ArMODillo [Variant Rules]

[ArmorArmadillo]

Well, I'm opening up the old noggin and offering two sets of Variant rules to try and enhance the game experience.

1. Crafting: I think Crafting is an interesting aspect to the game, but the way that the skill is designed, it takes weeks to build even mundane items; and items like alchemical gear and traps can take months. Based off of how the average DM operates, you can finish entire small modules in a week of game time. So, I'm offering the following special options to aid crafting:
Standard Crafting: As the current game skill, it takes the required time in light work (i.e. Free time at the camp fire, fiddling with your gadgets during free time in town)

Accelerated Crafting: Increases the progress made on building an item by 25%, it takes the required time in heavy work (i.e. Upwards of four hours a day of concentrated work, only basic other actions in a day: such as speaking to someone over lunch or going into town to shop)

Dedicated Crafting: Increases the progress made on building an item by 50%, it takes the required time in solid work (i.e. All time in a day other than eating and sleeping spent working.)

Master's Crafting: When using the Craft skill to build an item, the user may voluntarily raise the Craft DC by any number up to his class level.

2. Death Effects: Save or Die sucks. Save or Petrify sucks. I have not seen an encounter that was enhanced because one character makes a bad roll and dies. Also, the way these attacks are organized causes a severe imbalance on the save system. (Reflex Save or take full damage from Fireball, Fortitude Save or Die) So, I'm going to try and redesign some of these effects to make them more playable in game terms.

Death: If an effect would immediately kill a creature (such as the Finger of Death spell), that creature is instead reduced to -9 hp and dying. If the creature dies before recieving any healing or stabilizing, any special effects that would occur due to the death effect (such as from a Bodak's Death Gaze) take effect. Visibly, the character begins to visualize the incoming effect. (A character hit by disintegrate would begin to fade, a character killed by a Bodak would begin to blacken and take an unnatural appearance)

Petrify: If an effect would petrify a creature, that creature instead takes 2 points of Dexterity damage each round. Each round, that creature is entitled to a Fortitude Save (DC equal to the original effect), each time it makes one of these saves, it takes no damage this round. If the creature succeeds at 2 consecutive saves, the effect end. If the creature is reduced to 0 Dexterity, that damage becomes ability drain and he takes any form described by the effect (such as stone from a Gorgon's breath attack.)
If the creature is later affected by an effect that ends petrification (such as Stone to Flesh or Wish, this drain is immediately recovered.)

[jjpickar]

The craft variant seems fine but I don't understand what you mean by "...dies while suffering from this effect." Does it mean killed in the traditional manner (i.e.hp=-10) or something else?

[Altair_the_Vexed]

Most "Save or Die" effects happen at relatively high CRs - higher than the CR for a Fireball-wielding caster. Usually when you're faced with an actual "Save or Die" situation, your party has access to Raise Dead (through cash or PC casters). As for petrification - that's an easy effect to overcome.
Also - [pauses to stoke pipe of great age and wisdom: adopts cantankerous manner as of a codger; prods with stem of pipe] - you young players don't know the half of it!
[prod] We used to face 'save or die' effects at first level!
[prod] Poison these days wouldn't have given the likes of my ol' characters a headache!
[prod] You might as well say all your characters are immortal and can't be harmed if you're going to nerf the death effects like that!

Seriously, the chances of in game death in D&D3.5 are so slim compared to previous versions. Count yourself lucky!

If you must nerf death effects, I recommend you replace "Save or Die" with "Save or Be Incapacitated", where characters are reduced to -1 hp, instead of -10. Then the rest of the players have a chance to save them. The Temp STR damage is just too lightweight, in my opinion.

[ArmorArmadillo]

It is lightweight, I may think about "Save or Disabled" (0 hp or -9 seem like good cut off points,) I just feel like high level combat becomes way too dependant on single critical saves, and epic combat is a lost cause (race to the natural 1)

[Marcotic]

I like those rules a bit better, save or dies suck, and really, since theres, no matter what, a 5% chance of croking in a save or die, it doesn't take too much from the game. The petrify rules I don't have so much love for, but they do make the game less of a save or die.

[ExHunterEmerald]

Sounds good to me. I like having long-running characters.
Incidentally, Armadillo, I'd suggest you were hit by a spark of inspiration, but that would knock your armor off.
(C'mon, with that name you've GOTTA be a MMX fan...)

[ArmorArmadillo]

Sounds good to me. I like having long-running characters.
Incidentally, Armadillo, I'd suggest you were hit by a spark of inspiration, but that would knock your armor off.
(C'mon, with that name you've GOTTA be a MMX fan...)

