Evaluate these house rules.

[Sunic_Flames]

More sections added.

[RobbyPants]

All in all, I like the general changes.  I'd also add auto-Weapon Finesse in there too.

[Sunic_Flames]

All in all, I like the general changes.  I'd also add auto-Weapon Finesse in there too.

I haven't written it yet, but I'll just tell you. The item selection will include the following entry:

Any weapon labeled as 'finesseable' will allow you to use your Dexterity for attack and damage instead of your Strength if you so choose.

[RobbyPants]

Good.  Good.

[Sunic_Flames]

More added.

[BeholderSlayer]

I think you need to switch things up. There's way too many barrels of cock in this thread. We need some drunk monkeys and donkey balls.

[Sunic_Flames]

I think you need to switch things up. There's way too many barrels of cock in this thread. We need some drunk monkeys and donkey balls.

 

I'll make sure to include plenty of monkey references in the class section.

[JaronK]

Not familiar with Great Crossbows. I've never even heard someone mention them until now.

Great Crossbows are basically just bigger heavy crossbows with an 18-20 critical threat range, better damage, and better range, but slower firing.  They're Exotic.  They get used a bit for Crossbow Sniper builds.

For those who don't have high strength, use a normal crossbow. The strong ones can use a composite crossbow. Crossbows already have enough of a fuck you feat tax as is.

Yes, I understand it from a gameplay perspective, though before these changes crossbows had the (realistic) advantage of being less about strength than bows, due to the lack of composite crossbows but presence of the crossbow sniper feat.

Reread the goals section. And fuck being Earth like, which is what you really meant when you said realism.

No.  "Realistic" implies versimilitude, not "earth like."  D&D is a world where giant flying lizards breathe strange gasses and use magic spells.  It's not earth like.  But at the same time, a crossbow is a real thing within that world, and should behave roughly like a crossbow.  Otherwise, the game stops making any internal sense.

Not to mention you're wrong anyways, as it's not hard to envision more resistance on the crossbow mechanisms and a greater recoil upon firing. Which ya know, is what I said.

Yeah, this is what makes no sense.  Crossbows with very high resistance did exist... but that just meant you used a crank to reset the mechanism, so you still didn't need high strength, and recoil isn't really an issue on a weapon like a crossbow due to the high weight of the weapon and low weight of the projectile.  If you want to boost them in gameplay do so, but do so in a way that makes some sense for a crossbow.  The gnomish crossbow sight and crossbow sniper feat are good examples from in game about how that can work.  Real crossbows can be fired while prone, which differenciates them from bows, so boosting crossbow from a sniping angle makes a lot more sense than strength based crossbows.

The funny thing is that you were just talking about realism, but every realistic talk about crossbows had them with good armor penetration. They just had a terrible rate of fire. So they lost anyways.

I'm not sure where you're getting this.  Picks have good armor penetration.  Warhammers effectively penetrate armor by simply bending it in and in a way turning the armor against the wearer.  Pole arms tend to do a great job as well.  But Crossbows and Longbows were both defeated by platemail completely... in fact, one of the primary jobs of knights was to line up against archers (either Crossbowmen or Longbowmen) and charge, since they were best against them.  Mideival accounts all show that commanders at the time always expected serious armor to completely hold against ranged attacks.  It wasn't until the musket that suddenly plate mail needs to be heavily reinforced.  Realistically, all midieval ranged fire was poor at dealing with armor.  That's not something we should model in D&D, but making Crossbows particularly good at penetrating armor, better than Picks and Great hammers and such, just makes no sense at all.  

Boost Crossbows in ways that make sense, and that differentiate them from bows.  

Crossbows still can't manyshot. And what do those things do?

The Gnomish Crossbow Sight is a cheap mundane item that attaches to any Crossbow.  It allows you to treat any target as being up to two range increments closer for purposes of range penalties.  This makes them very handy for long ranged sniping type builds.  Those are rare, but they do exist... I've played around with them before.  They have to go with an appropriate party to work but they're a lot of fun, and since you were going to use an action to rehide after the shot anyway the like of multiple shots isn't as important.  Consider using a Splitting Great Crossbow of Distance with one of these on a sniper and combining it with Improved Critical and the Blood in the Water stance.

Crossbow Sniper is in PHB II.  It lets you add half your dex bonus to damage and lets you sneak attack from 60ft away with crossbows.

If you want to make crossbows better, move them in that direction.  Dex to damage and abilities that make them better at sniping... those are useful in game and actually make some sense.  It would obviously be nice to have Rapid Reload just let you reload any Crossbow as a free action though.

My baseline for comparison is stock Monster Manual stuff, though these changes have proven to hold up already in harder games. Both mine, and other people's. Against stock Monster Manual stuff, the casters do just fine and everyone else sucks a barrel of cocks.

Strange.  I've never had a problem against stock Monster Manual stuff with non casters.  The Monster Manual was created with the assumption that you'd be using a blaster Wizard, healbot Cleric, core Fighter, and sneaky Rogue, so I'm surprised you'd have that much trouble against them.  A decent archer Fighter (which is to say, a Fighter that just took a lot of decent archery feats and has a decent bow) or charger warrior of any stripe (Power attack stuff, usually combined with a flying mount and a lance) seems perfectly capable of running over the vast majority of MM threats.

As for your other changes, deleting the entire Conjuration (Calling) line is a good idea, for exactly the reason you stated.  I'd loose Alter Self though... it's far too good for a second level spell.  A single memorized spell for a Wizard that could give high AC (Crucian) or stealth (Whispergnome/Skulk) or Flight (Raptorian/Air Mephling) or underwater travel (Aquatic Elf) or burrowing (Earth Mephling), all for plenty of duration, is just way too much, and too flexible.  I'm actually more okay with Polymorph due to the short duration... as long as you're not doing anything absolutely silly with it it's just a solid buff.  Loss of Celerity and Shapechange makes perfect sense (though I use Celerity without Daze immunity just to combo spells before someone can get away).

