PDA

View Full Version : [PF] Homestew: Random Fixes and System Improvements



Dark.Revenant
2013-03-07, 04:05 AM
It's not a homebrew, it's a home-crockpot. Let's change EVERYTHING!

See this document for the full thing:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yCBvgy4B4iVUMyDjz2nvUvcR0LCtSBkEY_n50OPpfwo/edit?usp=sharing

The goal is to fix some of the more glaring issues of D&D, such as the fact that martial classes have a more boring time of it. Save-or-dies are often unfun because it's just "Oh. I guess we won!" Blasting sucks. There are only about a dozen (that's being generous) useful weapons out of the over-a-hundred we are given. Exotic Weapon Proficiency sucks. Fights once the iterative attacks come in are boring and static while everyone 5-steps and full attacks. Pathfinder broke tumbling. Instant-death from massive damage sucks. Shields are next to useless past the low levels.

This is my attempt to fix these problems. Everything herein is work-in-progress and open to serious PEACHing.

Contents

Class Weapon Groups: Shamelessly ripped and adapted from the 3.5 variant weapon proficiency system. This section expands the weapon group changes to all of the PC and NPC classes in Pathfinder, including Dreamscarred Psionics classes.

Racial Weapon Groups: More adaptation from the 3.5 variant system.

Weapon Groups Etcetera: Barebones rules for multiclassing and prestige classes as they apply for Weapon Proficiencies.

Weapon Group Combat Feats: This took some time to do; Pathfinder has a LOT of weapons. This section is a comprehensive port of the 3.5 weapon group variant feats to Pathfinder.

Full Attack and Move: A much-needed feat. The name speaks for itself. Different classes get this at different times.

Point Buy Rules: Optional rule for DMs who want to "tier the tiers" a little.

XP and Leveling: Personal preference in terms of pacing; optional.

Stat Sheet Conventions: Personal preference.

Death and Injury Rules: Injuries are fun and instant death is bad.

Acrobatics Fix: It's what it says on the tin.

Crafting Rules: Personal preference, once again.

Threat Level: An amusing tool for flavor and balance so the party can roughly gauge the effectiveness of the enemy.

High Challenge Rating Monsters: Single high-CR monsters are tougher than multiple low-CR monsters (ESPECIALLY under these rules). Why not give bonus XP for beating them?

Choking: Garrotes are useless, so this adds a bit more kick.

Saving Throw Reroll Dice: Now we're getting into some serious ****; this lets you reroll saves as many times as you have hit dice (or spend them all on one save, if you feel so inclined). It's like HP for your saving throws. Has some caveats and limitations. Works in conjunction with the armor changes.

Armor Revamp and Damage Reduction: Why pick different weapons after level 5, when only a couple creatures have damage resistance to slashing, piercing, or bludgeoning? Add DR/Slashing, DR/Piercing, or DR/Bludgeoning to all the creatures in the game! Now, natural armor and regular armor (and shields and enhancement bonuses to all three) grant DR/Slashing, DR/Piercing, or DR/Bludgeoning depending on type, and this DR stacks with all other DR. Included is a type table for all the armors and shields in the game. This change makes (non-buckler) shields more useful in general because they grant DR/- instead of a weapon-type DR. Sword and board lives on! Note that the AC bonuses for armor are NOT REMOVED. Adamantine armor is much improved as well (though the extra damage reduction is removed). Remember that this armor-based DR cuts off at 1/4 the original damage taken.

Dexterity AC: Meant to balance (improve) dexterity-based classes (including the Monk) with the armor buffs.


I won't pretend that this is done yet, so I'm open to suggestions on how to refine this ruleset.

Belial_the_Leveler
2013-03-07, 04:12 AM
So, my 20th level sorceror or wizard needs to be changed to Fighter 1/Wizard 19? Good to know.



Seriously, some of the "balancing" options in this one are just terrible.

Dark.Revenant
2013-03-07, 04:26 AM
So, my 20th level sorceror or wizard needs to be changed to Fighter 1/Wizard 19? Good to know.
Why? Where did you get that idea from?


Seriously, some of the "balancing" options in this one are just terrible.
I know, hence the PEACH. It doesn't help me refine them if you won't be specific.

Belial_the_Leveler
2013-03-07, 04:30 AM
It was a comment on different tier classes getting different point-buys.

A straight Cleric 12 for example would, by your rules, be given 15 point-buy (which is terrible) while a Monk 1 / Cleric 11 would be given a much larger point-buy... and also wisdom bonus to AC, better saving throws and a bonus feat or two, all with only delaying the spellcasting a single level.

