What Rules have you fixed for your game?

[Cyberzombie]

All spells with a duration of 1 min/round now have a duration of 10 min/round. I don't play hack 'n' slash, and I don't need rules nerfs that apply only to hack 'n' slash games.

 

[Wrathamon]

how about clarifications (certain rules that are misunderstood) or any loop hole abuse issue in 3.5?

These are all good keep them coming.

 

[Chaldfont]

All spells with a duration of 1 min/round now have a duration of 10 min/round. I don't play hack 'n' slash, and I don't need rules nerfs that apply only to hack 'n' slash games.

I totally agree, Cyberzombie. I think half of the 3.5 changes were for this reason.

Here's one of mine:

Druids' wildshape ability lasts as long as the player wishes. I had a player who wanted his druid to be more comfortable in wolf-shape than in his normal elf-shape. He only switched back when he absolutely had to. Why discourage good role-playing by players who don't abuse the rules?

 

[SpiralBound]

You may have addressed this in your trip rules:

Attack bonuses increase much faster than reflex saves. THus, at high levels its impossible to resist getting tripped.

Actually I didn't... I hadn't noticed that imbalance in the advancement rules. Then again, I guess neither did the original designers, so I guess I'm in good company! My original intent was to streamline the process of tripping and remove things that I didn't agree with like the automatice "return trip" attack in the event of a failed trip. I'm not sure really how to address what you've brought up. I want to maintain the smoothness of my rules, yet I agree with your observation regarding high level characters becoming vulnerable to trip attacks. That's really odd.

I suppose I could create a "sidestep" feat that would provide reflex bonuses versus trip attacks, but that doesn't feel quite right either... I'm going to need to rethink this. Thanks for pointing that out!

I'll stop hijacking this thread with my specific rules change now..

 

[Turanil]

All spells with a duration of 1 min/round now have a duration of 10 min/round. I don't play hack 'n' slash, and I don't need rules nerfs that apply only to hack 'n' slash games.

Same for me.

In addition I hate the economics sytem presented in D&D. I find it grotesque and totally unrealistic. I would like to change that, but it's too much work and would require too much research and thinking. So I just divided all magic stuff costs (in gp, but not in XP) by 10, while treasure are also typically only 10% to 20% of what they usually are in D&D adventures.

 

[Li Shenron]

I have used a few HR in the past, but nowadays I'm kind of fine with the core rules. I mean, there are many little things I don't like, but I can live with them. In groups I played, many DMs had their little favourite HR, mostly the result of mixing 3.0 and 3.5 together.

I just wanted to mention, about the shapechanging rules, that I like very much some ideas from Giant in The Playground website, although I haven't tried them in practice: the point of that variant is 1st of all to make shapechanging more streamlined and easy, and 2nd to make it more balanced.

I am looking mostly for abuse issues or things that are overpowered. The powerattack is a good example that I was already concidering. Another, would be that you can cast Awaken on a wildshaped druid.

Awaken on a wildshaped druid isn't overpowered, but it's an ill-conceived product of a pervert mindset

 

[reanjr]

This is primarily to make things simpler and clarify things for the players, but it ends up changing rules. Two actions per round. There's no such thing as standard or move actions. They're both just actions.

Sorcerer metamagic doesn't increase casting time.

No pokemounts.

A big balancing one here: When multiclassing into a class that has Armor or Weapon proficiencies you do not have, you only get one Feat per level in that class. So from Wizard to Fighter, you can choose to get Light Armor or a single Martial or Simple weapon prof. Each level of Fighter after that you can choose another.

I'm not sure if I'm going beyond "fix" to "house rule", but there it is.

 

[reanjr]

Actually I didn't... I hadn't noticed that imbalance in the advancement rules. Then again, I guess neither did the original designers

What does trip have to do with Reflex?

 

[Wonko the Sane]

I use opposed rolls to resolve Tumble and Defensive Casting, thus:

Tumble: the DC to tumble through an area threatened by an opponent is the opponent's BAB + 1d20. No modifiers to this roll at all (for magic weapons, Weapon Focus, etc.). If attempting to Tumble through an enemy's square, add 10 to the DC. If the tumbler does not beat this DC, he draws an attack of opportunity.

Defensive Casting: the DC to cast defensively is the opponent's BAB + the spell's level + 1d20. If the caster does not beat this DC with a Concentration check, the spell fizzles.

I think this was originally from Monte Cook, though I cannot remember for sure. It makes sense to me, as trying to Tumble past a goblin should be easier than trying to do the same past a dragon who has far more experience in combat.

 

[SpiralBound]

What does trip have to do with Reflex?

Well for me, the connection is that to avoid a trip attack, you would need to successfully roll a reflex check against their melee touch attack. The reasoning being that one would rely upon their reflexes to avoid an attack. I'm open to equally valid alternatives.

P.S. I swear I'm not trying to hijack this thread! Should I just start another thread just about my variant trip rules?