4E: Houserules You'll Make, and ways you might change the game

94 posts / 0 new
Last post
Go ahead and post what house rules you're planning on making already. Here's some of mine:


1. Tossing out classes. Since everything is compatible nowadays, you may as well give players the freedom to fully design their class. Choosing as they like between, feats, utility powers, daily powers, etc. from any class they like as long as they meet the level requirements.

2. Going to make some more powers that aren't so combat oriented (Elliestra knows that D&D was too combat-oriented before, and they made it even more combat oriented in 4E.... )

3. Vorpal... you know what? Yea, it's auto-death again. Oh, and whenever used, it will make the sound "snicker-snack".

4. "Mithril" will henceforth be known as 'Fool's Mithril'. True Mithril will drop weight of any armor down to negligible, and increase armor by an additional 10 in addition to giving damage reduction. Oh, and it will be among the most expensive addition you can make to an item -magic enchantments not excluded. Significantly more expensive than a lot of magical enchantments. After all, it has to be mined from on the deepest of mines, crafted by the greatest of the greatest of the dwarves, a single chain shirt of the stuff being enough to buy you an entire kingdom (AKA, mithril will finally be back to how originally described when presented in 'the hobbit'.)

5. Godhood? Yea, it's no longer coming nice and neat for you at 30th level just because you took a feature.You're going to have to get creative and convince the gods to let you join them.

6. You know what? Chaotic Good is back. And to prove the point, the campaign I run will be about the characters trying to stop a Hitler-like regime (whose leader will be lawful evil). Because lawful evil people (like Hitler) have always been ridiculously more evil and destructive than the chaotic evil ones could ever dream of being(like that one psychopath serial killer who only managed to kill around 5+ people... what was his name? Oh yea, Jack the Ripper).
1) 26 point buy.

2) No restrictions on trained skills. All skills are class skills.

3) No limit on magic item daily powers, except that only one magic item can be used per round. Use the stuff you have.

That's all I have, so far.
56816218 wrote:
What I find most frustrating about 4E is that I can see it includes the D&D game I've always wanted to play, but the game is so lathered in tatical combat rules that I have thus far been unable to coax the game I want out.
When the Cat's a Stray, the Mice will Pray
1. Tossing out classes. Since everything is compatible nowadays, you may as well give players the freedom to fully design their class. Choosing as they like between, feats, utility powers, daily powers, etc. from any class they like as long as they meet the level requirements.

I'm not convinced this is a good idea. I don't think classes are so much designed to be comparable to one another, as being comparable to classes of their particular archetype.

For example, I don't think it's a balanced idea to hand out Striker abilities, like the Curse, Quarry, and Sneak Attack.
[highlight]I'm going to request that this thread be move to House Rules.

-wrecan, you friendly neighborhood forum lead[/highlight]
If you exceed your movement while jumping you fall prone. This is the stupidest thing I have ever read in a D&D book (not really, but it's in the same ballpark). I will rule that you complete your jump and then stop, but you can't jump just to get extra movement. I mean, do you really think that if you run 5 squares and jump a 2 square pit that you will inexplicably fall right over the middle of the pit because you exceed your movement...please.
Ooo, where to start...

