Possible houserules

My group and I are coming back from our Christmas/New Years hiatus and so I sent out an email to touch base. Part of the email asked players what they liked and disliked and the unanimous reply is that mid-level complexity is threatening to ruin the fun. The characters are levels 11-12.

We're all prepared to give a bit, players and dm (we do round robin dming), to speed up play. So I prepared a list of possible solutions designed to reduce the complexity of execution, rather than the complexity of choice - which imo is a good area for complexity to exist.

Anyhoo, without further ado, please have a look over the below houserule solutions and feel free to comment. Remember, these are all designed to drop complexity, time consumption, or an area that's simply not fun. At the beginning of each house rule solution I'll state why it's being proposed in brackets ().


****


1. (complexity, time consumption, not fun)
Drop the variety of spells and take the same spell numerous times. This limits the huge variety of half understood spells for a fewer group of really well understood spells, and allows the character to tank away longer for that day.

2. (not fun)
While we're at it, I like the idea of tanking away for longer each day. This means more less-powerful encounters and less spell dumping, i.e. using every power at our disposal on 1 battle and then teleporting home to sleep at 9.05am. Tanking away means the flow of play continues for longer and I think that would lead to a more enjoyable session.

3. (complexity)
Possibly even have the Cleric cast his spells like a sorcerer. This would mean using the sorcerer progression tables. Domain spells are tricky but because spontaneous spell casting is more powerful (sorcerers don't get extra feats), so I reckon for the sake of balance the Cleric would select one of his 2 domain spells as additional known spell at each spell level. This would reinforce the 1st point.

4. (complexity, time consumption, not fun)
Drop ability damage and ability score buffs, compensate with stat increases every odd level. 4th edition does not have animal buffs nor ability damage because they create rippling complexity and because they move away from the model of hp damage being the easy measure of a character's fighting endurance. We are however using 3E monsters that assume animal buffs, so being a bit more generous with permanent boosts should hopefully counterbalance. A boost every odd level starting at 3rd may be under/over powered, but manageable I think. Key ability boost spells that define Priest, i.e. divine power & righteous might can just add the right +X to hit & damage etc...

5. (time consumption)
Damage spells that throw a lot of dice around should be like in 4th edition where 2/3 of the damage is a + bonus. I.e. a 10dice fireball should be 3d6+24. This same rule could apply to sneak attack or a physical attack that uses a handful of dice. Personally I'd rather change my 1d6 frost damage to a set +3.5 (round down).

6. (complexity, time consumption, not fun)
Dispel magic is limited to targeting free standing spell effects (wall of fire), magic items and individual characters. No area effect that strips away a bit here and a bit there because they create a lot of grind.

7. (complexity, time consumption)
Use a predetermined value for power attack. This is tough but these feats are a table grinder because of calculations. If someone wants to opt to continuously use these feats I suggest the value be a conservative -1BAB for +2dam(+4 for PA 2 handed). The BAB penalty is improved by 1 to compensate for the lack of flexibility. This may be too strong or weak, but if the value is low it should be manageable.

8. (complexity, time consumption)
Ditch the leadership Feat and allow the character to choose again. The various npc's could be persuaded to be recruited on a case by case basis as they're needed but their presence slows proceedings. Let the character remain a 'leader' in role playing terms, just not with a feat expended and an npc in tow.

9. (complexity)
Possibly limit the number of active buffs on a character to ?...

These last three are in relation to our characters having too good an AC for most creatures, which is sucking the DM's fun from out of the fights.

10. (not fun)
Ditch natural armour amulets and spells. The +3/+4 natural armour just ramps it up by 15%/20% too much. Natural armour from shapechanging will be fine because the creature seldom has a heavy natural armour without poor dex and/or no worn armour.

11. (not fun)
Do to Combat expertise what I suggest for Power attack, i.e. either a predetermined values or a modest, slightly advantageous, and continuous power.

12. (not fun)
Don't allow the fighting defensive combat option, the aid another's AC combat option, and the Combat expertise feat to be allowed together. Only 1 usable by a character at any given time.

Thanks for reading and feedback.

Welcome back from the holidays?

I have a couple thoughts regarding your ideas... at least the ones I have some thought already spent on

2. (not fun)
While we're at it, I like the idea of tanking away for longer each day.

