|
6 months ago ::
Nov 30, 2012 - 2:37PM
#41
|
|
|
Oops, I forgot to mention that before: I brought back damage types for non-magical attacks. Really it is for flavor more than anything, but occasionally it gives a benefit (like skeletons taking extra damage from blunt attacks, or zombies taking extra damage from slashing) or hindrance (skeletons taking less damage from piercing).
Exactly, it´s pretty nice... I was very inclined to do it too, but didn't out of pure laziness...and you use it against armor types too?
Nah, I don't get that fancy. But certainly you could do it if you wanted.
Also, is it just me or have things on this forum gotten a lot more civil lately? Much more honest and open trading back and forth of ideas between people. I like it.
I pin it on a number of people who have finally left. 
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 30, 2012 - 7:01PM
#42
|
|
|
Oh yea, I forgot.
For characters with Ritual Caster/ALchemy/Martial Practice/etc. feats, I make up lists appropriate to their character with them before a campaign starts and then allow them to learn a ritual (or it's equivalent) for free every even-numbered level. It just makes my treasure more stream-lined. Obviously I reserve certain rituals for quests and things, but for most alchemy items and things stuff, it's much easier this way as I can just give them residuum.
I also have my own game economics that dictate how much items sell for in a given place (something that is actually edition-neutral from 2e Dark Sun Dune Trader supplement).
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 30, 2012 - 8:58PM
#43
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2010
|
I do have one house rule that I plan to implement in my next homecoming game. Versatile weapons count as Two handed weapons for small creatures for the purpose of feats prerequisites and class powers/features. Always felt that is how it should of been from the start.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 01, 2012 - 2:15AM
#44
|
Date Joined:
Oct 28, 2010
|
In general, the number of hands you weild a weapon with should matter more than its category. but then, that;s one of those many points I'd redesign, if I were redesigning. Along with use/hold/wield.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 01, 2012 - 6:28AM
#45
|
Date Joined:
Jun 13, 2010
|
Nice to see all this house rules and implementations. Definitely the Expertise and improved defenses feats for free are very popular, I can understand why.
I really dig the inherent bonuses thing, and looking forward to using alternative rewards in my next campaigns. One thing I´m not sure, is removing all the magic item bonuses... I mean some of my players really love they have a +3 sword that does something else... I was wondering... could I make MI more scarce, giving away inherent bonuses, and on top of that allow for some Mi to have it´s regular bonus. Does that sonud too much?
Another thing I was wondering....I could use grandmaster training, legendary and divine boons to replace some of the magic items allowing them to grant normal bonuses and properties, just exactly like MI, and not use the inherent bonus system? kind of mixing the systems... Just ideas that occurred to me, never really tested it... How this sounds to you guys?
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 01, 2012 - 8:37AM
#46
|
Date Joined:
Jul 17, 2003
|
One thing I´m not sure, is removing all the magic item bonuses... I mean some of my players really love they have a +3 sword that does something else... I was wondering... could I make MI more scarce, giving away inherent bonuses, and on top of that allow for some Mi to have it´s regular bonus. Does that sonud too much?
Inherent bonuses do not stack with enhancement bonuses, so if you are using inherant bonuses and the character finds say, a flaming sword, the player would use the higher of the sword's bonus or the inherant bonus and its properties (i.e. inflicting fire damage) would function normally.
The really nice thing about this is that, because many weapon properties don't scale much (the enhancement bonus just gets bigger) a character could pick up a character defining item (such as a flaming sword) in heroic tier and that same item will still be just as useful to them in the epic tier.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 01, 2012 - 8:03PM
#47
|
|
|
My only house rule is that I give the PCs extra points to put into ability scores. It gets rid of the feat taxes for attack bonuses and defences even though some would, of course, decry it as power gaming.
It simply works better for the way we play and, more particularly, how I DM.
Cheers
Imruphel
aka Scrivener of Doom
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 01, 2012 - 11:13PM
#48
|
|
|
Nice to see all this house rules and implementations. Definitely the Expertise and improved defenses feats for free are very popular, I can understand why.
I really dig the inherent bonuses thing, and looking forward to using alternative rewards in my next campaigns. One thing I´m not sure, is removing all the magic item bonuses... I mean some of my players really love they have a +3 sword that does something else... I was wondering... could I make MI more scarce, giving away inherent bonuses, and on top of that allow for some Mi to have it´s regular bonus. Does that sonud too much?
Another thing I was wondering....I could use grandmaster training, legendary and divine boons to replace some of the magic items allowing them to grant normal bonuses and properties, just exactly like MI, and not use the inherent bonus system? kind of mixing the systems... Just ideas that occurred to me, never really tested it... How this sounds to you guys?