1: No dragonborn. Well, maybe for the GM as NPC villains, but that is about it.
2: Elardrin? That teleport thing is gone. Have to come up with something to replace it, probably something that still fits the "maigcal creature" motif.
3: Add back a ton of the spells missing from the wizard class, both as powers and as rituals (probably the second most time consuming thing to do).
4: Some kind of wound mechanic, healing to full after 6 hours is not utterly horrid, but it needs some tweaking. If you got knocked to 0 HP, 6 hours of rest should not have you fresh as a daisy....
5: New classes. Druid for sure, possibly some others, and several Paragon Paths. (this is probably the big time eater to create)
6: Meteor Swarm: The caster can shift any/all target(s) in the area 2 squares.
7: Some kind of feat for the Divine casters to let them turn undead more than once. Seems kinda weak right now.
8: Some kind of secondary skills/background systems to incorporate crafting rules.
9: Possibly changing half elves stat bonuses
10: Increasing the list of rogue weapons usable for sneak attacks and their powers a bit.
11: More divine powers for paladins and priests, even as feats
12: A paladin mount feat
13: A familiar feat for wizards and warlocks
14: Wizards and other casters take casting penalties for wearing metal armor. Probably something that makes the saves easier for targets to make. No wizards in plate mail, even if they DO spend the feats on it...
15: Arcane and Divine source powers all have somatic and verbal components, so restraining hands and gagging them keeps them from casting (nothing in the RAW right now shows they need to have hands/mouth free to cast, which is kinda dumb. And with some players, better to spell out that you can not do something than leave it open ended)
16: Possibly giving fighters one more trained skill.
If you exceed your movement while jumping you fall prone. This is the stupidest thing I have ever read in a D&D book (not really, but it's in the same ballpark). I will rule that you complete your jump and then stop, but you can't jump just to get extra movement. I mean, do you really think that if you run 5 squares and jump a 2 square pit that you will inexplicably fall right over the middle of the pit because you exceed your movement...please.

How bout you make a great leap over the 2 square pit and tumble to a stop on the other side? A character with 5 squares of movement (25ft) should be able to make a running jump (10ft start still?) and still have movement left to land on his feat on the 5th square. If he is exceeding his movement with a run, or would have ended his move in the air above the pit, it's sensible to have him finish the jump but fall prone (tumble to the ground, catch the edge of the pit and pick himself up and over, etc).
We play solo - with me running 2 (or maybe 3) characters, and the wife GMing. As we want to be able to run prepublished adventures some things we plan to do.

1) Use a different array Ability Scores are : 18 18 17 17 16 14.

And we are going to play (with a 3 member party) 2 levels above default - The characters will be 3rd for a first level encounter/adventure.

We plan on playing things pretty strait besides that.

Other things in mind for the future:
1)Some sort of gestalt - likely applying the Class template from the DMG for the second class.
2)Maybe -multiple paragon paths (one professional, one racial like in the warforged article (depending on if more racial paragon paths are released).

We like all the new races, and the alignment system, so that isn't going to change.

Should the Green Ronin Advanced Players Guide (or whatever they plan to call it) comes out as described, that will be grabbed, and used. Monks!!
1) no alignments allowed.
2) Meteor Swarm is a Cleric 29 known as "Divine Fire", Astral Storm is a Wizard 29 known as "Starstorm Omega".
3) Blade Cascade gives you a cumulative -2 penalty to hit after each hit, until the end of your turn.
4) An expanded language sub-system so that while communication is possible in common, it's not at all desirable if you can avoid it.
How bout you make a great leap over the 2 square pit and tumble to a stop on the other side? A character with 5 squares of movement (25ft) should be able to make a running jump (10ft start still?) and still have movement left to land on his feat on the 5th square. If he is exceeding his movement with a run, or would have ended his move in the air above the pit, it's sensible to have him finish the jump but fall prone (tumble to the ground, catch the edge of the pit and pick himself up and over, etc).

Well if a person can only move 5 squares in 6 seconds, then it stands to reason that in that 6 seconds he would not be able to move 7 sqs. So what should happen if he attempts to do so (by jumoing over a chasm)?

Well first he can only move 5sq in 6 seconds, that would be 10 sqs in 12 seconds, so to be fair he would have declared a movement that would take 2 rounds to complete. He should be able to make the jump, however his next turn begins with him completing that jump and moving the remaining 2 sqs.

The ruling, as I see it, is to prevent a player from exceeding his movement within a single round. If the player attempted to move beyond his movement within a single round to jump the chasm (say to get through the door on the other side which is closing during this round) then he should not be able to move further then he is able, by rushing such a jump he is literally trying to move further then he is capable of moving and should fail.

