D&D 3.x Still playing 3e? Share your 3.0 and/or 3.5 house rules

[John98GR]

I've been routinely running short stories for my group at the 15+ Level starting point (5-session Expeditions or Dungeon Crawls, maybe 1-2 sessions more depending on the story in question), and I've more or less done away with the default Starting Wealth system and the way you are supposed to calculate custom item value. The whole "Here's your Budget, now go scour the net for fancy items from 5 different splatbooks and 3 forums" treatment has lost its novelty on my players and... I'd be lying if I said I still like calculating how much a CL 12 Death Ward, Usable 2/Day on a pair of gloves that provide +4 Dexterity, and activated when the wearer says "Bazinga!" costs by RAW.

Regardless, they've been asking to go into the epic levels with various short-story premises (which had me occupied for a couple of weeks to make a system that is actually functional for my group's expectations, but that's another story entirely) and I believe it's going to save me quite some legwork. It has done so already for all their Lv15-20 characters. Just saying, it's definitely not for Lv1-10 starting characters.

THE SYSTEM
A character starts with a number of Wealth Points (WP) equal to twice his ECL. He uses them only at the start and they do not replace gold, loot or anything else in actual play (e.g. an ECL 15 Character would have 30 WP). You cannot buy an item with a WP cost that exceeds half your ECL.
---
Weapons, Armor and Shields: You spend 1 WP per enhancement bonus, plus 1 more if it is from an exotic material. A +3 keen adamantine Longsword would cost 5 WP. A +5 vorpal Longsword would cost 10 WP.
---
Protection or Resistance Items: You spend 1 WP per AC bonus or Resistance bonus to saving throws. A +5 ring of protection would cost 5 WP.
Ability Score Items: You spend 1 WP per 2 points of ability bonus. A belt of strength +6 would cost 3 WP.
Skill Items: You spend 1 WP per 4 points of skill bonus. A ring of move silently +20 would cost 5 WP.
Energy Resistance Items: You spend 1 WP per 5 points of resistance to one type of energy. If you exceed 50, then the item provides immunity instead. A ring of fire resistance 30 would cost 6 WP.
Damage Reduction Items: You spend 2 WP per 5 points of Damage Reduction/Magic. You can turn it to Damage Reduction/Magic and Adamantine with two additional WP. A ring of Damage Reduction 15/Magic and Adamantine costs 8 WP.
Spell Resistance Item: You spend 1 WP for Spell Resistance 10, then 1 WP per 2 points beyond that. A cloak of spell resistance 20 would cost 6 WP.
---
Spell Item: You spend 1 WP per spell level of the spell-like ability that the item provides.
-> The Caster Level is twice the spell’s level, the DC Bonus (if any) is 10 + Spell Level +1/4 Caster Level.
-> If the spell has a costly component (more than 1 gp), you add 1 WP. If it has an XP component, you add another 1 WP.
-> You may use it once per day, and pay 1 WP per additional daily use. If you exceed 4 uses, the item can be used at will.
-> Supportive spells with a duration that target one creature (Death Ward) can be made continuous with a single +2 WP adjustment. Continuous Time Stops are not within the scope of this system, just saying.
-> If you want the item’s Caster Level to be equal to your own ECL at the start of the campaign, you can pay an additional 1 WP.
-> 0-Level spells count as 1st-Level for determining price and Caster Level.
-> An amulet of continuous death ward would cost 6 WP (Caster Level 8), or 7 WP if bought by a Level 15 Character and heightened to his Level. A ring of fireball at will costs 7 WP (3 for 1 use per day, +4 for 5 uses per day -> effectively at will).
-> Spells that require XP to function ALWAYS emulate the minimum amount required, no more.
---
Inherent Bonus Item: A tome costs 2 WP per point of inherent bonus to be bestowed. You cannot exceed the usual +5 limit. A tome of strength +5 would cost 10 WP.
Consumable Items: 1 WP buys you 5,000gp worth of scrolls and potions.
All other items: 1 WP = 10,000gp (e.g. 9 WP for ring of regeneration).
Spare Change: You may trade one 1 WP per Level as spare money for actual in-game purposes at the rate of 5,000gp per WP. If you are left with 0 WP, you start with 25gp per level (500gp at Level 20).
---
Multi-property Cost: Each additional property on the same item adds 1 WP to the total cost. A Belt of Strength +2, Dexterity +2 and Constitution +2 costs 5 WP.
Slotless Items: Add 2 WP to the total cost for an item that is actually, for lack of a better term, an “innate ability”.
Epic Items and WP: You cannot buy Epic Items if your ECL does not exceed 20. If it does, there is no additional “epic cost”, but you may treat 1 WP as 100,000gp for all the epic consumable and utility items not detailed here. An item that costs 11 WP or more is an epic item for the purposes of this system.

