PDA

View Full Version : Common Adjustments



Reinboom
2007-06-06, 02:27 AM
I'm looking for common adjustments among OGC base classes in D&D (3.5).
Things that many people commonly do anyways, though in reality just house rules. For example, giving the monk full BAB and proficiency with unarmed strikes and a minor skill uppage.
I'm not looking for hugely significant class adjustments or anything that isn't OGC. For example, I would normally give the sorcerer the favored's souls spells known table, however, since favored soul isn't OGC, I can't use this.
I'm posting these common changes on my table generator here:
http://www.pifro.com/dnd/
Then under the Modified Classes list.

The adjustments I wish to post on this shall only be minor common tweaks. Giving a class another feat, more skills points, certain class skills, etc. that are in flavor with the class.
Thank you. :smallsmile:

Starsinger
2007-06-06, 02:46 AM
I commonly give classes that are 2+Int mod (with the exception of wizards/psions) 4+int mod for skills instead. I also commonly make everything a class skill for everyone, since there's no reason why a Fighter can't be just as well learned (i.e. knowledge ranks) as a Cleric or Wizard.

Matthew
2007-06-06, 07:12 AM
Taking away the automatic two new Spells for Wizards when they Level Up.

TheDon
2007-06-06, 07:30 AM
We make Spot, Listen and Sense motive class skills for everyone as we can't figure out why a trained fighter can't see as well as a trained rogue.

Zaggab
2007-06-06, 07:42 AM
We usually skip all the nonsensical and pointless material components of spells. I know you can just have a material component pouch and all, but I think it's silly to throw bat guano at people, or eat spiders and all that.

We don't bother with multiclass xp penalties. It punishes variety and freedom of choice, and we've never felt like we needed it or anything.

I also think that we usually let sorcerers use metamagic without increased casting times.

Zincorium
2007-06-06, 07:44 AM
One thing both of the groups I've been in recently have done, and which I've heard of others doing as well, is giving full points for each hit dice, much like all characters do at 1st except applied to all levels, and to all HD for monsters.

It's got several advantages, including less abruptly-lethal combat, bigger hit dice are more significant, and both high level characters and monsters are easier and more straightforward to create.

Considering it helps PCs and opponents equally, I haven't seen any game balance issues arise from it.

Citizen Joe
2007-06-06, 07:47 AM
We usually skip all the nonsensical and pointless material components of spells. I know you can just have a material component pouch and all, but I think it's silly to throw bat guano at people, or eat spiders and all that.

I always wondered how people kept spiders alive in their spell pouch or how they managed to convince people to swallow it. :smallyuk:

Khoran
2007-06-06, 07:59 AM
I'm looking for common adjustments among OGC base classes in D&D (3.5).
Things that many people commonly do anyways, though in reality just house rules. For example, giving the monk full BAB and proficiency with unarmed strikes and a minor skill uppage.
Sorry, just need to comment. Monks ARE proficient with Unarmed Strike. It's implied that everyone is proficient with it, since it's a natural weapon (that provokes an AoO without feats)


I'm not looking for hugely significant class adjustments or anything that isn't OGC. For example, I would normally give the sorcerer the favored's souls spells known table, however, since favored soul isn't OGC, I can't use this.
I'm posting these common changes on my table generator here:
http://www.pifro.com/dnd/
Then under the Modified Classes list.
That's actually a good idea. It is too bad their spells known isn't OGC. (Though I personally don't see the harm. But, still under licence)

The adjustments I wish to post on this shall only be minor common tweaks. Giving a class another feat, more skills points, certain class skills, etc. that are in flavor with the class.
Thank you. :smallsmile:
Nothing I've tried to impliment yet, but I've though about giving Sorcs one or more of the following:
*Medium BAB
*Better Hit Die
*Enchew Materials at First Level

Also, I make most varients that are officially published by WoTC, since they cover some of my ideas.

Swooper
2007-06-06, 08:04 AM
Taking away the automatic two new Spells for Wizards when they Level Up. Wait, what? Most wizards I've played and seen played have very few spells apart from those two they gain at each level. :smallconfused:

As for the topic: Removing spell components* for sorcerers is pretty common, so is letting them metamagic without lengthening casting time. There's a variant class ability for that in PH2 even, for those of you that didn't know.



*Whe the hell invented Spiderclimb anyway, and what did he think he was doing? :smalleek:

Pauwel
2007-06-06, 08:09 AM
Wait, what? Most wizards I've played and seen played have very few spells apart from those two they gain at each level. :smallconfused:

Apparently you have missed the Wizard's ability to copy spells from scrolls into their spellbook, giving them the ability to essentially have every single spell in their spellbook.

