Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Variant Rules from the DMG, for Combat in My Campaigns
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 1214859" data-attributes="member: 1465"><p>Incidentally our DM has used different rules to try achieve the same purposes of your (except point 3), while when I am the DM I use standard rules for all of them.</p><p></p><p>1. Our DM uses Initiative every round. It was nice at first, but later became annoying. Furthermore it messes up the special initiative actions and it is slightly more difficult to keep track of spells duration.</p><p></p><p>Your way has no consequences of these sort. Seems to me that you are just trying to decrease variance of the Init rolls, so to make them more often close to average. You can also roll 2d10 to do the same. I don't understand why are you concerned this much about occasionally rolling very low or very high Init: it really isn't important whether one is the last because he rolled a 1 or because he rolled 19 and everybody else rolled 20, it only matters that he's the last. IMHO reducing the variance has not much consequences.</p><p></p><p>2. This house rule balances the weapons more, since every weapon has at least a threat range of 2. If this is what you wanted to achieve then it's ok, but remember that in general it will make combat last slightly less and would empower weapon damage against spell damage. If that's ok for then do it.</p><p></p><p>Our DM increased frequency of criticals by skipping the confirmation roll, that is if you score a threat then it is automatically a crit. It is a very bad house rule IMHO.</p><p></p><p>3. I think this is a variant in the DMG (except that you can't choose, you always roll), and in fact there's nothing wrong with it, just that it increases randomness. If you like it, why not?</p><p></p><p>4. Different rules for rolling, but our DM uses fumbles too. I really dislike them, so I am very biased against it. They are funny for some time, then they lose their in-character fun and become annoying. Higher level PCs do many more attacks and are therefore exposed to more fumbles: your rule bases them to Reflex saves which makes them less likely at higher levels, but still you are going to roll many times for nothing.</p><p></p><p>If you really like the idea of fumbles, I strongly recommend you to add another roll in between: after a natural 1, let the PC roll a confirmation check (just like with criticals). It will require one more roll admittedly, but it will make them even less probable.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 1214859, member: 1465"] Incidentally our DM has used different rules to try achieve the same purposes of your (except point 3), while when I am the DM I use standard rules for all of them. 1. Our DM uses Initiative every round. It was nice at first, but later became annoying. Furthermore it messes up the special initiative actions and it is slightly more difficult to keep track of spells duration. Your way has no consequences of these sort. Seems to me that you are just trying to decrease variance of the Init rolls, so to make them more often close to average. You can also roll 2d10 to do the same. I don't understand why are you concerned this much about occasionally rolling very low or very high Init: it really isn't important whether one is the last because he rolled a 1 or because he rolled 19 and everybody else rolled 20, it only matters that he's the last. IMHO reducing the variance has not much consequences. 2. This house rule balances the weapons more, since every weapon has at least a threat range of 2. If this is what you wanted to achieve then it's ok, but remember that in general it will make combat last slightly less and would empower weapon damage against spell damage. If that's ok for then do it. Our DM increased frequency of criticals by skipping the confirmation roll, that is if you score a threat then it is automatically a crit. It is a very bad house rule IMHO. 3. I think this is a variant in the DMG (except that you can't choose, you always roll), and in fact there's nothing wrong with it, just that it increases randomness. If you like it, why not? 4. Different rules for rolling, but our DM uses fumbles too. I really dislike them, so I am very biased against it. They are funny for some time, then they lose their in-character fun and become annoying. Higher level PCs do many more attacks and are therefore exposed to more fumbles: your rule bases them to Reflex saves which makes them less likely at higher levels, but still you are going to roll many times for nothing. If you really like the idea of fumbles, I strongly recommend you to add another roll in between: after a natural 1, let the PC roll a confirmation check (just like with criticals). It will require one more roll admittedly, but it will make them even less probable. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Variant Rules from the DMG, for Combat in My Campaigns
Top