PDA

View Full Version : Spikes01k's DnD 4e update rules



Spikes01k
2007-07-17, 04:02 PM
Hello one and all.
I have a semi long list of house rules I have named "Spikes01k's DnD 4e update rules". So I thought I'd post them up and ask if anyone can see any natural flaws or points in which people can make abuse of them.
______________________________________
*Clerics get intermediate saves to fort, not full not poor, at the same points as the scout.
*Fighters get intermediate save to reflex, instead of poor.
*All Classes, except Barbarians, get a +2 class skill bonus for skill points in addition to their own normal skill points. This is also multiplied by 4 at 1st character level.
*Ninja's Ki and AC abilities are based of Int instead of Wis.
*No Alignment restriction except when mixing opposing alignment classes, and with specific deity classes and PrCs.
*Paladins would require to worship a deity of the same alignment to be anything but L/G.
*Half Dragons- Any type of half dragon can be any alignment. Breath Weapon DC, and uses per day, increase by +1 for every three class levels they posses. Breath weapon damage increases by +1d6 for every three levels they posses. LA +2
*Normally, you only get extra precision damage with attacks made by weapons in your primary hand. Precision damage are things such as elegant strike, insightful strike, skirmish, sudden strike, and sneak attack damage.
*Precision damage still applies to all natural attacks.
*Reduce two weapon fighting penalties, thus minuses using a one handed weapon and light weapon will only be -1 to each attack, if they have the feat two weapon fighting.
Edit:
*Using Hex Blade fix linked here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12228696&postcount=1)
__________________________________
* Home Patch Shield Rules: There are two main reasons for doing this.
1. There are no set rules for making/wielding a larger shield in any of the books I have or have been informed about.
2. Sword and shield wielding is a less supported fighting style than most of the others and could use a slight face lift.

Weaponized Shields:
All shields can be made double thick like a weapons to do more damage identical to a weapon of a larger size. For all intents purposes they retain their normal AC and are treated as one size larger for weapon damage; their weight and hit points are also doubled. To use them at all you require is the monkey grip feat and implies a -1 hit when shield bashing with the shield; as you normally would with a larger weapon with the monkey grip feat. If you have the ability to wield a larger weapon with out penalty you ignore the -1 to hit when shield bashing. A shield that is built for a larger person that is weaponized is treated as being two sizes larger than normally and can not be wielded. You may increase the weapon's damage even more by adding shield spikes and armor razors as per the normal rules, but their cost and weight is doubled as well. Surprisingly this does not effect arcane spell chance failure or armor check penalty.

Larger Shield Rules:
When using a shield that was designed for someone one size larger than you is simpler than using a weapon that is one size larger. In any case, a shield that is made for some one a size larger is treated as the shield listed all intensive purposes with properties such as arcane spell chance failure, weight, armor check penalty, and weapon size, but not proficiency's. You only require to have the proficiency for the shield as it was designed to wield, the monkey grip feat (which make shield bashing have a -1 to hit) or the ability to wield a weapon one size larger with out penalty, and to pay to get the shield modified by an a proper armor smith costing 75 gold. with out this modification you can not wield the shield. Other more restrictive requirements are listed with the appropriate shield below. Thus a goliath with a heavy shield proficiency can wield a large sized heavy shield as an extreme shield with no feather requirements, or if they are proficient with a large extreme shield they may wield it as a tower shield with no feather requirements.

Larger Shields
*Bucker: Is treated as light shield for all intents and purposes.
*Light Shield: Is treated as heavy shield.
*Heavy Shield: Is treated as a Extreme Shield.
*Extreme Shields: For all intents and purposed is treated as a tower shield. You are required the ability to wield a larger weapon with no negatives, at the very least, to wield this shield. You may not bash with this shield when it is one size larger.
*Tower shield: This shield acts in every way like a tower shield, and grants an additional +1 AC, except it simply can not be wielded unless they have the feat "Greater Shield Grip" or the epic feats Wield Oversized Weapon.

Other Larger Exotic Shield
*Battle cloak, gnome: You can not properly use a battle cloak made for a different sized wearer.
*Shield, Gauntlet: You can not properly use a gauntlet shield made for a different sized wearer. However you may get a shield gauntlet made to function like a verson one sized larger. The weight and cost is doubled plus an additional 75 gold. You also require the feat "Greater Shield Grip" or the epic feat "Wield Oversized Weapon" This shield is other wise treated identically to a heavy shield. The Arcane Spell Chance Failure and Armor Check Penalty is not effected.
*Riders Shield: To wield you still require the exotic feat but is other wise treated identically to a heavy shield.

*More on Extreme Shields: Monkey Grip, and other abilities to wield larger weapons allows you to perform a bash with an extreme shield. You treat it for all intensive purposes damage wise as a weaponized heavy shield.

