Psion's 3.5 house rule list
- Thread starter Dinkeldog
- Start date
Piratecat
Sesquipedalian
Xeriar
First Post
Yay! Because I want to weigh in my hair-brained opinion!
1)Square facings
I use two facings actually - always have. Armies march shoulder to shoulder (threat of area effect spells notwithstanding) and men are not spaced 5' apart. More like 2.5' or 3'.
So I don't mind the square facing - for small skirmishes, it's just fine. For -hoooooge- battles, the original facing rules weren't so hot anyway.
2) School Specialization
I do like their attempt (who knows how successful) at balancing the schools. We shall have to see, I guess. I am feeling kinda iffy at requiring the sacrifice of two schools though.
3)Nerfed spell focus
This was the only one that pissed me off. Mostly because it's 'brokenness' comes from combining it with spell power, and they seem to be including PRC's in balance now.
My personal thought of the Archmage PRC (and Heirophant) - above any beyond any game concerns, is that a path of such power is not something you walk down for a few years and just end, knowing all you can know about it.
It's really an anethma to me - and besides I've made my own anyway
If magical items did not grant a bonus to saves, then I would concede this, but since spell slots are often rare, precious things, I can't see the purpose behind the nerfing.
4)Doubled power attack damage
I don't really have a problem with this. It is only for two-handed weapons, who take an AC penalty.
The problem with dual wielding is its own, IMO.
5)Deflect arrows
On one hand, auto-stopping something seems a bit overpowered. On the other, only a stronger bow is gonna make an arrow go faster.
I read a story about a girl poking her eye out trying this stunt a year or two ago. I'm still iffy on the auto thing :-/
6)Pokemon Paladins
Indeed. Having had a wizard adventure for four days in a dead magic field, I cannot in the remotest sense sympathize with the paladin losing access to their horsie ever once in awhile.
On top of this, not everyone has adventures in dungeons or caves or whatever all the time. At some point I gotta think about the world and make the call.
The jury is out on DR...
I like this one. I think I'll combine some things to give players multiple or better options.
Ie, DR silver can also be affected by mithral.
DR cold iron can also be affected by greensteel.
DR adamantium can also be affected by orichalcum.
Something like that, anyway.
1)Square facings
I use two facings actually - always have. Armies march shoulder to shoulder (threat of area effect spells notwithstanding) and men are not spaced 5' apart. More like 2.5' or 3'.
So I don't mind the square facing - for small skirmishes, it's just fine. For -hoooooge- battles, the original facing rules weren't so hot anyway.
2) School Specialization
I do like their attempt (who knows how successful) at balancing the schools. We shall have to see, I guess. I am feeling kinda iffy at requiring the sacrifice of two schools though.
3)Nerfed spell focus
This was the only one that pissed me off. Mostly because it's 'brokenness' comes from combining it with spell power, and they seem to be including PRC's in balance now.
My personal thought of the Archmage PRC (and Heirophant) - above any beyond any game concerns, is that a path of such power is not something you walk down for a few years and just end, knowing all you can know about it.
It's really an anethma to me - and besides I've made my own anyway
If magical items did not grant a bonus to saves, then I would concede this, but since spell slots are often rare, precious things, I can't see the purpose behind the nerfing.
4)Doubled power attack damage
I don't really have a problem with this. It is only for two-handed weapons, who take an AC penalty.
The problem with dual wielding is its own, IMO.
5)Deflect arrows
On one hand, auto-stopping something seems a bit overpowered. On the other, only a stronger bow is gonna make an arrow go faster.
I read a story about a girl poking her eye out trying this stunt a year or two ago. I'm still iffy on the auto thing :-/
6)Pokemon Paladins
Indeed. Having had a wizard adventure for four days in a dead magic field, I cannot in the remotest sense sympathize with the paladin losing access to their horsie ever once in awhile.
On top of this, not everyone has adventures in dungeons or caves or whatever all the time. At some point I gotta think about the world and make the call.
The jury is out on DR...
I like this one. I think I'll combine some things to give players multiple or better options.
Ie, DR silver can also be affected by mithral.
DR cold iron can also be affected by greensteel.
DR adamantium can also be affected by orichalcum.
Something like that, anyway.
spunky_mutters
First Post
I don't know what all the whining is about DR changes. In 1e you could count on running into many, many creatures that you just weren't going to be able to defeat without experimentation. It seems like streamlining of the game has modified or removed most of those, so I am glad to see a bit more flavour creeping back in here. I would even like to see more material options (although possible only for epic level creatures when players have way more resources and are probably retreating to restock mid-combat anyways).
Destil
Explorer
1) I have no problems with this. Still need to see how the rules work for large creatures passing through places smaller than their facing, though. Also hopefully there will be some rules for smaller creatures to occupy/move thorugh the same area as much larger ones (I could see a halfling darting between a stone giant's legs fairly easily).
