* * * Wizards Community Thread * * * -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Thread : Critique My House Rules Please Started at 10-07-07 11:41 AM by dontheox Visit at http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=935406 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 1] Author : dontheox Date : 10-07-07 11:41 AM Thread Title : Critique My House Rules Please Thanks in advance for your input! Please if you find something in my rules you do not like tell me why, just don't say that sucks and offer no explanations. The golden rule is to have fun! No rule disputes at the table. If the dispute is a life or death factor for your character I and the player in question will quickly discuss a solution. I will then make a quick call and move on with the game. After the game I and the group will have a discussion decide on a rule and I will post it on the group page. If you miss a game no big deal life happens your character will be kept safe but no experience will be gained. If two games in a row are missed with out calling, emailing, or otherwise contacting me or another player. I will consider your character "retired" and will not be with the party. Miss all you want just keep me in the loop. New rules for Wizards; Wizards will get the same bonus spells as priest do using there intelligence score. Just use the wisdom chart for priests bonus spells. Or you can use the spell point system for spells. (Players Option Spells and Magic) Wizards can cast out of there spell books under these conditions only; an open slot for the spell level being cast and it takes 1D6 +1 rounds plus the casting time of the spell.Which erases the spell from the book. New rules for Priests; Priests have the ability to call for a spell they don't have memorized, under these conditions only; the priest must have an open slot for the spell level that is being called for, a casting time of one turn is required, and the spell must some how be furthering the priests faith. (Healing a fellow clergy or follower, or destroying enemies of the priest deity are some examples) Priests also have the ability to cast spell higher than the level they are at the time, but only in extreme circumstances! Single class fighters are the only class that can specialize! No if ands or buts! The other sub classes of fighters can use the other proficiencies in combat and tactics. New rules for humans; In my world humans have the ability to multi class and dual class, also they get a +3 reaction adjustment in any region that has a human ruler whether they are good or evil rulers dose not matter. Good rulers get respect from deeds, evil ones respect through fear. Either way humans will be respected in those particular regions. (Think of the Holy Roman Empire at their peak.) Also humans will get +1 to any one Prime Requisite, and a -1 to any non prime requisite the negative modifier represents the sacrifice made to one particular attribute for the focus of another. Humans have a good talent of adaptability, all human characters gets a survival proficiency in any one environment. Due to their short life spans humans tend to learn things faster and are more ambitious than their longer lived cousins. Therefore humans gain a better prime requisite bonus they get a 20% bonus instead of the usual 10%. Humans have the all options a half elf has to Multi Classing. New demi human rules; Demi humans have no level restrictions, or class restrictions, and can dual class except for the following. Any race can be a Paladin as long as the character follows a god of their particular race (i.e. Dwarves could choose Moradin or Clanggedin Silverbeard) half elves may choose from a human or an elves god depending on which racial community the character was brought up in. As for Monks or Ninjas those are mainly for humans but exceptions can be made. Nonhumnoid barbarians are very rare if not unique, but as always there are exceptions to the norm. New character rules. 1) What level of character do I need to make? The starting level will be average level of the party, or you can choose to play one of the parties' henchmen. (I prefer a new player to use one of the party's henchmen when starting in the middle of an adventure.) 2) Are you using just the core rules or are you also using the various "Complete Books of ________" or perhaps even using some of the Players Option Books? That leads into question 3. You can use any of the 2nd edition rule books that I own or have access to to create a character. 3) How are you handling proficiencies? Core Rules used a flat score upon character creation while Skill & Powers went with a Character Point based system that started low but allowed you to increase your ability as you gained levels. You can level your proficiencies, or if you are using the player’s option rules stick with those rules. 4) How are you generating attributes? I use 4D6 re roll 1's and then take away the lowest number rolled. Roll two sets of six and then pick which set you want. Put the scores in any order you wish, as long as they are from the same set. 5) What is the current party composition? I want a character with his own unique niche but I also am willing to play something that is needed by the party. I get this question every time a new player joins my group. To be blunt play what you want to! I appreciate players wanting to add to party in a utilitarian way, but most often than not when a player runs a character to help round out a party the player almost always regrets it. 6) Are there any races/classes that flat out aren't allowed? I like to keep to standard races or races allowed in other supplements however I am willing to work with players if they have a good idea for a certain race. I am not one of those DMs' who just ignores or forgets that there is serious implications, social and otherwise to playing a drow, orc, half-giant ect... running around the realms in cities or what have you with an adventuring party. