Pathfinder 1E Keeping it simple

[GameOgre]

I just had a crazy idea. I already know MANY people will not like this idea and will consider it WRONG. Lets skip all the debate and arguments about why NOT to do this. I can think of about a hundred reasons right off the bat and have already discarded them.

I am NOT trying to change Pathfinder for anyone(other than myself and my players) or trying to convince anyone that this idea is for them. I do like Pathfinder and find in many ways it's far and above many of the old school games in content and options. It just doesn't get played at my table much because of the huge amount of crunch. I think most DM's hand wave many of the rules away or change them in small ways to better suit their group.I'm just doing it in a heavier way.

I would appreciate any help or ideas on this subject that try and help do what I want to do instead of pointing out the many many reasons to NOT do it.

My idea.

Keeping It Simple(K.I.S.) is to be a set of House rules that can be used to play Pathfinder in a more simple and unbalanced fashion. One that I as a DM who likes more old school type rules could use to take advantage of the many great books and adventures that are already sitting on my shelf and let my players take advantage of the Pathfinder game system in a modified way.

1-No attacks of opportunity. Pretty simple. This would effect a great many things but I don't think a subsystem needs to be used as long as everyone involved knows about it at the start. Any feat that has a requirement involving another feat with a attack of opportunity aspect to it gets the requirement hand waved away.

2-No special attacks. What this really means is that anyone wanting to use a special move (shield bash,trip,bull rush,whatever) just needs to roll to hit and perhaps a contested roll against the defender. The roll to hit ect will be modified with a -3 to +0 to reflect the difficulty. -3 for very hard to pull off,+0 to very easy to pull off. Perfectly fine with the DM assigning mods on the fly instead of predetermining the mods.

3-Simple skills. This is one of the more difficult areas.What I want to do is remove skill lists and instead just give everyone a Very Skilled(max bonus for your level),Skilled(low end skill bonus for your level),Unskilled (no skill points added)modifier modified by stats. Example: Very skilled would be for all skills that are class skills.Skilled would be for any skill that fits your characters background(ie you used to be a blacksmith before leaving town and fighting goblins),Unskilled would be for skills that were not class skills and not in your background.

For this I think a simple chart could be created with just the bonus for each category (to be modified by player because of stats).

4-Simplify exp chart. Easily done in fact I think I saw someone else had already done so on a blog I read a while back.

5- Throw out miniature rules. Mostly this involves things like 5 foot step ect..

6-I'm tempted to simplify feats but this would would complicate things on a much higher level and make running adventures ect much more work. Think I'm deciding against doing it other than the already mentioned #1.

7- Simplify Under 0 hit points rules/Death. I think just borrowing from another system and have all hit point tracking stop at 0. At 0 hit points the character falls unconscious and at the end of each round makes a D20 roll modified by con. On a 10 or higher they stabilize. Three failures = Death. Any feats ect requiring a feat having to do with this rule area is hand waved away.

8-I use group initiative. Have the highest modified initiative person roll Init for each side.

9- More control placed on magic item creation,buying of magic items. It's not that you can't do either of those things BUT what is written in the book is not all of it. If the party mage wants to craft a wand of magic missiles a component might be added that needs to be collected,some special wood might be added that needs to be found,ect..The buying of items is fine as is BUT the default answer to is that item for sale is no. This is really just a perception thing based on my players wanting the default for everything to be YES and trying to build a unbalanced character with the right combo of magic items.

Can anyone think of other things I need to mod to make the system run in a more simplified way? See huge issues that can't be hand waved away?


Again,I realize the KIS house rules will have many and wide ranging effects and may indeed not work in the end. I just want to experiment with it.

If nothing else it's food for thought.

 

[JeffB]

The beginner box takes care of many things on your list.

Essentially I ran a similar game to what you want. Once we went to group initiative and ditched the grid and pawns, there was no turning back, so much more fun...especially as it is my preferred method from the get go, and has been since 1978, lol. Of course you need to ignore or modify things that apply.

Eventually I ended up running an OD&D game with some bits from PF, instead of vice versa. Much easier that way than trimming, trimming,trimming and more trimming.

I have run some one shots of C&C over the past few months but ditching the normal SIEGE engine for a DDN type advantage mechanic, as well as my normal additions from 3.5/PF..certain feats as class abilities, the spell lists, etc. Player feedback has been good enough for us to put the OD&D game on hold, and start up a new 1st level campaign. The numbers are a bit easier in conversion from CnC to 3.x/PF too. Both DCs to Siege engine checks, as well as damage expressions.

In general I find it easier to take my PF/3.5 stuff and convert it to my streamlined rules versions, rather than continually wittle away at PF/3.5, and then also deal with increased prep due to stat blocks,.classed NPCs, etc. I often just wing stats on the fly, and have run a few sessions with no prep other than having the ideas in my head for an encounter.

But that's me, YMMV.

 

[knottyprof]

Since Feats offer most of the crunch (since they provide special abilities or modify or improve skills etc.) you could either:
A) Drop them all together
B) Go through them and just offer a reduced list of those that you think fit your style of play.

