Just curious to know what kind of house rules the rest of you use(d) in your OD&D games.
I pretty much followed the rules in the RC, except all 1st level character had their CON stat plus whatever they rolled for hit points because I was never happy with characters dying after 5 minutes of play (espscially the poor Magic-Users...). To be fair though, I gave the monsters the same consideration. It meant slightly longer combats overall, but higher life expectancies.
Speaking of MU's, they also received bonus spell levels based on their INT stat bonus, so a first level MU with 18 INT could cast 4(!) first level spells. Clerics received the same bonuses for WIS.
I also used variable speeds in combat based in the DEX of the character, modified by the type of armour worn.
Initiative was modified by armour worn, weapon used, weapon mastery level and spell level being cast.
Perhaps the biggest change was the addition of two more abilities: Agility and Perception. So each character had eight stats: Strength, Intelligence, Wisdom, Manual Dexterity, Agility, Perception and Charisma. Manual Dexterity affected all chances to hit (melee and missile), Agility affected Armour Class and modified the save vs. Breath weapons and save vs. wands, Perception affected initiative and some skills.
Skills were a percentile roll based on the stat in question + level of the character.
Just curious to know what house rules the rest of you use
Cheers,
Malekith
I generally allow a cleric to pick up another weapon, and just swing it as a club (same damage), and for magic users to stab ineffectively with a sword (treating it as a dagger) allthough only emergencies.
1. The DM is GOD!
2. The DM is always right.
3. If the DM is wrong, prove it!
4. If the DM is proven wrong, refer back to rules no. 1 and 2.
5. If you say it, you play it.
Now, with that said...
-When playing 0e, I have developed several rules...
-Ability scores are rolled 4d6 (drop low) 7 times (drop low).
-Max HP at 1st lvl
-For spellcasters, PR score bonus equates to extra spell points. (see below)
-Only armor-worn is "usually" counted for encumbrance.
-All trainable weapons begin play at "basic" mastery... Clerics, MU's etc, may wield weapons normally restricted to them, however they cannot be trained in them.
-Spell charts are converted to spell points, eg. a 5th lvl MU has 2 1st, 2 2nd, and 1 3rd, making 9 SP's (2x1)+(2x2)+(1x3)=9; Max spell limits still apply.
-Spellcasters don't "memorize" spells, MU's read from their books as they cast, Clerics "pray".
-No alignment languages, "Common" is replaced by regional languages.
-"Druidic" and "Thieves' Cant" are special languages available to those classes.
-Paladin, Avenger, and Druid are optionally available at 1st level.
-Alignments: No Evil, limited CN (you better have a damned good b/g story, otherwise CN is defined as "insane; certifiable; non compis mentis")
(As an addendum, to above, alignments are always shaded of gray anyway)
I probably have more, but I can't think of any ATM.
Each player generates a set of six numbers using 3d6 (or 4d6, dropping the lowest) to be distributed between the stats. Then each player is allowed to chose any of the sets to use fotr his characters. He cant pick numbers from more than one set though, but several players may select the same set of numbers should they want to.
Some more rules:
* KISS - Keep it Simple. I'm conservative when it comes to the selection ofr optional rules and extra classes/races. I stick to the basics.
* No Alignment. Currently I've replaced it with personality traits (each must select two traits), but for the next campaign I will be using the Allegiance rules from D20 Modern.
Håvard
Players roll three dice of one colour and one of a different colour. The different coloured die is always included and the lowest from among the three similar coloured dice is dropped. In other words, three dicedrop the lowest, plus a single die that must be used. It gives better than the strick 3d6 method, but also tends to avoid the great numbers that a 4d6-lowest produces.
I know we used some other house rules but I can't seem to remember them right now.
Let's see, I usually make my players roll multiple times for stats till I'm personally satisfied they are above average characters. I like to have potential epic characters in my campaign, because I often put them in situations they can't easily get out of. Especially with the Critical charts system I used to create more realism in my campaigns. I'm currently setting up a spreadsheet to organize my critical charts which detail the type of damage, as well as any bonus damage included due to the wound. Some of the criticals allow a successful hit to kill in one blow, regardless of the amount of damage done or hit points left. :evillaugh
This critical system is "borrowed" from RoleMaster so I'll set up a thread detailing the charts and offer ideas how anyone could include it with their system. My players love it, and they say it brings the game above all other RPG board game styles and even VG's like Dark Alliance.