The skills changes are solid.  Most I'd completely agree with.  My only reservations are that I'd rather everyone get the +2 skill bump than just the 2+ folks, as I know even Rogues really want more, and that giving everyone all class skills means skill monkeys get comparitively less.  It's better than the current situation where Fighters can't know anything about warfare and Barbarians can't see things.  But I'd consider a boost specifically for the skillmonkeys if you're going to make these changes.  Also, decide whether you're playing with the more unusual skills when doing this... Iajuitsu Focus, Lucid Dreaming, and Autohypnosis.

Everyone getting max HP per HD I'm assuming only applies to PC types, otherwise you just stealth nerfed blasting right after trying to boost it.  If so it's fine, if not that's a problem.  I hate multiclass penalties and love Fractional BAB/Saves anyway so I love those changes, though I'd consider keeping the multiclassing save bumps... they just make casters a bit weaker and of course I love that.  But I can understand why you wouldn't.  The combination of the iterative attack changes with standard action full attacks is obviously helpful for melee types who need it, but I wonder if that makes maneuvers FAR less attractive in general.  With your Power Attack/Point Blank Shot/Precise Shot change I'm assuming the feat is actually deleted and never needed as a prerequisite as a result of the change you're making.  As for the weapon/armor proficiency thing, I understand the point but it's clunky.  EWP is an annoying feat anyway, but now you'd have to just record which weapons you've trained with... why wouldn't players claim to have trained with all weapons they'd ever want to use before the game started?  If you're going to do that you might as well just give everyone all proficiencies (which isn't a terrible idea).  Or consider just giving all proficiencies based on level... at level 1 you get all simple weapons.  At level 5 you get all martial weapons.  At level 10 you get all Exotic Weapons.  Or you could base it off BAB.  If you wanted it faster you could do 0BAB for simple weapons, 1 BAB for martial weapons, 5 BAB for Exotics.  Either way your game world still has a reason for simple weapons to exist (they're what low level people use) but there's no feat taxation going on and PCs can end up using whatever the heck they want.

JaronK

[snakeman830]

Jaron, the reason the Longbow was such a big deal in Europe was because it punched right through platemail.  Yes, the armor still protected its wearer, but it wasn't making the armored knight a tank.

I must say I like these houserules.  I'll probably implement a few in future games.

[Sunic_Flames]

Not familiar with Great Crossbows. I've never even heard someone mention them until now.

Great Crossbows are basically just bigger heavy crossbows with an 18-20 critical threat range, better damage, and better range, but slower firing.  They're Exotic.  They get used a bit for Crossbow Sniper builds.

Ok. So treat them as Greatbows for the purposes of adding composite onto them.

Yes, I understand it from a gameplay perspective, though before these changes crossbows had the (realistic) advantage of being less about strength than bows, due to the lack of composite crossbows but presence of the crossbow sniper feat.

There is still nothing stopping low Strength characters from using normal crossbows. Those with > 11 Strength now have an alternative option.

No.  "Realistic" implies versimilitude, not "earth like."  D&D is a world where giant flying lizards breathe strange gasses and use magic spells.  It's not earth like.  But at the same time, a crossbow is a real thing within that world, and should behave roughly like a crossbow.  Otherwise, the game stops making any internal sense.

And because it is a world in which giant flying lizards breathe strange gasses and use magic spells, plain crossbows don't cut it. They need to not work like they do on Earth, because they aren't on Earth. Which is why you can do things like jump off cliffs and either die or walk away unhindered by your injuries with no in between status. And if you really want to go down THAT slippery slope, crossbows attack at 1/minute. Enjoy your fail weapons.

Yeah, this is what makes no sense.  Crossbows with very high resistance did exist... but that just meant you used a crank to reset the mechanism, so you still didn't need high strength, and recoil isn't really an issue on a weapon like a crossbow due to the high weight of the weapon and low weight of the projectile.  If you want to boost them in gameplay do so, but do so in a way that makes some sense for a crossbow.  The gnomish crossbow sight and crossbow sniper feat are good examples from in game about how that can work.  Real crossbows can be fired while prone, which differenciates them from bows, so boosting crossbow from a sniping angle makes a lot more sense than strength based crossbows.

Because the whole party is going to sit back and watch you play with your crossbow? There's a reason why most of the 'archer' feats and abilities only work in a range of 30 or 60 feet, which defeats the point of being ranged in the first place.

Crossbow Sniper is in PHB II.  It lets you add half your dex bonus to damage and lets you sneak attack from 60ft away with crossbows.

If you want to make crossbows better, move them in that direction.  Dex to damage and abilities that make them better at sniping... those are useful in game and actually make some sense.  It would obviously be nice to have Rapid Reload just let you reload any Crossbow as a free action though.

Crossbow Sniper still stacks with the above. The idea is to make ranged combat viable at actual range, without forcing the party to sit there and watch you play with yourself.

Strange.  I've never had a problem against stock Monster Manual stuff with non casters.  The Monster Manual was created with the assumption that you'd be using a blaster Wizard, healbot Cleric, core Fighter, and sneaky Rogue, so I'm surprised you'd have that much trouble against them.  A decent archer Fighter (which is to say, a Fighter that just took a lot of decent archery feats and has a decent bow) or charger warrior of any stripe (Power attack stuff, usually combined with a flying mount and a lance) seems perfectly capable of running over the vast majority of MM threats.

Without the HP boosts and AC boosts the other changes make, you get torn apart in 1-2 rounds and must therefore kill the enemy in less time than that. This requires going well out of your way, and significant optimization. Yes, uber chargers can do more than enough damage to 1 round anything in the MM. Most builds don't go that far, and builds that don't optimize are stuck swinging for 20-30 against hundreds of HP. That's a thing a lot of optimizers forget. Not everyone does play, or wants to play a handful of specific builds. And even with those, common stuff shoves it to you hard like 'Wind Wall' or 'stuff that shoots your mount out from under you'.

The Monster Manual, like the rest of the game was also barely playtested at 1-10 and not playtested at all 11-20.