NOTES
Reminder: A character cannot spent WP exceeding half his ECL on a singular item. If you are theorycrafting and wondering how a level 15 character could afford a Wish spell item, they can’t.
Disclaimer: I cannot lie that it doesn't undervalue some items while overpricing others, but it's an abstraction I'm willing to make on my table. The costs are examples and, although they might work with my group, they might not work with yours. Also, I do not need to mention there are some heavy no-nos with certain spell-item combinations, but I'm sure your tables have similar such "blacklists".

 

[haakon1]

Glad to see another person running 3x like me.

It’s sort of the opposite of me on levels though. I’ve never played or DM’d for a PC above 14th level, but you start at 15th.

 

[Celebrim]

Start generally with 3.0e as superior to 3.5e

1) All characters get bonus hit points based on their current size class, with small characters gaining 4 and medium characters gaining 8. Colossal monsters gain 128 bonus hit points. This mitigates against the need for insanely high HD or CON scores for monsters as well as provides a buffer at low level to extend the sweet spot down to first level. It also largely solves the house cat problem, though it does create a white tail deer problem that you have to not think about too hard (1st level characters are unlikely to hunt a deer, requiring traps to do so, which isn't that unrealistic but is a little unrealistic).

2) Spells do not add their level to the DC of saving throws. Monsters do not add half their HD to the DC saving to resist their natural abilities.

3) You can't take a 5 foot step to avoid an attack of opportunity unless at the end of the step you would threaten the target. You can stand up without drawing an attack of opportunity.

4) There is a +3 flanking bonus if three characters encircle a target. There is a +4 flanking bonus if four characters surround a target.

5) Many spells that would replace a skill instead replace that skill with the Scry skill or else give a much smaller bonus to that skill. Spells that allow flying are typically one higher level. Generally, compare the two versions of the spells in 3.0 and 3.5. Take the weaker of the two spells.

6) Since there are more skills and skills are generally more important, non-spellcasting classes typically get more skills. For example, Fighters have 5 skill points and Rogues have 13. There are also new classes. Champion replaces Paladin. Hunter replaces Ranger. Shaman replaces Druid. Fanatic replaces Barbarian. There is no Monk class (this is a fighter with a background and a focus in unarmed attacks). There are new classes Paragon, Feyborn, and Explorer.

7) There are no PrCs. Multiclassing with a spellcasting class to avoid big caster level penalties involves a feat tree, not a custom PrC for each combination.

8) Characters get a destiny points to among other things buy rerolls. They get bonus destiny points equal to their charisma bonus, and recovery destiny points by either gaining a level or accomplishing a personal story goal.

9) Sorcerers have a bloodline that determines their known spells and available mutations.

10) Clerics get slower spell progression starting with one fewer spell slot at each level.

11) There a variety of new generic combat options similar to the ones in 1e Pathfinder but also an offensive fighting stance, flailing, and clinching opponents.

And a whole bunch of other balance tweaks, new feats, new spells, etc. But many of the most broken spells that are in the core game just don't even exist. There is also completely different pricing schemes for magic items.

 

[John98GR]

Glad to see another person running 3x like me.

It’s sort of the opposite of me on levels though. I’ve never played or DM’d for a PC above 14th level, but you start at 15th.

Yeah I can understand, but my group is kinda more interested in seeing how certain classes (core and supplemental) work at high levels in short-story formats instead of long campaigns from zero. I've attempted to run actual campaigns for them (with mixed success), but I believe I have conditioned them to the former approach, for better or worse.

