TS' Tome of Collected House Rules up for Download!

[Anguish]

What are you talking about?

You seem to think he's got people adding their level to their hit points at each level-up, or something like that. At least, that's the only way I can make sense of your math. But the passage you quoted doesn't say anything even vaguely resembling that. And the one thing you did say that was sort of like what the rule actually said (the bit about rounding down), you still managed to get wrong.

EDIT: Actually, now I see where you made the mistake, and the misreading on your part is more subtle than it seemed at first. You read "half their hit die plus one hit points per level" as "(half their hit die) plus (one hit point per level)", missing the "s" which makes it clear - though I would have thought it would be obvious even without it - that the correct reading is "(half their hit die plus one) hit points per level"

Thank you. I would never in a million years have parsed that rule the way he's intended it. Sort like one of those Escher drawings that looks like the soldiers are all going up an infinite staircase until something in your head clicks and you suddenly realize it's a bunch of spiders hanging off the ceiling of an inverted staircase. Or something.

"At each level, characters gain one half their stated hit die, rounded up. Apply any bonus or penalty from a Con modifier as usual as well as any hit points gained or lost from other sources including Feats and Prestige Classes."

Really -- and this is obviously off-topic -- this is one of the things I'm hoping the digital initiative side of 4e may help. Rules that are worded such that they aren't crystal clear and unambiguous can be changed/edited. Beyond errata, clarification releases would be really nice.

Again, thanks.

 

[Arkhandus]

"One half their stated hit die, rounded up" ? Bwuh?

Half a hit die wouldn't need rounding unless the die was a d3, d5, d7, or other odd-numbered one, which generally don't exist (even the rules only make use of d3s occasionally for really tiny damage, and people generally roll those as a d6 with some adjustment).

If you meant the average result for each hit die, rounded up, and made it clear, then that would be an appropriate wording for anyone who thinks in terms of probability and thereby realizes it means 2.5 rounded to 3 for a d4, 3.5 rounded to a 4 for a d6, etc.

Really should just say "Instead of rolling for hit points at each level, you gain 1 hit point plus half the maximum result from your hit die."

 

[Nellisir]

Really should just say "Instead of rolling for hit points at each level, you gain 1 hit point plus half the maximum result from your hit die."

I prefer: "You gain 3 hp/level if you have a d4 HD; 4hp/level if you have a d6; 5hp/level if you have a d8; 6hp/level if you have a d10; and 7hp/level if you have a d12. Plus Con, as usual.:

It's longer and needs prettying, but it says what it means.

 

[Griffith Dragonlake]

"Really should just say "Instead of rolling for hit points at each level, you gain 1 hit point plus half the maximum result from your hit die."

Yup, that sounds better.

 

[Archade]

I've read through the house rules, and there are a number of things I'm going to use.

1) I really like the idea that half-elves get a bonus feat, but it's limited to a +2/+2 feat. It's a bit flavorful towards the character's human heritage, but not unbalancing.

2) I like the skill focus feat automatically granting that skill as a class skill. That's now a good feat to take!

3) I enjoy the concept of allowing class features as feats, but as written, it's too easy. I think that either these feats should either be slightly sub-optimal compared to the class features (so it's better to take the class), or the prerequisites should be more demanding, so characters seeking to take these feats can't have them for a few levels after they'd be available to the comparable class.

For example, evasion. I like the idea that other characters can take it, but the existing prerequisite of base Reflex save +3 is too easy to meet, and steals the spotlight and advantage away from the rogue. I think a better prerequisite would be base Reflex save +4, Dodge, and Tumble 8 ranks. Now it's slightly harder to qualify for, but still an option for someone.

Thoughts?

 

[Piratecat]

Thanks for the b&w version! I scanned it and liked a lot of what I saw. I'm looking forward to going over it in depth.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

Glad you're appreciating my pdf, Archade.

3) I enjoy the concept of allowing class features as feats, but as written, it's too easy. I think that either these feats should either be slightly sub-optimal compared to the class features (so it's better to take the class), or the prerequisites should be more demanding, so characters seeking to take these feats can't have them for a few levels after they'd be available to the comparable class.

For example, evasion. I like the idea that other characters can take it, but the existing prerequisite of base Reflex save +3 is too easy to meet, and steals the spotlight and advantage away from the rogue. I think a better prerequisite would be base Reflex save +4, Dodge, and Tumble 8 ranks. Now it's slightly harder to qualify for, but still an option for someone.

I can understand your opinion, but I took it easy on prerequisites for two reasons. One, I like simplicity and didn't want to spend a lot of time coming up with strenuous prerequisites. Two, I like making it easy to get these abilities especially since many of them only require a couple level dips in X class. I try to discourage level dipping.