I suppose if your DM plays the enemies stupid, or only uses humanoid NPCs (which are not CR appropriate at all, even with all these changes unless a spellcaster or at low levels) you'll survive, but that says nothing about the non casters.

As for your other changes, deleting the entire Conjuration (Calling) line is a good idea, for exactly the reason you stated.  I'd loose Alter Self though... it's far too good for a second level spell.  A single memorized spell for a Wizard that could give high AC (Crucian) or stealth (Whispergnome/Skulk) or Flight (Raptorian/Air Mephling) or underwater travel (Aquatic Elf) or burrowing (Earth Mephling), all for plenty of duration, is just way too much, and too flexible.  I'm actually more okay with Polymorph due to the short duration... as long as you're not doing anything absolutely silly with it it's just a solid buff.  Loss of Celerity and Shapechange makes perfect sense (though I use Celerity without Daze immunity just to combo spells before someone can get away).

Crucian is an Outsider? Or what type? I forgot to mention this, but it should say somewhere in there that "Forgotten Realms, and anything from it can die in a fire. That means no Dwarf Ancestor Alter Self, no getting summons with > 20 Str, > 20 AC, and WALL OF THORNS on a level 1 Druid, no Incantrix, no Splitting(?), and no Elcockster related material. Pun Pun actually does exist. He's the overdeity of the campaign, but he ignores all worship or happenings in his domain not related to infinite loops. If anyone does attempt an infinite loop, he kills them before they are born. "

As for the other stuff, I really don't care all that much. Mundane sneaking skills are inferior to Invisibility, Flight with wings is inferior to Flight without wings (and don't you also need level 5 for that?), and underwater or ground travel is mainly just ways of getting to the adventure. If you don't have it, you just can't go on that adventure. I'm not a fan of Alter Self or Polymorph, but I was convinced to leave them be.

The skills changes are solid.  Most I'd completely agree with.  My only reservations are that I'd rather everyone get the +2 skill bump than just the 2+ folks, as I know even Rogues really want more, and that giving everyone all class skills means skill monkeys get comparitively less.  It's better than the current situation where Fighters can't know anything about warfare and Barbarians can't see things.  But I'd consider a boost specifically for the skillmonkeys if you're going to make these changes.  Also, decide whether you're playing with the more unusual skills when doing this... Iajuitsu Focus, Lucid Dreaming, and Autohypnosis.

With skills being fused together as they are a Human Rogue with Int 12 has 10 skill points a level but effectively has more like 20 considering they were the main ones to benefit. Quite intentional, and also helps to remove the unintended effect of Artificers being the best skillmonkeys, because they could make enhancement bonus items on the cheap, and then pile on other bullshit bonuses from items such that even with little actual training they were better than you at those skills. As for those skills, well I'm not that familiar with them. I'm only looking at the core skills here.

Everyone getting max HP per HD I'm assuming only applies to PC types, otherwise you just stealth nerfed blasting right after trying to boost it.  If so it's fine, if not that's a problem.

Reread the relevant section. Enemies have a few dozen more HP... and you do a bit over quadruple damage with blasting spells without even trying just by Standard + Swifting it. Seriously, adding 1 point per die to a D6 (the most common type) is about a 30% increase, and then the Standard version does double what the Swift one does.

I hate multiclass penalties and love Fractional BAB/Saves anyway so I love those changes, though I'd consider keeping the multiclassing save bumps... they just make casters a bit weaker and of course I love that. But I can understand why you wouldn't.

Not sure what you are referring to.

The combination of the iterative attack changes with standard action full attacks is obviously helpful for melee types who need it, but I wonder if that makes maneuvers FAR less attractive in general.

The underlying message of Tome of Battle was that melee characters need to be able to do something relevant, and still move. In the same turn. Maneuvers do this. So do Standard action full attacks. Though it is possible to go through the maneuvers and say that they let you full attack and do x additional effect once instead of attack and do x additional effect if they did not innately allow you to full attack it is precisely interactions such as this I was looking to expose. Whether we (me, and the people that don't post here but are involved in the project) do anything about it remains to be seen. I for one am not familiar enough with ToB to just make blanket changes to it without something breaking.

With your Power Attack/Point Blank Shot/Precise Shot change I'm assuming the feat is actually deleted and never needed as a prerequisite as a result of the change you're making.  As for the weapon/armor proficiency thing, I understand the point but it's clunky.  EWP is an annoying feat anyway, but now you'd have to just record which weapons you've trained with... why wouldn't players claim to have trained with all weapons they'd ever want to use before the game started?  If you're going to do that you might as well just give everyone all proficiencies (which isn't a terrible idea).  Or consider just giving all proficiencies based on level... at level 1 you get all simple weapons.  At level 5 you get all martial weapons.  At level 10 you get all Exotic Weapons.  Or you could base it off BAB.  If you wanted it faster you could do 0BAB for simple weapons, 1 BAB for martial weapons, 5 BAB for Exotics.  Either way your game world still has a reason for simple weapons to exist (they're what low level people use) but there's no feat taxation going on and PCs can end up using whatever the heck they want.

Yes, those feats count as you having them innately. If another feat needs them as a prerequisite, you qualify. If a PRC needs them, you qualify. But you don't use any actual feat slots on them.

Players can't just give themselves all proficiencies because they can't take 10 on the checks. Not that it really matters as you're only going to use one, or two weapons anyways. There also isn't a feat tax, because once you do the training you just get it. The cost is the time. This rule is mainly there for those games where you find a weapon much better than the one you currently have, but that no one is proficient in. It's either that or vendor trash it. And while I would not go making a powerful magic item that no one can use be in a treasure horde unless it actually was class specific (so NPC Warlocks can use Warlock items, even if none of the party is a Warlock) some people do.

Also, these are meant to be used as a package. They are chosen both because of their individual effects, but because of their interactions with each other. Cherry picking will result in train wrecks.

[JaronK]

Jaron, the reason the Longbow was such a big deal in Europe was because it punched right through platemail.  Yes, the armor still protected its wearer, but it wasn't making the armored knight a tank.

