'Standard' House Rules?

[Phototoxin]

FAO Mods, I'm posting a sister thread in AD&D2E forum.

Basically my parents visited and brought my old RPG books with them -including my heavily battered AD&D PHB and DMG (Didn't have monster manuals back in Ireland when I was a kid ), my 3.X collection (FRCG, OA, BOVD) & V:tM.

I've played a lot more 3.0/3.5 than AD&D but not as much as 4E and again was just wondering - are there any 'standard' or 'almost universally adopted' house rules to make it run smoother/better/faster/harder?

The last campaign I ran I started at level 2 and gave everyone the toughness feat free to avoid the whole 'a cat kills the wizard'.
I also used proto-minions (2hp goons - not 1hp, if you can only do 1hp you didn't deserve to kill it first time around!!!)
I don't have tonnes of splatbooks - the OA and BOVD are more for my own reading, I tend to stick to core classes and the FRCG/FRPG. I do have heroes of battle but have never used it in a game.

So anyone got useful house rules specific to 3.5?

 

[Ahnehnois]

I think fractional pooled saves and BAB are a no-brainer to most experienced players. Medium saves are perhaps less common but the progressions are published online and used in a fair number of homebrew classes.

The simple absolution of class skills is pretty common. Some type of "background skills" (i.e. bonus skill points only usable on Knowledge/Profession/Craft/Perform/...) is very common.

A lot of things from UA (if you count that as house rules) are widely used. Flaws and traits, action points, complex checks, and vp/wp jump to mind. I like my spell points too, but I don't know if that's as common. It does, however, fit the bill of "smoother/better/faster/harder".

I see people bring up the Trailblazer approach to iterative attacks and the PF combat maneuver system in the context of a 3.5 houserule. I also like TB's combat reactions, though I doubt they're as widely used.


Personally, I use tons and tons of things that are not "standard" houserules. For example, I've rewritten all the core classes whole cloth at this point rather than trying to renegotiate what ranger we'll use every time someone wants to play one. Tinkering with the system is definitely one of the highlights of the hobby for me.

 

[Phototoxin]

I think fractional pooled saves and BAB are a no-brainer to most experienced players.

What does that mean?

and vp/wp jump to mind.

Victory points/Willpower??

the Trailblazer approach to iterative attacks

Can you elaborate on that please.

Thanks, this is the sort of info I'm looking for

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

It's hard to define 'standard' house rules for a game like 3.x D&D because it doesn't have many explicit gameplay assumptions, which leads to everyone and their mother having different expectations and reactions to it, ranging from "Don't touch the RAW with a 10 foot pole!" to DMs like Ahnehnois revamping all the core classes. So I don't think there are any truly common house rules for 3.x.

But if I had to name the three least rare house rules...

1. Point buy and average hit points. If you count organized play, this might actually qualify as a standard house rule. If not, I think it's still not all that unusual.

2. No multiclass penalties. The whole favored class thing and associated penalties is wonky and didn't really work as expected, so it's fairly common for enlightened DMs to throw them in the circular file.

3. No onerous alignment restrictions, codes of conduct, or multiclass restrictions. I think most 3.x DMs still cleave to traditional class archetypes -- or at least don't consider the possibility of opening up the base core classes -- but I don't think it's super rare for DMs to say "Frak it, play whatever character you want to play!"

Or maybe that last one is just my wishful thinking.

I myself have a 7-page pdf of what I consider absolutely essential house rules from my 3.x days, but I'm an exception rather than the norm!

 

[Ahnehnois]

What does that mean?

Sorry, I seem to have gotten overly insider-y.

Fractional pooled bonuses means that you calculate your base attack by formula rather than using the tables. For base attack, for example, you take half your levels in weak BAB classes (wizard), 3/4 of your levels in medium BAB classes (rogue) and your full number of levels in good BAB classes (fighter) and add them together, rounding down the result.

For example, a rogue 1/wizard 1 has a base attack of 3/4 + 1/2, which is 1.25, which rounds down to +1. Under the rules as written, you get nothing (+0).

Pooling the bonuses also means that the +2 bonus to saving throws that a good save gets you applies only once. (So a fighter 1/barbarian 1 has a base fort save of +3, not +4).

This is very complicated to explain, but very simple to do, and is more fair than doing it by the rules as written.

Victory points/Willpower??