The other house rule I have in character creation is almost complete flexibility. I use personality traits and alignment along with motivation. It gives more detail to the character and reminds the player what the character is like to play them more tothat character. Especially since I plan to use their characters in a more serious comic book.
One of these days I'll have to sort through my makeshift DM Guide and pull out what is borrowed and share it here.
Armour reduces damage taken instead of improving armour class.
Characters receive a level-based bonus to their armour class, to reflect a better ability to dodge in combat. This also compensates for the severe restriction on the number of hit points.
Spellcasters can memorise (INT + LVL) levels of spell patterns. These are not forgotten when cast. However, they can only choose from among this pool of spells when casting a spell. They can study/pray at any time to re-arrange the memorised spell patterns. They must of course have the appropriate number of uncast spells.
In addition, I allow characters to cast spells beyond their normal level limit, by burning the memorised pattern from their mind. Spells cast by burning them cannot be rememorised without a long rest. This allows mages to be more that one shot ponies in a fight.
All spells require an INT check to cast successfully. Character level provides a bonus.
-All trainable weapons begin play at "basic" mastery... Clerics, MU's etc, may wield weapons normally restricted to them, however they cannot be trained in them.
I ditched the Weapon Mastery rules after playing CM1 -- the duel against the Avengers lasted too long! In hindsight, I suppose it would work for lower levels, though. And since they were quite nice, I'd probably try to reinstate them I were playing OD&D.
-No alignment languages, "Common" is replaced by regional languages.
-"Druidic" and "Thieves' Cant" are special languages available to those classes.
-Paladin, Avenger, and Druid are optionally available at 1st level.
"Me too" here, except that Druidic and Thieves' Cant are not languages per se, but simply sets of slang and codes, and therefore you can't speak with someone in Thieves' Cant unless there's another common language.
-Alignments: No Evil, limited CN (you better have a damned good b/g story,
otherwise CN is defined as "insane; certifiable; non compis mentis")
One of the first rules I took from AD&D was indeed two-axes alignments.
I ditched the Weapon Mastery rules after playing CM1 -- the duel against the Avengers lasted too long! In hindsight, I suppose it would work for lower levels, though. And since they were quite nice, I'd probably try to reinstate them I were playing OD&D.
Because of the Deflect ability right?
I like the variant Ive seen on Dragonsfoot.org giving bonuses to attack and damage from Mastery instead of the standard version. AC bonuses might also be appropriate now that I think of it, though low AC has never seemed to be much of a problem IMC.
Perhaps an AC bonus that does not stack with armor? This would allow sword masters to get their shirt off more!
"Me too" here, except that Druidic and Thieves' Cant are not languages per se, but simply sets of slang and codes, and therefore you can't speak with someone in Thieves' Cant unless there's another common language.
That makes alot of sense especially for Thieves' Cant. Not sure if it does for Druidic though. I like the 3E version where alignment languages have been replaced with Celestial(Good), Infernal(Evil) and Abyssal(Chaotic). IMC Infernal and Abyssal have been replaced with Entropic.
I use them more or less as Church languages, sort of how Latin worked for the Catholic Church in certain periods of history.
One of the first rules I took from AD&D was indeed two-axes alignments.
I always played Chaotic as Evil and Lawful as Good, but never saw the need for an extra set of alignments. The main problem with alignments for me were the arguments over good vs bad roleplaying. A ridiculous concept in itself IMHO. But when I ditched alignments altogether I saw how opportunistic people started playing, and how few players wanted to play sympathetic characters. Thats why I have decided to go with the Allegiance system.
Basically each character has to chose 3 things which he feels an allegiance to. This can be a moral or ethical philosophy like Good/Evil or Law/Chaos, but it can also be a person, an organization, a Deity (Immortal), a Church or whatnot. It is also possible to have fewer than 3 allegiances or none at all. Having an allegiance means you get a bonus on influence rolls when dealing with NPCs with the same allegiance.
I also encourage people to play characters that it is possible to have some sympathy with. They dont have to be downright good, but I dont care for running campaigns with evil PCs. It gets boring real quick IMHO.
Håvard