Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MadBlue" data-source="post: 2030761" data-attributes="member: 7552">The way I see it (and actually, it's not really my house rule, it's Andy Collins', so I can't take the credit/blame), Sorcerers should be able to choose the way they apply their Charisma rather than be potentially better at bluffing than anything else. According to the Sorcerer's flavor text, they can serve as the party's "face" and make excellent diplomats. It's hard to do that without Diplomacy as a class skill. And given that people tend to fear and misunderstand them as their powers are developing, I can easily see a Sorcerer with an evil bent choosing intimidation (rather than bluff or diplomacy) as their social interaction style. UMD is there because they have an innate talent for magic.   Thanks. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Yeah, I find it odd that the flavor text in the books use words like "self esteem", "self confidence" etc., when talking about Charisma, but the game mechanics don't follow up on that. In fact, most of the sample NPCs have a lower than average Charisma.  A typical adventuring party generated from the NPC lists in the DMG would consist of a Cleric, Fighter, Rogue and Wizard each with an 8 Charisma. Adventurers with low self-confidence?  If the rules as written treat Charisma like a dump stat, it's no wonder that many players tend to, too.My goal is primarily to cut down on rings and whatnot, so it'll work OK for me. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> I figure that the rules pretty much assume that characters will have AC boosting items and creature Natural ACs are built with that in mind. Creatures with class levels would get the 1/3 Lvl bonus to AC, though. In the last campaign I played in, it seemed like every other NPC villain had a Ring of Protection or Cloak of Resistance (most of the enemies we faced were classed humanoids). Of course when most of the enemies are creatures, it's not so much of an issue. I always thought it odd that a 20th level Fighter, stripped of weapons and armor, could conceivably be as easy to hit as he was at 1st level. Of course there are Feats like Dodge, and whatnot, but you know what I mean.Oh, another house rule I'm going to use is Andy's "High Cost of Dying" rule:Rather than losing a level, characters that die and are raised from the dead have a negative level imposed on them. The negative level is removed when the character gains enough experience points to go from his current level to the next one (Restoration has no effect). For example, a 5th level character with 14,999 xp is killed and raised from the dead. He's still 5th level, and still has 14,999 xp, and the next XP he gains will still make him a 6th level character, but he has a negative level imposed on him until he earns 5,000 xp (the amount it would take a character to go from 5th level to 6th level). It's still a harsh penalty, but it makes it a lot easier to deal with in game, rather than having to take the time to recalculate the character (sometimes on the spot) as a lower level character.My friend uses the regular death rule, but has a "3 deaths and you're in trouble with death" rule.  As he put it "After the 3rd death, Death notices you and is not happy he has been cheated so he will, at some time, send a piece of himself as a mini-death that will be tailor made for each person. I wanna make PCs try hard not to die and not to rely on being raised too much and for them to really think there is a consequence for dying."  I think I'm going to use that too. IMC, the "mini-death" will be an Aleax.</blockquote>

Verification