If you break it down, you're usually looking at an avg. of +1 to attack/damage/defenses on magic weapliments, armour, and neck slot items at 3rd level and every 5 thereafter.
For the 'expertise' and defense bonuses, I just give them in the middle of each tier.
I haven't played 4e in a little, so I may be forgetting some minor adjustments (for instance, to AC), but this is the gist of it.
I usually just give everyone everything at once to keep it simple, and so that people at the table don't feel 'weak' or 'strong' relative to the other characters.
I do it thus:
Lvl Bonus (Attack/Damage/Defenses)
1
2
3 +1 (Inherent Bonus - IB)
4
5 +1 (Free Feat Bonus - FFB)
6
7
8 +1 (IB)
9
10
11
12
13 +1 (IB)
14
15 +1 (FFB)
16
17
18 +1 (IB)
19
20
21
22
23 +1 (IB)
24
25 +1 (FFB)
26
27
28 +1 (IB)
29
30
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 02, 2012 - 10:08AM
#49
|
Date Joined:
May 17, 2009
|
I really dig the inherent bonuses thing, and looking forward to using alternative rewards in my next campaigns. One thing I´m not sure, is removing all the magic item bonuses... I mean some of my players really love they have a +3 sword that does something else... I was wondering... could I make MI more scarce, giving away inherent bonuses, and on top of that allow for some Mi to have it´s regular bonus. Does that sonud too much?
If you're going to do something like that, I'd recommend cutting the item enhancement bonuses down. +0 for most stuff, and let the properties or powers on the item be the real draw. +1 items for the more special stuff, and maybe a +2 in there somewhere for something really major. The main purpose of the inherent bonus system is to reduce dependancy on magic items, and by making them too buff, you undermine that purpose, so while it is possible, I'd recommend a light touch.
Seriously, though, you should check out the PbP Haven. You might also like Real Adventures, IF you're cool. | Knights of W.T.F.- Silver Spur Winner | |
4enclave, a place where 4e fans can talk 4e in peace.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 02, 2012 - 1:07PM
#50
|
|
|
I really dig the inherent bonuses thing, and looking forward to using alternative rewards in my next campaigns. One thing I´m not sure, is removing all the magic item bonuses... I mean some of my players really love they have a +3 sword that does something else... I was wondering... could I make MI more scarce, giving away inherent bonuses, and on top of that allow for some Mi to have it´s regular bonus. Does that sonud too much?
If you're going to do something like that, I'd recommend cutting the item enhancement bonuses down. +0 for most stuff, and let the properties or powers on the item be the real draw. +1 items for the more special stuff, and maybe a +2 in there somewhere for something really major. The main purpose of the inherent bonus system is to reduce dependancy on magic items, and by making them too buff, you undermine that purpose, so while it is possible, I'd recommend a light touch.
Correct me if I'm wrong but, I'm pretty sure the math in 4e assumes a scale of +1 from magical items/inherent bonuses every 5 levels or so. Magical abilities of the 'big 3' usually determine where, within that 5 level spread, you get the +1, but it's not like in 3e, where you actually trade the enhancement bonus for abilities.
EX: a +1 Magic Sword would be a lvl 1-2 magic item. Whereas a +1 Vorpal Sword (which doesn't technically exist, having a lower enhancement threshold of +5 I think, but for the sake of the example, it...) would be a lvl 5 magic item. Likewise with higher level items, so a +3 Magic Sword would be like a lvl 11-12 magic item, but a +3 Vorpal Sword would be a lvl 15 magic item. Basically, you stall on getting items with better abilities til later levels OR they count for more at lower levels in terms of the parcel system, but they still always have a bonus of +1 to +6.
In 3e, it was more like +X Magic Sword OR (+0) Vorpal Sword (though, again, the 'vorpal' property actually had some lower threshold of enhancement, and so, was not typically available until higher levels). In this method, you actually traded the enhancement bonus to hit/damage for a magical porperty, lowering the enhancement bonus. It should be noted in 3e that, although you could only benefit from up to a +5 enhancement bonus (I think that was the number), you (eventually) had a theoretical +10 bonus to work with, so you could grab a few extra properties without sacrificing enhancement.
The reason people give out free expertise and defense boost is because about half-way through the product release for 4e, people figured out a glitch in the math for monsters, which made them slightly too deadly at higher levels if you didn't. Since this 'feat tax' was basically rendered mandatory for the sake of game mechanics, (and thus, didn't really add anything to the characterization of PC's), people started giving it out for free.
I may be off with this as I haven't looked at the books in a while (they're currently packed away in a box I'm not about to try an dig up), but this is how I remember it working more or less.
|
|
|