This is completely and totally false, and a pesky myth besides.  Look at midieval battle reports.  Knights were used against archers specifically because they were so resistant to the firepower... an arrow could get lucky and get through a chink, but otherwise it was stopped.  Arrows don't "punch through platemail" unless it's a very close direct shot (otherwise they arc down and tend to glance off anyway) and even then it's not terribly likely.  Even at Agincourt, one of the greatest victories for archery and greatest failing for knights, the knights still made it to the archery lines, and were killed in melee by skirmishers using billhooks and the like (having lost momentum due to mud and such).  Standard combat doctrine simply assumed arrows weren't going to be effective against knights.  It wasn't until muskets that you saw knight armor being heavily reenforced since muskets actually could penetrate armor.

Longbows were a big deal because they could drop an arrow storm on infantry and completely devastate them, and in sufficient numbers had a decent shot of getting through a chink in the armor.  Furthermore, Welsh longbowmen proved that if you actually trained your archers they could be very effective, using arrow storms, dug in entrenchments, and so on.

JaronK

[Sunic_Flames]

Are you sure what you are describing isn't the result of low level humanoids fighting low level humanoids with an AC of 20 + Dex (full plate, heavy shield)? Because they do tend to miss a lot. With any weapon. But enough about shackling characters to normality in a supernatural world and thus condemning them to failure.

[JaronK]

There is still nothing stopping low Strength characters from using normal crossbows. Those with > 11 Strength now have an alternative option.

The point is that you could make crossbows better for dexterity characters and pull bows better for strength characters.  That makes them actually different and still useful.

And because it is a world in which giant flying lizards breathe strange gasses and use magic spells, plain crossbows don't cut it.

Obviously "plain" crossbows won't cut it, but overpowered crossbows that still act like crossbows still would.  A crossbow that hits very hard regardless of strength, is easy to use (low feat requirements), and can be used from stealth would be a reasonable fantasy approximation of a crossbow that actually would cut it... and still be a crossbow.

They need to not work like they do on Earth, because they aren't on Earth. Which is why you can do things like jump off cliffs and either die or walk away unhindered by your injuries with no in between status. And if you really want to go down THAT slippery slope, crossbows attack at 1/minute. Enjoy your fail weapons.

You're missing the fact that I'm saying crossbows need to be stronger, but in ways that make sense.  Right now you're making them stronger in ways that don't make sense, then turning around and saying that if they made sense they'd be too weak and be "fail weapons."  But if instead you had Crossbows that worked like composite bows except they got to add dex bonus to damage instead of strength bonus, you'd get a weapon that made sense and was worthwhile.  If crossbows were slower firing (not hugely slower, but a bit slower) but did more damage and didn't require strength like bows did, that would make sense and be strong.  You'd just have to make sure the damage was sufficient.

Because the whole party is going to sit back and watch you play with your crossbow?

Like I said, it has to work with the right party... just like a Paladin or a charger.  A charger in a party that's all about making the battlefield terrain difficult to cross and all about staying back sucks.  A Paladin in a group full of evil people sucks.  A sniper in a group full of chargers sucks.  But it's quite possible to make a stealth based party or a ranged based party, and snipers can be a lot of fun to play in that situation.

Crossbow Sniper still stacks with the above. The idea is to make ranged combat viable at actual range, without forcing the party to sit there and watch you play with yourself.

So do that, but make it make sense.

Without the HP boosts and AC boosts the other changes make, you get torn apart in 1-2 rounds and must therefore kill the enemy in less time than that.

I dunno, I haven't had that problem.  Usually you have to kill them in about 4-6 rounds or so I've found, but you do have to use debuffs and crowd control to get the job done.  The casters have to work with the melees... spells like Evard's Tenticles and Solid Fog slow the enemy down and keep them from being fully effective while the melees hack through.

The Monster Manual, like the rest of the game was also barely playtested at 1-10 and not playtested at all 11-20.

This I can't argue with.

I suppose if your DM plays the enemies stupid, or only uses humanoid NPCs (which are not CR appropriate at all, even with all these changes unless a spellcaster or at low levels) you'll survive, but that says nothing about the non casters.

You have to actually play somewhat cleverly to beat decent monsters.  Lure them into ambushes.  Use superior terrain.  It doesn't work if you just kick in the door charge in of course, but even something as simple as opening the door and shooting one, then running away around a corner so they have to follow into an ambush... well, let's face it, pull tactics work on a lot of the enemies in there.  Not so much against Balors of course, but a lot of monsters aren't actually that intelligent anyway.

Crucian is an Outsider? Or what type?

Humanoid, along with everything else I mentioned.  You don't need to be weird types to get ridiculous stuff from Alter Self.

 

I forgot to mention this, but it should say somewhere in there that "Forgotten Realms, and anything from it can die in a fire. That means no Dwarf Ancestor Alter Self, no getting summons with > 20 Str, > 20 AC, and WALL OF THORNS on a level 1 Druid, no Incantrix, no Splitting(?), and no Elcockster related material.

Other than splitting, nothing I mentioned was Forgotten Realms.  Though if you're trying to make crossbows decent losing splitting hurts.  Heck, have you considered making Splitting a Crossbow only enchantment?  Or just making improved versions of repeater crossbows instead of the composite thing (like making repeater be an option you can add to any crossbow)?

Pun Pun actually does exist. He's the overdeity of the campaign, but he ignores all worship or happenings in his domain not related to infinite loops. If anyone does attempt an infinite loop, he kills them before they are born. "

I do something similar, except it's that Pun Pun, when he assended, realized he was in a game due to his infinite wisdom and intelligence.  As such, he realized his world only existed as long as the game remained functional, so he became the god of exploits and broken stuff.  As such, he always knows when you're about to do something that would break the game, and sends down a Nut Pun who politely tells you not to do it.  

As for the other stuff, I really don't care all that much. Mundane sneaking skills are inferior to Invisibility,

When we're talking about a Wizard using Alter Self this is true, Alter Self won't go away if you need to attack something and the duration is very nice.  Plus, you don't decide it's going to be an armor boosting spell or a stealth spell or a movement spell until you cast it, so it's very flexible.