Yuki Akuma
2007-06-06, 08:29 AM
Sorry, just need to comment. Monks ARE proficient with Unarmed Strike. It's implied that everyone is proficient with it, since it's a natural weapon (that provokes an AoO without feats)

Oh, for the love of...

No it isn't! It is a "manufactured" weapon, for some reason! Nobody is proficient with it, by the RAW, but that's silly and everyone ignores it!

*huff, puff* Thank you, and goodnight.

Reinboom
2007-06-06, 08:36 AM
Yes, Eschew Materials I realize is common (Hence it's on that modified sorcerer on my class table generator :smalltongue: ).
For the rest, I'm asking for additions or alterations to classes that I can add to my site/lists/tables/whatever for quick use to anyone, as quick reference. Not necessarily homebrew rulings, etc, but actual core class modifications. Specifically, ones that are commonly used.

Matthew
2007-06-06, 09:10 AM
Wait, what? Most wizards I've played and seen played have very few spells apart from those two they gain at each level. :smallconfused:

Wizards can learn Spells from anywhere. They can even go off and research them. Giving them an automatic two Spells every time they level up is just asking for trouble when Spells vary so much in power and usefulness.
Your DM may even have been compensating for this rule by keeping access to other Spells away from you. Crazy, though, as that means never encountering or fighting another Wizard or coming across a Spell Book or Scroll of any use. Different strokes for different folks, I suppose.

Oh, for the love of...

No it isn't! It is a "manufactured" weapon, for some reason! Nobody is proficient with it, by the RAW, but that's silly and everyone ignores it!

*huff, puff* Thank you, and goodnight.
Only those Characters who don't have Weapon Proficiency (Simple Weapons) or whatever, face this problem, such as Monks, Druids and Wizards. Fighters, Paladins, Barbarians, Rangers, Rogues, Clerics, Bards and Sorcerers are all proficient with all Simple Weapons, which Unarmed Strikes are listed as.

Swooper
2007-06-06, 09:17 AM
Apparently you have missed the Wizard's ability to copy spells from scrolls into their spellbook, giving them the ability to essentially have every single spell in their spellbook. I didn't miss it. In a relatively sane game, however, players are not allowed to simply walk into a store and buy an magical item they can afford. Finding scrolls or enemy wizards' spellbooks is not reliable enough to take away those measly two spells per level.

Also, by that logic, taking away those two spells is no use, since the wizard will know them anyway.

Jayabalard
2007-06-06, 09:28 AM
I didn't miss it. In a relatively sane game, however, players are not allowed to simply walk into a store and buy an magical item they can afford. Finding scrolls or enemy wizards' spellbooks is not reliable enough to take away those measly two spells per level.

Also, by that logic, taking away those two spells is no use, since the wizard will know them anyway.Not really... you see, you can take away those 2 free spells and still not give wizards instant access to any and all spells like you're suggesting.

Finding scrolls or enemy wizard's spellbooks or doing tasks/quests for a master wizard (at lower levels) or questing to find particular ancient lost knowledge (ie rare spells) or taking time off to research new spells (at higher levels) is indeed reliable enough to take away those measly two spells per level.

Piccamo
2007-06-06, 09:30 AM
I didn't miss it. In a relatively sane game, however, players are not allowed to simply walk into a store and buy an magical item they can afford.

I must direct you to this: Magic Shop Argument (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12005614&postcount=1). I do not wish to derail this thread, so for further discussion please start a new thread.

Green Bean
2007-06-06, 09:34 AM
One that our DM always sticks in is that a Paladin's Smite Evil ability counts as a magic weapon for the purposes of DR.

ZeroNumerous
2007-06-06, 09:41 AM
In games I DM, I remove Fighter and give Barbarian 4+INT skill points. Other than that, it depends in the style of the game I'm running at the time.

Khoran
2007-06-06, 10:14 AM
Oh, for the love of...

No it isn't! It is a "manufactured" weapon, for some reason! Nobody is proficient with it, by the RAW, but that's silly and everyone ignores it!

*huff, puff* Thank you, and goodnight.

Are you sure about that? I could have sworn it wasn't typed as a "Manfuactured" weapon (though put in the same place as them for reference.), especially since it's, you know, a natural part of your body and therefore would be proficient with them. However, if I am wrong, then that's what I get for trying to apply logic to D&D.

Yuki Akuma
2007-06-06, 10:16 AM
Are you sure about that? I could have sworn it wasn't typed as a "Manfuactured" weapon (though put in the same place as them for reference.), especially since it's, you know, a natural part of your body and therefore would be proficient with them. However, if I am wrong, then that's what I get for trying to apply logic to D&D.