But the DM and player should be wise enough to realize the difference between an action that takes several rounds (such as moving across a terain over multiple rounds) and attempting to move beyond your maximum movement within a single round.
4) An expanded language sub-system so that while communication is possible in common, it's not at all desirable if you can avoid it.

"We am thy freighter...Ursva, six weeks out of Kronos. Over. We is condemning food...things and...supplies."
Lt. Cmd. Uhura, --"STVI:TUC", Stardate 9523.8
I'm assuming you want some constructive criticism and suggestions, or?

1. Tossing out classes. Since everything is compatible nowadays, you may as well give players the freedom to fully design their class. Choosing as they like between, feats, utility powers, daily powers, etc. from any class they like as long as they meet the level requirements.

An interesting idea. But how will you deal with class abilities? How will you deal with HP and proficiencies? Skills?

2. Going to make some more powers that aren't so combat oriented (Elliestra knows that D&D was too combat-oriented before, and they made it even more combat oriented in 4E.... )

Hmm, like a power that lets you get swift boost in speed, or to do a spectacular jump, or what do you mean?

6. You know what? Chaotic Good is back. And to prove the point, the campaign I run will be about the characters trying to stop a Hitler-like regime (whose leader will be lawful evil). Because lawful evil people (like Hitler) have always been ridiculously more evil and destructive than the chaotic evil ones could ever dream of being(like that one psychopath serial killer who only managed to kill around 5+ people... what was his name? Oh yea, Jack the Ripper).

Okay, I know that this is just personal reflections and opinions, but... First, I'd put Hitler as more Neutral Evil than Lawful Evil. Just because you rule a Lawful Evil nation (at the time), you don't have to be Lawful yourself. Hitler did what he thought he could get away with, lying and breaking laws (I presume) if he felt like he would benefit from it. The avarage nazi soldier might be Lawful Evil, though.

Also, Lawful Evil being more evil than Chaotic Evil? The way I see it, Lawful Evil is more like "I do things that helps my cause, but I have some rules that I follow, and perhaps value honor too." while Chaotic Evil is like: "Hey, I'll torture that guy, that seems like fun. Oh, and why not burn down that village and watch all the destruction and chaos? Great fun!"

Not that all Chaotic Evil is worse than all Lawful Evil, though.
So far anyway, I'd do the following:

1) Bring back die rolls for hit points at each level. Sorry, but I don't like the fact that there is a set number every time you advance. I'll keep the "Con score +" mechanic for first level, as monsters are definately too tough to just have anywhere from say 1-16 hp at first level. (I'm from the old school though, and can't wrap my head entirely around the idea of a fighter possibly having as many as 33 hp at first level.)

2) Use the 3.5 experience point totals for advancement. They made it a lot easier to advance in level this time around (3.5 required 6000 xp to make 4th level. 4e requires 3,750.)

3) Add in more languages from 3.5 to give more depth.

4) Thought of one more: I use an 82 point buy for stats. All stats start at 0, and it is paid on a 1:1 basis (An 18 in STR costs you 18 points). It keeps things balanced, as it's difficult to have really high scores in one area without sacrificing something else you need.

Otherwise, I like the new alignments. I can already tell I'll have a lot of unaligned players at my table. I like the classes and races as is, although I think it would be difficult to play with a group composed of five dragonborn, all with different breath weapons. And, monsters I really want to bring in that haven't been already been included I can make myself with the rules in the DMG, at least until they make an appearance in another book later.
2) Use the 3.5 experience point totals for advancement. They made it a lot easier to advance in level this time around (3.5 required 6000 xp to make 4th level. 4e requires 3,750.)

This would only be true if monsters kept the same experience values, which they haven't.
You're right. I guess I'll have to look a bit more into that. It was just one of the thingst that jumped out at me right away when I saw the table.
4) An expanded language sub-system so that while communication is possible in common, it's not at all desirable if you can avoid it.