 

[Vivificient]

My house rules are pretty extensive. I tried to play D&D 3.0 with just a few patches, but kept finding more things I wanted to "fix". Eventually I put it all together as a standalone PHB replacement text, since it's a lot easier to have the rules in one place rather than having the official text plus a "diff". Ultimately it's something of a mashup between 3e, Pathfinder, 5e, and a few other games.

My full rules are on my website here, but a summary of my changes would be:

Spells

• Spell slots work like in 5e.
• Spell lists per class are shorter and have very little overlap
• Remove almost all buff spells (Bless, bardic inspiration... most things that require modifying your stats in the middle of a fight)
• Any spell with a duration of more than 1 round lasts the entire fight (10 minutes)
• Spells components are more uniform - all arcane spells have VSM unless otherwise noted, all divine spells are V+DF unless otherwise noted.
• Spells don't scale with caster level, but metamagic is available to all casters without requiring feats.
• Spellcraft checks are based on Caster Level + Casting Stat (no longer a skill). Use Spellcraft check for concentration checks and for overcoming SR.

Classes

• Max level is 10
• Multiclassing is based on a "gestalt" system where you can spend XP to level up in each class separately (not based on your total level), and take the best features from each of your classes
• Rangers / Paladins no longer cast spells, but can gain Druid / Cleric levels (respectively) at a discounted XP cost if they wish.
• Sorcerer deleted (pointless without Vancian spell slots). Witch added (loosely similar to Pathfinder witch).
• Druid has no animal companion. Ranger has full animal companion progression.
• Barbarian and Monk are similar to version from Pathfinder Unchained

Skills

• Shorter skill list (25 skills)
• Class skills are +3 (like in Pathfinder). No cross-class skill penalty.
• More skill points for non-magic classes (6 for paladin, 8 for fighter/monk, 10 for ranger, 12 for thief).
• Knowledge skills are collapsed into one skill. Gain more areas of knowledge as you gain more ranks.

Combat

• Side-based initiative (roll on the first turn to see if you go before or after the first monster turn)
• Rewrote rules about engagement and opportunity attacks to not require a grid (similar to 13th age)
• No swift actions or full-round actions (just standard action, free actions, and move)

Other

• All magic items and spells give "magic" bonus type, so they never stack with each other (no enhancement, insight, luck, resistance, deflection, etc).
• Each +1 on a magic weapon overcomes 10 DR. So a DR 30 monster counts as DR 10 if attacked with a +2 weapon.

Given all those changes maybe it's debatable whether we're still playing third edition. However, the core math is still the same, so I can use third edition monsters, spells, magic items, etc.

 

[John98GR]

A collection of feats for martial characters.
The general idea is, "sacrifice BAB, do things".
I use them on my table in place of obscure feat chains and prestige classes my players will never touch in a million years.

 

[John98GR]

Well, I had nothing better to do the past week so here's a collection of all my homebrew rules on D&D 3.5e.
I'd say it's more akin to a 'fan patch' than just a few intricacies at my table.
I like to kid myself that I write these things for my own players, but they are not the kind of people that require a 36-page "revision" for D&D 3.5e. They just kinda like to tell me what they want to play and I have to figure out the rest.

What this includes:
1) RAI and not-so RAI responses to notorious RAW cheese.
2) Core Class Revisions.
3) A selection of feats (most of which I have already posted around the net, including here, now a part of this collection).
4) A revised epic system (again something stand-alone that has been incorporated as part of a single document).

 

[earthsea_wizard]

Well, I had nothing better to do the past week so here's a collection of all my homebrew rules on D&D 3.5e.
I'd say it's more akin to a 'fan patch' than just a few intricacies at my table.
I like to kid myself that I write these things for my own players, but they are not the kind of people that require a 36-page "revision" for D&D 3.5e. They just kinda like to tell me what they want to play and I have to figure out the rest.

What this includes:
1) RAI and not-so RAI responses to notorious RAW cheese.
2) Core Class Revisions.
3) A selection of feats (most of which I have already posted around the net, including here, now a part of this collection).
4) A revised epic system (again something stand-alone that has been incorporated as part of a single document).