Feat

Greater Shield Grip
Requirements: Powerful Build, Strength 19, proficiency with a tower shield, or specific exotic shield, and shield specialization "tower shield" or other specific exotic shield.
Benefit: This feat allows you to wield a larger sized tower shield or specific exotic shield that can use this feat as stated above.
Special: This feat can be selected as a fighter feat. You may take this feat multiple times but the benefits do not stack. Each time you take this it must apply to a different shield.


Smaller Shield Use: A shield built for a smaller creature is not as effective as a normal shield of its same type. To use a smaller shield you need to be proficient with how it going to be used but you do not require any special modification.
*Bucker: Can not be used
*Light Shield: is identical to and used as a a buckler; you can not shield bash with this shield
*Heavy Shield: is identical to and used as a light shield
*Extreme Shields: is identical to and used as a heavy shield;
*Tower shield: is identical to and used as a extreme shield
_________________________________


New/Modified Feats
Two Weapon Fighting
Preq: Dex of 13
All other improvements on normal two weapon fighting are obtained when the reach the proper base attack bonus. With this feat you also gain an extra attack with precision damage with your off hand weapon attack. Precision damage are things such as elegant strike, insightful strike, skirmish, sudden strike, and sneak attack damage.

Extra Precision Attack
Preq: Dex of 15, Base Attack of +6, Two Weapon Fighting
You gain an additional attack with precision damage with your off hand weapon attack at your lower base attack bonus.

Improved Extra Precision Attack
Preq: Dex of 17, Base Attack of +12, Extra Precision Attack, Two Weapon Fighting
You gain an additional attack with precision damage with your off hand weapon attack at your lower base attack bonus.

Greater Extra Precision Attack
Preq: Dex of 19, Base Attack of +18, Extra Precision Attack, Improved Extra Precision Attack, Two Weapon Fighting
You may perform as many additional attack with precision damage with one of your off hand weapon attack as you get from two weapon fighting.

Ambidexterity
Preq: Dex 15, Str 15, Two Weapon fighting.
Reduces minuses of wielding two weapons at the same time by 1. You also now apply your full strength to attacks made by both hands.

Monkey Grip
Preq: Str 15, Base attack bonus +4, Power Attack
You may wield weapons one size larger than normal as they were intended to be used. So a large one handed weapon may be used with only one hand; however you still inquire a -1 to hit. Alternatively you my wield a weapon one size larger one handed weapon, two handed, with no minuses. You may wield a weapon one size larger in both hands with this feat.

Apprenticed Woods Man
Preq: Must be 1st level in ehter barbarian or ranger class. If taken past 1st level character you also require to find a teacher of the same class.
Rangers or barbarian gain +1 skill point per level, +4 at level one character.
___________
New Magic Item
Dual Weapon Enhancer Gloves
Cost: any enhancements costs x1.5, plus 1000 gp
These gloves are always in a set of two, never more or less. The enhancements on these gloves only apply while using two weapons, in the hands that these gloves are on, while using the two weapon fighting feat. The gloves are linked to only one pair of masterwork weapons. You may only apply a total of +10 weapon enhancements on them, and they always circumvent normal bonuses on the weapons them self. The gloves override the +x enhancement bonuses already on the weapon. If a linked weapon is ever broken you must re-pay half the cost the current bonuses to get it re-attuned to your gloves. If both your linked weapons are broken you may keep your gloves to cover the 1000 base cost, but all the enhancements must be re-bought.
________________

Ok thats it for now. What do you think?

Damionte
2007-07-17, 05:35 PM
I don't think I understand your extra precision feats. Are you giving another attack over and above what two weapon fighting gives?

Or are you saying they can use precision damage without qualifiers with thier off hand attack? I don't understand.

Spikes01k
2007-07-17, 06:48 PM
I don't think I understand your extra precision feats. Are you giving another attack over and above what two weapon fighting gives?

Or are you saying they can use precision damage without qualifiers with thier off hand attack? I don't understand.

OK, I changed it so that it is a bit clearer.

*Now, Normally, you only get extra precision damage with attacks made by your primary hand. Precision damage are things such as elegant strike, insightful strike, skirmish, sudden strike, and sneak attack damage.

Note this rule, it was there before. Basicly I said that even though they had the two weapon fighting feat they would still only get additional precision damage with their primary hand attacks, and only one with their secondary.

If you pay attention to what this is in comparison to normal two weapon fighting, you get a lot more attacks for one feat, but you get no boost in damage with a lot of those attacks unless you pay the normal amount of feats you did in the old system. Simply getting additional attacks isn't worth the huge amount of requirements, and feats spent into it, unless you have some sort of extra damage, so I ungimped the two weapon fighting and still kept the same restriction on doing precision damage, sense that extra damage is worth the feats if you can do it.