I've actually done that. In the end, it restricted roleplaying to the few players that knew the language. Sure, it's realistic, but is it fun?
Technically Lawful Evil and Chaotic Good haven't gone anywhere if you actually read the write ups. It is more that Neutral Evil and Neutral Good have. "Good" is Chaotic Good, and "Evil" is Lawful Evil, with a bit of overlap into neutral territory. As it was, there was never really any concrete distinction between Chaotic G and Neutral G, and the same applies for LE and NE. Altruistic Good and Self-Serving Evil were wrapped up into one alignment, where 'Cultural' Good and Entropic/Destructive Evil were kept distinct.
I've actually done that. In the end, it restricted roleplaying to the few players that knew the language. Sure, it's realistic, but is it fun?

You could just do something as simple as either providing bonuses to social interaction skills when not using Common. Or rule that you can only use the full range of the skills benefits or you can only apply your Charisma modifier to social skill checks when not using Common.

You don't need to go into full-on conlanguage mode even if you did want more 'realism' in your langauges. It can be handled on the mechanical side, and there is at least some value of entertainment to be had from elaborate games of telephone used when 'translating'.
1. Dragonborn get the boot. Possibly tieflings as well

2. Halflings go back to being their 3.5 3 foot selves

3. Elves back to humanoid instead of fey

4. Ditch Eladrin, bring elves more in line with the 3e High/Grey/Wood trio of subraces

5. Put racial age rates back where they were.

6. Definately going to mess around with paragon paths

7. Ditch the "Level 30, gone from campaign" thing, possibly the entire Epic Detiny bit. Houserule stuff for levels higher than 30

Will be edited as I read more of the book.
3) No limit on magic item daily powers, except that only one magic item can be used per round. Use the stuff you have.

I agree and disagree. I think once per day is far too restrictive. I'd say give everyone 1 extra use per day for free (2/3/4 heroic/paragon/epic), with a feat to increase that. Perhaps make the "recharge magic item with healing surge" idea into a feat or ritual.
Experienced gamer. D&D 3.x, Pathfinder, Savage Worlds, Dark Heresy, GURPS, various WW games, and more. Currently running Savage Worlds set in Eberron.
I've actually done that. In the end, it restricted roleplaying to the few players that knew the language. Sure, it's realistic, but is it fun?

It was fun for us in Conan, but that game is built on a disconnected, wild, uncommunicative world. In D&D, it's a bit different.
still learning here, but this is mine from just setting up for game.

Pick and stick: pick your at-will/encounter/daily those are your powers for the duration of the adventure*

*Unlearn what you have learned: when your character levels up, they may exchange their at-will/encounter/daily for a different power from the same chart.

Cleric: "Oh great Raven Queen, the quest the king sent us on is far different than what we were told it would be and I need different powers to keep my friends alive, please open your wings to me that I may pluck different feathers from your gracious down."

basicly this means the players have to keep thir powers at least until the next level, making power choices very tactical for their group.
I'm assuming you want some constructive criticism and suggestions, or?

An interesting idea. But how will you deal with class abilities? How will you deal with HP and proficiencies? Skills?

Class features will basically be something you choose at the appropriate level. Like "I choose the class features of class 'A' at first level, and later, at choosing paragon, I can choose a paragon set of class features, or another base set of class features." As for HP, I'll probably just take the average HP and everyone gets that.
Hmm, like a power that lets you get swift boost in speed, or to do a spectacular jump, or what do you mean?

I was thinking more story-line oriented. Like a class feature of 'merchant nobility' that gets you 'free' money once a day, a 'first impression' one that's useable once an encounter (not neccesarrily combat encounter) to give a boost to charisma-based skills, etc.
Okay, I know that this is just personal reflections and opinions, but... First, I'd put Hitler as more Neutral Evil than Lawful Evil. Just because you rule a Lawful Evil nation (at the time), you don't have to be Lawful yourself. Hitler did what he thought he could get away with, lying and breaking laws (I presume) if he felt like he would benefit from it. The avarage nazi soldier might be Lawful Evil, though.

