Major house rules for 4E, opinions hoped for.

[Galdor Miriel]

Proposed Alternative/House Rules for my 4E game

To me, the 4E innovation is really a new combat system for the roleplay game. The skill challenge is an aid to role play and rituals actually give magic the freedom it has in the literature. I love the story the most and would like to focus on that more in the games I DM so......

1. Use inherent bonuses built in to Character builder (used so monster levels still vaguely appropriate).
2. No weapon/implement expertise alowed
3. Dex or Int for initiative
4. New magic item system, using fewer magic items close in spirit to 1st edition AD&D
5. Money is really for plot, bribes, castles, boat trips, rituals and consumables, not magic items as there will be no magic item shop. If you want to get something specific lets try and work it into the story with a side quest or similar. I will ignore the money levels of the books and come up with something that is not exponentially ridiculous. Stuff will not be astronomically expensive, just demand you go somewhere else to get it, if it is very high level.
6. I plan on using the temporary boons that work until your next extended rest, such as recharge a daily, use encounter twice etc. It makes for a fun fast paced game.
7. Detect Magic and Identify are both now rituals, wizards get detect magic at level 1
8. Rituals are repriced, I want people to use them, but you have to have it with you and know what it does
9. Cursed magic items exist
10. An ambush gives +15 on initiative. If you beat the opposition by 15 you get an extra standard action to use in your first round. And as a special case, sneak attack damage can be applied again with this second attack. It is considered a surprise round until you act if taken by surprise for sneak attack damage etc.

Proposed magic item system

1. Have fewer magic items.
2. Go back to old style magic weapons or implements. i.e. +1 sword is a big deal
3. Still have skill enhancing, magic items with daily/encounter powers but not in such a bewildering array.
4. You cannot just buy them from a magic shop.
5. I would like to rebirth the old school magic wondrous items in a way that works under the new system, this might take some imagination, watch this space for the portable hole, but not the deck of many things.
6. Artifacts become more powerful as you grow closer in ideal to the artifact, use 4E rules but rework any artifact individually.

So the only bookwork that would need to be done is to make a list of magic items. Reprice rituals for casting cost and figure out how the pcs get hold of them. Basically wealth by level, and using money to build your character would no longer be part of the game. New/replacement characters will get to choose/pick a nifty magic item or two depending on the partys current magic level.

I would like to pcs to only have a few magic items and make them major plot hooks, not business as usual.

Some of these house rules might be controversial, but I and my gaming group all suffer from the same problem with both 3.5 and 4E: Given the ability to shop, pick and choose magic items we optimize like hell and get crazy abilitiies and well balanced powers, however we actually prefer having to make do with what we find and designing the characters for the flavor. Given a choice, we always optimize.

Playgrounders, let me know what you think, as long as your opinions are polite and eloquent. Let Gygax speak through you.....

[Another_Poet]

I get the flavour you are going for. Let me make sure I understand how you are balancing it though.

Magic items are more rare and cannot be purchased, so a +1 sword is a big deal. But because the monster level system assumes normal magical gear, you are giving the PCs inherent bonuses (+1 to hit, etc.) at various levels to make up for the lack of gear.

This will work to balance it, and do away with the need for as much money, but doesn't it kind of ruin the flavour you are going for?

In other words if I am supposed to have a +1 sword at my level, but instead I have a +1 inherent bonus to attack, do I really care about magic swords that I can't get anywhere? Don't they become even less special because I am basically just as strong as one on my own? I mean sure if I found one I would be even more powerful, but it's unlikely I will find one... until much later in the game when I have an inherent +3 or something to my attacks and the sword looks even sadder.

See what I mean?

A friend of mine runs his game in a way you might like. We cannot purchase magic items but it is actually fairly common to find them as loot. This is because as adventurers we go to the few dangerous places where they might be found; shopkeepers in towns don't have access to them. The result is that we are always keenly interested in magical items and think of them as special, because every time we finds one (even though it's fairly common) is a special opportunity to get something we can't just go out and buy. But we find them so often (every quest) that no special rules are need to make us strong enough to face encounters of our level.

As we gain a stockpile, we have more options to choose from. Most people in the world are too poor to offer us enough money to buy them, but we could maybe try to barter them with a few powerful people with collections of their own - though we haven't done this yet.

ap

[Kurald Galain]

If you keep WBL but do not let players spend it on items, they're all going to end up with ludicrous amounts of money and no ways to spend it. Not necessarily a problem, but still.

