age in the case of reincarnate. Reincarnate also draws from custom lists, depending on your type.)

Bloodlines levels are just level adjustment, and can be bought off like any LA once you've taken all the ones you're required to. (I've also simplified the LA buyoff system a bit.)

For Leadership and Thrallherd, followers/believers are always limited to tier 6. You can take additional feats to expand the range of permitted classes for cohorts/thralls (Improved Cohort I expands it to tier 5, Improved Cohort II to tier 4, etc, Improved Cohort V to tier 1).

I allow a trait that lets you make two class skills permanently cross-class skills in exchange for making one cross-class skill permanently a class skill.

No XP penalty for multiclassing. Instead, you gain a bonus feat based on your racial favored class (Monastic Training, Knight Training, or a feat that lets you partially ignore alignment restrictions for your favored class).

A natural 1 on an attack is a threat for a critical fumble. If your confirmation roll would miss your target's AC, then it's a critical fumble. I use Paizo's critical hit and fumble decks for critical hits and fumbles. (I know everybody on these boards hate critical fumbles, but as far as I'm concerned you're all just joyless fun-killers; my players love them. Especially when monsters injure themselves, which they do a lot, because they get a lot more attacks than PCs do at the levels we play.)

Healers cast spontaneously from any spell they know, and know their entire spell list like a Warmage/Beguiler/etc. Their spell list is expanded (with spells mostly from SpC and BoED but also a couple other places). They can spontaneously cast any Sanctified spell (considering changing this to "they can give up spell slots in the morning to prepare Sanctified spells"). At fourth level, they may choose a domain or Turn Undead.

Ur-Priest requires Any Nonlawful and Spell Focus (any) instead of Any Evil and Spell Focus (Evil).

The Battle Blessing feat works for Blackguard spells as well as Paladin spells. A Blackguard trading in Paladin levels works like the Defiant trading in Cleric levels: you convert up to ten Paladin levels to Blackguard levels, and gain the trade-in benefit for levels traded in. Blighters can convert up to ten Druid levels to Blighter levels, though they gain no additional trade-in benefit.

I use the Giant's fix for Diplomacy, and Pathfinder's fix for all Polymorph spells. Also, to Polymorph into a creature, you have to have encountered (or at least know about, i.e., roll a knowledge check) the creature.

The Extra Spell feat lets you pick from any class list. If a spell isn't on your class list, then you treat it as a spell of the highest level of the lists it is on (excluding domains). (e.g.: Cure Critical Wounds is a Brd 4, Clr 4, Drd 5 spell. If a Wizard took it with Extra Spell, it would be added to his spell list as a Wiz 5 spell.)

I also play in a game with a number of other houserules, of which I like the DM's rule that, at every 4 levels, whenever you would gain a point in an ability score, you instead gain a point in two different ability scores. I'm considering adopting this one in my game.

[Con_Brio1993]

The problem I have with critical fumbles is if a character can injure himself on a natural one. If the fighter is able to theoretically kill himself from training on a practice dummy for several hours then something is wrong.

Slightly offtopic, but could you PM me the link for the Diplomacy fix?

[Uhtred]

I ruled long ago that Str can stand in for Cha on Intimidate checks as long as you're threatening bodily harm. There's no reason why a nine-foot Minotaur Barbarian War-Hulk with a 50 Str score and a warhammer the size of a Buick should fail his Intimidate check to convince Lord Fauntleroy not to welch on a protection payment due to an almost negative Charisma score. If he's trying to be diplomatic and nice for some reason, Cha. If he's got that hammer out and is threatening to murder Fauntleroy, Str.

[Curmudgeon]

No the text says a full attack action. That's not an attack in and of itself, it just allows you to 'make' extra attacks beyond the first. What types of attacks you make is covered under the standard actions.
Nope, that's just wrong. A full attack is not a multiple of standard action attacks. Instead, it is a multiple of attacks, which are explicitly not standard actions when you're using a full attack action. In a full attack you may make, for instance, disarm and trip attacks. Neither of these are covered in the standard action rules. The basics of how attacks (melee or ranged) work are covered at the start of the Combat chapter, before any consideration of action types.

The Full-Round Actions rules only refer to the Standard Actions section of the Combat chapter in two cases: when casting a full-round spell, and making a Charge when you're restricted to only a standard action. No part of the "Full Attack" section refers to standard actions; because the mechanics of attacks are covered outside the Standard Actions section, no such reference is necessary.

[Con_Brio1993]

I ruled long ago that Str can stand in for Cha on Intimidate checks as long as you're threatening bodily harm. There's no reason why a nine-foot Minotaur Barbarian War-Hulk with a 50 Str score and a warhammer the size of a Buick should fail his Intimidate check to convince Lord Fauntleroy not to welch on a protection payment due to an almost negative Charisma score. If he's trying to be diplomatic and nice for some reason, Cha. If he's got that hammer out and is threatening to murder Fauntleroy, Str.

Maybe the people in the DND-verse are aware enough that the sickly looking Sorcerer who can barely lift 10 pounds is a far greater threat than a Minotaur Barbarian ever could be.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Maybe the people in the DND-verse are aware enough that the sickly looking Sorcerer who can barely lift 10 pounds is a far greater threat than a Minotaur Barbarian ever could be.

And no small number of people are far more afraid of bad things happening to people and things they care about than they are of having simple physical pain inflicted on them or even being mangled or killed.

[Uhtred]

Maybe the people in the DND-verse are aware enough that the sickly looking Sorcerer who can barely lift 10 pounds is a far greater threat than a Minotaur Barbarian ever could be.

That depends on levels and Op. I've seen that particular Minotaur do some terrifying things, and by the time he'd maxed out his War-Hulk levels he had murdered most of a country and shrugged off the magic users who tried to stop him. People don't give warriors the credit they deserve sometimes.

[Con_Brio1993]

That depends on levels and Op. I've seen that particular Minotaur do some terrifying things, and by the time he'd maxed out his War-Hulk levels he had murdered most of a country and shrugged off the magic users who tried to stop him. People don't give warriors the credit they deserve sometimes.

I was being facetious honestly. Having seen a Frenzied Barbarian charger build in action, I'm well aware of the sheer damage warriors can dish out.

[Gildedragon]

On Magic Ammunition:

You get 5 not 50 pieces of magic ammo, but it is not destroyed on impact.
You get 10 not 50 pieces of masterwork ammo, but it only has a 50% chance of being destroyed on hitting a target

[SowZ]

Maybe the people in the DND-verse are aware enough that the sickly looking Sorcerer who can barely lift 10 pounds is a far greater threat than a Minotaur Barbarian ever could be.

Of course, in that case Int could be put in place of Cha, too, since the wizard is even more terrifying. Regardless, I use intimidate as more of an interrogation skill/psychology based skill which is why I fluff it as Charisma. People who think they can withstand the interrogation and take the pain. As for actually intimidating people without touching them or having them restrained, I roleplay it out. I factor in the race, reputation, strength, etc. of the party or character to decide if someone is intimidated. Typically, no role is required at all.

You can use intimidate to 'act' crazy or to try and come off as bloodthirsty or strong or terrifying, which is acting so Charisma works, if you wish. For that reason, I keep intimidate under Cha. I'd much rather Conan the Barbarian have me in a room to get information from me than Dr. Elderlyweakling McMadnazi.