Actually, when you read his biography and read what those who followed him believed, and understand his background, his es absolutely lawful evil. Hitler didn't break that many laws, the only ones he really broke were those put on Germany by other countries (which Germany, by right of being a seperate country, is not obliged to follow). In fact, Hitler had a mental disorder that led him to be the 'most perfect and correct' of whatever occupation he went into. It should be noted that most of the books that hitler references for his actions described the struggle of countries as the struggle of different races. It was his duty, in his mind, to further the **** race when he took over germany. He even did so despite the fact he wasn't exactly the model of an ****. That's a very lawful way to act. He was quite literally ruling 'by the book'.
Also, Lawful Evil being more evil than Chaotic Evil? The way I see it, Lawful Evil is more like "I do things that helps my cause, but I have some rules that I follow, and perhaps value honor too." while Chaotic Evil is like: "Hey, I'll torture that guy, that seems like fun. Oh, and why not burn down that village and watch all the destruction and chaos? Great fun!"

Not that all Chaotic Evil is worse than all Lawful Evil, though.

Let me put it this way. Chaotic evil generally destroys, kills, etc. For the purpose of taking out compitition, survival, and 'getting things out of the way', and maybe fun.... it's more instinctual the way they do it. In a lot of ways, it's a very predator and natural-ish way to act. Lawful evil on the other hand plans it's evil. Takes steps to make sure it won't be stopped. It has to fully consider the ramifications of its actions of evil before doing them. As a result, not only do they do evil, they do their best to avoid natural consequences for their actions as well as generally fully comprehend what they're doing.

Which is more evil
A. killing a man to see him die,
or
B. killing a man while knowing that he has a family to feed and that the man just wants to do the right thing and want to help society, but you're going to kill him anyway just because you think he might slow your rise to power?
Technically Lawful Evil and Chaotic Good haven't gone anywhere if you actually read the write ups. It is more that Neutral Evil and Neutral Good have. "Good" is Chaotic Good, and "Evil" is Lawful Evil, with a bit of overlap into neutral territory. As it was, there was never really any concrete distinction between Chaotic G and Neutral G, and the same applies for LE and NE. Altruistic Good and Self-Serving Evil were wrapped up into one alignment, where 'Cultural' Good and Entropic/Destructive Evil were kept distinct.

I see a lot of difference between Neutral Good, Lawful Good, and Chaotic Good.

An example of each...
Lawful Good - The New York cop who specifically went in to stop homocides and child abuse.
Neutral Good - The average jane in Amsterdam who goes about her daily life, and volunteers at the soup kitchen weekly, but generally ambivalent politics.
Chaotic Good - The Chinese teenager who protests the oppression the people suffer at the government, knowing that the act could very well end his life.

Also, the way they set it up, I'm kind of philosophically opposed to as well. It makes it sound like chaos is more evil than law. (Anarchy vs the 'perfect law' society in Orwell's 1984... I'll take Anarchy over that any day.)
1. Allow Rogues to not have Thievery, and choose another skill in its place. With the elimination (albeit temporarily) of Swordsage and somewhat Monk, lightweight martial artist characters are moved to Rogue or Ranger. Some of these characters are extremely honorable and there is no way they would have picked up the skill to pick locks.

2. Power names and descriptions are examples. A character who has a power simply does something that produces that effect. What it is and what he calls it is up to him. Given the low number of powers a character has, and the current relatively limited number of classes, I think this is a necessary step to allowing customization of your character's flavor.

3. I am considering changing Elves back to their original height (4'5 to 5'5 for most Elves, and about 4'3 to 5'3 for Drow, which are said to be smaller and leaner). This was a source of too many funny jokes, and too many cutesy Drow for me to let it go.
Just because you 'see' a difference between NG and CG doesn't mean there is one. In you example you did not differentiate the two other than you seem to consider CG 'more good' than NG.