I think I'm going to have a permanent red mark from slapping myself on the forehead.

[ExHunterEmerald]

I think I'm going to have a permanent red mark from slapping myself on the forehead.

I try, I try. Jokes, studies, patience...

[Crystall_Myr]

That does sound nice, I can't see how save or die could ever make something feel more epic.

I caught the MMX reference before you said what it was from, is that sad?

[ExHunterEmerald]

That does sound nice, I can't see how save or die could ever make something feel more epic.

I caught the MMX reference before you said what it was from, is that sad?

Naw. X1 is my favorite game of all time, I just never got around to asking him about it.

[Icewalker]

I don't know about this. It's not like character death is a really big deal. Hell, back in first edition it was a permanent 1 con for character death, so you couldn't regain it through killing more stuff (not to mention if you had a low con there is a chance resurection spells fail). I think you can't get rid of save or die effects without making them seem really ridiculous. "I cast disintigrate upon you! hahahaha! you fail your save, and are now lying on the ground unconscious with no signs of disintigration, but if I stab you with my mundane knife now, you will disintigrate! what?"

I dunno, I think you can't really get rid of save or die effects, and they really aren't that big of a deal, they can be overcome without massive effort on the part of the group.

also^ MMXs ftw. 1 and 3 in particular. I really liked 3, because Zero features prominently.

[ExHunterEmerald]

also^ MMXs ftw. 1 and 3 in particular. I really liked 3, because Zero features prominently.

Hells yeah. If I can ever claim to have completely mastered a series, it'd be the SNES X games.

[ArmorArmadillo]

I don't know about this. It's not like character death is a really big deal. Hell, back in first edition it was a permanent 1 con for character death, so you couldn't regain it through killing more stuff (not to mention if you had a low con there is a chance resurection spells fail). I think you can't get rid of save or die effects without making them seem really ridiculous. "I cast disintigrate upon you! hahahaha! you fail your save, and are now lying on the ground unconscious with no signs of disintigration, but if I stab you with my mundane knife now, you will disintigrate! what?"

It's not wholly that ridiculous (Disintegrate is an odd effect to work into this)

Still, I've always disliked the way that death becomes a nuisance in high-level campaigns, which comes randomly when you fail a save vs. a Bodak and then sidetracks the party while a Cleric goes to town and gets a diamond. I feel like resurrection should be a rare instance, rather than a constant waste on money and resources. (Also, it seriously demeans the value of death.)

I feel like this at least gives you a chance to keep a more fluid campaign. Also, by weakening instadeath; you give some chance to make Resurrection a smaller aspect of your setting.

Also, I reworked Petrification, it may seem odd, but I like it as it is now.

[Icewalker]

It's true, it does weaken the idea of death, which is kind of annoying for a lot of plots. It could be good in a campaign with heavily weakened or removed death spells, and near impossible resurrection, if at all.

[Leather_Book_Wizard]

Most "Save or Die" effects happen at relatively high CRs - higher than the CR for a Fireball-wielding caster. Usually when you're faced with an actual "Save or Die" situation, your party has access to Raise Dead (through cash or PC casters). As for petrification - that's an easy effect to overcome.
Also - [pauses to stoke pipe of great age and wisdom: adopts cantankerous manner as of a codger; prods with stem of pipe] - you young players don't know the half of it!
[prod] We used to face 'save or die' effects at first level!
[prod] Poison these days wouldn't have given the likes of my ol' characters a headache!
[prod] You might as well say all your characters are immortal and can't be harmed if you're going to nerf the death effects like that!

Seriously, the chances of in game death in D&D3.5 are so slim compared to previous versions. Count yourself lucky!

We walked up hill both ways to get to our dungeons! In the blue cold and pouring rain! We stayed in inns where the barkeep was actually 3 kobold in a coat! And we didn't have no fancy natural 20 either! The best we got was an 18, and you had to work your tail off to get it! And you no what? WE LIKED IT!

[Fallen Martyr]

THAC0

*shudder*

More on-topic-like, the save or die thing I like. I don't really like the whole 1 in 20 chance to one shot something with any number of hitpoints, perhaps even Pun-Pun.

The petrification thing? Treating it like a disease doesn't really suit the flavor of the ability.

[ArmorArmadillo]

The petrification thing? Treating it like a disease doesn't really suit the flavor of the ability.

Why not? As written, the ability turns you into stone, the only difference is that it takes several rounds rather than being instant. Also, it is unlike a disease because of how quickly it takes effect.

Also, as it stands the only reason Death is worse than Petrification is the spell that it takes to undo it. I don't like a system where easily accessible Cleric and Druid spells determine the meaningfulness of effects.