[Uhtred]

You can use intimidate to 'act' crazy or to try and come off as bloodthirsty or strong or terrifying, which is acting so Charisma works, if you wish. For that reason, I keep intimidate under Cha. I'd much rather Conan the Barbarian have me in a room to get information from me than Dr. Elderlyweakling McMadnazi.

In the case of the Minotaur Barbarian (and most Barbarians, I've found) he's not acting. There is no "Does this Minotaur ACTUALLY want to add my spine to his spine-pile, or does he just want to know where I hide my cash box?" There's no doubt there. No question, really. If a party was so incredibly desperate as to have the Minotaur interrogate me, they've tried everything else (Or don't have time to work me over mentally) then they're serious about letting him eat me. And that 50 Str (physically evident in a War Hulk) means he can back up his threats.

Also in the books, Conan was a Rogue. For whom Charisma would be a vital stat.

[Pickford]

Nope, that's just wrong. A full attack is not a multiple of standard action attacks. Instead, it is a multiple of attacks, which are explicitly not standard actions when you're using a full attack action. In a full attack you may make, for instance, disarm and trip attacks. Neither of these are covered in the standard action rules. The basics of how attacks (melee or ranged) work are covered at the start of the Combat chapter, before any consideration of action types.

Oh I get it, you're just pulling my leg. Facepalm.

If you're serious that you believe that to be the case, I can only recommend you open up the page on combat and read them start to finish rather than referring to a very tiny subset of the rules which have apparently confused you into thinking that attacks made 'through' a full attack action are magical attacks allowed to ignore the rules of the game.


The Full-Round Actions rules only refer to the Standard Actions section of the Combat chapter in two cases: when casting a full-round spell, and making a Charge when you're restricted to only a standard action. No part of the "Full Attack" section refers to standard actions; because the mechanics of attacks are covered outside the Standard Actions section, no such reference is necessary.

Actually the section titled "Full-Round Actions" on page 143 of the PHB is quite explicit about what a full attack action is and isn't.

I will quote it in full so you can see that you are completely wrong:

"FULL-ROUND ACTIONS
A full-round action requires an entire round to complete. Thus, it can't be coupled with a standard or a move action, though if it does not involve moving any distance, you can take a 5-foot step."

A brief pause here: Note the bolded/highlighted and remember this, if attacks of opportunity always occur just prior to the actions that trigger them (and they do) then being able to retroactively change a full action (if we accepted your logic, though I do not) would be make it impossible to actually carry out combat. We'd be constantly undoing rolls to allow an AoO which would undo damage done if it interrupted ranged attacks. This becomes important later in the section.

"Full Attack
If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough, because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon (see Two-Weapon Fighting under Special Attacks, page 160), or for some special reason (such as a feat or a magic item), you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your atacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning later ones.
The only movement you can take during a full attack is a 5-foot step. You may take the step before, after, or between your attacks. If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first. If you are using a double weapon, you can strike with either part of the weapon first."

Another brief comment: I bolded the part about the only movement, it becomes important in this next section to the overall point that a full attack is quite clearly not a determinant in if your attacks made do or do not cause an Attack of Opportunity.

"Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack: After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out. If you've already taken a 5-foot step, you can't use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different move action."

If the above all holds true then it would be possible, according to you, to Make a ranged attack, receive an Attack of Opportunity, then if that hits claim 'Oh no, I'm doing a full attack' and retroactively negate the attack. Similarly, a player could claim to be doing a full attack, hit, and then decide not to continue and evade an attack of opportunity. WTF?!

No, no, a thousand times no. The whole point of having a list of standard actions is to allow 'some' kind of offensive ability before or after using a move action.

If that were the only way to attack, nobody could ever do multiple attacks because everyone is limited to one standard action a round. If the full attack worked the way you want it to, attacks of opportunity would never work/happen, there would be time paradoxes and the entire universe might collapse!

[Inucune]

aside from the house rules that are targeted at specific people...
-no kenders (dragonlance)
-rule 0 applies
-if it doesn't make sense, you can't do it.(regardless of the rules.)
-no 'seven deadly sins' campaign...we've tried, it doesn't work (with our group anyway)
-No geometrical shapes (our DM took us through the hypercube, it ended badly.)
-depending on the campaign, use the same enchanting table for both armor and weapons.

[SowZ]

In the case of the Minotaur Barbarian (and most Barbarians, I've found) he's not acting. There is no "Does this Minotaur ACTUALLY want to add my spine to his spine-pile, or does he just want to know where I hide my cash box?" There's no doubt there. No question, really. If a party was so incredibly desperate as to have the Minotaur interrogate me, they've tried everything else (Or don't have time to work me over mentally) then they're serious about letting him eat me. And that 50 Str (physically evident in a War Hulk) means he can back up his threats.

Also in the books, Conan was a Rogue. For whom Charisma would be a vital stat.

That's my point. I wouldn't make the Minotaur roll for Intimidate at all. I would roleplay out if NPC X would surrender or be shaken if they encountered someone who they thought could and would want to kill them. The Minotaur? It's intimidating. No roll required.

The halfling bard who wants to convince some guard that he is crazy and vicious enough to be intimidating? That's what the skill is for, in my games. It is to make yourself seem more intimidating than you already are. It isn't required to just be your own, intimidating self. Just like you don't need to roll to sound like you are telling the truth when you are speaking honestly.

Also, intimidate isn't used for torture/interrogation scenes where you rip the dude's spine out or chop off his hands. Anyone can do that, no skill required, and MOST people will always surrender to it. The intimidate skill for interrogation is used for subtle tortures. Proper use of anticipation and the 'exact' application of force needed to cause the most pain and fear. You use the barbarian on interrogating most dudes. You use the intimidator on well trained, mentally resilient enemies.

[Greenish]

In the case of the Minotaur Barbarian (and most Barbarians, I've found) he's not acting. There is no "Does this Minotaur ACTUALLY want to add my spine to his spine-pile, or does he just want to know where I hide my cash box?" There's no doubt there. No question, really. If a party was so incredibly desperate as to have the Minotaur interrogate me, they've tried everything else (Or don't have time to work me over mentally) then they're serious about letting him eat me. And that 50 Str (physically evident in a War Hulk) means he can back up his threats.There is actually a bonus to Intimidate from being larger than the target. That does help a bit.


[Edit]:
Oh I get it, you're just pulling my leg. Facepalm.
If the above all holds true then it would be possible, according to you, to Make a ranged attack, receive an Attack of Opportunity, then if that hits claim 'Oh no, I'm doing a full attack' and retroactively negate the attack. Similarly, a player could claim to be doing a full attack, hit, and then decide not to continue and evade an attack of opportunity. WTF?!"It doesn't make sense" is not an RAW argument. RAW is full of inane, plainly stupid things.

[Pickford]

[Edit]: "It doesn't make sense" is not an RAW argument. RAW is full of inane, plainly stupid things.

The text makes sense, however Curmudgeon is deliberately (I hope?) misreading it.

Full Attack Action allows you to do multiple attacks which otherwise would be standard actions if done on their own.

If you want you can do 'one' attack and move OR do many attacks and not move. That's the entire distinction that a full attack action provides and it has no bearing on if your attacks cause attacks of opportunity.

Doing a full attack action doesn't stop any of the attacks made from being the attacks made.

[Greenish]

I'll not sink my spoon into that soup, I was just pointing out that reductio ad absurdum doesn't work when arguing RAW.

[TuggyNE]

The text makes sense, however Curmudgeon is deliberately (I hope?) misreading it.