I would suggest a modified 'Reserve Hit Points' that gives a pool of reserve points of CON stat + level. This allows more time tanking without cutting into the 3E clerics spell pool or the groups magic items. So far I have playtested this at low levels. At higher levels it might be better to use CON mod + level reserve pool that is usable after any encounter... not sure.


5. (time consumption)
Damage spells that throw a lot of dice around should be like in 4th edition where 2/3 of the damage is a + bonus.

Not sure how much faster this would make things, how much extra time does it really take?

6. (complexity, time consumption, not fun)
Dispel magic is limited...

Do you get many uses of dispel magic? One option that would retain the area affect function would be to simply use one caster level check, and the highest DC effect beaten by this check in the area gets dispelled. Much preferable to making lots of dice rolls. The only problem would be tracking the DC of every spell in effect... ?
Not as much grind, and still retain the capabilty.


7. (complexity, time consumption)
Use a predetermined value for power attack.

I tried out something like this recently and it worked out...er, interestingly. My rule changed a PA into a standard action and granted bonus dice of damage to the attack. The two cases in play so far has made me thing the boost is a bit too much.

9. (complexity)
Possibly limit the number of active buffs on a character to ?...

EoM has a rule to limit active spell effects to 12. This limits magic items as well as buffs. Worked pretty good so far.

10. (not fun)
Ditch natural armour amulets and spells.

Easier to just rename 'nat armor' as 'armor'. That avoids the stacking AC problem.



IMHO, most of the complexity comes from magic, the rest of the game is relatively simple. Hopefully 4E will help that

Not sure about some of your ideas, have to look them over/think about them longer.
But heres another idea:
13) Cap the level at 12, allow continued advancement through feats like in E6.
Perhaps every 12k XP +1 feat.

If you are having trouble with mid level complexity then you never want to reach high level complexity, therefore you must either curb advancmenet or end the game.

Actually, natural armor is almost required for PCs to maintain viable levels of AC. Let's look at a random CR 11 creature: the Elder Air Elemental. This guy has a +27 attack bonus. Now let's see how much AC a level 11 character might have. The most would probably be a +3 Full Plate (+11), a +3 Large Shield (+5), a +1 dexterity modifier, a Ring of Protection +2, and a Barkskin for +5. That's only an AC of 34, and he gets hit on a 7. Without Barkskin, he gets hit on a 2. Remember, this is a tank's equipment list; you can't tank too well if you get hit 95% of the time.

Of course, most characters won't have that, and especially in those cases the extra natural armor can make a huge difference. For instance, a Rogue might have a +3 Mithral Shirt, no shield, a +6 Dexterity modifier, a Ring of Protection +2, and the Barkskin for +5 for a total AC of 30. Now he's really easy to hit especially if he doesn't have the AC buff.


EDIT: Actually, going E6 or E8 would be a great idea.

1. Not sure I understand your idea.

2. Great idea: how were you going to implement it? (Also note that DMs can control this pretty well without extra rules.)

3. Tricky; have you thought about just making a cleric a favored soul?

4. Sure, why not? Certainly seems simpler.

5. Sure, why not?

6. GOD YES. Dispel magic is the worst spell in the game when it comes to big full-party battles. I hate its AoE option: someone really didn't think that through. I've seen parties spend over an hour casting buffs (in real time) because you have to keep track of EVERYTHING because of that one greater dispell that comes along and all of a sudden you've got a random number of your buffs still going and then you have to recalculate EVERYTHING AGAIN and it's just so horrible... Yes, yes yes! Down with dispel!

7. Sure, why not? As long as the numbers are just coming out the same and the power is still there, seems fine. You could also just ask your players to pick 2-3 values of PA and only use those as well; that might do just as well with fewer changes.

8. Yeah, good idea. Waaaay too complicated for what all it gets you.

9. Sure, why not?

10 - 12. This, I would avoid entirely. Taking away player AC so the DM can have more "fun" doesn't seem like you're solving the correct problem. DMs can run a game any way they want to. High AC is a reward to players for having good items/skills/whatever. I wouldn't specifically limit AC just to make players easier to hit; that just means the DM isn't putting them against the right challenge. Besides the fact that I have no idea how that's even possible; mid-level CRs appropriate to the players should -always- hit on their first attack - D&D is an offensively-balanced game.