Fax Celestis
2007-07-17, 06:54 PM
*Now, Normally, you only get extra precision damage with attacks made by your primary hand. Precision damage are things such as elegant strike, insightful strike, skirmish, sudden strike, and sneak attack damage.

Um, according to what?

Triaxx
2007-07-17, 07:14 PM
I'd guess his house rules. Most of the people I play with don't use Precision attacks.

Damionte
2007-07-17, 07:40 PM
OK, I changed it so that it is a bit clearer.

*Now, Normally, you only get extra precision damage with attacks made by your primary hand. Precision damage are things such as elegant strike, insightful strike, skirmish, sudden strike, and sneak attack damage.


That's where my confusion on those came from as well. It's simply not true. If you guys have house rules it to be so then ok I guess..... seems silly to have to make a house rule to get around your house rule though.

Spikes01k
2007-07-17, 07:49 PM
Um, according to what?

Yes that is the new house rule. It is there so that the single two weapon fighting feat doesn't completely out power a two handed weapon fighting style.

Fax Celestis
2007-07-17, 07:52 PM
Yes that is the new house rule. It is there so that the single two weapon fighting feat doesn't completely out power a two handed weapon fighting style.

You realize that THF is superior to TWF in many many ways to begin with, and that powering down TWF is like saying "The fighter is overpowered"?

Spikes01k
2007-07-17, 07:57 PM
These house rules is nothing but good things for a TWF fighter type. Making it more to par with THF.

Note the following
*Reduction of minuses with normal TWF feat to only -1 to hit with each.
*Ambidexterity Feat, which allows full strength to both attacks, and elimination of -1 to hit while wielding a one handed and light weapon.
*New magic Item to cut the second weapon's enhancments in half with some restriction of its own though.

I think that did a pretty good job of balancing out a TWF and THF typed fighters.


P.S. just note that I basically kept the feat requirements to perform extra damage precision damage the same as in the normal rules.

P.P.S I got to leave to feat a naber's cat, will be back in a little.

Triaxx
2007-07-18, 05:38 AM
Is the cat taking Great Cleave?
---

You're attempting to improve TWF, not weaken it correct? Because from your explanation, you see TWF as being the more powerful style, where THF has been statistically shown to be more effective.

Jack_Simth
2007-07-18, 06:09 AM
You realize that THF is superior to TWF in many many ways to begin with, and that powering down TWF is like saying "The fighter is overpowered"?

He's powering down the TWF Rogue (only get sneak attack on the primary hand), and powering up the TWF Fighter (lower attack penalty) - and quite frankly, the TWF Rogue can get absurdly good. With enough work, the TWF Fighter gets reasonable, and it's easier under his house rules.

Zeta Kai
2007-07-18, 06:16 AM
I miss the Ambidexterity feat from 3.0; it wasn't that spectacular, but it just had flavor.

Spikes01k
2007-07-18, 08:17 AM
He's powering down the TWF Rogue (only get sneak attack on the primary hand), and powering up the TWF Fighter (lower attack penalty) - and quite frankly, the TWF Rogue can get absurdly good. With enough work, the TWF Fighter gets reasonable, and it's easier under his house rules.

Actually I am keeping it about the same for a Rogue TWF. Yeah you NEED to buy the feats to do a good TWF. I will need to come up with seperate rules dealing with natural weapons and precision damage.

P.S. Look at this like this. In the NORMAL RULES To get precision damage on extra attacks using two weapon fighting requires the following:

Two Weapon Fighting, Improved Two Weapon Fighting, Greater Two Weapon Fighting, Epic Two Weapon Fightin

I require the following:
Two Weapon Fighting, Improved Two Weapon Fighting, and Greater Two Weapon Fighting

To get the VERY same thing.

So if you could please tell me HOW I am powering them down?

Zherog
2007-07-18, 08:40 AM
I'm going to skip all the two-weapon fighting stuff, because I think other people are covering it well enough. I'll just say this about it and then move on - twf, currently, is only a good option for rogues (and some rare fringe cases for fighter-types). While your rules might slightly increase TWF for fighters, I don't think you've done a thing to hurt rogues using it as a means to deliver oodles of sneak attack. Maybe after I've had some more coffee I'll delve into it more...

On to the other stuff.


Hello one and all.
I have a semi long list of house rules I would like to make.

Personal opinion: When you have a long list of house rules, it's often a good idea to take a step back and re-evaluate what you have and why. Lots of times, a long list comes about because you instituted House Rule X, but then found A, B, and C all broke as a result. So rather than fixing X, you add more house rules for A, B, and C. And so on.

Now that said, a lot of the things you consider house rules here, I don't. For example, I consider your feats (the new ones) and magic item homebrew stuff, but not necessarily house rules. It's semantics though. The point here is that maybe you want to re-examine why you have so many rules when you have a long list of house rules. In your specific example, maybe you want to take a step back and re-consider your thoughts on TWF. You also might want to make sure you understand the rules, just in case that's leading to a misunderstanding.


