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

[Deset Gled]

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.

I like it, but I'd grant it somewhere around 5th level.

Lots of builds dip into ranger for the TWF. This ability at level one make the dip even more attractive. Putting it later would prevent that.

 

[earthsea_wizard]

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.

For me I never understood people wanting to find ways to let rogues and rangers etc get crits on undead. They don't have vital points in their anatomy, which is what a critical hit is searching for (especially something like a backstab). But I also don't reallyp rescribe to every class needing to be their most useful in every scenario, which seems to be where the sentiment comes from.

 

[cbwjm]

For me I never understood people wanting to find ways to let rogues and rangers etc get crits on undead. They don't have vital points in their anatomy, which is what a critical hit is searching for (especially something like a backstab). But I also don't reallyp rescribe to every class needing to be their most useful in every scenario, which seems to be where the sentiment comes from.

I always think of crits against undead as the zombie "Headshot", it's the only way to keep the undead down.

 

[Tinker Gnome]

For me I never understood people wanting to find ways to let rogues and rangers etc get crits on undead. They don't have vital points in their anatomy, which is what a critical hit is searching for (especially something like a backstab). But I also don't reallyp rescribe to every class needing to be their most useful in every scenario, which seems to be where the sentiment comes from.

I would fluff it as something like this...

"The weakpoints in the negative energy in undead are constantly shifting around their body. For a long time nobody thought they had any weak points, until my order of Rangers figured out the timing and where these weak points shift around on their body. It takes a lot of training to recognize these weak points in the constantly shifting flux of negative energy that is in the undead, but they are there and we know how to capitalize on it when we see an opportunity."

Or something like that. It is also a reward for Rangers who chose one of the crit immune enemies as their favored enemy. It shows they really know how to fight against them.

@Deset Gled Yeah, that is a good idea.

Outside of Rangers I have also thought that there should be some sort of alchemical item, like a salt that when thrown on Oozes dries them out and make them susceptible to crit hits and sneak attacks. It could have a DC 25 to create, perhaps the recipe is found by the PCs when a Cult of Juiblex is trying to kill a local alchemist and destroy the recipe.

 

[John98GR]

Made some fixes based on the feedback of several people. Many wording ambiguities have been clarified, with a few new things added (some feats and synergy bonuses for classes).

 

[Tinker Gnome]

I would bring back Shapechanger being a main monster type instead of just a subtype. Why? Cuz I like it.

 

[Emerikol]

Generally, if we are going to play the 3.5 system...

We play PF1e.

I didn't want an amped up 3e. I wanted a more relaxed version of 3e.

 

[Tinker Gnome]

I would let Sorcerers "research" new spells in between levels so when they gained a new spell they could get the new spell they were researching for free. So a players tells me they want their Sorcerer to make a spell to polymorph their arm into a weapon that attacks at 3/4th BAB for 1/round a level. When they hit their next level where they can gain spells that would get that spell for "free".

 

[VHawkwinter]

So - I've been working on my own 3.X d20 RPG for the past year and a half. It's substantially changed from 3.0/3.5. But there are some of my changes I would definitely backport if I run proper 3.0 or 3.5 again.

• Your feats would be on a points scale rather than slots, and not all feats would have the same value. 1/3 of the 'average' point value of a feat would be handed out every level. When you get them in a class I would leave them chunkier, if they have a limited list they would be tracked in a different pool, but it would still be points instead of slots. Maybe use the Eclipse: The Codex Persona scale where 1 feat is 6 pts. It divides nicely by 3.
• Simplify the crap out of prereqs. Cull the feat trees into individual items. Convert most of them to a BAB or CL or HD requirement, or a single skill's ranks. If a feat requires another feat, it should build on that feat directly, and that feat should require no other feats.
• Bake WBL into the advancement of character level like how feats work. Magic items found in the field would not stack with your innate enhancement bonuses. There are a few ways I would consider for this. The simplest is the PF1 Unchained variant rule, but I would probably try to make it more of a character build choice thing. And then I would not have WBL be a thing tracked anymore. You get what you find or negotiate pay for.
• Use the Alexandrian's Diplomacy rewrite if not doing a more in depth Skill System overhaul.
• You can't get into PrCs through prerequisites. The variant rule from UA (or the DMG, I forget which) where you have to pass a test and join an organisation, would normally be the only way (unless it's like a Savage Progression Template class or something).
• I would consider doing away with combat xp and make levels be gained through some sort of downtime training system which might be easier with a teacher and harder without. Incentivising joining guilds and academies and such. Paying for training would be a big use of gold. Multiclass XP Penalties would go bye bye.
• Fall damage is modified by creature size. Every size up from medium you double it (or halve the distance increment), every size down you halve it (or double the distance increment) - Treat flying creatures as maybe two sizes smaller for fall damage, they fly, they're less dense than a land animal of the same size.
• Monster Characters either get built with the GitP Revised and Negative LA assignments, or the Oslecamo Monster Classes - and for the latter I probably still set a minimum party level they can start at, and maybe a minimum number of levels in the monster class. No 1HD cloud giants.

Those are the big ones. But they're pretty significant in scope.

 

[Brendan Byrd]

So - I've been working on my own 3.X d20 RPG for the past year and a half. It's substantially changed from 3.0/3.5. But there are some of my changes I would definitely backport if I run proper 3.0 or 3.5 again.

• Your feats would be on a points scale rather than slots, and not all feats would have the same value. 1/3 of the 'average' point value of a feat would be handed out every level. When you get them in a class I would leave them chunkier, if they have a limited list they would be tracked in a different pool, but it would still be points instead of slots. Maybe use the Eclipse: The Codex Persona scale where 1 feat is 6 pts. It divides nicely by 3.
• Simplify the crap out of prereqs. Cull the feat trees into individual items. Convert most of them to a BAB or CL or HD requirement, or a single skill's ranks. If a feat requires another feat, it should build on that feat directly, and that feat should require no other feats.

Thanks for pointing out Eclipse: The Codex Persona, I wasn't aware of that resource. I'll take a look at it.
I had feats weighted at 4, talents at 2, and skill ranks at 1.