Thanks for the replies people. I deliberately left off replying earlier as our group are still mulling over these options and more. Still a bit more to do.

(Oh, and thanks Primitive Screwhead, my wife and I just got married in China where we've been staying with her folks. It's totally polluted but the hospitality I've experienced has been the best I've ever had. Truly outstanding. Having to come back to NZ soon. :\ )

We're playing RttToEE and once it's finished we're moving to 4E. So we only need to deal with levels 10-14. Ironically we prefer to have minimal houserules.

****

Primitive Screwhead

2) I would suggest a modified 'Reserve Hit Points' that gives a pool of reserve points of CON stat + level. So far I have playtested this at low levels. At higher levels it might be better to use CON mod + level reserve pool that is usable after any encounter... not sure.
Are these hps that the character can restore to themselves after a combat?

5. Not sure how much faster this would make things, how much extra time does it really take?
What I have noticed are players (inc. self) performing calculations under their breath and it's made up of adding one grouping of dice+bonuses, and then adding another group, before combining totals. As an example one character launches empowered fireballs, and another uses a holy greatsword with power attack, and this happens almost every round of combat. The consolidation of rolls into a simpler 'roll+damage' can hopefully noticably speed up play by eliminating the many marginal delays.

6. Do you get many uses of dispel magic? One option that would retain the area affect function would be to simply use one caster level check, and the highest DC effect beaten by this check in the area gets dispelled.
Yes, we do have a lot of dispel magics firing off. Basically every intelligent foe that's heard of our characters must make steps to do this or they will get absolutely wailed on. The problem with your solution is that it will still pick out one spell and possibly force a cascade of recalculations, especially if it's a stat enhancing spell.

7. My rule changed a PA into a standard action and granted bonus dice of damage to the attack. The two cases in play so far has made me thing the boost is a bit too much.
The 2 players of the characters that have power attack enjoy the damage dished out by iterative attacks. Don't get me wrong, I'm looking forward to seeing the end of so many calculations, but that'll be a hard sell at the moment... Power attack as a standard action would be difficult to balance too. If you change every attacks +3(.5) damage to a +1d6 damage, that would work, but the consolidation of iteratives into one attack would require much more complexity...

9. EoM has a rule to limit active spell effects to 12. This limits magic items as well as buffs. Worked pretty good so far.
Thanks for the number, I didn't have a starting point before now.

10. Easier to just rename 'nat armor' as 'armor'. That avoids the stacking AC problem.
That does seem the solution although there is one little issue left, that of barkskin and mage armour - which do appear in our game. The more powerful barkskin is weaker under this house rule, so I'm thinking a response could be to make mage armour a personal spell?

****

Aust Diamondew

As we’re playing RttToEE, we’ve almost reached our level cap as is. The players probably won’t want to give up these higher levels because we want the powers, just not the complexity.

House rules are a hard sell to begin with because we move forward with unanimity. Much of what I’ve suggested won’t fly and I accept that, but some will. I don’t think something like E6 or E8 will happen, but thanks for the suggestion.

****

Zelc

I agree that ditching natural armour is a big issue, due to the assumptions built into the rules. However, in our case we do not need to worry about random creatures because the dm will be using selected creatures.

For this houserule to proceed the dm-on-the-day needs to know the pc defense numbers and the creatures attack numbers, and know how they’ll likely interact. Get this wrong and a certain fan may get hit by a certain substance.

****

Evil Bob

1. Not sure I understand your idea.
This idea is to have (for example) the cleric take divine power three times, instead of once and have two other separate spells. The purpose of this is that it adds to the characters ‘depth’ of powers so that it: A) increases the character’s ability to chug along from encounter to encounter without need for rest, and B) it increases the players knowledge of the spell therefore reducing dependence of looking up rules while in play.

2. Great idea: how were you going to implement it? (Also note that DMs can control this pretty well without extra rules.)
The implementation would just be us players agreeing to have our characters charge about longer, and our characters finding whatever in-character reason to do so, and then prepping accordingly.

What we’ve encountered is the dm can not easily control this once scry, divination, find the path and teleport are available to the party.

3. Tricky; have you thought about just making a cleric a favored soul?
The player would baulk at the idea as I think it would be moving away from his character concept. Thanks for the pointer though – I’ll have a look at the spell casting progression of this class.