*Clerics get intermediate saves to fort, not full not poor, at the same points as the scout.
*Fighters get intermediate save to reflex, instead of poor.

I like the intermediate save, and think it's a good thing that should've been incorporated into D&D. So I don't have any problems with these. I'm curious, though, why you didn't change any other saves for other classes. Just for an example, you left the druid with a good Fort and a good Will, even though you nerfed that exact thing on the cleric.



*All Classes except Barbarians get a +2 int mod bonus for skill points in addition to their own normal skill points. This is hit by negative int modifiers separately from normal skill points, and can not be decreased below 0. So if you have an int of 8, you actually lost two skill points per level, and if you have an int of 6 you lose 4 skill points per level, but you only lose 6 points per level if you have an int of 4.

Maybe it's a lack of caffeine. I'm not understanding this at all. Can you re-explain it.


*Ninja's Ki and AC abilities are based of Int instead of Wis.

You're doing two things here.

1) You're reducing the ninja's reliance on multiple attributes. For example, now the ninja doesn't have to choose between a high Int (for more skills) and a high Wis (for better stuff). He can go Int and dump his Wisdom completely. Is that what you want?
2) You're impacting the synergistic benefits of a monk/ninja. While it's a pretty weak combo to begin with, you've made it that much weaker.



*No Alignment restriction except when mixing opposing alignment classes, and with specific deity classes and PrCs.

Just to make sure I understand what you mean here - I can play a chaotic evil paladin? I can play a lawful good bard? I can play a lawful good druid? And so on?

I'm not a fan of the alignment system - I think it's kinda buggy and unclear. But it does serve a purpose. You might be erasing that with this - depending on if I'm interpreting it correctly or not.


*Half Dragons- Can be any alignment. Breath Weapon DC, and uses per day, increase by +1 for every three class levels they posses. Breath weapon damage increases by +1d6 for every three levels they posses. LA +2

In order...

-- Half-dragons can already be any alignment.
-- I like abilities that scale, so I see no problem with scaling the breath weapon DC, uses, or damage.
-- I think LA is one of the worst mechanics in the game. It's clunky and often hurts a character more than intended (which, actually, was the original design intent behind LA - to make monster races worse than PHB races). Dropping half-dragon to +2 makes it less sucky. In fact, coupled with the scaling abilities, it might be a good trade for a non-caster. Maybe.

***

So there's some comments on your other stuff.

Spikes01k
2007-07-18, 09:15 AM
I'm going to skip all the two-weapon fighting stuff, because I think other people are covering it well enough. I'll just say this about it and then move on - twf, currently, is only a good option for rogues (and some rare fringe cases for fighter-types). While your rules might slightly increase TWF for fighters, I don't think you've done a thing to hurt rogues using it as a means to deliver oodles of sneak attack. Maybe after I've had some more coffee I'll delve into it more...

Thank you. I actually made it easier for them, by one howl feat, to do sneak attack damage with TWF.


On to the other stuff.

Personal opinion: When you have a long list of house rules, it's often a good idea to take a step back and re-evaluate what you have and why. Lots of times, a long list comes about because you instituted House Rule X, but then found A, B, and C all broke as a result. So rather than fixing X, you add more house rules for A, B, and C. And so on.

Now that said, a lot of the things you consider house rules here, I don't. For example, I consider your feats (the new ones) and magic item homebrew stuff, but not necessarily house rules. It's semantics though. The point here is that maybe you want to re-examine why you have so many rules when you have a long list of house rules. In your specific example, maybe you want to take a step back and re-consider your thoughts on TWF. You also might want to make sure you understand the rules, just in case that's leading to a misunderstanding. Good point, I have gone over these things in other forums on other web sites.


I like the intermediate save, and think it's a good thing that should've been incorporated into D&D. So I don't have any problems with these. I'm curious, though, why you didn't change any other saves for other classes. Just for an example, you left the druid with a good Fort and a good Will, even though you nerfed that exact thing on the cleric.
The main reason was a light touch, clerics are said, and I agree with them, to be completly over powered when in comparison with other classes. Good will saves, plus casting off of wisdom, plus you get all your spells on the list, plus casting in full armor, D8 Hit die, two good saves, ability to turn any spell they got into the single most vital spell in the game: cure spells, and an intermediate BaB. So a slight touch to reducing their saves still keeps them functional and a little more balanced. I may go and do the same sort of thing with other classes, but the druids have more trouble with armor so I'd thought I'd give them a second chance as they are.