Honestly, as someone that started out with AD&D (1st) I personnally think that the individual initiative can be more of a headache than a boon. To me the group initiative allowed the characters to coordinate their actions in a round and it provided a more cohesive group feel while I think the individual initiative seems to focus more on the individual. I also liked group initiative since it was rolled each round and it helped randomize who had the advantage from round to round. Plus the fact that it was less of a headache for the DM since anyone that decides or ready an action or delay then effectively changes the initiative order which then needs to be resorted(reordered)

 

[Razjah]

I like some of your ideas, however:

9- More control placed on magic item creation,buying of magic items. It's not that you can't do either of those things BUT what is written in the book is not all of it. If the party mage wants to craft a wand of magic missiles a component might be added that needs to be collected,some special wood might be added that needs to be found,ect..The buying of items is fine as is BUT the default answer to is that item for sale is no. This is really just a perception thing based
on my players wanting the default for everything to be YES and trying to build a unbalanced character with the right combo of magic items.

What you could end up with an adversarial relationship between yourself and the players. Most of the house rules prior to this are just house rules that seem fine. But the comment about your players trying to make unbalanced characters and wanting everything to be "Yes" is where you seem to have an issue. To combat this I recommend the following:

Have you read about E6? That greatly helps limit complexity. It is hard to make some busted gear when you are only caster level 6. Plus it helps capture the Lord of the Rings and Conan style game play. Orcs in a horde are still scary, even at 6th level. A powerful wizard is a force to be reckoned with, even if he dies to one good swrod strike. Dragons are terrifying, and generally become plot points where you need to gather the Ancient Forgotten MacGuffin of Slaying and then find Smaug's weakpoint to use the Black Arrow.

Something else to consider? Play with only the Core Rulebook allowed. No APG. No Ultimate X. Just the core book. In my experience, the adding of material is typically what causes too many problems. There are a lot less spells to put on items, less items to buy/find/beg for/wishlist, far less feats to create a problem unknowingly (or knowingly), and no archetypes to combine for maximum effect give feat X, item Y, and racial ability Z.

 

[Psion]

Honestly (and you knew this post was coming), why play Pathfinder? Sounds like you should go out and grab Swords & Wizardry or Labyrinth Lord instead of re-inventing the wheel.

If you invited me to a Pathfinder game and then presented me with your house rules, I would feel misled, as what you are doing is really not playing Pathfinder.

 

[GameOgre]

Posting this on my nook while I ride bus so bare with me.

I do play osr games but also modern games. My players love feats and the way from a mechanical point of view that there characters are far more differant from standard.

Add to that the four hundred bucks or more of pathfinder books and adventures and you might can see why I'm willing to try this.

Also I wouldn't invite anyone but my players to play due to the fact you brought up.

 

[GameOgre]

So for skills I'm thinking level +3for class skills.

For background skills level either level or level - 2.

For unskilled level -4.

Not too sure about those numbers.

 

[Psion]

Posting this on my nook while I ride bus so bare with me.

I do play osr games but also modern games. My players love feats and the way from a mechanical point of view that there characters are far more differant from standard.

Add to that the four hundred bucks or more of pathfinder books and adventures and you might can see why I'm willing to try this.

Fair enough.

Not strictly in the context of simplifying, but whenever I make houserules, I strive for "maximum transparency" of the house rule. In other words, I try to minimize the impact the rule has on the rest of the game so as not to compromise the utility or balance of the rest of the system. As you say a primary goal of yours is to use yor Pathfinder material, that seems paramount.

Some of the rules are easy to make transparent. Some, not so much.

Attacks of opportunity can be a big one to just totally ignore. You might try considering alternatives from other d20/D&D-derived games here.

• Fantasy Craft does use attacks of opportunity. Instead, if you become adjacent (not just in reach) to an opponent, you must end your movement unless you make an acrobatics roll. Most other events that cause Attacks of Opportunity in 3.5 make your character flat-footed instead.
• In 13th age, to run from an opponent, you must make a disengagement roll or suffer consequences (attacks or penalties.)

Ignoring combat maneuvers is probably not a big balance impact for the players, but can be limiting (what if you REALLY have to get that wand away from the high priestess in the dramatic final scene?). It might impact your adventures a bit more, as some combat encounters are written assuming the opposition uses certain tactics that utilize combat maneuvers. But those villains typically have the feats for those attacks anyways. Since you are aiming to take out AoO's anyways, and the primary use of the feats related to maneuvers is to defray the AoO, perhaps let those feats allow the maneuver. For instance, instead of the improve trip feat, just replace it with a "trip" feat that lets you use the trip maneuver.

 

[Nikosandros]

Attack of opportunity of some sort actually exist in both AD&D and BD&D. If you just walk from your opponent, you grant a free attack. IMO this is a simple rule and I like it.

 

[Water Bob]

This is a serious reply to the OP, not a flame starter: Why not just play an older version of D&D instead of putting all of the work into changing Pathfinder and having to deal with all of the consequences?

If your preferance is the Olde School, then why not ride on dem motor-sickles?