Some good stuff in here. I think your About Section 1 afterward expects way too much from Hasbro haha, but is relevant to this thread.

The "original writers" you mention are the three who wrote 3e, before Hasbro owned WotC. Two of them were pushed out before the 3.5e revision and the one who stayed onboard for 3.5 was, I think, freelancing at that point (Skip Williams), and mostly did the Monster Manual and then did very little work for the 3.5 line. The entire approach to 3rd edition shifted with Hasbro. The original 3 designers didn't even intend to publish new classes for the edition, they felt that their new approach to multi-classing, their feat system and their skill system all combined would enable you to cover the fantasy archetypes you needed, and in a broad sense they are correct. Notice none of the 3.0 splat books have new classes.

The team who revised 3.5e, a move largely known to have been too-soon, mostly for profit, and in many ways to adjust the rules to better fit with the new miniatures game (even something like the change to way the cover worked, and other rules that required a DM to adjudicate being altered), were not in a position to care or be motivated to provide players with the type of patch you mention.

I love the 3e chassis, the flavor of it, the approach that Cook, Tweet and Williams took to writing the game in a way that conceded to the then vocal majority shouting that D&D was 20 years behind every other RPG in terms of mechanics and useability while aslo keeping so much of the DNA of the original editions. I have gone back to 3e using the errata that was released for it and about two pages worth of updates from 3.5 and I am happy with it. The era of having to run into tables of wotc messageboard players is over and I think core 3.0 actually fits a niche that a lot of people would love and maybe have forgotten existed (many people in time have fallen prey to the myth that 3.0 and 3.5 are largely the same game. In reality there were thousands of changes to the game. Here is every change just in the PHB alone: Changes for Dungeons and Dragons 3.5, collected by Steven Cooper). It really does read and play like late 2nd edition with the better of the combat and tactics rules added on, and none of the 3.5 baggage to go with it. And given that it was designed in the 1990s, by AD&D players and playtesters (Peter Atkinson himself was obsessed with 1e AD&D, Wizards of the Coast was the name of his home campaign group, probably the last time the D&D brand was entirely directed by a D&D player. And actually the only time it was run by a D&D player other than when Gary was in charge), it makes sense that it would read as an evoltuion of the D&D line. 3.5 started taking major steps away from this, the new iteration of the internet being to blame for much of it.

As an aside: Anyone interested enough in the thousands of changes who takes the time to look through that link might be surprised to find that there are countless changes, additions, and "clarifications" to the text between 3e and 3.5 that simply amount to the text treading the reader as if they have 0 intelligence. Things are spelled out that for most groups would never need to have explained to them, because the answers are already inherent in what was written. Another known motivation for many of the 3.5 changes was to cater to RPGA play, and this is a sign of that. I've read the entire document and it is actually quite embarrasing in retrospect. It also is the culprit for a lot of added verbosity to the rules. Things that were covered with a few obvious sentences in the 3e text become a paragraph of ifs, ands and buts in 3.5.

 

[Celebrim]

Some good stuff in here. I think your About Section 1 afterward expects way too much from Hasbro haha, but is relevant to this thread.

The "original writers" you mention are the three who wrote 3e, before Hasbro owned WotC. Two of them were pushed out before the 3.5e revision...

I wish I could give this 100 thumbs up. As someone who loved 3.0e and had it immediately rekindle my love of D&D, I despised 3.5e. I don't think people are really cognizant of how much was changed for the worse in the design and practices of 3.5e because they superficially seem compatible. In fact, 3.0e was designed to be the framework of a game, and 3.5e was almost entirely predicated on becoming a cash cow almost along the lines of MtG to the speedy detriment of the game. (And while it's limping along still, I feel we are starting to get into late stage MtG cash cow as well, to the point I'm thinking of selling my 90's era cards before the crash comes.)

 

[Tinker Gnome]

One thing I have been considering if I ever get around to running another 3.X game is to let Ranger's get critical hits on enemies who are normally immune to crits if it is their favored enemy. So, a Ranger with Undead as their favored enemy could crit undead, and a Ranger/Rogue multiclass could sneak attack Undead if they had Undead as their favored enemy.