[The Glyphstone]

I get the flavour you are going for. Let me make sure I understand how you are balancing it though.

Magic items are more rare and cannot be purchased, so a +1 sword is a big deal. But because the monster level system assumes normal magical gear, you are giving the PCs inherent bonuses (+1 to hit, etc.) at various levels to make up for the lack of gear.

This will work to balance it, and do away with the need for as much money, but doesn't it kind of ruin the flavour you are going for?

That's not the impression I'm getting. if I'm reading it right, he's not saying +1 swords are rare - as you mentioned, the inherent bonuses would invalidate them. Instead, there are no +1 swords - the only swords are all +5 Holy Avengers or whatever, exceptional weapons or artifacts.

[zantes]

Proposed Alternative/House Rules for my 4E game

No weapon/implement expertise alowed

By doing this, you ensure that monsters will be better than they are supposed to be against the PCs. The Expertise feats are a game fix disguised as a feat tax. It has been proven that for the expected numbers against monsters, a PC is down +1/+2/+3 by level 10/20/30 against similar monsters. Unless you account for this as well, you would be better off just giving everyone a free Expertise feat of their choice.

[NEO|Phyte]

By doing this, you ensure that monsters will be better than they are supposed to be against the PCs. The Expertise feats are a game fix disguised as a feat tax. It has been proven that for the expected numbers against monsters, a PC is down +1/+2/+3 by level 10/20/30 against similar monsters. Unless you account for this as well, you would be better off just giving everyone a free Expertise feat of their choice.

Technically speaking, he didn't ban Versatile Expertise, or whatever the new one was called.

[TricksyAndFalse]

By doing this, you ensure that monsters will be better than they are supposed to be against the PCs. The Expertise feats are a game fix disguised as a feat tax. It has been proven that for the expected numbers against monsters, a PC is down +1/+2/+3 by level 10/20/30 against similar monsters. Unless you account for this as well, you would be better off just giving everyone a free Expertise feat of their choice.

I think the discrepancy can be overcome by tactics--PCs get better leadership bonuses and more opportunities to grab CA as they gain levels. But, if I was wrong (my group hasn't played higher than level 17), or my players didn't want to play a tactics-oriented game, I would fold the "math-fix" into the inherent bonus rather than give out Expertise feats--this allows PCs to use any weapon or implement they like, rather than straight-jacket them into using the same weapon or implement.

[Mando Knight]

this allows PCs to use any weapon or implement they like, rather than straight-jacket them into using the same weapon or implement.

Think about it this way: a Wizard likes his one implement... he's got Implement Mastery, and that means that deviating from his implement is silly. A Swordmage has one set of implement/weapon types. Most Divine characters use only their favorite weapon and a Holy Symbol, with Invokers being an exception. Martial characters, etc. get attached to their favorite weapon type. Rogues will use light blades almost exclusively. Superior Weapon/Implement feats only give you the one weapon or implement.

Most characters will pick their favorite weapon, then get feats to boost them anyway. Weapon Focus is as much a straitjacket as Expertise in that sense, and it's not a bad thing. A sword master is known for the deftness of his blade. A dwarf almost never picks up a sword or spear, since he loves his axes and/or hammers. The archer is already in trouble if he can't use his bow.

[Galdor Miriel]

Great comments people.

I would either do away with or give expertise for free. It doesn't matter. I understand that mathematiclaly you do better with the pluses to hit, but I don't care as a dm. If I need to use monsters a level lower that is not a problem as regards making a story. Its the story that matters.

The intention is to have the inherent enhancement built in. If a pc is lucky enough to get a +1 sword then he has a +1 on top of that. So he/she is a little better than the level norm.

There is no wealth by level, the heroes have money, they may be rich they may be poor, dependent on number of dragons slain/maidens rescued. However, their wealth does not determine their effectiveness as heroes whose destiny it is to save the world from the arch evil of X. Also less bookkeeping.

I am toying with the idea of using hitpoints (not surges) for rituals. So low level rituals become safer and cheaper in terms of resources as you go up in level and high level ones....could lead to your death as you are weakened.