Curmudgeon is well-known for being extremely careful to separate RAW and RAI (and RACSD, though he doesn't use the term much if at all). He's also generally quite careful to get a strict RAW reading correct, however illogical it may seem.

You are, of course, free to disagree with him on exactly what the text says, but it's not often terribly productive. And in this case in particular, why bother? As long as everyone agrees on what it should say if written properly, the only thing you're really arguing is whether it was written well to begin with.

[Pickford]

Curmudgeon is well-known for being extremely careful to separate RAW and RAI (and RACSD, though he doesn't use the term much if at all). He's also generally quite careful to get a strict RAW reading correct, however illogical it may seem.

You are, of course, free to disagree with him on exactly what the text says, but it's not often terribly productive. And in this case in particular, why bother? As long as everyone agrees on what it should say if written properly, the only thing you're really arguing is whether it was written well to begin with.

What you've just done is made an appeal to authority. You may not know this, but it's a logical fallacy.

I am also careful to correctly read the rules as written. As written full attack action provides the opportunity to carry out multiple attacks. Taking that opportunity provides NO attack of opportunity in and of itself. That is correct.

However, that doesn't provide immunity if one of the attacks used causes a provoke. Nowhere is it written that it provides immunity to AoO for ranged attacks made. Therefore saying it does is NOT RAW nor RAI. It's a misreading of the material at hand.

Choosing to continue and ignore that when presented with the obvious truth is just hubris and pride.

As to why I would continue and argue the point? I don't know, because it's true? Why argue a position that isn't true? Curmudgeon?

[willpell]

I presume the weak feat is expected to be used to qualify for other feats/prcs as long as it wouldn't let them qualify earlier than would otherwise be possible?

This is not really a relevant question as far as I can tell, unless you're asking about qualifying for multiple simultaneous PRCs. If you want to get into Dwarven Defender you need Dodge, Endurance, and Toughness; at least one of those is a "weak" feat (they're all weak, but Dodge and Endurance are prerequisites for Spring Attack and Diehard, so I'm waffling on whether it's reasonable to let them be "free"). Dwarven Defender also has a +7 BAB prereq so that's not a problem. However if we pretend that instead of +7 BAB it required Weapon Specialization (which has Weapon Focus as a prerequisite), then a dwarf fighter (who isn't a human) would need to take Dodge and Weapon Focus at level 1, Toughness at level 2, Endurance at level 3, and Weapon Spec at level 4. That's still not a problem, but if the prerequisites also included one more feat on top of that (Diehard perhaps), then that massive pile of required feats would delay entering the PRC until after level 6. And I wouldn't want to screw that up by giving a feat away that lets you enter after level 4.


Also, toughness should die a quick, painful death since Tireless is a thing and while not great is still not horrible.

Never heard of Tireless. I know Improved Toughness is much stronger than Toughness, but it does have to wait a long time to show up. Since my game includes Magic of Incarnum, I usually use Azure Toughness, which is potentially multiple instances of toughness if you get some more essentia somehow (they count as temporary HP, so it's not quite as good if you have a healer in the party which you should, but at low levels it's good enough).


aside from the house rules that are targeted at specific people...

Wow, you must have a really friendly group... :smalltongue:


-if it doesn't make sense, you can't do it.(regardless of the rules.)

I wish every group would have this rule.


-no 'seven deadly sins' campaign...we've tried, it doesn't work (with our group anyway)

I have no idea what this is but it sounds awesome.


-No geometrical shapes (our DM took us through the hypercube, it ended badly.)

Okay now you're just pulling our legs right? If not, I seriously want to know how this even came up as a concept.

[Pickford]

Nope, that's just wrong. A full attack is not a multiple of standard action attacks. Instead, it is a multiple of attacks, which are explicitly not standard actions when you're using a full attack action. In a full attack you may make, for instance, disarm and trip attacks. Neither of these are covered in the standard action rules. The basics of how attacks (melee or ranged) work are covered at the start of the Combat chapter, before any consideration of action types.

The Full-Round Actions rules only refer to the Standard Actions section of the Combat chapter in two cases: when casting a full-round spell, and making a Charge when you're restricted to only a standard action. No part of the "Full Attack" section refers to standard actions; because the mechanics of attacks are covered outside the Standard Actions section, no such reference is necessary.

I just read through the section you referred to.

Riddle me this: There are only two types of attack rolls listed:

"Melee Attack Roll" and "Ranged Attack Roll" on the Combat Basics Page (135)

If Full Attack is in fact an action. How do you use it? Because otherwise there are no rules for it.

Further, how does one explain "The most common full-round action is a full attack, which allows you to make multiple melee or ranged attacks in a single round." "Making a ranged attack provokes attacks of opportunity from opponents that threaten you" "Actions that provoke attacks of opportunity include moving (except as noted below), casting a spell, and attacking with a ranged weapon." "Some actions, when performed in a threatened square, provoke attacks of opportunity as you divert your attention from the battle. Casting a spell and attacking with a ranged weapon, for example, are distracting actions."

Incidentally, I note you keep pointing to the table. The reason the standard actions say yes/no are because there's no default scenario in which a threatened square doing ranged doesn't provoke and no default scenario in which a melee attack doesn't.

I would also point out this: The Chart says Charge does not provoke an attack of opportunity. But the diagram on pg. 138 clearly indicates a charging Tordek does.

[Curmudgeon]

As written full attack action provides the opportunity to carry out multiple attacks. Taking that opportunity provides NO attack of opportunity in and of itself. That is correct.

However, that doesn't provide immunity if one of the attacks used causes a provoke. Nowhere is it written that it provides immunity to AoO for ranged attacks made.
That highlighted sentence assumes something which is not proven to exist: a general rule stating ranged attacks provoke AoOs. Only if there were a general provocation for all ranged attacks would an exception ("immunity") be needed. (The term "immunity" isn't used anywhere in the Combat chapter, nor in any of the related Glossary entries like "attack", "attack of opportunity", "full attack", or "ranged attack"; that makes it a rather confusing term in this discussion.)

The only rule stating that ranged attacks provoke is in the Standard Actions section of the Combat chapter, and a matching Standard Action section entry in Table 8–2: Actions in Combat. This makes it a rule specific to standard action attacks. We also have the Full-Round Action section of Table 8–2: Actions in Combat specifying that full attacks (without qualification) do not provoke. This is another specific rule. Absent any general rule about ranged attacks and AoOs, both specific rules are correct in their separate contexts, without any disagreement in the RAW.

[Pickford]

That highlighted sentence assumes something which is not proven to exist: a general rule stating ranged attacks provoke AoOs. Only if there were a general provocation for all ranged attacks would an exception ("immunity") be needed. (The term "immunity" isn't used anywhere in the Combat chapter, nor in any of the related Glossary entries like "attack", "attack of opportunity", "full attack", or "ranged attack"; that makes it a rather confusing term in this discussion.)

The only rule stating that ranged attacks provoke is in the Standard Actions section of the Combat chapter, and a matching Standard Action section entry in Table 8–2: Actions in Combat. This makes it a rule specific to standard action attacks. We also have the Full-Round Action section of Table 8–2: Actions in Combat specifying that full attacks (without qualification) do not provoke. This is another specific rule. Absent any general rule about ranged attacks and AoOs, both specific rules are correct in their separate contexts, without any disagreement in the RAW.

Hold up, that 'is' a general rule. page 137 Attacks of Opportunity topic, subsection Provoking an Attack of Opportunity, ranged attacks are classified as distracting acts and thus provoke. That's prior to even the discusison of types of actions. So no, it's not only in the Standard Actions section.