2) Most likely I'll use the original 3E rules. If anything I'll treat necromancy as as good as the second tier schools like enchantment, illusion and such, depending on what's been added. But I'm failry convinced that the hiarachy of superior schools and inferior schools could not be fixed without serious changes to the spell list.
3) This annoys me tremendously, as well. Since Andy Collins basicly said this is a fix to Greater Spell Focus on his boards and that if you ban that you can just leave it at +2. This is the wrong way to do things, IMHO. If anything drop GSF to +1 and leave spell focus alone.
However, there was a very nice suggestion here about this feat, where you would gain +1 to DC and caster level with the school. I like that, makes it far more usfull for some schools. 3eR gives me a chance to change my house rules document, so I'll be trying this version, instead. In addition I'll also make my own contrubution and give it a +1 bonus to opposed rolls (like Dispel checks) within that school.
4) I like the flavor. Also, in yet one more Andy Collins introspective moment: Andy mentioned that this should idealy be 1/2 for light weapons, +1 1/2 for two handed, the same as strength bonuses. However this makes the math a bit of a pain, so instead it's 2x or no bonus. Since I'm already weary of giving two-handed weapons any more of a boost (and very close to requireing a feat to gain 1 1/2 strength bonus to damage in the first place...) I'll use it like that, instead. The math's not too bad, really.
5) No problems with it, either way. Snatch Arrows was already a psionic feat, though. So I'm not sure I'll be using that... if anything I'll just drop snatch arrows. Might need to make a version of this for use with a shield, too...
6) Yeah, this is a bad flavor point, but a way to help with a known problem. Most likely I'll just let a palidin teleport their mount to them once per day, instead.
7) DR looks okay. Again, it's good flavor. I'm a bit worried about some things. Like the Lantern Archon, which was useful because it had DR that was hard to overcome. And stoneskin/protection from arrows. If anything I'll change these to unbeatable/epic DRs, or mabye a combination. Like give the lantern archon (old DR 25/+2) DR 10/Evil and DR 5/Epic.
2) Most likely I'll use the original 3E rules. If anything I'll treat necromancy as as good as the second tier schools like enchantment, illusion and such, depending on what's been added. But I'm failry convinced that the hiarachy of superior schools and inferior schools could not be fixed without serious changes to the spell list.
3) This annoys me tremendously, as well. Since Andy Collins basicly said this is a fix to Greater Spell Focus on his boards and that if you ban that you can just leave it at +2. This is the wrong way to do things, IMHO. If anything drop GSF to +1 and leave spell focus alone.
However, there was a very nice suggestion here about this feat, where you would gain +1 to DC and caster level with the school. I like that, makes it far more usfull for some schools. 3eR gives me a chance to change my house rules document, so I'll be trying this version, instead. In addition I'll also make my own contrubution and give it a +1 bonus to opposed rolls (like Dispel checks) within that school.
4) I like the flavor. Also, in yet one more Andy Collins introspective moment: Andy mentioned that this should idealy be 1/2 for light weapons, +1 1/2 for two handed, the same as strength bonuses. However this makes the math a bit of a pain, so instead it's 2x or no bonus. Since I'm already weary of giving two-handed weapons any more of a boost (and very close to requireing a feat to gain 1 1/2 strength bonus to damage in the first place...) I'll use it like that, instead. The math's not too bad, really.
5) No problems with it, either way. Snatch Arrows was already a psionic feat, though. So I'm not sure I'll be using that... if anything I'll just drop snatch arrows. Might need to make a version of this for use with a shield, too...
6) Yeah, this is a bad flavor point, but a way to help with a known problem. Most likely I'll just let a palidin teleport their mount to them once per day, instead.
7) DR looks okay. Again, it's good flavor. I'm a bit worried about some things. Like the Lantern Archon, which was useful because it had DR that was hard to overcome. And stoneskin/protection from arrows. If anything I'll change these to unbeatable/epic DRs, or mabye a combination. Like give the lantern archon (old DR 25/+2) DR 10/Evil and DR 5/Epic.
Last edited:
Olgar Shiverstone
Legend
So let's see here:
1) Square facings.
I've played with both now (switched when the change was first announced) and generally prefer the square facings becuase it does away with awkwardness in 5' steps and rotations for long critters. I am interested to see what the details are on mounted combat and movement in smaller areas, because I see some potentail for awkwardness there, but see no reason to reject this right off until I see how that is handled. I can think of one fix for horses (treat as medium creatures -- 5' square -- yep, a strange abstraction, but so is the whole thing, and it works).
2) School Specialization
Can't really judge until I see the full spell lists. If the other schools have been improved such that Divination is clearly weaker, then I'll be fine with this -- my fear would be abuse of Divination specialization more than anything else at that point. Undecided, but willing to give the benefit of the doubt. I don't see specialists so defined by what they are prohibited, anyway (the specialists played IMC cast virtually ALL their spells from their specialty schools, so it really wouldn't have mattered what was prohibited).
