Two House Rules

[Quantum]

So why can't my fighter get spells? After all, casting spells is just a sort of knowledge too?

Which is why d20 allows for easy dual classing. And when it first came out there was nothing to prevent people from having 1 level in all classes, only if the DM allowed it.

To answer all of these questions, you have to consider what the game would be like if it was a skill based system.

And the d20 is based heavily on skills, most other games are not. Skills are just part of the flavor and have no real game effect. For example, in 2e they were just there and had no real game effect. In 1e, they weren't even there. But of course, this would depend on how you define skills too. But most games are stat dependent more than anything else.
​

 

[Celebrim]

Which is why d20 allows for easy dual classing.

Exactly. So, if you want your fighter to study arcane lore rather than sword play for while, then dual class into the appropriate class.

And the d20 is based heavily on skills, most other games are not. Skills are just part of the flavor and have no real game effect.

I don't understand what you are trying to say there.

 

[Quantum]

I don't understand what you are trying to say there.

Only that I have played those kinds of games, both that rely heavily on stats, and heavily on skills. For example, Palladium games rely heavily on skills rather than stats.

 

[Celebrim]

Only that I have played those kinds of games, both that rely heavily on stats, and heavily on skills. For example, Palladium games rely heavily on skills rather than stats.

Well, D&D is based very heavily on levels. Being high level completely overwhelms character stats in skills and everything else. A first level character with 18 Charisma has little hope of being as skilled of a diplomat as a 12th level character with 9 Charisma whose invested his resources in charisma based skills. In practice, the high level low charisma character is the more charismatic of the two because skills and most everything else are dependent on level.

Skills in 3.X certainly have an in game effect, and depending on who is running the table, it can be a very big in game effect.

My suspicion is that your rules work very well for tables where the players all trust each other and don't abuse their priviledges and power game to the detriment of role playing, and the DM runs the table so that skills have a fairly small impact on play such that it really doesn't effect your chance of success that much however you invest your skill points. At such a table, the players aren't going to cause alot of trouble, and no one is going to feel particularly cheated because having alot of skills isn't a huge part of how your character contributes to party success.

 

[Hrothgar Rannúlfr]

For base saves I use his Offense Or Defense option on page 10 in his book. I have no problems in allowing players to choose their own saves. They are Table 1-8 and Table 1-9.

Not looking at the book, right now, but I like those options, too. Choosing saves allows for different kinds of characters within the same class, too some degree. At least in another way compared to the usual customization options.

Then I allow players to choose ten class skills. For skill points they get 32 plus Intelligence modifier for first level. Then they get 8 points plus Intelligence modifier for every level after that.

Interesting option. It's almost as if you're using the Gestalt rules from Unearthed Arcana and everyone's character is gestalted with the Expert from the Generic Classes section. In one game, I did something similar, but I gave everyone more feats instead of skill points.

I personally have no problems in allowing players to use this method. In play testing with my friends, it really doesn't change the dynamics of things.

I can see that. I can also see the validity of the arguments presented, so far, against doing this, but for me the arguments fade when I realize that you're actually just saying that all the characters are semi-gestalted with the expert class at every level. Sure, it makes some classes more powerful and others less so, relatively speaking, but it sounds fun.

 

[Quantum]

My suspicion is that your rules work very well for tables where the players all trust each other and don't abuse their privileges and power game to the detriment of role playing,

You're right. My current crop of players have been quite mature, and in fact it was one of my players who did suggest using this method, and they all agreed to it when he brought it to the table. And it has worked quite well for our game.

And you're right, it probably wouldn't work with immature players who care only about being the biggest baddest guy around. But then again, what rules really work with those kinds of players?

One of the other rules I use is once a month if there is something they'd like to try, they should suggest it to the other players and bring it to the table before we start playing. I ask that they give me a week in advance to read up and prepare for it if they want to try something out.

 

[Aus_Snow]

and the DM runs the table so that skills have a fairly small impact on play such that it really doesn't effect your chance of success that much however you invest your skill points.

Because that very important part of the sentence was missing from the quoted text, in the previous post.