Full Attack actions don't provoke because then (assuming a high enough dex and combat reflexes) you would provoke 1 attack for doing them even if all your attacks were melee. Which is nonsense. If you did 5 ranged attacks, you'd end up provoking 6 attacks!

RAW is that ranged attacks as distracting acts provoke. There's no exception given under full attack action, therefore comitting any kind of ranged attack using that action continues, as normal, to be a distracting act which provokes. QED.

[TuggyNE]

What you've just done is made an appeal to authority. You may not know this, but it's a logical fallacy.

I am, in fact, aware; I don't especially care what the precise reading of 3.5 RAW is here (although on balance I suspect it's a bit messed up, if only because I'm quite jaded about WotC editing). What I do care about is putting energy into useful discussions instead of rehashing stuff that is not massively important, and I also wanted to remind you not to confuse "this is how it works" with "this is how it obviously should work". The bit about Curmudgeon usually being right was merely a friendly note. :smalltongue:

[Curmudgeon]

Hold up, that 'is' a general rule. page 137 Attacks of Opportunity topic, subsection Provoking an Attack of Opportunity, ranged attacks are classified as distracting acts and thus provoke. That's prior to even the discusison of types of actions.
Your paraphrase removes the context. Here's the full paragraph:
Performing a Distracting Act: Some actions, when performed in a threatened square, provoke attacks of opportunity as you divert your attention from the battle. Casting a spell and attacking with a ranged weapon, for example, are distracting actions. Table 8–2: Actions in Combat notes many of the actions that provoke attacks of opportunity. These examples are first qualified by noting that some actions provoke, and following them you are referred to the table for further details. So, certainly, some spellcasting provokes AoOs as do some ranged attacks; Table 8–2 lists which ones. But note from the various table entries that casting some spells definitely will not provoke AoOs, and some ranged attacks similarly do not provoke.

In addition to confusing a list of examples with a limiting specification, you've taken another logical leap by equating distracting actions with actions which necessarily provoke attacks of opportunity ("ranged attacks are classified as distracting acts and thus provoke"). That's an unwarranted assumption (an example of "post hoc, ergo propter hoc"). The actual text (quoted above) simply follows the discussion of distracting actions by stating that many provoking actions are noted on the table. As cited, some actions which divert your attention provoke AoOs. The "and thus" clause you've used is your own invention, not backed by the RAW.

[Pickford]

Your paraphrase removes the context. Here's the full paragraph: These examples are first qualified by noting that some actions provoke, and following them you are referred to the table for further details. So, certainly, some spellcasting provokes AoOs as do some ranged attacks; Table 8–2 lists which ones. But note from the various table entries that casting some spells definitely will not provoke AoOs, and some ranged attacks similarly do not provoke.

No, table 8-2 lists many actions that provoke. Many is not 'all'. The entire paragraph is describing distracting actions and indicating that those are actions which provoke then declaring ranged attacks are distracting actions. There is no wiggle room here.


In addition to confusing a list of examples with a limiting specification, you've taken another logical leap by equating distracting actions with actions which necessarily provoke attacks of opportunity ("ranged attacks are classified as distracting acts and thus provoke").

Wow. So you're trying to assert, without evidence, that the first sentence of the paragraph titled Provoking an Attack of Opportunity and which describes the two kinds of actions which provoke "moving out of a threatened square and performing an action within a threatened square." is completely unrelated to its two subsections: Moving: and Performing a Distracting Act: which describe distracting actions as those which provoke attacks of opportunity and ranged attacks as distracting actions....???

I don't care if you want to make up a house-rule for something ranged attacks don't provoke, but RAW they do so that's a house-rule to remove it.


That's an unwarranted assumption (an example of "post hoc, ergo propter hoc"). The actual text (quoted above) simply follows the discussion of distracting actions by stating that many provoking actions are noted on the table. As cited, some actions which divert your attention provoke AoOs. The "and thus" clause you've used is your own invention, not backed by the RAW.

No, the quoted text states outright that there are distracting actions and that distracting actions provoke. It then points out two very specific examples of distracting actions casting a spell and attacking with a ranged weapon. Case closed. If you ranged attack you provoke.

Hey guess what doesn't provoke? Choosing to make a full attack action. Totally right. But guess what does? If you make a ranged attack during a full attack action, cause the ranged attack is distracting and, as everyone who was paying attention knows by now, distracting acts provoke. So you can avoid provoking during a full attack by 'not' attacking with a ranged weapon. Just melee.

Also you misused the term post hoc ergo propter hoc. That means when you see something happen, see something else happen consequently and then assume the first action caused the second.

For example, you push a button and then the lights go out and then assume that the button turns off the lights. (Which may not be the case, say the electricity went out).

What we have here is that we're told a class if things do something...so they do. There's no observation of a second event nor an assumption being made.

Though you are making an assumption when you say full attack's allow you to do anything that provokes an attack of opportunity...because they let you make attacks and some attacks provoke.

[Curmudgeon]

Performing a Distracting Act: Some actions, when performed in a threatened square, provoke attacks of opportunity as you divert your attention from the battle. Casting a spell and attacking with a ranged weapon, for example, are distracting actions. Table 8–2: Actions in Combat notes many of the actions that provoke attacks of opportunity.
The entire paragraph is describing distracting actions and indicating that those are actions which provoke then declaring ranged attacks are distracting actions. There is no wiggle room here.
The second sentence lists two example actions which are distracting: casting a spell, and a ranged attack. The following sentence refers us to the table. When we look at the table, we find an instance where casting a spell does provoke (Standard Action section), and an instance where casting a spell does not provoke (Free Action section). Similarly, we find an instance where a ranged attack does provoke (Standard Action section), and an instance where a ranged attack does not provoke (Full-Round Action section). Because both examples of distracting actions appear on the table in provoking and non-provoking forms, we've got plenty of "wiggle room". That is, there is no guarantee that a distracting act will provoke an attack of opportunity.

I don't care if you want to make up a house-rule for something ranged attacks don't provoke, but RAW they do so that's a house-rule to remove it.

No, the quoted text states outright that there are distracting actions and that distracting actions provoke. It then points out two very specific examples of distracting actions casting a spell and attacking with a ranged weapon. Case closed. If you ranged attack you provoke.
On the contrary, I've just provided evidence that the distracting actions of casting a spell and making a ranged attack only provoke AoOs when the rules say so. Your assertion that there is a general rule somewhere stating that ranged attacks always provoke remains unfounded. (Also, where is the general rule stating that casting a spell always provokes? If you're using the paragraph quoted above as the basis of your argument, you need to establish a necessary link between both of these example distracting acts and provocation of AoOs.)

Also you misused the term post hoc ergo propter hoc. That means when you see something happen, see something else happen consequently and then assume the first action caused the second.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc means "after this, therefore on account of this". The Latin phrase says nothing about events or the observation thereof; that's merely the most common context in which the phrase is used. I used the phrase literally rather than in the limited colloquy of debate.