6. GOD YES.
I see you’ve experienced this little delight.

7. Sure, why not? As long as the numbers are just coming out the same and the power is still there, seems fine. You could also just ask your players to pick 2-3 values of PA and only use those as well; that might do just as well with fewer changes.
That’s basically how I’m thinking too. Great minds and all that.

10 - 12. This, I would avoid entirely. Taking away player AC so the DM can have more "fun" doesn't seem like you're solving the correct problem. I wouldn't specifically limit AC just to make pc’s easier to hit... Besides the fact that I have no idea how that's even possible; mid-level CRs appropriate to the players should -always- hit on their first attack - D&D is an offensively-balanced game.
Well the dm gets to have fun too, right?

The current one likes to use minions and our characters have buffed ACs in the late 20s and early-to-mid 30s. The problem he’s experiencing is that in 3E the % to hit drops away rather dramatically after about 4 levels, so unless his <CR7 minion is a heavy hitter or incorporeal toucher, they’re left whistling Dixie waiting for that 20.

Basically it’s the lack of a baseline numbers problem that 3E suffers from, and I’m prepared to give a bit of my character’s AC to help shore up the problem. Your last sentence however is telling. Giving up AC for minions means that equal CR foes may need to give up some attack to maintain balance. This is not easily implemented…


****

Thanks everyone for your initial responses. Please post if you have any other thoughts or want to examine anything more closely. I'll be monitoring this thread.

I have a suggestion that could help with several of your problems at once: TS' Bonus Points. It might be hard to implement mid-campaign, but then again it might not. The Bonus Points system replaces all the stat bonuses that normally come from magic items with similar character-based bonuses. Since these bonuses are inherent to the characters (though not Inherent), they cannot be dispelled so there is a lot less rewriting of character sheets in mid-battle when someone drops a Dispel Magic. PCs can only have a certain bonus in a single type depending on their character level, so ACs should remain at a pretty constant +1 per level.

I give out two bonus points per level because I don't like low level PCs begging and scraping for bonuses while high level characters get another bonus every time they sneeze, but you might feel differently. Of course to compensate for these bonuses, you should give out a lot less loot but that's okay because the PCs don't need nearly as much anymore. I don't have any hard and fast rules about how much less loot to give out, but it shouldn't be too hard to eyeball.

Hope that helps,
TS

3.

Have you seen the Spontaneous Divine Casting rules from http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/spontaneousDivineCasters.htm ?

6. I'm not sure I agree that all those stat boosting buffs / items create a lot of recalculations. I didn't think those were a big deal. The total number of buffs is a big deal, though. Anyhow, removing AoE dispel magic is a pretty significant change IMO because the targeted version is so powerful that my players (and I) have learned to invest heavily in rings of counterspelling loaded with DM and/or GDM. Without the AoE option, they basically become undispellable. And, a vast majority of the buffs are not visible, so they cannot be targeted (e.g. repulsion). You'll have a major downside (game play wise) if you disallow AoE and then surround the bad guy(s) with repulsion or anti-life shell, etc. It may be okay, but just keep an eye on this should it come up (perhaps be more generous with targeting spell effects).

1. I'm with evilbob, I don't understand your idea, even after your second explanation. Are you trying to enforce the selection of spells for, say, half the cleric's spells?

FreeTheSlaves said:

1. (complexity, time consumption, not fun)
Drop the variety of spells and take the same spell numerous times. This limits the huge variety of half understood spells for a fewer group of really well understood spells, and allows the character to tank away longer for that day.

Click to expand...

Sounds like you want spontaneous casters. Why not ditch wizards entirely, and stick with characters that are more limited selection wise, but still versatile. (Sorceror, Battle Sorceror, Warmage, Beguiler, Duskblade)

2. (not fun)
While we're at it, I like the idea of tanking away for longer each day. This means more less-powerful encounters and less spell dumping, i.e. using every power at our disposal on 1 battle and then teleporting home to sleep at 9.05am. Tanking away means the flow of play continues for longer and I think that would lead to a more enjoyable session.

Click to expand...