Does the Chinese teenager not care for his family, and is the Dutch mom actually incapable of standing up to a corrupt government? What makes the Chinese boy 'chaotic' and what makes the Dutch mom 'not lawful, not chaotic', and what makes either of them 'good'?

Where is the disconnect? Deed, or thought? So when the Chinese boy overthrows the government and sets up a new society with him at its head, is he no longer 'Chaotic'? If he always had thoughts about a rightfully ordered and just society was he ever 'Chaotic'?

Is this psychology, is it fate? If the Chinese boy had been born in the egalitarian, multicultural, free and proud Netherlands would he have been a dissident, and would the Dutch woman have just quietly gone about her apolitical life under Maoist tyranny?

The way you view 'Chaotic' or 'Neutral' isn't implicit in the actual text of any PHB. You are essentially making a non-rule as what you are houseruling against isn't actually in the text of the new edition and you are bringing 'back' alignments that never existed as you describe them.

Nothing compels my Chaotic Good character to protest a tyrannical Communist government, and nothing compels my Neutral Good character not to.

In fact, if you take a '60s radical planting bombs in the US and traveling to Cuba to get marching orders and advice from Leonid Brezhnev's network, and then transplant them to Moscow chances are you just had a major alignment shift from very Chaotic, to very Lawful.

This is especially apt considering you are defining Law versus Chaos in political and not personal terms. A Cop is Lawful, a rebel is Chaotic, and a citizen is Neutral. The chinese kid defects to NY, becomes a cop and he is now LG instead of CG? Interesting.
1) "Good" is officially renamed to "Chaotic Good" and "Evil" is officially renamed to "Lawful Evil" and receive corresponding descriptions. The whole Lawful Good = more Good than Good thing is irritating.

2) Multiclassing feats are not necessary to go into the Paragon multiclassing, and Paragon multiclassing is getting an overhaul. It looks to me that Paragon multiclassing was an afterthought and it doesn't work nearly as well as it should.

3) Domains and deity powers will be created to work with Channel Divinity to better differentiate clerics of different deities.

4) Similar systems to Channel Divinity will be put in place for other classes to represent wizard orders, warlock pact secrets, thieves guilds, etc.

5) You can multiclass into 2 classes: 1 with the feats, 1 with Paragon multiclassing.

Those are all for now, though when I get the books I'll probably have more.
I'll be splitting up certain skills (Thievery one skill? Right...) and I'm ditching the untrained/trained system for a proper skill point system à la 3E. And a number of skills need some tweaking (jump results are ridiculously low, for instance).
Garic's City - A 3.5 D&D PbP (play-by-post) roleplaying game with a decade of tradition. Enter and enjoy the city of Garic and explore the surrounding, unchartered lands. A city in the middle of nowhere is always in need of heroes... Other PbP forums: Castle of Fun - Coalition War Game - COre COlisseum - D20 Modern - Gleemax Roleplaying - Guild House - Magic Puzzles, Fun, & Games! - Map of the Planes - Paranoia Paradise - PbP Haven - Real Adventures - Terisia City
I have a great D&D system that I've been working on for months and I want people to try it out. It's an add-on that works for D&D 3.5 or 4.0. It's a lot of fun and much simpler than regular D&D. If you are interested, email me and I will send it to you. It's 11 pages long in Microsoft Word format. If you know of a place where I can upload my system, please tell me.
I have a great D&D system that I've been working on for months and I want people to try it out. It's an add-on that works for D&D 3.5 or 4.0. It's a lot of fun and much simpler than regular D&D. If you are interested, email me and I will send it to you. It's 11 pages long in Microsoft Word format. If you know of a place where I can upload my system, please tell me. [email=mmoran5554@aol.com]mmoran5554@aol.com[/email]
Most of these are from other sources, but since the OP was about house rules you plan to use, not ones you invented, I think these still apply.