[SowZ]

This is not really a relevant question as far as I can tell, unless you're asking about qualifying for multiple simultaneous PRCs. If you want to get into Dwarven Defender you need Dodge, Endurance, and Toughness; at least one of those is a "weak" feat (they're all weak, but Dodge and Endurance are prerequisites for Spring Attack and Diehard, so I'm waffling on whether it's reasonable to let them be "free"). Dwarven Defender also has a +7 BAB prereq so that's not a problem. However if we pretend that instead of +7 BAB it required Weapon Specialization (which has Weapon Focus as a prerequisite), then a dwarf fighter (who isn't a human) would need to take Dodge and Weapon Focus at level 1, Toughness at level 2, Endurance at level 3, and Weapon Spec at level 4. That's still not a problem, but if the prerequisites also included one more feat on top of that (Diehard perhaps), then that massive pile of required feats would delay entering the PRC until after level 6. And I wouldn't want to screw that up by giving a feat away that lets you enter after level 4.



Never heard of Tireless. I know Improved Toughness is much stronger than Toughness, but it does have to wait a long time to show up. Since my game includes Magic of Incarnum, I usually use Azure Toughness, which is potentially multiple instances of toughness if you get some more essentia somehow (they count as temporary HP, so it's not quite as good if you have a healer in the party which you should, but at low levels it's good enough).



Wow, you must have a really friendly group... :smalltongue:



I wish every group would have this rule.



I have no idea what this is but it sounds awesome.



Okay now you're just pulling our legs right? If not, I seriously want to know how this even came up as a concept.

Sorry, I meant to say Endurance, not toughness. Tireless is a feat that counts as Endurance for sake of feat pre-reqs but is just a better feat.

[Story]

I wish every group would have this rule.


But being able to do silly things can also be a lot of fun. In our last session, the ranger somehow managed to fire two bolts out of a giant ballista that normally takes a full round to reload thanks to Rapid Shot.

[molten_dragon]

Yeah, I use quite a few of them.

I have a modified skill system I use with a lot fewer skills.
I also use the pathfinder way of doing class skill vs. cross-class skills
I use weapon groups rather than simple/martial/exotic
I use action points
No multiclassing penalties
Fractional BAB and saves
I don't pay attention to multiclassing XP penalties
I waive alignment requirements when they're stupid.
You don't die until you reach negative CON score rather than -10.
You can use part of your action to take an action that takes less time. So for example you could use your standard action to take another move action (i.e. double move, already allowed by the rules) or you could use your move action to take another swift action. So if you wanted to you could just use 3 swift actions in a round.

I also ignore a lot of the minutiae in the game when it doesn't add something fun. Tracking mundane ammunition for example or the weight of coins. I also typically ignore all the rules about wizards and scribing in their spellbooks. And I'm not strict about item creation times for people who want to make magic items.

[Story]

In our game, Clerics are spontaneous casters. As if they weren't ridiculous enough already. Methinks the DM has seen too many healbots.

[Greenish]

In our game, Clerics are spontaneous casters. As if they weren't ridiculous enough already. Methinks the DM has seen too many healbots.You mean they can spontaneously cast anything on cleric spell list? :smalleek:

[Story]

Yes. I'm not sure how domain spells are handled.

[Greenish]

Yes. I'm not sure how domain spells are handled.I can sort of see how someone frustrated on the whole party waiting for specific spells like Cure Disease or Remove Curse to be readied might think it a good idea, but… :smallyuk:

[hymer]

How many of your players take a 1 level dip in Factorum at the start?

None, obviously. Or he wouldn't use that rule. Once a player does it, the rule goes, and all the other players get annoyed at the dipping player because they lose a houserule they liked and which worked for their game. :smallsmile:

[Pickford]

The second sentence lists two example actions which are distracting: casting a spell, and a ranged attack. The following sentence refers us to the table. When we look at the table, we find an instance where casting a spell does provoke (Standard Action section), and an instance where casting a spell does not provoke (Free Action section). Similarly, we find an instance where a ranged attack does provoke (Standard Action section), and an instance where a ranged attack does not provoke (Full-Round Action section). Because both examples of distracting actions appear on the table in provoking and non-provoking forms, we've got plenty of "wiggle room". That is, there is no guarantee that a distracting act will provoke an attack of opportunity.

On the contrary, I've just provided evidence that the distracting actions of casting a spell and making a ranged attack only provoke AoOs when the rules say so. Your assertion that there is a general rule somewhere stating that ranged attacks always provoke remains unfounded. (Also, where is the general rule stating that casting a spell always provokes? If you're using the paragraph quoted above as the basis of your argument, you need to establish a necessary link between both of these example distracting acts and provocation of AoOs.)

Post hoc ergo propter hoc means "after this, therefore on account of this". The Latin phrase says nothing about events or the observation thereof; that's merely the most common context in which the phrase is used. I used the phrase literally rather than in the limited colloquy of debate.

That table doesn't say the ranged attack doesn't provoke, it says a full attack doesn't provoke. A full attack doesn't 'do' any attacks it lets you do attacks. The attacks you actually commit, if ranged, still provoke.

You're reading more into the table than is actually written.

Edit:

Full Attack is an action that enables other actions. The initial action does not (and reliably should not) provoke. The unlocked actions are normal.

Further edit:
Casting a spell always provokes. Casting a quickened spell is a different and non-provoking action. It being a free action has no bearing on the provoking, only that it is quickened. If you read the feat it explains that the feat is the reason.

Full attack provides no such exception it just lets you do many attacks. Those attacks may (or may not) provoke for their own reasons.

[SowZ]

I can sort of see how someone frustrated on the whole party waiting for specific spells like Cure Disease or Remove Curse to be readied might think it a good idea, but… :smallyuk:

I actually do the same thing, make clerics spontaneous. But I restrict them only to healing spells like Cure X, Remove Curse, Restoration, etc. and domain spells, where each cleric picks one domain from their god and they have access to that domain and fill the slots normally. Being a healbot is a bit more applicable in my games, though, since I max all healing spells healing. Potions still get rolled.

But then again, I max HD, so you have more to heal in the first place.

[Greenish]

Casting a spell always provokes.Unless the spell's casting time is swift action. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#swiftActions)


I actually do the same thing, make clerics spontaneous. But I restrict them only to healing spells like Cure X, Remove Curse, Restoration, etc. and domain spells, where each cleric picks one domain from their god and they have access to that domain and fill the slots normally.Do you mean that they can cast said spells spontaneously (by replacing a prepared spell) and have prepare spells in their slots normally, or that they're spontaneous casters who only know healing spells and spells from one domain?

[Pickford]

Unless the spell's casting time is swift action. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#swiftActions)

Do you mean that they can cast said spells spontaneously (by replacing a prepared spell) and have prepare spells in their slots normally, or that they're spontaneous casters who only know healing spells and spells from one domain?

Are we not discussing just the PHB? :smallwink:

So the point still stands, swift is a noted exception to AoO. But it takes that to apply, if a sorceror or bard cast a swift spell as meta-magic it would no long be swift and provoke.

[Greenish]

Are we not discussing just the PHB? :smallwink:I admit I have kept only a casual eye on the whole argument, but why would you? :smallconfused:

[RebelRogue]

One that came up recently: Trap sense also grants the ability not to be considered flatfooted vs. unseen traps. That way the dodge bonus the class feature grants may actually be applied.

[SowZ]

Unless the spell's casting time is swift action. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#swiftActions)

Do you mean that they can cast said spells spontaneously (by replacing a prepared spell) and have prepare spells in their slots normally, or that they're spontaneous casters who only know healing spells and spells from one domain?

This is something I did on one occasion. It was a group that was pretty new to D&D, and I made some class alterations. I did away with Vancian casting for the cleric, excepting domains, and limited the list to healing spells. Since healing is pretty weak and I maxed out HD, I gave spells max healing.

It actually worked really well. It took out a lot of prep and rolling time.