I think this is also a matter of DMing style. Perhaps the DM could tailor some encounters for the party that are more time-comsuming and complex, rather than big blow-out battles. We had this problem with my group at the same power level, and solved it by adding some puzzle-filled dungeon crawls into the mix.

3. (complexity)
Possibly even have the Cleric cast his spells like a sorcerer. This would mean using the sorcerer progression tables. Domain spells are tricky but because spontaneous spell casting is more powerful (sorcerers don't get extra feats), so I reckon for the sake of balance the Cleric would select one of his 2 domain spells as additional known spell at each spell level. This would reinforce the 1st point.

Click to expand...

There's a variant in Unearthed Arcana for a spontaneous divine caster. It works out pretty well. You also might want to check out the Favored Soul class for a slightly different flavor of cleric.

4. (complexity, time consumption, not fun)
Drop ability damage and ability score buffs, compensate with stat increases every odd level. 4th edition does not have animal buffs nor ability damage because they create rippling complexity and because they move away from the model of hp damage being the easy measure of a character's fighting endurance. We are however using 3E monsters that assume animal buffs, so being a bit more generous with permanent boosts should hopefully counterbalance. A boost every odd level starting at 3rd may be under/over powered, but manageable I think. Key ability boost spells that define Priest, i.e. divine power & righteous might can just add the right +X to hit & damage etc...

Click to expand...

This was also a big problem in our group. We solved it by making a check-sheet of the most commonly used buffs in the party, and what the effects were. Before a battle, we'd just check off the buffs we were using, and we had a handy reference sheet right in front of us. If you laminate it, you can use wet-erase markers and wipe it clean. You can also keep track of the rounds for round based buffs.

5. (time consumption)
Damage spells that throw a lot of dice around should be like in 4th edition where 2/3 of the damage is a + bonus. I.e. a 10dice fireball should be 3d6+24. This same rule could apply to sneak attack or a physical attack that uses a handful of dice. Personally I'd rather change my 1d6 frost damage to a set +3.5 (round down).

Click to expand...

Hrm, I see what you're saying here, but I can't agree with it. Taking the variability out of combat damage takes away alot of the "chance" of battle. You know what your characters are capable of, and you know how much damage they're going to do. If your also reducing the tactics capability (by reducing spell versatility) then you can almost just "know" how every battle is going to turn out ahead of time.

7. (complexity, time consumption)
Use a predetermined value for power attack. This is tough but these feats are a table grinder because of calculations. If someone wants to opt to continuously use these feats I suggest the value be a conservative -1BAB for +2dam(+4 for PA 2 handed). The BAB penalty is improved by 1 to compensate for the lack of flexibility. This may be too strong or weak, but if the value is low it should be manageable.

Click to expand...

Again, we solve this in my group by preperation. The people in the group who use Power Attack have pre-determined values for attack and damage already listed on their character sheet in subsequent weapon slots. That way, making a 5 point power attack is no more troubling than a regular attack.

8. (complexity, time consumption)
Ditch the leadership Feat and allow the character to choose again. The various npc's could be persuaded to be recruited on a case by case basis as they're needed but their presence slows proceedings. Let the character remain a 'leader' in role playing terms, just not with a feat expended and an npc in tow.

Click to expand...

Our group is also becoming bogged down with NPCs. I can't remember if this is a real rule or not, but in our group, if you forego a cohort, you get a +2 to your leadership score. The actual hundreds of followers play a much more abstract role in the game. They're there for large-scale battles or function as a spy network.

9. (complexity)
Possibly limit the number of active buffs on a character to ?...

These last three are in relation to our characters having too good an AC for most creatures, which is sucking the DM's fun from out of the fights.

10. (not fun)
Ditch natural armour amulets and spells. The +3/+4 natural armour just ramps it up by 15%/20% too much. Natural armour from shapechanging will be fine because the creature seldom has a heavy natural armour without poor dex and/or no worn armour.

Click to expand...

Have you considered that maybe your encounter level isn't high enough? Especially if your group is flooded with high level NPCs, you might be able to have them fight a higher CR (which means higher to-hit).

11. (not fun)
Do to Combat expertise what I suggest for Power attack, i.e. either a predetermined values or a modest, slightly advantageous, and continuous power.

Click to expand...

We do the same thing here that we do for power attack.

Ultimately, it comes down to what works for your group. The main goal is for everyone to be having fun.