Dark.Revenant
2013-03-07, 04:37 AM
It's an optional rule meant to be used or disused or changed by DM fiat. A Cleric that focuses on casting would indeed be 15-pt but a more gish-focused Cleric would be fine with something higher like 20-pt. (Also, 15-pt isn't exactly terrible; 8 Str, 12 Dex, 13 Con, 10 Int, 18 Wis, 12 Cha for a casting class is generally fine, and you can even build a gish: 16 Str, 10 Dex, 13 Con, 10 Int, 15 Wis, 10 Cha -- low dex is workable because of the armor boost)

Also "Multiclasses are averaged" ignores dips. It has to be a relatively even split for it to change the point buy, by the rules.

Belial_the_Leveler
2013-03-07, 05:12 AM
8 Str, 12 Dex, 13 Con, 10 Int, 18 Wis, 12 Cha
That is not 15 point-buy, unless you go and change the point-buy costs. With current point-buy costs in 3.5 that is a good 22-24 points.


"Multiclasses are averaged"
So the guy that starts as a monk at 1st level and then multiclasses to cleric for the rest of his career has to reduce his ability scores as he gains levels? Does that make sense to you?

Dark.Revenant
2013-03-07, 05:26 AM
The point buy is using PF standards (15: standard, 20: high, 25: epic). The thread title was a bit misleading there (so I changed it just now); this is using PF as a baseline but these same principles apply to 3.5.

Anyway, the presumption is that the DM and the player would agree on a rough career path (i.e. which tier the player is playing at). Deviating from this would require a good RP reason but would not punish the player.

Ashtagon
2013-03-07, 07:20 AM
Weapon Feats
1) Can you take Weapon Focus (orcish weapons)? If so, does it only apply to axes, heavy blades, weapons with "orc" in the name, or some combination?

2) How does "exotic" interact with the more advanced weapon feats?


Weapon Groups
The ancient group doesn't really make much sense to me. Some weapons are aztec, some greek, some maori. It'd probbaly be better to make culture-specific groups if you have this at all, but then that makes the problem that when playing in that culture, you've just given everyone all the available weapons in a single group.

Battle Swiftness
I'd seriously consider giving it even sooner.

Point Buy
Fighter 1 / wizard 19 is still borked.

Dark.Revenant
2013-03-07, 07:58 AM
Weapon Feats
1) Can you take Weapon Focus (orcish weapons)? If so, does it only apply to axes, heavy blades, weapons with "orc" in the name, or some combination?
I prefer for the weapon feats to match up with the Fighter weapon groups (which I based most of the weapon group placements on), so you would only be able to pick one of the groups that the feats use, not some other selection. Though, the only one that this would actually mean anything for would be "Dwarven" because there is exactly one "Orcish" weapon in the list.


2) How does "exotic" interact with the more advanced weapon feats?
Good catch. The intent is that Exotic is not a group, but rather a feat that unlocks extra weapons in the existing groups; I have added clarification to make these points clear. The available groups to use are Ancient, Axes, Basic, Bows, Close, Crossbows, Druid, Firearms, Flails, Hammers, Heavy Blades, Light Blades, Monk, Ninja, Polearms, Siege Engines, Spears, and Thrown.


Weapon Groups
The ancient group doesn't really make much sense to me. Some weapons are aztec, some greek, some maori. It'd probbaly be better to make culture-specific groups if you have this at all, but then that makes the problem that when playing in that culture, you've just given everyone all the available weapons in a single group.
Pathfinder has a few bronze and stone age weapons; I just lumped them all in one group so they had somewhere to go. It's mainly just a convenience thing. I seriously doubt anyone would take the time to learn to use an Atlatl when focusing on a bunch of other modern weapons; it would be like a member of the Army learning how to wield a broadsword. If you learned one ancient weapon, you're likely a historian of some sort and learned how to use several.


Battle Swiftness
I'd seriously consider giving it even sooner.
You're probably right. Prerequisites changed to: Base Attack Bonus +9, Fighter level 6, Monk level 6, Ninja level 9, or Rogue level 9.


Point Buy
Fighter 1 / wizard 19 is still borked.
OPTIONAL rule, because it requires DM-Player agreement. In the case of a Fighter 1 / Wizard 19, the point buy would still be 15. Not 25. Because a Fighter dip doesn't do jack; it's still tier 1. A player trying to go into Wizard after the fact would be breaking the agreement made with the DM about what kind of tier he was making; fudging by one notch isn't such a big deal but going straight from 5 to 1 is bull**** and any DM using this system would be right to call out the player. It doesn't even make much common sense; you can't just train to be a Wizard in the literal days between dungeon crawls. This problem is already prevalent in D&D; the addition of this system just makes it more obvious.

But yeah, I added actual clarification to the rule so this is not so egregious.