[Greenish]

I did away with Vancian casting for the cleric, excepting domains, and limited the list to healing spells. Since healing is pretty weak and I maxed out HD, I gave spells max healing.

It actually worked really well. It took out a lot of prep and rolling time.I'm still not sure of what you did. Do you mean prepared casting when you say "Vancian"? Did the clerics just prepare all their slots with domain spells? :smallconfused:

The more you explain, the more confused I become.

[SowZ]

I'm still not sure of what you did. Do you mean prepared casting when you say "Vancian"? Did the clerics just prepare all their slots with domain spells? :smallconfused:

The more you explain, the more confused I become.

Sorry, sorry. Simply put, domain slots worked the same as normal. Domain spells could not be used in normal spell slots, but were otherwise unchanged.

I took away prepared casting since it was too complicated for the new player, I thought, and the system was always a bit wonky in my mind. Basically, I let her spontaneously cast all cleric spells she knew, which I limited to only the healing spells. So, if she had a 2nd level spell slot, she could cast any 2nd level or 1st level healing spell with it. I also didn't roll for amount healed, it was always maxed out. But people had max hit dice, too, so they had more HP to start with.

[Pickford]

One that came up recently: Trap sense also grants the ability not to be considered flatfooted vs. unseen traps. That way the dodge bonus the class feature grants may actually be applied.

That's what Uncanny dodge is for...which Barbarians get the level prior and rogues one level after.

[Lord Il Palazzo]

Just remembered a couple more from my group:
For any hit die that comes from class levels, a character receives at least half of the maximum hit points. (If your hit die is a d4, you reroll all 1s and 2s. If it's a d6, you reroll anything 3 or lower and so on.)

The Identify spell identifies one item per caster level (max of five), rather than just one item.

A half-orc receives a +1 racial bonus on Intimidate checks (i.e. enough to offset the -2 racial penalty to charisma).

Class skills for racial hit dice are negotiable. There's no reason a culture of fire giants that values magic might not have Spellcraft instead of Climb as a class skill or that an individual who was raised in the wilderness might not have Survival on the list. (This is mostly to allow NPCs with lots of racial hit dice to use more interesting prestige classes and play less like stereotypes but is open to player characters if it's ever applicable.)

Inexpensive material components for spells are negotiable. If you want Hideous Laughter to use cupcakes instead of tarts or Color Spray to use a string of colorful beads instead of pinches or red, blue and yellow sand, I've got no objections. This provides no bonus or penalty to identifying spells based on seeing components and is entirely for fluff.

[Curmudgeon]

I've also got some rules for character generation, and for spellcasters; this is my attempt at slightly reducing class imbalance.

There's no rolling for any part of character creation. Adjust the points available for point buy based on the Tier System for Classes (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=266559):

15 point buy (This is where the Wizard is.)
22 point buy
28 point buy
32 point buy
40 point buy (This is where the Monk is.)
You might try 50 here, but really: just skip characters this weak. :smallsigh:
This assumes PCs are going to start in their primary class. If they change the primary class in later levels they'd retroactively lose points if necessary, but would never retroactively gain points.
There are no metamagic cost reducers of any kind, and certainly no "free" metamagic (ex: Incantatrix), so that influences character creation.
Beyond those spells that a class gets for free, spell access is limited. Wizards have free choice of 2 spells per level, and everything else is hard to get. The same goes for Sorcerers who want to swap out spells. Scrolls are 1/10th as common in treasure, and the costs for buying scrolls on the rare occasion that they're offered for sale are 5x as high as in standard rules. Finding someone who will allow copying their spellbook is rare, and the fees are at minimum 10x as high. Even finding out the name of a particular spell that will accomplish some desired aim can involve a quest for a spellcasting character, because magical knowledge is hoarded. Again, this is important to get out there before players create their characters, and occasionally a higher-level build will be dependent on using some spell at level-up time.
Above level 1, there's still no rolling allowed. Use average + ½ on each HD after first level:
3 HP for each d4 http://home.comcast.net/~ftm3/ASMoNM/d4.gif
4 HP for each d6 http://home.comcast.net/~ftm3/ASMoNM/d6.gif
5 HP for each d8 http://home.comcast.net/~ftm3/ASMoNM/d8.gif
6 HP for each d10 http://home.comcast.net/~ftm3/ASMoNM/d10.gif
7 HP for each d12 http://home.comcast.net/~ftm3/ASMoNM/d12.gif
Standard Wealth by Level for character generation. Builds at higher levels can't include items until they're below half that level's allowed wealth. I don't expect WbL to be maintained across all characters afterward; that's a function how the players run their characters.

[Suddo]

I believe Pathfinder is the most common house rule. To give you a quick list of things I can think of that they do that are cool:
You die at -Con
No half skill point stuff. You can keep how it works in 3.5 with total not exceeding half or do what pathfinder does and give +3 to any skill you have a point in that is also a class skill.
Fly as a skill is interesting.
Compacted skills. Perception is spot + search + listen. This is easy to convert over.
Pathfinder races are nice. It makes humans not such a default class.
No multiclass penalties instead there are Favored class bonuses.
The pathfinder Trait system is fun.
Buffing Toughness and dodge.
I also like the core classes better in Pathfinder.
More Feats.

There are probably some more but these are the ones I can think of.

[AuraTwilight]

Yea, except Pathfinder is a published system and thus outside the bounds of what this thread is requesting, so can we not just senselessly pimp Pathfinder in every thread?

[Story]

Beyond those spells that a class gets for free, spell access is limited. Wizards have free choice of 2 spells per level, and everything else is hard to get. The same goes for Sorcerers who want to swap out spells. Scrolls are 1/10th as common in treasure, and the costs for buying scrolls on the rare occasion that they're offered for sale are 5x as high as in standard rules. Finding someone who will allow copying their spellbook is rare, and the fees are at minimum 10x as high. Even finding out the name of a particular spell that will accomplish some desired aim can involve a quest for a spellcasting character, because magical knowledge is hoarded. Again, this is important to get out there before players create their characters, and occasionally a higher-level build will be dependent on using some spell at level-up time.

So basically, Wizards are a weaker version of Sorcerer and everyone wants to be a Cleric or Druid?

[Suddo]

Yea, except Pathfinder is a published system and thus outside the bounds of what this thread is requesting, so can we not just senselessly pimp Pathfinder in every thread?

Actually many people play a 3.P type game where they take system things they like from Pathfinder and the depth of things from 3.5 (as 3.5 has so many cool and different things). This is a popular thing to do and is well within what this thread is about. I don't think everything about pathfinder is better (not by a long shot) but I do think that they did several things that helped simplify things and if you want to still play 3.5 and want it to be simpler then its a good place to look.

[AuraTwilight]

My apologies; might be a good idea to clarify the wording in that original post; I've seen a lot of houserule threads that inevitably degenerate into "Why not just play Pathfinder?" and it gets annoying.

[Kuulvheysoon]

I use a lot of houserules and am pretty conservative. Here are the ones I can think of which aren't specific to my campaign world, but are going to apply in all games I run henceforth unless I decide otherwise.

* All halflings are Strongheart Halflings, but many of them spend their bonus feat on a Halfling-only feat called "Lightfoot", which grants a +1 to all saving throws.

Like the FRCS feat Luck of Heroes?


* The Favored Soul does not have Knowledge: Arcana as a class skill, but rather Knowledge: Religion.

The designers at WotC actually did this in an online supplement (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20070227x).