Flight with wings is inferior to Flight without wings (and don't you also need level 5 for that?),

Air mephlings fly without wings at level 1 as a natural ability.  So, you have that.  It's slow (only 10') but it's perfect maneuverability.  Raptorian form only works at higher levels where you'd actually have the full wings.

and underwater or ground travel is mainly just ways of getting to the adventure.

Ever done an adventure in a naturally made dungeon?  Suddenly the ability to dig through the walls or skip rooms by burrowing under them matters quite a bit.  Likewise, city based campaigns where you can dig under the foundation to sneak into the house are another consideration.

With skills being fused together as they are a Human Rogue with Int 12 has 10 skill points a level but effectively has more like 20 considering they were the main ones to benefit. Quite intentional, and also helps to remove the unintended effect of Artificers being the best skillmonkeys, because they could make enhancement bonus items on the cheap, and then pile on other bullshit bonuses from items such that even with little actual training they were better than you at those skills. As for those skills, well I'm not that familiar with them. I'm only looking at the core skills here.

Artificers are more Int based than Rogues, would have all the same class skills, and have only 4 fewer skill points per level before factoring in Int.  This actually makes them better skill monkeys than Rogues.  Wizards too, for similar reasons.  Also Archivists.  Basically, if you're actually Int based you're likely to now be a better skillmonkey.  This is especially true with Int giving skills when boosted (a change I like, but this is one consequence).  At level 10 or so a Rogue is likely to still have 16 Int but maybe 24 dex.  At level 10 a Wizard or Artificer will have 24 Int or so, for an extra 4 skill points per level... so now he has just as many skills as a Rogue.

I'd throw Rogues (and other skillmonkeys) a bone somewhere to make up for this.  What exactly is your choice... could be more skill points, could be some bonus to skills (all skillmonkey classes add half their class level to all skill checks or something?), or something else, I don't know.

Reread the relevant section. Enemies have a few dozen more HP... and you do a bit over quadruple damage with blasting spells without even trying just by Standard + Swifting it. Seriously, adding 1 point per die to a D6 (the most common type) is about a 30% increase, and then the Standard version does double what the Swift one does.

That's going to REALLY leave behind the melees then without a lot of help.  

I hate multiclass penalties and love Fractional BAB/Saves anyway so I love those changes, though I'd consider keeping the multiclassing save bumps... they just make casters a bit weaker and of course I love that. But I can understand why you wouldn't.

Not sure what you are referring to.

I was referring to removing the +2 save bumps you get when you multiclass, since you said you only get that bump once at level 1.

The underlying message of Tome of Battle was that melee characters need to be able to do something relevant, and still move. In the same turn. Maneuvers do this. So do Standard action full attacks. Though it is possible to go through the maneuvers and say that they let you full attack and do x additional effect once instead of attack and do x additional effect if they did not innately allow you to full attack it is precisely interactions such as this I was looking to expose. Whether we (me, and the people that don't post here but are involved in the project) do anything about it remains to be seen. I for one am not familiar enough with ToB to just make blanket changes to it without something breaking.

Right.  I understand the point of the full attack changes, I'm just saying that if you do that maneuvers will need some help to make up for it, because right now your full attack is better than most manuevers.  Having them give their effect instead of the normal full BAB attack (but never effect the iteratives that come after) would probably work.  You need melees to be a lot stronger if you're boosting casters and boosting the HP of every monster.

Also, these are meant to be used as a package. They are chosen both because of their individual effects, but because of their interactions with each other. Cherry picking will result in train wrecks.

Obviously.  I'm only looking at these in terms of how they work with everything else.

JaronK

[JaronK]

Are you sure what you are describing isn't the result of low level humanoids fighting low level humanoids with an AC of 20 + Dex (full plate, heavy shield)? Because they do tend to miss a lot.  With any weapon.

The point isn't about missing, it's about the concept of armor penetration and whether it should be modeled into the system.

But enough about shackling characters to normality in a supernatural world and thus condemning them to failure.

The point here is that "mundane" characters should still be able to do things to impossible degrees, at the same power level of casters.  The difference between a magical character and a mundane one shouldn't be of power (or else it's unbalanced).  Rather, it should be how they do it... a low level magical character does impossible things to possible degrees (like waving their hands around to make a glowy missile kill someone) while a low level mundane character does possible things to possible degrees (like firing their crossbow to make a wooden missile kill someone).  A high level magical character should do impossible things to impossible degrees (like wave their hands around to make an earthquake that ruins a town from a few miles away) while a high level mundane character should do possible things to impossible degrees (like shoot a bow so fast that the storm of arrows falls down and wipes out much of the population of a town from a few miles away). 

You keep talking about this like I'm saying mundanes should be weaker.  They shouldn't.  But the ways they're strong should make sense.

JaronK

[BeholderSlayer]

I think the armor penetration concept actually can make sense, albeit not in a historical sense. While a historical crossbow wasn't easier to crank if you were stronger, necessarily, that doesn't mean a fantasy one can't be made that way. The mechanism may require more strength to use, but creates more potential energy than a historical crossbow. Think of the new crossbow as a bucket that holds potential energy. One bucket is easy to fill, the other is more difficult to fill but holds more in the same space. It is possible to fill the second crossbow at the same rate as the first, but it requires a certain amount of strength which is directly correlated to the amount of extra potential energy generated. When the second crossbow is fired, it generates more kinetic energy due to the extra stored potential energy, and penetrates armor better. At longer ranges, the second crossbow may be fired in more of a straight line than the first, which gives it a greater chance to penetrate armor.

It makes sense to me.

Oh god...think of the catgirls!

[Sunic_Flames]

There is still nothing stopping low Strength characters from using normal crossbows. Those with > 11 Strength now have an alternative option.

The point is that you could make crossbows better for dexterity characters and pull bows better for strength characters.  That makes them actually different and still useful.

Which Crossbow Sniper, alone in no way does. And feats like it would just attract people BAWing that it's precision damage, and shouldn't work against anything actually at range, or past level 15. The goal is to make them different in function, not to pull a 4.Fail where one weapon uses Str, another uses Dex, and another uses Cha. Maybe it's a giant penis. I dunno.