Any type of fluff is mutable. If you want to say that your full-plate looks like chain, or call your wizard a sorceror, no one will care. I don't really consider this a house-rule (since it has no mechanical implications), more of a reminder.

Alignment is what happens when planets form an interesting geometric shape. It has nothing whatsoever to do with your moral outlook.

You don't heal to full during an extended rest, but you do recover all your surges and can use as many of them as you want.

Created a feat allowing characters to take "at will" powers as a multi-class, in addition to encounters, utilities and dailies. Considering one for class features too.

Initiative uses the higher of Int or Dex.

Paladins have a Sense Evil ability that basically works like the "I feel the presense of the Dark Side" thing that Jedi do. It has no mechanics per say and pretty much operates by DM fiat; it can't normally be used on a specific person and can be thrown off in various ways. It's based on what the paladin defines as "evil", and does not imply that good and evil are in any way objective.

Stuff to think about:

Creating an injury system, either based on the disease mechanics or on the SWSE condition track. (Probably hurts PC's more than NPC's)

Giving characters their Con mod in HP every level. (mostly to balance out with the above)

Steal the refresh mechanic for encounter powers from ToB (can see major balance issues here. Also not sure if it would be the Warblade's or the Swordsage's method)

Steal "non heroic levels" from SWSE for an in-between minion and monster status.

Allow multi-class feats to be taken multiple times and in multiple classes.

Tweak various powers, feats, features etc. when/if problems appear.
I've actually done that. In the end, it restricted roleplaying to the few players that knew the language. Sure, it's realistic, but is it fun?

None of my players really roleplay in the first place. They mostly attack "Monsters" on sight, despite the fact that they play monstrous races anyways.

And I said that communication is possible using Common (which everyone and their dog knows), just not desirable. Would you rather speak in a pidgin of english, or actual english?
On the subject of throwing out classes: I suggest you check out my thread on this subject - I'm testing in a real game just that very thing http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1060917
1) No alignments. They cause a big stink and don't even do anything mechanical anymore. All they do, and have ever done, is let your DM stop you from acting a certain way because you wrote two letters on the top of your character sheet.

2) No Eladrin. Not because their power is broken, or whatever people call things they don't like these days, but because I think the idea of elves that are literally fairies a little fruity for me. I haven't bothered to include them in my setting, because I don't care for having a race of higher-than-thou elves rubbing elbows with prettier-than-thou elves. If a player wants to play as one, that's fine, but I'll make fun of them for it. ;)

3) Players roll for stats, and then all use the same results, arranged as they want. Point-buy is really wierd to me, and it's not much fun playing second fiddle to the guy who rolled three 18s and two 17s when you've got a bunch of 10s and 12s.

4) Fluff is mutable! I know that some of the more pedantic people get into arguments over whether or not the fluff does X, Y, or Z, but to me, fluff is just that. It doesn't affect a thing, and can do whatever you want. If your eldritch blast is a hideous mind-curse, a purple spiraling beam of death, or a two-handed hadouken, or even all three of those things at different moments, I don't even care. If you're having fun and I'm having fun, describe your powers in the way that is most amusing for the both of us.

Other than those three tiny nudges, I'm in love with 4e.
1) I am very seriously considering applying a characters' Con mod to hp every level (and to opponents!).

2) A thought I'd had runs thusly; rather than switching out powers at high levels (gaining high level powers but sacrificing low-level powers), you accumulate said higher-level powers as you gain levels without losing your previous choices, but at the end of an extended rest, you select four of your encounter/daily powers from the list that you can use until your next rest - these represent those that you have practiced during your morning meditations/sparring/etc.

3) I like the Eladrin, but I'm going to make them villains, a la Hellboy II.
Thoughts?
SK
1) I am very seriously considering applying a characters' Con mod to hp every level (and to opponents!).