My DM uses a lot of houserules, most of which are situational. Here are a few of the permanent ones:

-LA is paid off upfront. You start at a lower level and gain xp as if you were that level rather than your ECL.

...That's brilliant. I love it, and it might actually let me play that Couatl that I've always wanted to try.

[willpell]

Like the FRCS feat Luck of Heroes?

Wouldn't know, but it's logical to suspect. I see little reason in having a more cryptic name (not to mention one that sounds extremely dubious on Evil or even "south of center" Neutral characters); "Lightfoot" may not be entirely descriptive of the feat itself, but since it's the name of the default halfling and this feat turns a Strongheart into a Lightfoot, it seemed obvious.


The designers at WotC actually did this in an online supplement (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20070227x).

Score! Thanks.

[Curmudgeon]

So basically, Wizards are a weaker version of Sorcerer and everyone wants to be a Cleric or Druid?
Wizards still have access to more spells than Sorcerers, if they're willing to work/pay to acquire them. And in my experience not everyone wants to play a Cleric or Druid with a 15 point buy. Personally, I'd much rather play a Rogue with a 32 point buy. :smallsmile:

[TypoNinja]

A +1 natural bonus to rolls if they are quick on the uptake of their turn

I quite like this, good way to encourage people to make sure turns flow smoothly.

In my group we put death at negative Con score instead of -10. Represents the big beefy types being harder to put down, also makes it much less likely that you'll go from up to DEAD, you just go down and if its a win can be stabilized easily enough.

Likewise the stabilize roll is 10+con modifier, similar reasons.

Both minor changes, but they really feel nice.

Since some of our games tend to get kind of off the wall, we have notes written down for things like the weight of an anvil, mass of granite, cost of stone as a building material. Adamantine, mithril, and cold iron, cost by the pound.

Crafting rules get damn tricky when its not a matter of instantly turning GP into "Crafting material" at the market. When I spend 600 GP enchanting something, what exactly was that spent on? How do I know if I can get some if we cant just go to market? We decided to abstract it, just like a spell component pouch, there are generic "mystical ingredients".

[Allanimal]

my DM has an interesting house rule.

character creation is via point buy, and the house rule is that at levels where you gain a new attribute point, instead of +1 to an attribute, you get a number of point buy points to spend as desired.
the cost of increasing a score is the delta of the point buy table in the DMG:
13->14 is +1
14->15 is +2
extrapolating the table so that:
18->19 = +4
19->20 = +4
21->22 = +5
23->24=+5
and so on.

nothing changes for the player that starts at 18 and advances only that score because the points granted every 4th level are enough to advance that much.
if the player chooses, he can advance 2 scores by 1, 1 by 2 or whatever combo the player likes. any unspent points can be banked until the next time.
I think it is nice for MAD characters especially.

[Greenish]

my DM has an interesting house rule.

character creation is via point buy, and the house rule is that at levels where you gain a new attribute point, instead of +1 to an attribute, you get a number of point buy points to spend as desired.
the cost of increasing a score is the delta of the point buy table in the DMG:
13->14 is +1
14->15 is +2
extrapolating the table so that:
18->19 = +4
19->20 = +4
21->22 = +5
23->24=+5
and so on.

nothing changes for the player that starts at 18 and advances only that score because the points granted every 4th level are enough to advance that much.
if the player chooses, he can advance 2 scores by 1, 1 by 2 or whatever combo the player likes. any unspent points can be banked until the next time.
I think it is nice for MAD characters especially.Interesting. How many points do you get, and are they applied before or after racial and other bonuses?

[Mnemnosyne]

A couple bunch of mine:

Build Plan: Characters can advance in planned character classes without the need for external training or lengthy training periods. It is assumed that they are practicing the skills and abilities needed to achieve their pre-planned build. Deviating from the pre-planned build requires additional time for training and practice. With a trainer, this requires one day per hit die of the character (including the new level just being gained). Without a trainer, this requires five days per hit die of the character, with the days primarily devoted to training. Without a trainer, and without being able to devote the majority of the day to training, it requires ten days per hit die to advance into a new, unplanned character class. This replaces the Gaining Class Benefits rule on 198 DMG.I like to make sure that players have a solid plan for their characters, so this helps to ensure that they have such a plan and stick to it for the most part, without absolutely requiring them to stick to it.


Spell Resistance: Spell Resistance does not require a standard action to lower. Each spell can be resisted or allowed to take effect individually with no action required.If spell resistance takes a standard action to raise and lower, it's often as much or more of a weakness than it is a benefit. I think it makes more sense for a character to accept or resist spells individually, the same way they can choose individually on saving throws.


Alignment Restrictions: As a general rule, there are no alignment-based restrictions on actions, feats, spells, classes, abilities, etc. Specific exceptions may exist, such as for Exalted or Vile feats. Alignment restrictions on magical items still exist as normal.
Multiclass Experience Penalties: There is no penalty for multiclassing, regardless of the disparity between levels in various classes.Never liked restrictions on those things, so they're gone for the most part. In general, there are only a very small handful of classes I can see justifying an alignment restriction for, and players may well come up with explanations even for those, so I left it somewhat open. Since build plans are necessary, it's easy for me to point out the few that I would enforce alignment restrictions on.


Damage Immunity: Some creatures are outright immune to weapon damage, except by sufficiently enchanted weapons, or weapons otherwise targeting specific weaknesses, rather than having damage resistance.A holdover from 2nd Edition. Although I like damage resistance for a lot of things, I think a few monsters should still be able to be flat out immune to damage except to powerful enough weapons. So some things are still totally invulnerable to weapons unless they're +x.


Saving Throws: A character can only gain a +2 bonus to a saving throw once. Changing to a class that grants a good save which has already received the +2 bonus does not grant it again, but a character can switch to a class that provides a +2 bonus in a saving throw she has not yet gotten that bonus in.I don't know if it was intended that way or not, but when a character takes multiple PrC's with the same high save, their saving throw goes tremendously high. I also use fractional saving throws and BAB from Unearthed Arcana, so a character still gets saving throw advancement, they just don't get that +2 bump over and over.


Intelligence Increases: Any permanent increases to a character’s intelligence modifier also provide retroactive skill points for all previous levels.
Class Skills: Any class skill remains a class skill for the remainder of that character’s career, even if a future class or prestige class does not offer it as a class skill. This is not retroactive: skill points spent in cross-class ranks before entering the class that offered them do not increase to full ranks.I have always found it silly that intelligence increases don't retroactively increase your skill ranks. It seems to me that the increase in skill ranks can be considered exactly what made you more intelligent, and they should go hand in hand. Also, I find keeping track of class skills separately for each class somewhat annoying, so I institute this rule. Frankly, it doesn't bother me if someone decides to dip Factotum 1 for the skills. It seems a reasonable investment; use a character level to gain all skills as class skills.


Knowledge Checks for Identifying Creatures: For a knowledge check to identify a creature, the following special rules apply.
Ø The DC for a creature's own type (or, in special cases, the most common creature type in the region the creature has gained most of their education in) and the animal type is DC 5+HD, all others remain unchanged.
Ø Even untrained, a character can take 10 to identify a creature, as per the normal rules of taking 10.
Ø As an exception to the rule where no character can take 10 in an attempt to aid another, a character can use 2 minutes of time to take 10 on the check to aid another. There is a limit of 10 additional people who can aid on this type of knowledge check.
Ø When aided by others, knowledge checks to identify creatures can be made untrained even if the DC is higher than 10.Picked this one up from a thread about it on the matter a while back around here. It seemed like the most logical solution to some of the problems with knowledge checks, since it solves various problems, like humans not being able to identify humans, and entire towns being collectively baffled at the existence of say, dragons. I think I was going to add in a couple more things, but never got around to writing them down.