Unarmed strikes follow none of the rules for natural weapons, follow (almost) all of the rules for manufactured weapons, are in a table listing manufactured weapons, and can be chosen as a kensai's special weapon.

What more do you want?

Natural weapons are designed to be weapons. Hands are designed to be multi-tools. :smallwink:

Mr the Geoff
2007-06-06, 10:45 AM
I always wondered how people kept spiders alive in their spell pouch or how they managed to convince people to swallow it. :smallyuk:

I just had that one in my PbP game.
"So which of the 2 rogues wants to spider climb over there with the rope?"
"Uh, I'll do it if you promise to pick up Eschew materials next level"

Danin
2007-06-06, 10:45 AM
I have a small health varient that I find usefull.

If players have d4 or d6 hd and roll a 1 for health when they level up, they are allowed to re-roll it untill they get a higher result (once they get this result it stands). A player with d8 or d10 hd? Re-roll on a 1 or a 2. Finally, the Barbarian with his beefy d12 hd gets to re-roll on a 1, 2 or 3. All this does is ensures that those classes that are supposed to be able to take some shots don't have a string of bad luck and roll a 1, 3, 2, 3, 1 respectively for when they level up.

Yes, I am taking this from personal experiance.

Draz74
2007-06-06, 11:00 AM
I think one of the most common adjustments is making the ranger count as (Ranger Level -2 or -3) instead of (Ranger Level / 2) for the purposes of his Animal Companion's strength.

Optional additions:
- Make him count as full level for the animal companion. It's not like he's going to overpower the Druid still.
- Adjust his caster level for spells the same way as his animal-companion-determining level.

Fascisticide
2007-06-06, 11:08 AM
When someone gains a level and rolls for HD, the DM rolls a dice too and the best result is used. It's been a tradition in every game I played and DMed with my friends.

Seffbasilisk
2007-06-06, 12:20 PM
In games I DM, I remove Fighter and give Barbarian 4+INT skill points. Other than that, it depends in the style of the game I'm running at the time.

Barbarians already have 4+int skillpoints.


Sorcerers get eschew material components as a free feat.

Paladin's code is toned back to allow them to work with evil for the greater good, they just can't do evil themselves and the evil must be directly in the cause of a greater good. (IE poisoning the evil wizard king)

Bards get a bonus language starting out.

Sutremaine
2007-06-06, 06:53 PM
If players have d4 or d6 hd and roll a 1 for health when they level up, they are allowed to re-roll it untill they get a higher result (once they get this result it stands). A player with d8 or d10 hd? Re-roll on a 1 or a 2. Finally, the Barbarian with his beefy d12 hd gets to re-roll on a 1, 2 or 3.
I considered doing the following: 1d4, 1d4+2, 1d6+2, 1d8+2, 1d8+4. Then I realised that unless I did the same when rolling HP losses, spells that did HP damage would be even less attractive than they were previously (it's not only the PCs that are affected by any house rules I make...).

Skill points: Any class with 2 points a level and no class features relying on Int gets 4 points a level.

Class skills: Extra skills added to most classes' lists as class skills (paladins get Forgery. This is probably not a common adjustment), or as skills bought 1:1 and maxing out at half ranks. Spot and Listen fall into the second category for everyone.

Two-Weapon Fighting: After taking TWF, ITWF, GTWF, and PTWF are automatically gained once your BAB is high enough. Some DMs keep the Dex requirements for each off-hand attack gained, and some don't. I'm working on something else.

Power Attack: 3:2 on two-handers, not 2:1.

Paladins: relaxed code specific to each paladin, caster level = paladin level minus 3, improved mount, and assorted minor additions.

Fighters: Fighter is the new Warrior.

Magic: 1. Any spell (or item derived from a spell) that screws with the initiative order or grants extra actions Does Not Exist And Never Will. 2. The characters aren't the only ones who know about that trick. 3. The DM can build a character whose entire being is devoted to one encounter. The players can't. Unless they're using one of those tortuous level-20 builds that never ever die horribly during their gimp levels, always have perfectly matched and colour-coordinated sets of equipment, and spend three hours a day prestigitating themselves for the bards.

Natural healing, negative HP, and massive damage: are calculated using number of HD, size of HD, and Con score or modifier. Also, the save DC against death by massive damage increases with the amount of damage done.

Lemur
2007-06-06, 07:03 PM
Take away multiclassing XP penalties. They're a holdover from 2nd edition, and irrelevant for the d20 system. D&D is the only d20 product I've seen that uses a system for penalizing multiclassing, all the others do away with it completely.