Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="seasong" data-source="post: 862471" data-attributes="member: 5137">This is more a reference for me, but I wouldn't mind commentary, either.I am building a D&D-based fantasy setting which is internally consistent, while still being fun for my players. For the most part, that means satisfying my own critical demands, rather than the players, who could probably care less about the impact of plant growth on urban populations, or about what the crazy D&D aging rules do to population demographics (much less spells like raise dead).One of my critical demands is a careful balance between enough house rules to allow me to create an internally consistent world that is still fun, and not stepping over the line of "this no longer looks like D&D".Yes, yes, for some of you I stepped over that line long ago when I <a href="http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=48368" target="_blank">decided to drop the ranger class</a>. It's my line, I'll draw it where I want it <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />. But it is there, and so I'm kind of keeping a record here (and possibly discussion, if anyone's interested) of just how many house rules I'm considering, and how well they fit into "still being D&D".CORE CLASSESI want, absolutely, no exception, to retain the flavor and general rules of the cleric, fighter, rogue and wizard. I am considering offering extra ability options to rogues, and I may tweak domains for the cleric, but these are the heart of D&D classes, for me.Of the changes listed below, I think only the Monk and Sorcerer represent real departures from classic D&D. They're good departures, but I recognize them as such. The others, for the most part, are simply attempts by me to stretch the class to cover some additional roles.Bard: More options - a larger list of bardic music abilities, which the bard can choose from. Classic bard the most common for adventurers, since it covers a spectrum of situations. Since the bard is said to be changing in 3.5, I may wait for that to work on this one. Update: Wow. The new bard is a lot like what I was planning. So I'm really waiting now! I'll probably add a few more song options to the bard, but 3.5 will cut my workload on this down a lot.<a href="http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=49728" target="_blank">Cleric</a>: I was considering changing the cleric to match the <a href="http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=46976" target="_blank">priest's</a> spell abilities, but decided not to. The cleric remains unchanged. Update: I'm still considering allowing clerics to choose a domain to spontaneously cast rather than cure spells. We'll see.Monk: From a flavor perspective, I really don't like the monk. On the other hand, the role the monk plays is a good one. I just have a problem with "every enlightened martial artist on the planet" picking up the ability to fall great distances. So I may drop the monk, or rewrite it entirely as a martial artist with eight or so 10-level paths like Intuition and Fleetness, of which the monk chooses four to advance along. My goal in the latter instance would be to allow a classic monk to be built as well.Paladin: Summon mount is instantaneous rather than 2 hours per level. Slight reflavoring - Paladins gradually become the incarnate will of Communities, and the mount is a manifest symbol of that Trust.<a href="http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=48368" target="_blank">Ranger</a>: Removed from the game. See the thread for the reasons why, but basically... I like ranger-like roles, but I think the ranger class tries to fulfill too many of them at once, and as a result, fails at all of them. I could write a ranger variant, but pre-existing classes can do the job already.<a href="http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=48593" target="_blank">Sorcerer</a>: Drastic! The wizard may be at the heart of D&D, but the sorcerer is a late comer that overlaps way too much with the wizard's role and archetype. On the other hand, the mechanic of spontaneous casting is nice to have. The result is that I rewrote the sorcerer for a wholly new role, the battle caster.Flavor Changes: These are non-mechanics changes. Barbarians are redescribed as tapping their animal side for speed and cunning. Druids are redescribed as wilderness hermits. Sorcerers are not born that way, it is just a different way of training (mastery of a few singular spells rather than mastery of magic as an arcane art).NPC Classes: The introduction of NPC classes in D&D really offered something special. I will be keeping them, and I am planning on the following tweaks:1. Experts get a Skill Focus feat for free at 3rd level.2. Adept spell progression is compressed a bit; my demographics have no adepts over 10th, and I'd like to see some adepts who can cast the higher spells.3. New NPC Class: <a href="http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=46976" target="_blank">The priest</a>. Like a cleric, only with a more administrative/holy person/clergical skill set and crappy combat skills.4. New NPC Class: The holy warrior. Like a warrior, only slightly less buff in combat, and some minor spell casting abilities. A common man's cleric.Of these, the adept's spell progression is probably the most drastic. Still, I like adepts. It would be nice to make them cool.SPELLSAt the moment, I'm only considering two changes:1. Bringing back the dead costs the caster 1,000 XP, and all such spells are 2 levels higher.2. I'll also be looking at the new edition for revised heal, harm, polymorph and so on. Since these will be official, I can't really call them house rules.3. I'm using <a href="http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=56714" target="_blank">these metamagic feats</a>. Some are slightly revised from the SRD, others are wholly new.I also plan to have more and better domains, like agricultural blessings (rather than druid-like plant magic), non-combat blessings, court justice (truth, divinations, etc.), and so on. As I think of others, I'll be adding them. And I also intend to expand the spell lists somewhat.A few other notes on changes from what I now know of 3.5:1. There will be two haste spells; the new 3.5 one, and the old 3.0 one (with the caveat that it does not allow multiple non-quickened spells to be cast). I'll rename the old one, maybe something like alacritous action.2. Buff spells will be altered to 10 minutes per level. A 1 min/lvl duration doesn't work well for me.3. I will probably write up a specialized polymorph spell that allows the caster to become a Tiny animal for an hour per level.GENERAL HOUSE RULESDamage Reduction: From what I've seen of the new edition, I'll be going with the new edition.SETTING RULESEquipment: I'm revising the equipment lists for the setting's economy, and my own narrow sense of correct weights and stats, given the present technology. I will also be including rules for armor made of bronze, silver, gold, adamantine, etc. This is probably too anal even for me, but it's hard to go back. And as I have time, magic items will be undergoing revision for setting flavor and the setting's economy.I may be using <a href="http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=53000" target="_blank">these armor rules</a>, depending on how much they change the feel of the game. I'm playtesting them a bit with random grand melees, so we'll see how that turns out.MISCELLANYHere are the <a href="http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=60311" target="_blank">feats</a>. I'll add to that as I have time. I don't really consider this a house rule, anymore than designing a headband of divination for the setting would be a house rule.</blockquote>

Verification