With this magic item system, it would be just like the old days of AD&D, that is the idea. I thought that the flavour of those books was great. I loved to read them. I have no interest in reading through magic items in 4E as they are not interesting as a read, which I think leaves them uninteresting in play. The idea is I will invent magic items that are fun and interesting for the players to use in and out of combat. Or just reuse things like portable holes etc. Currently my pcs have two magic swords, reworked into this they would be artifacts with +1, +3 vs undead and a couple of powers/skill effects and a +1/+3 vs dragons with a +1 to saves and a power. Simple, interesting and merging the old with the new.

GM

[NotScaryBats]

One thing you might consider to make magic items more rare and interesting is this: allow people to upgrade them.

That way, instead of a +1 longsword, it is Gryntol, the Orc Bane. As you quest and discover some rare material (a magical gem, rare metal, dragon blood, whatever) you allow the PCs to visit some special blacksmith and BAM the sword becomes +2. This allows PCs to get more out of their magical items, while still having them rare.

Obviously, as the DM you would have control over when and where they get the necessary components to upgrade their gear, so you can make it as abundant or rare as you please. This simply makes it so that items are rare and powerful things to be cherished.

[TricksyAndFalse]

Think about it this way: [...] Most characters will pick their favorite weapon, then get feats to boost them anyway [...] A dwarf almost never picks up a sword or spear, since he loves his axes and/or hammers.

Our dwarf fighter loves both axes and hammers and the player feels like he is being forced to pick one.

An invoker might want to choose between the nicer of a rod or staff without retraining a feat. Same with druids and staves and totems.

A rogue might like the aesthetics of a sword sword, but want the same to-hit bonus when using blinding barrage with his ranged weapon.

I'm only suggesting that if you think the Expertise feats are a math-fix and the feats should be free, you fix the math for all weapons/implements the character might use, and not make them pick one, doomed to be math un-fixed in all others.

[Mando Knight]

Our dwarf fighter loves both axes and hammers and the player feels like he is being forced to pick one.

An invoker might want to choose between the nicer of a rod or staff without retraining a feat. Same with druids and staves and totems.

A rogue might like the aesthetics of a sword sword, but want the same to-hit bonus when using blinding barrage with his ranged weapon.

I'm only suggesting that if you think the Expertise feats are a math-fix and the feats should be free, you fix the math for all weapons/implements the character might use, and not make them pick one, doomed to be math un-fixed in all others.

Weapon Expertise applies to all weapons of the same category. Shuriken are Light Blades, with the same +3/1d6 as a Short Sword when wielded by a Rogue. Daggers are +4/1d4 throwable light blades in the hands of a Rogue. Most crossbows are +2 weapons, with the exception of the Superior Crossbow.

Versatile Expertise works with two implement/weapon groups at once. Most implement-based characters other than the Wizard use only two implement types at most, with the Artificer and Bard being exceptions (though they usually choose one and stick with it as well).

If that's not enough, Dragon has Weapon Mastery, a feat that grants both Expertise and Focus with every weapon that a character is proficient with.

On top of that, you usually only use one weapon or implement at a time. Every time you use a power, you're making a choice as to what item you're using.

[Tiki Snakes]

Just to note, because I suspect you may have missed it; You mention no Deck of Many Things, but that's already been updated to the edition as of a few weeks back or so.

And it's pretty interesting.

Similarly, I take it you are aware that anyone trained in arcana can, by default, already detect magic and spend a little time (short rest?) to identify items. So, would they be losing these uses of Arcana as part of the system?

[Galdor Miriel]

One thing you might consider to make magic items more rare and interesting is this: allow people to upgrade them.

That way, instead of a +1 longsword, it is Gryntol, the Orc Bane. As you quest and discover some rare material (a magical gem, rare metal, dragon blood, whatever) you allow the PCs to visit some special blacksmith and BAM the sword becomes +2. This allows PCs to get more out of their magical items, while still having them rare.

Obviously, as the DM you would have control over when and where they get the necessary components to upgrade their gear, so you can make it as abundant or rare as you please. This simply makes it so that items are rare and powerful things to be cherished.

I like that a lot, tie it to the story and make it a reward.

Thanks.

[Galdor Miriel]

Our dwarf fighter loves both axes and hammers and the player feels like he is being forced to pick one.

An invoker might want to choose between the nicer of a rod or staff without retraining a feat. Same with druids and staves and totems.

A rogue might like the aesthetics of a sword sword, but want the same to-hit bonus when using blinding barrage with his ranged weapon.