3) Spell Focus
*Shrug*. Didn't think this was broken, but I could see the potential for it to be so before. I don't think it's a game breaking change -- wizards would still be viable if there were no other way to boost their save DCs. Need to playtest this, but I expect it will work out OK.
4) Power Attack.
Well, I though 1.5 * would be more elegant/consistent, but that makes the math a pain. TWF seems to have been made much more viable, too -- so it looks like the overall balance in styles is preserved. While I'm hesitant to say this is a perfect solution, the initial analysis done by the Rules Board guys seems to indicate this will be OK -- again, I'll play it first, but think it will work out OK.
5) Deflect Arrows
Yeah, poorly designed feat, but frankly doesn't have enough impact for me to even get excited about -- plenty of other stuff in the game is automatic that we don't think twice about. Not even worth the effort of changing.
6) Paladin's Mount
Need to see the exact text on this before making any opinion, really. Frankly, it just sounds like the Paladin's getting the ability to cast a Mount spell once per day, with minor variations. Given that the druid can now spontaneously pull badgers out of his butt, I hardly think a daily casting of Mount by a Paladin is a big deal for flavor or any other reason. Heck, the game mechanics of the familiar-in-a-pocket, who grants a continuous benefit to a character without ever making an in-game appearance *cough*toad*cough* are much more worrisome in comparison.
7) DR
Nice flavor change, mechanically, I expect there will be no net change, though again, I really need to see it in action first -- but I'm not bothered by it.
So in summary, there's maybe two items I've really raised my eyebrows at -- and there are a heck of a lot more things than that that I think are broke in 3.0 that aren't changing, and no one's suggesting a return to 2E -- so if that's all that's wrong with 3.5, I'd call it a win. And even those things I really need to see the whole package in play first before I can really judge.
Maybe once I've gotten to play with the full rules set I can afford to get my knickers in a bunch and start creating new house rules, but I'm willing to give the base rules a shot first.
1) Square facings.
I've played with both now (switched when the change was first announced) and generally prefer the square facings becuase it does away with awkwardness in 5' steps and rotations for long critters. I am interested to see what the details are on mounted combat and movement in smaller areas, because I see some potentail for awkwardness there, but see no reason to reject this right off until I see how that is handled. I can think of one fix for horses (treat as medium creatures -- 5' square -- yep, a strange abstraction, but so is the whole thing, and it works).
2) School Specialization
Can't really judge until I see the full spell lists. If the other schools have been improved such that Divination is clearly weaker, then I'll be fine with this -- my fear would be abuse of Divination specialization more than anything else at that point. Undecided, but willing to give the benefit of the doubt. I don't see specialists so defined by what they are prohibited, anyway (the specialists played IMC cast virtually ALL their spells from their specialty schools, so it really wouldn't have mattered what was prohibited).
3) Spell Focus
*Shrug*. Didn't think this was broken, but I could see the potential for it to be so before. I don't think it's a game breaking change -- wizards would still be viable if there were no other way to boost their save DCs. Need to playtest this, but I expect it will work out OK.
4) Power Attack.
Well, I though 1.5 * would be more elegant/consistent, but that makes the math a pain. TWF seems to have been made much more viable, too -- so it looks like the overall balance in styles is preserved. While I'm hesitant to say this is a perfect solution, the initial analysis done by the Rules Board guys seems to indicate this will be OK -- again, I'll play it first, but think it will work out OK.
5) Deflect Arrows
Yeah, poorly designed feat, but frankly doesn't have enough impact for me to even get excited about -- plenty of other stuff in the game is automatic that we don't think twice about. Not even worth the effort of changing.
6) Paladin's Mount
Need to see the exact text on this before making any opinion, really. Frankly, it just sounds like the Paladin's getting the ability to cast a Mount spell once per day, with minor variations. Given that the druid can now spontaneously pull badgers out of his butt, I hardly think a daily casting of Mount by a Paladin is a big deal for flavor or any other reason. Heck, the game mechanics of the familiar-in-a-pocket, who grants a continuous benefit to a character without ever making an in-game appearance *cough*toad*cough* are much more worrisome in comparison.
7) DR
Nice flavor change, mechanically, I expect there will be no net change, though again, I really need to see it in action first -- but I'm not bothered by it.
So in summary, there's maybe two items I've really raised my eyebrows at -- and there are a heck of a lot more things than that that I think are broke in 3.0 that aren't changing, and no one's suggesting a return to 2E -- so if that's all that's wrong with 3.5, I'd call it a win. And even those things I really need to see the whole package in play first before I can really judge.
Maybe once I've gotten to play with the full rules set I can afford to get my knickers in a bunch and start creating new house rules, but I'm willing to give the base rules a shot first.
Similar Threads
Enchanted Trinkets Complete
Recent & Upcoming Releases
-
December 9 2025 -
June 18 2026 -
October 1 2026