Maybe it's a lack of caffeine. I'm not understanding this at all. Can you re-explain it.
Basicly All classes, except barbarian, get two additional skills they can master. I have found that skill points to have such a high demand in the game that even a very intelligent character, such as a rogue or wizard, never seems to have enough skill points to meet a lot of the modules demands. I also found that the sheer idiocy of a well trained warrior, or spell caster such as a fighter or wizard should get more than the minimum skill points. While some hick with a two handed weapon and a chemical imbalance some how learns more skills than you do, which is mostly untrained. If anything I think I should set their skill points to 2+int after the modification, but I didn't want to nurf them too much. Grant it their more tougher, but by no means should they really get more skill points than a fighter.



You're doing two things here.

1) You're reducing the ninja's reliance on multiple attributes. For example, now the ninja doesn't have to choose between a high Int (for more skills) and a high Wis (for better stuff). He can go Int and dump his Wisdom completely. Is that what you want?
2) You're impacting the synergistic benefits of a monk/ninja. While it's a pretty weak combo to begin with, you've made it that much weaker.

I personally have played a ninja, as well as seen others, and the amount of power they get has been found to be sub-par to a straight rogue, even when done as I said, so I gave them this little enhancement, that in my opinion and research is still underpowered compared to a rogue



Just to make sure I understand what you mean here - I can play a chaotic evil paladin? I can play a lawful good bard? I can play a lawful good druid? And so on?

I'm not a fan of the alignment system - I think it's kinda buggy and unclear. But it does serve a purpose. You might be erasing that with this - depending on if I'm interpreting it correctly or not.

Please note I made a comment on alignment and deity specific classes and PrCs. A Pld in my game would have to be the same alignment as their deity whether it was C/E or L/G. As for odd things like L/G bard they wouldn't be allowed to mix with a paladin because the original alignment restrictions wouldn't allow it.


In order...

-- Half-dragons can already be any alignment.
-- I like abilities that scale, so I see no problem with scaling the breath weapon DC, uses, or damage.
-- I think LA is one of the worst mechanics in the game. It's clunky and often hurts a character more than intended (which, actually, was the original design intent behind LA - to make monster races worse than PHB races). Dropping half-dragon to +2 makes it less sucky. In fact, coupled with the scaling abilities, it might be a good trade for a non-caster. Maybe.

***

So there's some comments on your other stuff.

I think you missed something here.


Alignment

Same as the dragon variety. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/halfDragon.htm) Click on it to see the source; www.D20SRD.org

Any way, my point was, it was at least better than what it was before, that is all I was trying to do.

If you could please give any suggestions on how to clean things up and make them more understanding that would be great.

cody.burton
2007-07-18, 09:44 AM
Basicly All classes, except barbarian, get two additional skills they can master. I have found that skill points to have such a high demand in the game that even a very intelligent character, such as a rogue or wizard, never seems to have enough skill points to meet a lot of the modules demands. I also found that the sheer idiocy of a well trained warrior, or spell caster such as a fighter or wizard should get more than the minimum skill points. While some hick with a two handed weapon and a chemical imbalance some how learns more skills than you do, which is mostly untrained. If anything I think I should set their skill points to 2+int after the modification, but I didn't want to nurf them too much. Grant it their more tougher, but by no means should they really get more skill points than a fighter.


I'm still a bit confused on this part. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that you are saying here that all classes except barbarians get 2 extra skill points per level. i.e. Fighters get 4+int, rogues get 10+int, etc. In return, the barbarian gets 2+int skill points per level, instead of 4+int as they do now.
I'm all for giving fighters more skill points, but I don't agree that:
1. Barbarians can only be a "hick with a two handed weapon and a chemical imbalance." I have played a skilled noble savage, hunter barbarian that used his rage as a trained tool and was more balanced than the party rogue (CN klepto).
2. Being officially trained should net you more skill points IC. Look at the skill list: jump, swim, and survival (just off the top of my head) are learned as well or better by living in the wild than being trained specifically for fighting (the fighter) or casting (the wizard). It makes sense that fighters and wizards get fewer skill points because their training is so focused.

Zherog
2007-07-18, 09:50 AM
Thank you. I actually made it easier for them, by one howl feat, to do sneak attack damage with TWF.

I don't think you did. I think, in fact, it's almost exactly the same.

Under the core rules, anybody can make an off-hand attack - though they take some monstrous penalties for doing so. But still, the option is there. A rogue who does this gets her sneak attack on both attacks (let's assume one attack with the primary hand). So by RAW, she has two sneak attacks; by your rule, she only has one.

Now our rogue hits 3rd level and takes the Two-Handed Fighting feat. The penalties drop to reasonable values (in fact, it's better in your rules than core). Your rule says you can make one sneak attack with the off-hand; but that's exactly what RAW says, too - so you haven't changed anything there.

Basically, I think you've hit what I was talking about previously. You tweaked a rule, then you found you had to tweak other rules, and then more, and so on. What you ended up with was a long list of house rules and homebrewed feats that don't really change very much from the base game.