I'm only suggesting that if you think the Expertise feats are a math-fix and the feats should be free, you fix the math for all weapons/implements the character might use, and not make them pick one, doomed to be math un-fixed in all others.

I wanted to get rid of the expertise feats because everybody takes it. They retrain if they change weapon, so it is just a feat tax that stops you doing something with your feat to make your character more unique. If they are not there in the game, they have no effect.

[Kaiyanwang]

If you keep WBL but do not let players spend it on items, they're all going to end up with ludicrous amounts of money and no ways to spend it. Not necessarily a problem, but still.

Couldn't the PC use all that money to build castles and similar structures? Perhaps the campaign could be designed in a way to encourage PCs to do it..

[Galdor Miriel]

Just to note, because I suspect you may have missed it; You mention no Deck of Many Things, but that's already been updated to the edition as of a few weeks back or so.

And it's pretty interesting.

Similarly, I take it you are aware that anyone trained in arcana can, by default, already detect magic and spend a little time (short rest?) to identify items. So, would they be losing these uses of Arcana as part of the system?

I would be losing the detect magic ability as part of skill training, it would become a ritual, so you could not do it in the heat of battle without dropping your guard. You would not now know what a magic item does just be taking a short break for five minutes, which I have always found idiotic. The identify ritual would tell you if something is cursed or not, and how it works. It would be based on a skill check rather than be a an automatic thing, I have to write it up. This way I can make it dc 25 to identify the curse. Fits into the system and encourages skill use.

I was talking about the old school deck of many things, which was ridiculous and would break or ruin any game it appeared in as the pcs would start drawing cards all the time and not be able to help themselves until something bad happened, like being banished to the Abyss. It was hilarious at times, but perhaps a bit ridiculous....

[Kylarra]

To be honest, the mentality that the way to deal with a feat tax is to prevent everyone from taking it is kind of confusing to me.

I realize in a sense the double-stacking magic items+inherent make up for that, but it's even more of a limitation that way since they'll be "forced" to use that magic item all the time in order to have the proper maths, keeping them from being able to choose their character concept by weapon or implement use and placing that burden solely on you to decide what their characters will wield in order to reach the level of competency that wotc envisioned for their game.

[Galdor Miriel]

To be honest, the mentality that the way to deal with a feat tax is to prevent everyone from taking it is kind of confusing to me.

I realize in a sense the double-stacking magic items+inherent make up for that, but it's even more of a limitation that way since they'll be "forced" to use that magic item all the time in order to have the proper maths, keeping them from being able to choose their character concept by weapon or implement use and placing that burden solely on you to decide what their characters will wield in order to reach the level of competency that wotc envisioned for their game.

The way I have been thinking about is as follows. If everyone takes it, which they do in my groups, then everyone has +1 (higher at higher tiers) to hit. All I am doing is encouraging people to use feats that are more interesting because people will not make the same feat choice, I free up a feat for everyone. It does not actually matter what the + is for hitting, because as a dm I have to get a feel for the deadliness of encounters and try and make every third encounter or so pretty damned deadly. If I have a change like no expertise, the pcs are slightly weaker mathematically, so I might need one fewer baddy to make it a real challenge. Its as simple as that. The actual numbers do not matter. It is the story that matters and people having fun.

I could also just give everyone that feat for free, no skin off my nose, all it does is adjust the levels of monster I need to make an encounter a real challenge.
GM

[Kylarra]

I guess that mentality could work if you're obviating the experience system, otherwise you're basically just penalizing them by forcing them to fight more and more monsters to level, increasing the number of necessary monsters by each tier as the gap between monster defenses and PC attacks grows.

[Galdor Miriel]

I guess that mentality could work if you're obviating the experience system, otherwise you're basically just penalizing them by forcing them to fight more and more monsters to level, increasing the number of necessary monsters by each tier as the gap between monster defenses and PC attacks grows.

I should have said, we generally have every one go up every few sessions, attend or not.

[Drakefall]

I've personally never been a fan of the christmas tree effect. I've always liked magic items to be at least somewhat rare and special. I would personally love to play under these house rules, though I do agree that you should hand out expertise feats for free, being math fixes and all.

As long as you can stay on top of everything, such as encouter difficulties, as a dm I think your house rules will work out just fine.

[BobTheDog]

Level up by DM-fiat is my personal favorite house rule.

"Okay, guys. It's been a few weeks of playing, you've done a few quests and fought well. Level up time!"