Quote Originally Posted by Fizban View Post
and a note that healing resets the timer if needed.
That's a good idea, but I still don't think I'd use it because they can never stabilize until above their threshold. I specifically left the time limit vague because I want to decide at the time if its too long or not and the players shouldnt know something like that anyway.

lone breastplate.
since the scales can be made to lock with those below them and prevent that
The armor names/"categories" aren't quite set in stone; if something would be basically equivalent you can have that instead. So like a breastplate + helm over a gambeson might be a "chain shirt", or maybe leatherplate or chainmail covering everything else would be the same as a brigandine-coat. I had to be sparse with explanations because the post runs right up against the word limit, but in general a heavier/more advanced armor incorporates the lighter/simpler armors. So like a brigandine-coat has chainmail or maybe leatherplate covering everything else (everything past leatherplate comes with a metal helm or helmet already). Platemail has chain to cover its gaps. A gambeson doesnt quite equal padded armor, but from chain-shirt up you probably have a gambeson under the armor.

Reducing the effective direct fire range of projectile weapons seems plenty reasonable to me, though it cuts off later level ridiculous feats of heroism. A mass of archers can hit things when arcing out to maximum technical range, but that's not the range at which direct target fire was used.
Indirect fire would count as a stationary target for me. The rule exists because I don't think the range penalties are enough. It's very easy to step out of the way of an incoming projectile past a certain point, and also it becomes impossible to predict where a target is going to be by the time the projectile gets to it if its moving erratically (like a bird flying in circles, but not perfect even circles). I almost removed the rule once or twice because of the added complication, but it just makes too much sense to me.

Ya know, if I want to get rid of the "shields are for bashing!" mentality, banning Bashing shields is a good idea.
I actually made shield-bashing an easier/better choice, but the bashing enhancement is just lazy and imo not even a good choice.

Shield spikes I only leave in because tradition as all I ever hear is they never existed. . .
Armor spikes too, but they're a fantasy staple imo so I'm keeping them. Now, armor spikes being used offensively but not defensively (harming those who grapple you) seems like a strange omission, but I haven't got around to homebrewing anything yet.

Is this published somewhere? (deflection)
I don't remember where I got the idea, but I did get it from somewhere.

I feel like I commented on and/or suggested this at some point in the past.
You probably did; I made a thread about it a year or two ago. Got the idea from the skyblivion videos where they show Goldbrand.

I like specific potions. I'm not sure I like many of these
I really liked baldurs gate 1 potions; I tried to replicate most of them (without being OP).

As much as I hate the term "archetype," these are some nice low-key buffs to make Bards do things, though I would say the warrior goes a bit too far with full BAB and the mage rather needs a set of extra slots to cast their spells.
Bard are advertised as a "step in and cover a role" class, but they're not. The idea here is you pick another role (besides what bard already does) and are good enough at it. A party with an adventurer rogue for instance can get by without a real rogue, in addition to having their "face"/"buffer"/whatever, or at least thats the idea. Warrior bards are probably going to stick with light armor and have to split up their stats too much to truly compete with a real fighter, so I don't worry about it. If a player thinks its too strong they are welcome to play one. The mage actually had bonus slots originally but people kept saying it was too good and I kinda agreed. Mage bard is the default/standard bard. I'm open to suggestions but I dont think they need much more.

Drawing weapons already doesn't provoke AoOs
That seems counterintuitive, but there it is.

An interesting nerf (I have a higher level version that's meant to be stationary myself)- out of curiosity then, what is your expected lighting method?
There's tons of choices. Lanterns (they have better reach than most sources), sunrods (the best, but expensive over time and kinda short-lived), the light spell (cheap and has a decent duration), enchanted glowing weapons (probably the standard past low levels), I've even homebrewed some new light spells , but these are the kind you've have to find or make on your own rather than just pick as you level up.

I like the various options for lighting, such as one person using a hooded lantern for an aura of light around the party and another person using a bullseye to look down hallways or target things farther out, or leaving light sources in a specific spot while the party is somewhere else, or casting light on an arrow and firing it off into the distance; that kind of thing. I also like the players having to manage resources; continual flame is cheap and lazy imo, but I also don't mind dungeons or cities having some permanent magic light if they're willing to pay for it.