The main reason was a light touch, clerics are said, and I agree with them, to be completly over powered when in comparison with other classes. Good will saves, plus casting off of wisdom, plus you get all your spells on the list, plus casting in full armor, D8 Hit die, two good saves, ability to turn any spell they got into the single most vital spell in the game: cure spells, and an intermediate BaB. So a slight touch to reducing their saves still keeps them functional and a little more balanced. I may go and do the same sort of thing with other classes, but the druids have more trouble with armor so I'd thought I'd give them a second chance as they are.

A really good argument can be made that the druid is more powerful than the cleric. The point gets easier to make the more books you allow into the game.

Like I said, I like the intermediate save; I think it's a good thing. It's probably worthwhile to go through all the classes and tweak a little bit if you're going to incorporate it.



Basicly All classes, except barbarian, get two additional skills they can master. I have found that skill points to have such a high demand in the game that even a very intelligent character, such as a rogue or wizard, never seems to have enough skill points to meet a lot of the modules demands. I also found that the sheer idiocy of a well trained warrior, or spell caster such as a fighter or wizard should get more than the minimum skill points. While some hick with a two handed weapon and a chemical imbalance some how learns more skills than you do, which is mostly untrained. If anything I think I should set their skill points to 2+int after the modification, but I didn't want to nurf them too much. Grant it their more tougher, but by no means should they really get more skill points than a fighter.

I'm still not getting it - especially when combined with your examples from your first post. Let's try this.

How many skill points do the following non-human characters receive each level:

rogue with 12 Int
wizard with 18 Int
fighter with 10 Int



I personally have played a ninja, as well as seen others, and the amount of power they get has been found to be sub-par to a straight rogue, even when done as I said, so I gave them this little enhancement, that in my opinion and research is still underpowered compared to a rogue

Yep, I think the ninja is weak too. I'm not sure this change fixes it, though.


Please note I made a comment on alignment and deity specific classes and PrCs. A Pld in my game would have to be the same alignment as their deity whether it was C/E or L/G. As for odd things like L/G bard they wouldn't be allowed to mix with a paladin because the original alignment restrictions wouldn't allow it.

By RAW, paladins don't need a deity. If you've house ruled otherwise, that's cool - it's a common house rule.



I think you missed something here.

[/URL] Click on it to see the source; [url]www.D20SRD.org (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/halfDragon.htm)

Any way, my point was, it was at least better than what it was before, that is all I was trying to do.

No, I saw that "restriction." But it's not really that difficult to deal with, to be honest. Pick the breath weapon you want, see which color gives it, then make yourself that alignment.

You did make it better, so that's something. Like I said, I think scaling abilities are a good thing - especially if they come from a template that kicks you in the family jewels with a high level adjustment. It's still a bad choice for casters - but anything with an LA is a bad choice for casters, so we really can't fix that.

Spikes01k
2007-07-18, 10:07 AM
I'm still a bit confused on this part. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that you are saying here that all classes except barbarians get 2 extra skill points per level. i.e. Fighters get 4+int, rogues get 10+int, etc. In return, the barbarian gets 2+int skill points per level, instead of 4+int as they do now.
Fighter gets 4+int, Rogue gets 10+int, Wizards gets 4+int, Barbarian gets 4+int.


I'm all for giving fighters more skill points, but I don't agree that:
1. Barbarians can only be a "hick with a two handed weapon and a chemical imbalance." I have played a skilled noble savage, hunter barbarian that used his rage as a trained tool and was more balanced than the party rogue (CN klepto).
2. Being officially trained should net you more skill points IC. Look at the skill list: jump, swim, and survival (just off the top of my head) are learned as well or better by living in the wild than being trained specifically for fighting (the fighter) or casting (the wizard). It makes sense that fighters and wizards get fewer skill points because their training is so focused.

That was just a statement I made was just that, a statement. I an not dropping the skill points to 2+int, although I think they should, and I think upping everyones skill points by +4 per level, that would probably break it. However I just disagree with you that nature would be a better teacher than an actual teacher who already knows what he is talking about. Yeah they may get a wider verity of skills, because they had to, but I think mastering would take a great deal longer. So this would have to be a distinct difference in opinion.

Spikes01k
2007-07-18, 10:27 AM
I don't think you did. I think, in fact, it's almost exactly the same.

Under the core rules, anybody can make an off-hand attack - though they take some monstrous penalties for doing so. But still, the option is there. A rogue who does this gets her sneak attack on both attacks (let's assume one attack with the primary hand). So by RAW, she has two sneak attacks; by your rule, she only has one.

Now our rogue hits 3rd level and takes the Two-Handed Fighting feat. The penalties drop to reasonable values (in fact, it's better in your rules than core). Your rule says you can make one sneak attack with the off-hand; but that's exactly what RAW says, too - so you haven't changed anything there.