Illusion Spells: Detect magic does not automatically reveal illusion auras of spells higher level than it; instead, it grants a saving throw with a +4 bonus to disbelieve the illusion. Under no circumstances does detect magic reveal a magical aura on an object that the caster cannot see due to invisibility or similar spells, or the aura of the invisibility spell itself. In order to determine the location of a magical aura, it must remain still for three full rounds of concentration; any movement of 5 feet or more spoils the attempt and requires the caster to begin concentrating once again.I found the idea that illusions were auto-defeated by detect magic or arcane sight somewhat annoying, because there are other spells that are supposed to be used for that, but RAW I can see no way that an illusion wouldn't give off a huge honking magical aura that would make it blatantly obviously an illusion. So I added this one in.


Healing Spells: All healing spells revert to the Necromancy (Healing) school, rather than Conjuration (Healing).Yeah, this was a retarded change, always have been. I have yet to hear a good explanation for it either.


Cure Spells: All spells in the cure line, as well as their reversed versions, are a swift action to cast.Slight buff to both the Cure and Inflict line. Probably still not worth it to cast in combat most of the time, but it helps a little.


Resting: Characters who sleep less than 8 hours a day can regain spells after their normal rest period, even if the reduced need for sleep is the result of a magical item or spell. Characters that do not need to sleep at all must meditate in restful calm for one hour before regaining spells. Psionic characters regain their power points after similar periods of rest.I was also debating getting rid of the '8 hour rule', and I think I declared it removed, but didn't write it down in my houserules. In any event, I find it silly that casters have to rest for so much longer than they have to sleep if their sleep time is less than 8 hours.


Continual Light: This spell replaces the ‘continual flame’ spell. It causes the targeted object to glow brightly. Reversible into continual darkness.
Darkness: The darkness spell, and its variants, create total darkness, not shadowy illumination.I hate the change to continual light. Hate. Also, darkness makes much more sense if it actually creates darkness. You'll notice mentions of reversible spells - another holdover from 2nd Edition that I brought back. I haven't fully listed them out yet though.


Mordenkainen’s Disjunction: Magic items subjected to Mordenkainen’s disjunction must make a will saving throw or be rendered inert for 24 hours. If a magic item that has been rendered inert in this fashion is subjected to a second casting of Mordenkainen’s disjunction, it must then make a will save or be rendered permanently nonmagical. A wish or miracle spell can restore magic to a single magic item that has been rendered nonfunctional in this manner. Artifacts cannot be destroyed by Mordenkainen’s disjunction, but there is a 1% chance per caster level of rendering them inert for 24 hours. If subjected to a second casting of Mordenkainen’s disjunction while inert, an artifact has a 1% chance per caster level of being rendered inert for one year.MDJ is an awesome spell, but the way it destroys loot makes it effectively unusable. The players never want to use it because it destroys their loot. The DM never wants to use it because it can pretty much be a one-shot 'make the game unfun for players' pill, even if they beat the caster who cast it. This makes it useful for disabling people without completely destroying their loot. Also, I never really cared for MDJ being able to destroy artifacts...even if no sane caster would ever intentionally do it (besides, too easy to get around with shenanigans that let expendable duplicates of you cast MDJ) the only way to destroy them should be through the suggested means of destruction. No creating duplicates of yourself and then having them destroy the artifact and eat the loss of spellcasting.

[Allanimal]

Interesting. How many points do you get, and are they applied before or after racial and other bonuses?

original point buy is 32.
at levels 4 & 8 you get 4 points.
at 12 & 16 you get 5 points.
at 20 you get 6 points.
in each case, that is enough for someone starting with an 18 in a score to continue advancing it as normal.
The points are applied after racial bonuses* but before bonuses due to magic items or spells. basically, every 4th level we can re-point buy with the expanded pool (with an increased max score - 18 at 1st as usual, 19 at 4th, 20 at 8th, etc) then apply everything else. we're only 4th level in the campaign so things like tomes haven't come up yet...

*an assumption here, because the DM has also eliminated racial bonuses to the 6 ability scores (they keep everything else). to compensate, all races get a bonus feat.

Edit: add max score clause.

[Deaxsa]

Not the DM sadly.

And because skill crits are so stupid I purposefully try to do outrageous things.

Situation: Talking the evil king out of his quest for conquest?

Roll a 1: Combat begins

2-19: It is the evil king, combat begins and he won't listen.

20: The king gives up his conquest.

It is pretty much always worth trying to do stuff like that in the DM's game.

In my game, i have soft skill crits. in other words, it's like you take your 20, take your modifier, and then add 4. that way, it's not unreasonable, but can still be kind of cool (in my opinion).

[Squirrel_Dude]

1.) No penalties for multiclassing. Big shock there.


2.) When players roll for health, you can't do worse on the die than the lower side of half the value. Basically:

A d8 can roll numbers 1 through 8. Shock, I know. When rolling health, however, if a player rolls a 1, 2, or 3, then the player can instead simply take a 4 for their roll.

It boosts up health overall, but also helps to further separate characters that have larger hit dice from characters that have smaller hit dice in terms of health. It does change the average rolls on dice though, so monsters have to be readjusted.

Change in dice average values
d4: 2.5 to 2.75
d6: 3.5 to 4.00
d8: 4.5 to 5.25
d10: 5.5 to 6.5
d12: 6.5 to 7.75

So the difference from a Barbarian and a Wizard goes from an average value of 4/level to 5/level, and Melee classes are always going to roll better than a spellcaster

[Needle]

So many too remember, both as a DM or player as we like to switch DMs :smalltongue: but from the top of my head:

Charisma does not define Appearance. Appearance does. You roll a d20 and that's your APP score forever, else you may choose not to roll and have a 10. There's a table with descriptions examples too. You may use your APP score for some skills if you first succeed a Bluff check. Some spells may add the APP mod instead of the spellcasting stat mod to their DC, eg. a Wizard casting Charm Person may use his APP score instead of his INT score to determine the spell DC.
Diplomacy, Bluff and Tumble doesn't use flat DCs but different kind of fixes. (We use the Giant's one for Diplo :smallbiggrin:)
Appraise may be used to identify items, as the Identify spell, on a successful check. No reroll.
Knowledge Local may be rolled untrained.
Perform and Profession may treat any ability score as its main mod, depending on what you do.
Everything is subject to revision or discussion outside the game, from the DM or the players side (Mostly classes, prestige classes, feats, modified rules, etc.) Rules cannot be changed while we're playing. Changes that modifies something important are informed with anticipation.
You gain XP points normally up to level 10. After that, you need double the XP points to progress (tough nobody likes high leveled games anyways in the group, so this is kinda pointless. THE all-time highest level character is a Rogue 13 who survived a TPK).
So many race and classes changes it's boring, we like to constantly modify things between ourselves.
You may use Level 0 spells as much as you want, as long as you prepare it. As a result, Cure Minor Wounds is banned and spells like Create Water or Summon Instrument are promoted to level 1.
You won't abuse things, even if you can as RAW. (by abuse we mean things as abusing Wood Shape or other common tricks)
Humanoid, Monstrous Humanoid and Giants are affected by the [something] Person spells line.

Guess that's most of our rules, on a general line.