If crossbows were slower firing (not hugely slower, but a bit slower) but did more damage and didn't require strength like bows did, that would make sense and be strong.  You'd just have to make sure the damage was sufficient.

Because base damage really matters past low levels. Oh wait...

I dunno, I haven't had that problem.  Usually you have to kill them in about 4-6 rounds or so I've found, but you do have to use debuffs and crowd control to get the job done.  The casters have to work with the melees... spells like Evard's Tenticles and Solid Fog slow the enemy down and keep them from being fully effective while the melees hack through.

4-6? Way too slow. Of course you primarily play at low levels, with low tier characters so your DM is probably throwing you more softballs than a 9 year old girl at bat. Also while the casters certainly should be throwing out win spells, this doesn't account for the enemy going before the casters, nor is Camp Follower a valid party role.

You have to actually play somewhat cleverly to beat decent monsters.  Lure them into ambushes.  Use superior terrain.  It doesn't work if you just kick in the door charge in of course, but even something as simple as opening the door and shooting one, then running away around a corner so they have to follow into an ambush... well, let's face it, pull tactics work on a lot of the enemies in there.  Not so much against Balors of course, but a lot of monsters aren't actually that intelligent anyway.

Because enemies are always inside, are never faster than you, and won't just take that as time to buff up... assuming they were not already aware of your presence and readying actions that is. Effective and efficient play has been likened to the actions of a SWAT team on more than one forum, by more than one group of people and for good reason. You might get some Orcs with that, but that's about it.

Humanoid, along with everything else I mentioned.  You don't need to be weird types to get ridiculous stuff from Alter Self.

And how much AC is that?

Other than splitting, nothing I mentioned was Forgotten Realms.  Though if you're trying to make crossbows decent losing splitting hurts.  Heck, have you considered making Splitting a Crossbow only enchantment?  Or just making improved versions of repeater crossbows instead of the composite thing (like making repeater be an option you can add to any crossbow)?

Ranged weapons were revamped for the following reasons:

1: Having all the good ranged stuff involve you not using your actual range at all, and instead going into melee range (30 feet) sucks. Now if you still want to do that, you can. But if you want to be at actual range, and not fail at life then this should help.
2: The composite thing and having to replace your bow, or find some bullshit workaround like that relic bow. It has to stop. By the way, if you strip off all the other properties from that bow, it amounts to 1,000 gold. That's where that number came from.
3: Having mandatory weapon enchantments just to be relevant. While I admittedly have done nothing about Seeking and Force, needing some bullshit enhancement to double your damage to be relevant has to stop. Granted, I haven't done anything to just give them the ability to get their relevant damage anyways. If I were to it would probably be something like 'Manyshot is a Swift action' and 'for some trivial cost, you can load and fire crossbows with one hand even if you normally couldn't if you have the Two Weapon Fighting feat'.

Since after all, while it's a given to people like me, you, and everyone else helping with this that ranged characters must have Splitting to be relevant, not everyone knows that. And since I am putting them here, out in the open that means people without that degree of expertise can see it. Which means it's best to just let them do their relevant damage without bullshit workarounds, and remove the bullshit workarounds.

When we're talking about a Wizard using Alter Self this is true, Alter Self won't go away if you need to attack something and the duration is very nice.  Plus, you don't decide it's going to be an armor boosting spell or a stealth spell or a movement spell until you cast it, so it's very flexible.

Air mephlings fly without wings at level 1 as a natural ability.  So, you have that.  It's slow (only 10') but it's perfect maneuverability.  Raptorian form only works at higher levels where you'd actually have the full wings.

Regardless, I'm not all that worried about Alter Self. It's strong sure, but every slot that is an Alter Self is not a Glitterdust or a Web. Both of which have Effect: End target encounter.

Also, 10 foot fly speed? Suppose you can bypass pits, which are a level 1 challenge. See if I care. By the time Raptorians can fly, flight is online for everyone.

Ever done an adventure in a naturally made dungeon?  Suddenly the ability to dig through the walls or skip rooms by burrowing under them matters quite a bit.  Likewise, city based campaigns where you can dig under the foundation to sneak into the house are another consideration.

So the Wizard can bypass level 1 adventures. By himself. As in, not bringing the party along. This is better than casting Silence, and using an adamantine weapon in what way?

Artificers are more Int based than Rogues, would have all the same class skills, and have only 4 fewer skill points per level before factoring in Int.  This actually makes them better skill monkeys than Rogues.  Wizards too, for similar reasons.  Also Archivists.  Basically, if you're actually Int based you're likely to now be a better skillmonkey.  This is especially true with Int giving skills when boosted (a change I like, but this is one consequence).  At level 10 or so a Rogue is likely to still have 16 Int but maybe 24 dex.  At level 10 a Wizard or Artificer will have 24 Int or so, for an extra 4 skill points per level... so now he has just as many skills as a Rogue.

And before Rogues would not have the obscure skills at all. While the Artificer says "Give me five." and casts Armor Enhancement to get a +15 competence bonus, Skill Enhancement to get a 2 + half CL circumstance bonus, and that's before he uses Item Alteration + Armor Enhancement combos to get more bullshit bonuses. Not that he should need more than these two.

As for skill points... the Wizard has 24 Int with items. Only permanent bonuses count, so he actually has 20. How much does the Rogue have? If all of that 16 is natural (and I seriously question why you would make it that high, as skills alone do not a valid role make) the result is that the Rogue has 2 more points per level than the Wizard. And I don't know about you, but every Wizard I've seen invests heavily in the creature Knowledges, so they know what save or loses to use on what. Artificers are... not going to have an Int that high, with or without an item. Yes they are an Int based caster. They have almost no DC based spells, and no good ones. It's all buffs and warforged healing otherwise. I could see an end Int of 22 (which means 14 or 16 to start) but that's it.