Vitality and wound. An alternate health system for those who (like myself) want something that rewards character advancement but also describes physical wounds and adds in an element of unpredictability and deadliness. There are plenty of other health systems, but this is the one (for D&D) anyway that I hear the most about.

Can you elaborate on that please.

In Trailblazer, your iterative attacks (the attacks you gain for having a high base attack) work like the monk ability flurry of blows. At +6 BAB, a character can make two attacks, but they are both at a penalty; your attack is +4/+4, rather than +6/+1. You can always just take your one attack at a full bonus, but rolling two attacks is usually good enough to make up for the penalty. At 11th and 16th level, you do not gain any extra attacks, but the penalty is reduced. Thus, at 16th level, your full attack is at +16/+16, instead of +16/+11/+6/+1. This is good because under the core rules, high-level characters can make three or four attacks, but some of those attacks are so poor they will not hit an opponent with credible defenses without rolling a 20.

 

[Ahnehnois]

It's hard to define 'standard' house rules for a game like 3.x D&D because it doesn't have many explicit gameplay assumptions, which leads to everyone and their mother having different expectations and reactions to it, ranging from "Don't touch the RAW with a 10 foot pole!" to DMs like Ahnehnois revamping all the core classes. So I don't think there are any truly common house rules for 3.x.

Agreed.

2. No multiclass penalties. The whole favored class thing and associated penalties is wonky and didn't really work as expected, so it's fairly common for enlightened DMs to throw them in the circular file.

This is the closest thing to a universal house rule. I think the main reason someone would use it is if they don't use experience in the first place (common enough).

3. No onerous alignment restrictions, codes of conduct, or multiclass restrictions. I think most 3.x DMs still cleave to traditional class archetypes -- or at least don't consider the possibility of opening up the base core classes -- but I don't think it's super rare for DMs to say "Frak it, play whatever character you want to play!"

I don't know if that even qualifies as a house rule. But I tend to agree.

 

[Phototoxin]

The buffing of iterative attacks makes a lot of sense - as mentioned by teh time you need a +16 you're +6/+1 are useless most of the time!!

Thanks, this has give me some ideas for if I return to 3.5

 

[NewJeffCT]

I think fractional pooled saves and BAB are a no-brainer to most experienced players. Medium saves are perhaps less common but the progressions are published online and used in a fair number of homebrew classes.

The simple absolution of class skills is pretty common. Some type of "background skills" (i.e. bonus skill points only usable on Knowledge/Profession/Craft/Perform/...) is very common.

A lot of things from UA (if you count that as house rules) are widely used. Flaws and traits, action points, complex checks, and vp/wp jump to mind. I like my spell points too, but I don't know if that's as common. It does, however, fit the bill of "smoother/better/faster/harder".

I see people bring up the Trailblazer approach to iterative attacks and the PF combat maneuver system in the context of a 3.5 houserule. I also like TB's combat reactions, though I doubt they're as widely used.


Personally, I use tons and tons of things that are not "standard" houserules. For example, I've rewritten all the core classes whole cloth at this point rather than trying to renegotiate what ranger we'll use every time someone wants to play one. Tinkering with the system is definitely one of the highlights of the hobby for me.

I've been playing D&D since the late 70s and I've never heard of fractional pooled saves & BAB?

We didn't use many house rules for 3.5E. About the only one I remember is that death was not at -10, it was -10 -(your CON modifier), so a person with a 14 CON (+2 bonus) would die when his or her PC hit -12 instead of -10.

I'm sure we had one or two others, but not many.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

My standard house rules: run the game as written.

Optional house rules:

- Death at negative Con, not -10.
- Hero points (3 at 1st, one per each additional level can be used for instant success on a die roll).

 

[Ahnehnois]

I've been playing D&D since the late 70s and I've never heard of fractional pooled saves & BAB?

I think the rationale for using it is pretty clear whenever you realize that a couple of fractional bonuses, because the tables are rounded down, add up to zero, and your character is screwed. No 2nd level character should have +0 BAB. Seems like one of the most basic house rules to me, but then, there is nothing universal.

We didn't use many house rules for 3.5E. About the only one I remember is that death was not at -10, it was -10 -(your CON modifier), so a person with a 14 CON (+2 bonus) would die when his or her PC hit -12 instead of -10.

Altered death thresholds. Yeah, that's pretty common. The flat -10 is a stupid rule. UA has some variants on that.