Why should a CR 3 Cockatrice get to kill players outright?

Also, why should petrify be either game-breaking (if you don't have Stone to Flesh) or a nuisance (if you do?)


Finally, I don't mind having a significant possibility of death, (I think a well made encounter should have one); I don't like the idea of death being some sudden shock that comes in an instant without any chance of reaction.

[Fallen Martyr]

Oh, I agree that petrification can kill all too easily.
My problem was letting the body recover naturally from being partially turned to stone.
Maybe a Remove Curse or even Dispel Magic before it heals naturally?

[alchemy.freak]

I don't know about this. It's not like character death is a really big deal.

i would disagree. i think character death is indeed a pretty big deal. i don't think i have ever played a game where a character dying has improved it. Unless it is absolutely necessary i do not kill my players. Their characters are important (they should be, most of us are playing the first characters we ever made) the fact is, dying is not fun. if you want to make your game more fun and interesting for your players, killing one of them is a poor choice.

i thinks it is much more interesting to have characters be very very close to death and the party members help save them. It does not work if overused(then again nothing does) but it really helps improve the experience.

[ArmorArmadillo]

Oh, I agree that petrification can kill all too easily.
My problem was letting the body recover naturally from being partially turned to stone.
Maybe a Remove Curse or even Dispel Magic before it heals naturally?

As it is currently written; this variant does make the change permanent without a reversal effect if the effect succeeds.

[Altair_the_Vexed]

I think that reducing a character to -9hp and immediately stabilising is missing the point of a death effect. Once he's stabilised, there's little chance beyond a TPK that the character is going to die, even if no-one helps him.

I recommend you change "-9hp and immediately stabilise" to "-1hp and dying". The rest of the party has plenty of chance to help - the dying character has at least 9 rounds to be saved, that way - and it still involves some risk. A stable character at -9 is not much worse off in mechanical terms than a stable character at -1 hp.

[Glittersamas]

What about con damage or even con drain? You con is reduced to 0, you die as norm. Just a thought.

[Nahal]

Umm question, how long do these effects last if the attack was originally instantaneous? Under these rule proposals you bleed dex after being hit by a petrification attack, but how many save do you need to make to fight it off? Because if you fail the initial save, then only need to make one fort afterward, you have severely nerfed the tactic.

[ArmorArmadillo]

You have to make two consecutive saves. Even if the petrification was instantaneous, you are under the effect until you succeed on two saves.
Yes, it nerfs the effect, but the effect kind of needed to be nerfed.

[Fallen Martyr]

As it is currently written; this variant does make the change permanent without a reversal effect if the effect succeeds.

Are you making petrification slower, i.e. the person slowly turns to stone with Fort saves to stop the process, with the Dex loss as a way of showing the loss of mobility?

Or, are you changing the way petrification works? Making it so the person loses Dex until 0 and then is turned into stone.

If it's the former, then turning "out of stone" naturally doesn't seem right to me.
If it's the latter, then I'll have to chew on it a bit more.

I think that reducing a character to -9hp and immediately stabilising is missing the point of a death effect. Once he's stabilised, there's little chance beyond a TPK that the character is going to die, even if no-one helps him.

I recommend you change "-9hp and immediately stabilise" to "-1hp and dying". The rest of the party has plenty of chance to help - the dying character has at least 9 rounds to be saved, that way - and it still involves some risk. A stable character at -9 is not much worse off in mechanical terms than a stable character at -1 hp.

Putting a character at -9 and stable is as close to death as you can get without the "one bad roll = ded" thing. The roll to stabilize has miserable chances. They are, literally, hanging on by a thread.
Reducing them to -1 and dying makes it so an untrained Heal check or a 0 level spell takes most of the risk out. There's only about a 40% chance that the character won't stabilize on his own, even.

[alchemy.freak]

How about reducing them to -7 or -6 and not stabilizing them, that way there is risk of death, but only if no one is there to help, and a level 0 spell or heal check will stabilize them, but not make them conscious.

and if they are left too long they will die eventually

[ArmorArmadillo]

How about reducing them to -7 or -6 and not stabilizing them, that way there is risk of death, but only if no one is there to help, and a level 0 spell or heal check will stabilize them, but not make them conscious.

and if they are left too long they will die eventually

It works, but they're awkward numbers.

I'm thinking of making them -9 and unstable; it risks death but a quick heal or lucky roll can still save them. That way death effects are still serious, but there's some element of tactics and reaction beyond a simple save or die.

Also, I added a visual manifestation to ease the awkwardness of spells like Disintegrate.