I'd throw Rogues (and other skillmonkeys) a bone somewhere to make up for this.  What exactly is your choice... could be more skill points, could be some bonus to skills (all skillmonkey classes add half their class level to all skill checks or something?), or something else, I don't know.

The main advantage to being a skill monkey, if you're going to do that at all is special abilities like can take 10 at any time, etc. Which Rogues do get, and Artificers do not (except Spellcraft and UMD). But as I said before, skills alone are not a role. Skills are something you do, along with all the other stuff you do because An Adventurer is You.

That's going to REALLY leave behind the melees then without a lot of help.

Full attack as a standard action. Also already covered. The HP gain, as stated (and you really need to read what I actually say, or this discussion is over) is at best one hit worth. Since you can full attack basically any time you're close to the enemy, applying your HP damage is simple. And so is 1-2 rounding the enemy like you need to. It's been tested by me at high levels and by others at mid and high levels (at low levels, we're talking differences of 5 HP, so who gives a fuck?) and found to not be a problem in spite of the need to CEF the enemy.

I was referring to removing the +2 save bumps you get when you multiclass, since you said you only get that bump once at level 1.

...No I didn't.

Right.  I understand the point of the full attack changes, I'm just saying that if you do that maneuvers will need some help to make up for it, because right now your full attack is better than most manuevers.  Having them give their effect instead of the normal full BAB attack (but never effect the iteratives that come after) would probably work.  You need melees to be a lot stronger if you're boosting casters and boosting the HP of every monster.

Not really boosting casters. They can use their Swift action to Fireball or something and do a small amount of damage at the expense of using slots twice as fast, and not doing anything else with that Swift action. But that's the only thing on there that really helps casters. Everything else essentially means enemies will have higher saves and/or more immunities, and melee characters on your side will be much better off while melee enemies will be better able to actually do something to casters. Suffice it to say I give less than a fuck about a caster burning resources twice as fast to do about as much damage as a single attack would do (and since HP is CEF based, it doesn't matter if it hits more than one enemy or not).

Obviously.  I'm only looking at these in terms of how they work with everything else.

This was in response to someone else.

[Sunic_Flames]

I think the armor penetration concept actually can make sense, albeit not in a historical sense. While a historical crossbow wasn't easier to crank if you were stronger, necessarily, that doesn't mean a fantasy one can't be made that way. The mechanism may require more strength to use, but creates more potential energy than a historical crossbow. Think of the new crossbow as a bucket that holds potential energy. One bucket is easy to fill, the other is more difficult to fill but holds more in the same space. It is possible to fill the second crossbow at the same rate as the first, but it requires a certain amount of strength which is directly correlated to the amount of extra potential energy generated. When the second crossbow is fired, it generates more kinetic energy due to the extra stored potential energy, and penetrates armor better. At longer ranges, the second crossbow may be fired in more of a straight line than the first, which gives it a greater chance to penetrate armor.

It makes sense to me.

Oh god...think of the catgirls!

This is what I was aiming for. After all, composite bows aren't built like normal bows either.

[JaronK]

Which Crossbow Sniper, alone in no way does. And feats like it would just attract people BAWing that it's precision damage, and shouldn't work against anything actually at range, or past level 15. The goal is to make them different in function, not to pull a 4.Fail where one weapon uses Str, another uses Dex, and another uses Cha. Maybe it's a giant penis. I dunno.

I'm not saying Crossbow Sniper makes Crossbows good... I'm saying it's a good direction to consider.  There's nothing wrong with having one bow type be based on Str and another based on Dex.  Not everything 4th did was wrong.  Just... a lot.  My point was more that if instead of this composite strength stuff you did a similar dex based concept, you'd still get your more powerful Crossbows without the nonsensical strength thing.

Because base damage really matters past low levels. Oh wait...

Who said base damage?  I said the damage from crossbows would need to be suitably higher if you were firing slower.  I didn't say due to base damage.  Giving them other damage sources (dex to damage being one example) would work.

4-6? Way too slow. Of course you primarily play at low levels, with low tier characters so your DM is probably throwing you more softballs than a 9 year old girl at bat.

False.  I play a wide range of character types.  My current characters (in various games) are a level 12 Dread Necromancer, a level 12 Factotum/Swordsage, and a level 6 Expert.  Previous games have been at varying power levels, from Shadowcraft Mages to Commoners.  And 4-6 rounds to kill is acceptable as long as you control the battlefield.

Also while the casters certainly should be throwing out win spells, this doesn't account for the enemy going before the casters, nor is Camp Follower a valid party role.

Never said it was.

Because enemies are always inside, are never faster than you, and won't just take that as time to buff up... assuming they were not already aware of your presence and readying actions that is. Effective and efficient play has been likened to the actions of a SWAT team on more than one forum, by more than one group of people and for good reason. You might get some Orcs with that, but that's about it.

I was giving an example.  There are plenty of ways to do it.  But "charge in and whack things" shouldn't work all the time, and if it does your characters are overpowered and the game becomes boring.

And how much AC is that?

Crucians give +8 Natural AC.  They're in Miniatures Handbook.  There's also a humanoid that gives +6 Natural AC and two claw attacks (Troglodytes, IIRC). 

1: Having all the good ranged stuff involve you not using your actual range at all, and instead going into melee range (30 feet) sucks. Now if you still want to do that, you can. But if you want to be at actual range, and not fail at life then this should help.

The 30ft range thing is really annoying.  But I've been talking about long range combat, which does currently work in D&D rather well already.  It only doesn't work for precision damage types.

2: The composite thing and having to replace your bow, or find some bullshit workaround like that relic bow. It has to stop. By the way, if you strip off all the other properties from that bow, it amounts to 1,000 gold. That's where that number came from.

Being able to upgrade (or maybe even downgrade) your bow to the right strength is a very good idea, one I'd never disagree with.  I hate replacing weapons all the time or finding useless weapons because they don't quite fit.

3: Having mandatory weapon enchantments just to be relevant. While I admittedly have done nothing about Seeking and Force, needing some bullshit enhancement to double your damage to be relevant has to stop. Granted, I haven't done anything to just give them the ability to get their relevant damage anyways. If I were to it would probably be something like 'Manyshot is a Swift action' and 'for some trivial cost, you can load and fire crossbows with one hand even if you normally couldn't if you have the Two Weapon Fighting feat'.