A player of mine doesn't like the "heroes at 1st level" feel given by so many beginning HP, so I'm considering adding this feat:

Noncombatant
You didn't start out as a rough-and-tough mercenary, or a legendary burglar, just an average joe who picked up a sword and went out to make his destiny.
Prerequisite: May only be taken at 1st level
Benefit: Instead of gaining your normal starting HP of 1st level HP + Con score, you gain later level HP + Con modifier. For instance, a rogue with Con 10 normally gets 12+10=22 HP at first level, but the same rogue with this feat would get 5+0=5 HP at first level.
In exchange for lower starting HP, you add your Con modifier to HP at every level after 1st.
Special: Characters starting at a level above 1st may not take this feat retroactively.

So basically you exchange lower HP in the beginning for higher HP later on; a character with 12 starting Con should pull ahead around level 24 and a character with 20 starting Con should pull ahead around level 6, with scores in between pulling ahead in that range, assuming they don't boost their Con as they level.
And you hope to god that you don't get hit for the first 3 or four levels...

Seriously: That would be waaay swingy.
I am Blue/Green
I am Blue/Green
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I am both rational and instinctive. I value self-knowledge and understanding of the world; my ultimate goal is self-improvement and improvement of the world around me. At best, I am focused and methodical; at worst, I am obsessive and amoral.
And you hope to god that you don't get hit for the first 3 or four levels...

Seriously: That would be waaay swingy.

Hey, I'm not the one who wanted to be weaker at 1st level, and that's the version he liked best (:looloo, so....

You think I should bump up the HP a bit anyway? I suggested keeping base HP and just replacing Con score with Con modifier (among other ideas), but he didn't like it.
I'd definitely go with the replacing con score with modifier...

However the other thought would be base hp equal to your constitution. That would give the low con classes incentive to have at least a decent con score.
I am Blue/Green
I am Blue/Green
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I am both rational and instinctive. I value self-knowledge and understanding of the world; my ultimate goal is self-improvement and improvement of the world around me. At best, I am focused and methodical; at worst, I am obsessive and amoral.
I'd definitely go with the replacing con score with modifier...

However the other thought would be base hp equal to your constitution. That would give the low con classes incentive to have at least a decent con score.

Sounds good; I'll run that and the score->modifier ideas by him again and see if he prefers either of those.
Ooo, where to start...

1: No dragonborn. Well, maybe for the GM as NPC villains, but that is about it.
2: Elardrin? That teleport thing is gone. Have to come up with something to replace it, probably something that still fits the "maigcal creature" motif.
3: Add back a ton of the spells missing from the wizard class, both as powers and as rituals (probably the second most time consuming thing to do).
4: Some kind of wound mechanic, healing to full after 6 hours is not utterly horrid, but it needs some tweaking. If you got knocked to 0 HP, 6 hours of rest should not have you fresh as a daisy....
5: New classes. Druid for sure, possibly some others, and several Paragon Paths. (this is probably the big time eater to create)
6: Meteor Swarm: The caster can shift any/all target(s) in the area 2 squares.
7: Some kind of feat for the Divine casters to let them turn undead more than once. Seems kinda weak right now.
8: Some kind of secondary skills/background systems to incorporate crafting rules.
9: Possibly changing half elves stat bonuses
10: Increasing the list of rogue weapons usable for sneak attacks and their powers a bit.
11: More divine powers for paladins and priests, even as feats
12: A paladin mount feat
13: A familiar feat for wizards and warlocks
14: Wizards and other casters take casting penalties for wearing metal armor. Probably something that makes the saves easier for targets to make. No wizards in plate mail, even if they DO spend the feats on it...
15: Arcane and Divine source powers all have somatic and verbal components, so restraining hands and gagging them keeps them from casting (nothing in the RAW right now shows they need to have hands/mouth free to cast, which is kinda dumb. And with some players, better to spell out that you can not do something than leave it open ended)
16: Possibly giving fighters one more trained skill.

Wow, most of those actually remove fun from the game instead of adding fun, which is what house rules are for. I'm glad you're not my DM. Have fun.