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 2] Author : Mojo_Rat Date : 10-07-07 03:10 PM Thread Title : Re: Critique My House Rules Please Which Version of D&D is this for?. Most of your suggestions Seem Fine Although I thought I would Coment on a fiew. In the case of Wizards, If the wizard wants to cast a spell out of his spell book treat it like a scroll. I Always thought this was how it was supposed to work So I am not sure if you are house ruling to let wizards cast out of their spell book or just make the process take longer. In the case of clerics in our 1st AD&D game the Dm let you cast from any spell you knew. However its been so long since I personally read the rules So I might be confusing a house rule :) Anyhow I comented on thse two because while i get the idea of what you are trying to allow spending 2-5 rounds casting a spell is Rather tedious and not fun and might mean it never even gets to be used. I also wanted to coment on the Human bit you put in. I understand the intent to make humans more Viable or percieved 'lack of viability' due to no stat adjustments. However 20% xp bonus is pretty High. If you really want to include some sort of xp bonus maybe allow humans to get the 10% bonus easier (like at 15 in the prime stat) You may not need to add a benefit to humans being able to interact with others in quite the way you put in. Depending on where your game takes place Youc an Just have Humans in general be nicer to other humans or at least less likely to Stiff them and more likely to harass demi humans etc. This is how our DM does it and Humans have bee a pretty popular choice just on their ability to go anywhere. By and large Your ideas though seem Okay -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 3] Author : Extempus Date : 10-08-07 03:01 AM Thread Title : Re: Critique My House Rules Please New rules for Wizards; Wizards will get the same bonus spells as priest do using there intelligence score. Just use the wisdom chart for priests bonus spells. Personally, I don't see any reason to allow wizards bonus spells other than those allowed by the rules. My reasoning is that while priests may have far more spells due to bonuses from high wisdom, wizards can pack one hell of a lot more firepower than a priest could ever hope for. They're powerful enough as it is without allowing them more spells, IMHO. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 4] Author : Agathokles Date : 10-08-07 03:51 AM Thread Title : Re: Critique My House Rules Please Personally, I don't see any reason to allow wizards bonus spells other than those allowed by the rules. My reasoning is that while priests may have far more spells due to bonuses from high wisdom, wizards can pack one hell of a lot more firepower than a priest could ever hope for. They're powerful enough as it is without allowing them more spells, IMHO. The rationale is to let low-level wizards cast spells in more than one encounter per day. If additional spells are too powerful, an alternative is to allow a Cantrip non-weapon proficiency to be used (i.e., allowing a large number of Cantrips per day with some risk of failure). GP -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 5] Author : Extempus Date : 10-08-07 10:36 PM Thread Title : Re: Critique My House Rules Please Makes sense, however, low-level wizards are hardly useless once they cast their few spells. Being highly intelligent, they make excellent advisors and should be used as such, suggesting alternative courses of action and so forth. Also, there are magic items usable only by wizards that can easily make up for a lack of spells. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 6] Author : dontheox Date : 10-08-07 11:19 PM Thread Title : Re: Critique My House Rules Please Personally, I don't see any reason to allow wizards bonus spells other than those allowed by the rules. My reasoning is that while priests may have far more spells due to bonuses from high wisdom, wizards can pack one hell of a lot more firepower than a priest could ever hope for. They're powerful enough as it is without allowing them more spells, IMHO. Using my rules even if the mage has an 18 intelligence he would get two extra 1st level spells, two extra 2nd level spells, one 3rd level and one 4th level spell. So at higher level it dose not really make a difference. All it dose is give low level mages a little more umph. Personally makes sense, however, low-level wizards are hardly useless once they cast their few spells. Being highly intelligent, they make excellent advisers and should be used as such, suggesting alternative courses of action and so forth. Also, there are magic items usable only by wizards that can easily make up for a lack of spells. I agree mages are more than just spell lobbers but trying to advise an angry owlbear not to attack is a feat beyond reckoning! As I said above it dose not give them that much more power. As far as the magic items most mages don't get to acquire magic items until higher level least not in my game. Personally I always wondered why a mage with a 9 intelligence could cast the same number of spells as a mage with a 18 intelligence, but thats just me. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 7] Author : dontheox Date : 10-08-07 11:50 PM Thread Title : Re: Critique My House Rules Please Which Version of D&D is this for?. Most of your suggestions seem fine, Aathough I thought I would comment on a few. In the case of Wizards, If the wizard wants to cast a spell out of his spell book treat it like a scroll. I Always thought this was how it was supposed to work, so I am not sure if you are house ruling to let wizards cast out of their spell book or just make the process take longer. In the case of clerics in our 1st AD&D game the DM let you cast from any spell you knew. However its been so long since I personally read the rules So I might be confusing a house rule :) Anyhow I commented on these two because while i get the idea of what you are trying to allow spending 2-5 rounds casting a spell is Rather tedious and not fun and might mean it never even gets to be used. I also wanted to comment on the human bit you put in. I understand the intent to make humans more Viable or perceived 'lack of viability' due to no stat adjustments. However 20% xp bonus is pretty High. If you really want to include some sort of xp bonus maybe allow humans to get the 10% bonus easier (like at 15 in the prime stat) You may not need to add a benefit to humans being able to interact with others in quite the way you put in. Depending on where your game takes place You can just have humans in general be nicer to other humans or at least less likely to Stiff them and more likely to harass demi humans etc. This is how our DM does it and Humans have bee a pretty popular choice just on their ability to go anywhere. By and large Your ideas though seem Okay These are the house rules for my 2.5 AD&D game I am running. The spell if read out the spell book dose erase the spell, and the increased time is mainly for digging out your book finding the right pages and then reading the spell which might be any where from 1 to 14 pages depending on the level of the spell and how many pages it took up in the spell book. The xp bonus seems high but really your only gonna get an extra 200xp per thousand, that is a pittance at high levels. The reaction idea is a good one I might implement that in my game instead of using my rule. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 8] Author : Agathokles Date : 10-09-07 10:54 AM Thread Title : Re: Critique My House Rules Please Makes sense, however, low-level wizards are hardly useless once they cast their few spells. Being highly intelligent, they make excellent advisors and should be used as such, suggesting alternative courses of action and so forth. Also, there are magic items usable only by wizards that can easily make up for a lack of spells. At 1st level the PCs should not have any magic item, IMO. I find it better to give "free" cantrips than to give free magic items. GP -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 9] Author : Extempus Date : 10-09-07 03:00 PM Thread Title : Re: Critique My House Rules Please I agree mages are more than just spell lobbers but trying to advise an angry owlbear not to attack is a feat beyond reckoning! As I said above it dose not give them that much more power. As far as the magic items most mages don't get to acquire magic items until higher level least not in my game. Personally I always wondered why a mage with a 9 intelligence could cast the same number of spells as a mage with a 18 intelligence, but thats just me. That's not quite what I mean, lol. The wizard should be advising his own party, not a monster! Besides, I don't know what first level spell cast by a first level wizard would kill an owlbear anyway. Something minor like a wand of magic missiles would be quite appropriate to acquire early on, I think, since it does give a wizard something to do spell-wise once his memorized spell is gone. As far as wizards with differing intelligence goes, they can't cast the same number of spells; they are strictly limited as to how many spells they can know, so while they can memorize the same number of spells, those with greater intelligence have access to a far greater variety. It's kind of like giving Forrest Gump and Rambo each a gun; Gump would know how to point and shoot and probably reload one type of gun, but Rambo can do anything with any gun. Gump could have 10 .38s, and Rambo 10 different guns, rifles etc, so they each have the same number, but Rambo has a greater variety and ultimately packs for more power... At 1st level the PCs should not have any magic item, IMO. I find it better to give "free" cantrips than to give free magic items. GP I don't see any problem with allowing 1st level characters a minor magic item or two. Way back when (1981), we had a DM who had no idea what he was doing, and ended up giving us some pretty powerful things, such as a staff of power and a +4 sword. I guess it was the DM of another campaign who commented about it, and so ours had us conveniently drop and lose the sword in quicksand, and the staff was stolen and had only a few remaining charges left, then became useless... that, of course, should never have happened, but rewarding low-level characters with something minor for outstanding work is OK with me... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 10] Author : Agathokles Date : 10-09-07 05:39 PM Thread Title : Re: Critique My House Rules Please that, of course, should never have happened, but rewarding low-level characters with something minor for outstanding work is OK with me... Yes, but 1st level character have done nothing that requires a reward -- they are beginning characters. And the problem is much heavier at 1st level than at any other -- wizards get reasonably powerful from 5th level up, and specialists have enough spells even at 3rd level or so. Also, if one starts giving out "minor" magical items so soon, magic will generally go out of hand soon, as it happened in the OD&D "B" and "X" modules, where characters ended up with more magic items than they could reasonably need. Finally, treasure is supposed to be divided evenly, so if you give some reward, it will be for everyone. If you give mostly wizard-only items, the other characters will end up with items they can't use, or with a lot of money, and so on. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 11] Author : Extempus Date : 10-09-07 07:07 PM Thread Title : Re: Critique My House Rules Please After an adventure (that doesn't necessarily give anyone enough experience to rise to 2nd level), I can certainly see rewarding a 1st level character with something minor to help them out a little. Personally, I don't see much difference in rewarding a low-level wizard with extra spells because he's smarter and giving the same wizard a wand of magic missiles, but I'd just as soon stick to the rules and disallow extra spells (unless one acquires a magic item or finds/researches a spell that allows such a thing). It's easy for magic to get out of hand (if you choose to call it that), but it ultimately comes down to the wisdom of the players themselves: if they come to depend on magic to save their bacon in every adventure, what happens when magic doesn't work? In my campaign, magic is hardly rare and everyone has lots of magic items, but we've often commented on how little we actually use spells and items. We don't allow our characters to become lazy; they use their heads more than anything else. I wasn't advocating giving only wizards magic items to the exclusion of everyone else; what I was suggesting was that one should include items that perhaps only a wizard can make use of so he doesn't feel completely useless at low levels. That doesn't mean you can't also include a +1 dagger for a thief or a +1 shield for a fighter. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 12] Author : Mojo_Rat Date : 10-09-07 11:29 PM Thread Title : Re: Critique My House Rules Please These are the house rules for my 2.5 AD&D game I am running. The spell if read out the spell book dose erase the spell, and the increased time is mainly for digging out your book finding the right pages and then reading the spell which might be any where from 1 to 14 pages depending on the level of the spell and how many pages it took up in the spell book. The xp bonus seems high but really your only gonna get an extra 200xp per thousand, that is a pittance at high levels. The reaction idea is a good one I might implement that in my game instead of using my rule. Ahh K the char op rules are a fuzzy point in my memory I hope the stuff I said was relevent then. :) As for the length of time to get the book. The reasons for it make sense. I just thought the amount of time involved when practically applied to the game might be a bit long. I would honestly say if you really wanted to do it with lengthier time then set it at something flat like 3 rounds. 1 to find the book 1 to find the spell 1 to recite it. This would be one round longer than for a scroll that you don't have on hand. Lastly have you tried the 20% xp? how is it working then?. It just always seemed to me that when one of the players had the 10% bonus they were slowly pulling ahead of the other players. But my memory on some of this as i said is fuzzy -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 13] Author : Agathokles Date : 10-10-07 02:13 PM Thread Title : Re: Critique My House Rules Please I wasn't advocating giving only wizards magic items to the exclusion of everyone else; what I was suggesting was that one should include items that perhaps only a wizard can make use of so he doesn't feel completely useless at low levels. That doesn't mean you can't also include a +1 dagger for a thief or a +1 shield for a fighter. You basically have to, which leads to proliferation of magic -- if at the first adventure you give out one permanent magic item for killing a few kobolds, it would be not so reasonable to give less treasure for dealing with orcs in the next adventure. By the time your characters reach 3rd level, they will probably face monsters much more dangerous, and therefore expect more magic. This in itself may be acceptable, but it's heavily campaign dependent -- you can't have 1st level characters wielding magic items after the first adventure in a low-magic campaign (e.g., Ravenloft). In such a campaign, the PCs might not have permanent magic item before 3rd level or so. In the end, it's mostly a matter of preferences -- e.g., I prefer the PCs to be more or less able to stand on their own whether they have magic items or not. So I'd rather go to the point of whether giving some extra low-level spells unbalances the game in favor of the Wizard or not. IMO it is not the case, especially with the cantrip NWP option. The Wizard's abilities are already tied to limited uses and equipment (material components), so I find allowing a less restrictive usage of Cantrips (which BTW stimulate clever play, since Cantrips cannot cause direct damage or have any major or lasting effect) gives more flavour to the low-level wizard without leading to a specific game style (high-magic). The option proposed by the OP should not unbalance the game as well, just like it doesn't in the Cleric's case. True, the Wizard has stronger magic (Sleep, for example), but this could be dealt with by reducing the number of extra spells w.r.t. the Cleric's table. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Downloaded from Wizards Community (http://forums.gleemax.com) at 05-10-08 08:22 AM.