If you're dropping Splitting and Seeking and Force, just make sure you put in enough natural upgrades to compensate.  Loading crossbows in one hand would be nice, as it opens up another avenue for Crossbows... two weapon fighting.  If done right, that could be quite good, and in fact be a great replacement for the loss of stuff like splitting.

Also, 10 foot fly speed? Suppose you can bypass pits, which are a level 1 challenge. See if I care. By the time Raptorians can fly, flight is online for everyone.

I'm a little more worried about flying 20 feet up and becoming immune to all non ranged non flying threats... which at level 3 is a significant number of threats.  Also, low levels are the only times where you can do the whole "ricketey bridge over a chasm" style challenge, which is a fun fantasy trope but worthless as soon as folks start flying and teleporting.  Personally, I'd like to leave that possible as a challenge for as long as possible.

So the Wizard can bypass level 1 adventures. By himself. As in, not bringing the party along. This is better than casting Silence, and using an adamantine weapon in what way?

At level 3, affording Adamantine is actually somewhat difficult.  Wizards can't cast Silence (it's a Cleric spell).  No evidence is left outside that you went into the house.  And again, it's just one more flexible option.

And before Rogues would not have the obscure skills at all. While the Artificer says "Give me five." and casts Armor Enhancement to get a +15 competence bonus, Skill Enhancement to get a 2 + half CL circumstance bonus, and that's before he uses Item Alteration + Armor Enhancement combos to get more bullshit bonuses. Not that he should need more than these two.

Or the Cleric casts Divine Inspiration or something.  It sucks, and frankly shouldn't be happening.  Why not fix this problem with the house rules?  But right now the Artificer can do all that... and have as many skill points as the Rogue.

One thing I've considered doing in the past is saying that magical bonuses add to your skill points temporarily but can't bring you above your normal skill rank cap or qualify for prerequisites, so a 10th level character could never go above +13 to hide that way for example.  Racial bonuses, size bonuses, and stat bonuses can still go over but that's it.  You have to  adjust some DCs but it stabilizes skills a great deal.  Suddenly you know that a DC 25 check is actually hard at level 10, whereas before even a DC 35 might have been trivial (or impossible, who knows without seeing the characters).

JaronK

[Sunic_Flames]

The discussion about crossbows has exceeded my level of give a fuck.

False.  I play a wide range of character types.  My current characters (in various games) are a level 12 Dread Necromancer, a level 12 Factotum/Swordsage, and a level 6 Expert.  Previous games have been at varying power levels, from Shadowcraft Mages to Commoners.  And 4-6 rounds to kill is acceptable as long as you control the battlefield.

So you finally upgraded to mid level and mid tier? Good for you, but by your own admissions you still fight softballed opponents. The stuff that's actually level appropriate... Well, ever played FF13? Know the Doom timer? It's kinda like that.

I was giving an example.  There are plenty of ways to do it.  But "charge in and whack things" shouldn't work all the time, and if it does your characters are overpowered and the game becomes boring.

No, but if you are running room to room, which is necessary to get in that situation in the first place you need to press the attack, not shoot once for irrelevant damage and run around a corner.

Crucians give +8 Natural AC.  They're in Miniatures Handbook.  There's also a humanoid that gives +6 Natural AC and two claw attacks (Troglodytes, IIRC).

If a Wizard really wants to play with AC, instead of using an effective means of defending themselves I'm inclined to allow them enough rope to hang themselves.

The 30ft range thing is really annoying.  But I've been talking about long range combat, which does currently work in D&D rather well already.  It only doesn't work for precision damage types.

Except for the bit about doing piddly shit damage.

If you're dropping Splitting and Seeking and Force, just make sure you put in enough natural upgrades to compensate.  Loading crossbows in one hand would be nice, as it opens up another avenue for Crossbows... two weapon fighting.  If done right, that could be quite good, and in fact be a great replacement for the loss of stuff like splitting.

I'm not dropping Seeking and Force. Not unless I can find a feasible means of granting the same effect. Manyshot as a Swift action (bows) or double Crossbows makes up the DPS loss from not having Splitting, so that's an easy one.

Given that everyone will have 150% WBL, I'm inclined to just leave it be. Level 10 will give 73,500 gold, and a +1 seeking force bow with the auto adjusting bowstring will cost 33k. That's somewhat reasonable, but it doesn't really get affordable for another 1-2 levels.

I'm a little more worried about flying 20 feet up and becoming immune to all non ranged non flying threats... which at level 3 is a significant number of threats.  Also, low levels are the only times where you can do the whole "ricketey bridge over a chasm" style challenge, which is a fun fantasy trope but worthless as soon as folks start flying and teleporting.  Personally, I'd like to leave that possible as a challenge for as long as possible.

Unless they jump. Which is what? 5 feet for a Large size creature? Jump is a Strength based skill that is also boosted by speed. Now if they go a bit higher that's different. But ya know what? I really don't care if the party can defeat some one trick ponies safely by virtue of having actual options available to them.

D&D is a superhero game. I am not going to pretend otherwise.

At level 3, affording Adamantine is actually somewhat difficult.  Wizards can't cast Silence (it's a Cleric spell).  No evidence is left outside that you went into the house.  And again, it's just one more flexible option.

Craft adamantine weapon = 1,000 gold. Silence is still a 2nd level spell.

Or the Cleric casts Divine Inspiration or something.  It sucks, and frankly shouldn't be happening.  Why not fix this problem with the house rules?  But right now the Artificer can do all that... and have as many skill points as the Rogue.

No, no he can't.

[Prime32]

Random suggestion: for "slower firing"

When making a full attack with a crossbow you make one fewer attack than normal. Minimum 1, but making a standard or full attack inflicts a -2 penalty unless you have a BAB of +6 or higher. Reloading is presumed to be part of the action of attacking - if for some reason you choose not to reload then it's a move action.