Basically, I think you've hit what I was talking about previously. You tweaked a rule, then you found you had to tweak other rules, and then more, and so on. What you ended up with was a long list of house rules and homebrewed feats that don't really change very much from the base game.

I give you that it is a lot, but these rules are there to fix a fighter type using two weapons, but still keep about the same power a rogue would have with two weapon fighting. I still in the end give them more power with the magic item I made and the reduction of two weapon fighting minuses.



A really good argument can be made that the druid is more powerful than the cleric. The point gets easier to make the more books you allow into the game.

Like I said, I like the intermediate save; I think it's a good thing. It's probably worthwhile to go through all the classes and tweak a little bit if you're going to incorporate it. Will do, but off the top no many really needed it in my original opinion.



I'm still not getting it - especially when combined with your examples from your first post. Let's try this.

How many skill points do the following non-human characters receive each level:

rogue with 12 Int: 11 skill points per level
wizard with 18 Int: 8 skill points per level
fighter with 10 Int: 4 skill points per level
barbarian with 10 int: 4 skill points per level

In addition to make things clearer. I probably should work on the barbarian a bit better here. We should act as if they already have this bonus.

Barbarian with Int 8: 2 skill points per level
Fighter with Int 8: 2 skill points per level
Barbarian with Int 6: 1 skill point per level
Fighter with Int 6: skill point per level
Rogue with Int 8: 8 skill points per level
Rogue with Int 6: 6 skill points per level
Rogue with Int 4: 5 skill points per level

I am starting to see you point here that I maybe making things too complicated. Thanks for the suggestion, and I'll consider re-working it.


Yep, I think the ninja is weak too. I'm not sure this change fixes it, though.

Yeah I just wanted to make them a bit better, I am also more in favor of pure classing instead of multi classing.


By RAW, paladins don't need a deity. If you've house ruled otherwise, that's cool - it's a common house rule.


True, true, I forgot about that. Will look at possible problems, i would probably require paladins of alternate alignments have a deity.



No, I saw that "restriction." But it's not really that difficult to deal with, to be honest. Pick the breath weapon you want, see which color gives it, then make yourself that alignment.

You did make it better, so that's something. Like I said, I think scaling abilities are a good thing - especially if they come from a template that kicks you in the family jewels with a high level adjustment. It's still a bad choice for casters - but anything with an LA is a bad choice for casters, so we really can't fix that.

OK, well I just didn't see a good reason why a half dragon would really have that sort of restriction, we are talking about a third step away from a deity with a mix with a race that usually has no alignment restriction. I just don't see why the restriction, especially sense they are more commonly raised with the non dragon parent.

Spikes01k
2007-07-18, 10:28 AM
I don't think you did. I think, in fact, it's almost exactly the same.

Under the core rules, anybody can make an off-hand attack - though they take some monstrous penalties for doing so. But still, the option is there. A rogue who does this gets her sneak attack on both attacks (let's assume one attack with the primary hand). So by RAW, she has two sneak attacks; by your rule, she only has one.

Now our rogue hits 3rd level and takes the Two-Handed Fighting feat. The penalties drop to reasonable values (in fact, it's better in your rules than core). Your rule says you can make one sneak attack with the off-hand; but that's exactly what RAW says, too - so you haven't changed anything there.

Basically, I think you've hit what I was talking about previously. You tweaked a rule, then you found you had to tweak other rules, and then more, and so on. What you ended up with was a long list of house rules and homebrewed feats that don't really change very much from the base game.

I give you that it is a lot, but these rules are there to fix a fighter type using two weapons, but still keep about the same power a rogue would have with two weapon fighting. I still in the end give them more power with the magic item I made and the reduction of two weapon fighting minuses.



A really good argument can be made that the druid is more powerful than the cleric. The point gets easier to make the more books you allow into the game.

Like I said, I like the intermediate save; I think it's a good thing. It's probably worthwhile to go through all the classes and tweak a little bit if you're going to incorporate it. Will do, but off the top no many really needed it in my original opinion.



I'm still not getting it - especially when combined with your examples from your first post. Let's try this.

How many skill points do the following non-human characters receive each level:

rogue with 12 Int: 11 skill points per level
wizard with 18 Int: 8 skill points per level
fighter with 10 Int: 4 skill points per level
barbarian with 10 int: 4 skill points per level

In addition to make things clearer. I probably should work on the barbarian a bit better here. We should act as if they already have this bonus.

Barbarian with Int 8: 2 skill points per level
Fighter with Int 8: 2 skill points per level
Barbarian with Int 6: 1 skill point per level
Fighter with Int 6: skill point per level
Rogue with Int 8: 8 skill points per level
Rogue with Int 6: 6 skill points per level
Rogue with Int 4: 5 skill points per level

I am starting to see you point here that I maybe making things too complicated. Thanks for the suggestion, and I'll consider re-working it.


