Our most serious variants: what do you think?

[Li Shenron]

Our DM uses the following 4 house rules/variants, which in my opinion are important differences with the core rules. Has anybody of you used the same before? Are they feasible in your opinion? Which are the most dangerous consequences, or bad sides?

1) A natural 1 is a fumble

2) Initiative is rolled every round

3) A threat (if hits) is automatically a critical hit, no confirmation roll required

4) When a creature is dying (below 0 hp), any spell that cures at least 1 point of dmg cast upon her restores her exactly to 0 hp, not one less and not one more

Being a DM myself, I have my own opinion on these house rules, but I'd like to gather yours as well. Thanks!

 

[Geoff Watson]

Our DM uses the following 4 house rules/variants, which in my opinion are important differences with the core rules. Has anybody of you used the same before? Are they feasible in your opinion? Which are the most dangerous consequences, or bad sides?

1) A natural 1 is a fumble

What does a fumble mean?
Higher level characters will fumble more often (as they get more attacks).


2) Initiative is rolled every round

Slows things down, makes them more random, makes Readying useless.


3) A threat (if hits) is automatically a critical hit, no confirmation roll required

Makes criticals unrelated to skill.


4) When a creature is dying (below 0 hp), any spell that cures at least 1 point of dmg cast upon her restores her exactly to 0 hp, not one less and not one more

The cleric will have to waste a round casting Cure Minor Wounds before casting Heal?

Geoff.

 

[Capellan]

In order ...

1. I don't like fumbles. They slow the game down, they happen more often at high levels than low (which makes no sense) because you're rolling more dice, and they add an additional element of randomness that I don't believe the game needs. It's enough that a '1' always misses on an attack, to my mind.

2. Only rolling initiative once is easily on my "top ten best changes for 3E". I hated 2E initiative, and I have no desire to see it return - even in part. This adds more randomness again, I notice. How does your DM adjudicate when a spell ends, since it would normally do so on the caster's initiative?

3. Again, this adds randomness, since criticals will occur just as often for barely-skilled characters as for weapon masters. I think it's a bad change. I'll bet everyone in the campaign is desperate for Improved Critical and a Keen weapon, though!

4. I see little point in this change - as has been pointed out, the only thing it accomplishes is to delay the use of a 'real' healing spell until after the character has been 'reset'.

YMMV, of course. Obviously your DM's does!

 

[Drawmack]

1) A natural 1 is a fumble

We play that a natural 1 threatens a fumble, roll again - same mods - if that misses you fumble. If you roll a 1 on the reroll you've broken your weapon, even if it's magic the spell is called greater inneptitude.

2) Initiative is rolled every round

Slows down, makes refocus and readying a mute point, players do not know when they are going so will probably not be ready. (i.e. Spellcaster goes last round 1 and first round 2 be prepared to wait for him to pick a spell)

3) A threat (if hits) is automatically a critical hit, no confirmation roll required

You can do this but I prefer the reroll cause it makes them depend a bit less on luck.

4) When a creature is dying (below 0 hp), any spell that cures at least 1 point of dmg cast upon her restores her exactly to 0 hp, not one less and not one more

YOU WANT TO WHAT??? High level clerics get spells like resurection and such. If I had resurection I'd let the guy die then bring him back. I'd just leave healing alone cause if you change any of it, you've got to change it all.

 

[Li Shenron]

Re: Re: Our most serious variants: what do you think?

We play that a natural 1 threatens a fumble, roll again - same mods - if that misses you fumble. If you roll a 1 on the reroll you've broken your weapon, even if it's magic the spell is called greater inneptitude.

IIRC, it's how it is suggested also in the DMG. But since our DM uses (3) i.e. no confirmation rolls for critical hits, there are also no confirmation rolls for fumbles. I forgot to say it.

Also, the DM rolls a random consequence for the fumble; I could not see his table for it, but until now I know it contains at least the follow possibilities:

- you drop the weapon
- you hit a friend (if any is in melee or ranged range)
- you hit yourself
- nothing happens (as it wasn't a fumble)

 

[nHammer]

Our DM uses the following 4 house rules/variants, which in my opinion are important differences with the core rules. Has anybody of you used the same before? Are they feasible in your opinion? Which are the most dangerous consequences, or bad sides?

1) A natural 1 is a fumble

2) Initiative is rolled every round

3) A threat (if hits) is automatically a critical hit, no confirmation roll required

4) When a creature is dying (below 0 hp), any spell that cures at least 1 point of dmg cast upon her restores her exactly to 0 hp, not one less and not one more

Being a DM myself, I have my own opinion on these house rules, but I'd like to gather yours as well. Thanks!

1) In my came if you roll a 1 you roll again, with all the same modifiers. If the roll fails, any opponent in melee combat with you gets an AoO. So yes, a character who attacks more does have an increase chance of fumbling.

2) blah, no thanks

3)see above answer

4)see above answer