Yep, I think the ninja is weak too. I'm not sure this change fixes it, though.

Yeah I just wanted to make them a bit better, I am also more in favor of pure classing instead of multi classing.


By RAW, paladins don't need a deity. If you've house ruled otherwise, that's cool - it's a common house rule.


True, true, I forgot about that. Will look at possible problems, i would probably require paladins of alternate alignments have a deity.



No, I saw that "restriction." But it's not really that difficult to deal with, to be honest. Pick the breath weapon you want, see which color gives it, then make yourself that alignment.

You did make it better, so that's something. Like I said, I think scaling abilities are a good thing - especially if they come from a template that kicks you in the family jewels with a high level adjustment. It's still a bad choice for casters - but anything with an LA is a bad choice for casters, so we really can't fix that.

OK, well I just didn't see a good reason why a half dragon would really have that sort of restriction, we are talking about a third step away from a deity with a mix with a race that usually has no alignment restriction. I just don't see why the restriction, especially sense they are more commonly raised with the non dragon parent.

Zherog
2007-07-18, 10:53 AM
Barbarian with Int 8: 2 skill points per level
Fighter with Int 8: 2 skill points per level
Barbarian with Int 6: 1 skill point per level
Fighter with Int 6: skill point per level
Rogue with Int 8: 8 skill points per level
Rogue with Int 6: 6 skill points per level
Rogue with Int 4: 5 skill points per level

Alright - so what you've done is raise everybody's skill points per level by two, except the barbarian. Or, at least, that's what you said in your post to Cody. Given that, these numbers don't make sense to me.

A fighter now gets 4 skill points per level. An Int of 8 is a -1 modifier. So why does he get 2 skill points instead of 3?

A barbarian gets 4 skill points (unchanged from core). An Int of 6 is a -2 modifier. So why does he get 1 skill point instead of 2?

A rogue now gets 10 skill points per level. An Int of 8 is a -1 modifier. So why isn't he getting 9 skill points per level instead of 8?

Increasing the number of skill points is fairly common; but I'm still not understanding how you're handling skill points for characters with an Int penalty.

Spikes01k
2007-07-18, 11:10 AM
Alright - so what you've done is raise everybody's skill points per level by two, except the barbarian. Or, at least, that's what you said in your post to Cody. Given that, these numbers don't make sense to me.

A fighter now gets 4 skill points per level. An Int of 8 is a -1 modifier. So why does he get 2 skill points instead of 3?

A barbarian gets 4 skill points (unchanged from core). An Int of 6 is a -2 modifier. So why does he get 1 skill point instead of 2?

A rogue now gets 10 skill points per level. An Int of 8 is a -1 modifier. So why isn't he getting 9 skill points per level instead of 8?

Increasing the number of skill points is fairly common; but I'm still not understanding how you're handling skill points for characters with an Int penalty.

Yeah I changed it, that was unnecessarily complicated. Thanks.

Edit: The idea was that all classes, I made the mistake of not noting the actual normal int bonus to skills did apply to the barbarian class so technically they would get only Int+2 from the class it self. The idea was to create a sepurit bonus to from having an in above 6. This would be a standard INT bonus of +2. This was to be delt with seperatly from your class skills. So having a negative int is applied double till it drops below an int score of 6. Seeing as this was way to complicated I just made things a world simpler and gust gave all classes a +2 class skill bonus.

Jack_Simth
2007-07-18, 06:58 PM
Actually I am keeping it about the same for a Rogue TWF. Yeah you NEED to buy the feats to do a good TWF. I will need to come up with seperate rules dealing with natural weapons and precision damage.

P.S. Look at this like this. In the NORMAL RULES To get precision damage on extra attacks using two weapon fighting requires the following:

Two Weapon Fighting, Improved Two Weapon Fighting, Greater Two Weapon Fighting, Epic Two Weapon Fightin

I require the following:
Two Weapon Fighting, Improved Two Weapon Fighting, and Greater Two Weapon Fighting

To get the VERY same thing.

So if you could please tell me HOW I am powering them down?

Because your House Rule for Normal is that you don't get precision damage on off-hand attacks, and the OP listed alterations to two-weapon fighting chain in general does not negate that "normal" - so it follows through.

Now that you've gone back and clarified that you mean an additional exception to what happens when you do have the feat, you cleared that up.

Spikes01k
2007-07-19, 06:32 AM
Because your House Rule for Normal is that you don't get precision damage on off-hand attacks, and the OP listed alterations to two-weapon fighting chain in general does not negate that "normal" - so it follows through.

Now that you've gone back and clarified that you mean an additional exception to what happens when you do have the feat, you cleared that up.

OK maybe your right, it was a typo, sorry. I have this posted on a different site and I must have lost track of when I fixed what where, sorry.

Spikes01k
2007-07-22, 07:37 PM
:smallcool: Harmless Bump :smallcool: