Best house rules!

[AxeMental]

I'm primarily interested in house rules related to these systems:

Psionics, unarmed combat, reaction adjustment, subdual damage, and anything else good you have

[Lord Cias]

I came up with a decent alternate system for overbearing attacks.

I originally posted it at DF here (look at the 2nd page):
www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=10114

I would post it here, but I am having trouble getting the tables to work. Until I can correct the problem, the link above will have to do.

[Jerry Mapes]

see reply for table help in general board

[Lord Cias]

I have come up with an alternate overbear system, and a similar system could probably be used for grappling. I haven't had much opprotunity to test it, and I'm sure there are still a few kinks in it, but I will post what I've got so far.

I originally posted this over at DF here:
www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=10114

Please note that this system may appear rather complicated or lengthy, but rest assured that most of the complication is in the initial base value determination, after that has been determined for a particular PC or creature type everything else is rather simple.

First, each creature is assigned an "overbear value." Once determined this value will be roughly the same for all creatures of that type and will be relatively permanent (with the notable exception of PCs and NPCs). I will explain how these overbear values are calculated and assigned, but as that is the most complex and least used aspect I will explain all of that later.

When one creature tries to overbear another, simply find the difference in their overbear values. If the attacker's value is lower, the difference is a penalty; if the attacker's value is higher, the difference is a bonus.

There are certain situational modifiers, most of which are the exact same as would apply to normal combat (dexterity defensive adjustments, flank and rear attack, attacking slowed or stunned opponents, charging, etc.).

Simply roll 1d20, apply any bonuses or penalties due to difference in overbear value and situational modifiers, and consult the table below:

Die Roll	Result
5 or less	attacker is knocked down, opponent may strike as if from the rear
6 - 9	avoided/bounced off, opponent may attack
10 - 13	opponent stumbles, no further attacks
14 - 17	opponent knocked to sitting/kneeing position, attack again as if from the rear
18 or more	opponent knocked flat and stunned, attack again

As with normal combat, if the attacker is charging then the longest weapon will strike first. This means that unless the defender has no weapon, or the attacker has some unusually long natural reach, the defender will always strike first. However, this will not stop the overbear attack unless the attacker is killed.

Once an overbear attack is resolved, unless the roll is in the 10 - 13 range, one opponent or the other will get another attack. This attack can be another overbear attempt if the other is not yet prone, a grapple attack, or a normal attack with weapons.

Situational Modifiers
These adjustments apply to the overbear value of the applicable individual.

Braced	+1
Encumbrance*	+1/0/-1/-2
Hasted	+2
Slowed/one leg held	-2
Stunned/2 legs held	-4

*encumbrance adjustments do not apply if character is also slowed/stunned.

Medium and large shields also add their protective value (1 + magic). Other large bashing devices may also add +1 (such as large antlers).

If two opponents are of the same size category but one out weighs the other by 50% or more (including equipment) then the heavier gets a +1 and the lighter gets a -1.

Sample Overbear Values
Fighters = 9
Clerics = 8
Monks* = 12
All other Humans = 7

All characters with classes get a +1 for levels 4 - 6, +2 for levels 7 - 9, and +3 for levels 10+

*Monks also get additional bonuses as their movement rate and AC values improve (exact values not completed yet).

Giant Ants = 4
Goblins & Kobolds = 5
Ogres = 15 - 17
Hill Giants = 17
Storm Giants = 27
Minotaurs = 18
Rhinos = 17

There are still a few quirks that need to be worked out, so comments are welcome.

Calculating Overbear Value

Again, this is just a rough draft, changes may be needed.

Base Value by Size

Tiny (under 2.5' in height/length)	2
Small (2.5 - 4.5' in height/length)	6
Medium (5' to 7' in height/length)	8
Large (7.5' to 10.5' in height/length)	10
Huge (11' or larger)	14

# of Legs

2	0
3 - 6	bonus = to base
7 or more	bonus = to 2 x base

Base Movement (does not include encumbrance)

3" or less	penalty = to 1/2 base
6" to 12"	0
15" to 21"	bonus = to 1/2 base
24" or more	bonus = to base

Jumping Ability

Poor	penalty = to 1/2 base
Normal	0
Superior	bonus = to 1/2 base
Extraordinary	bonus = to base

Hit Dice

HD has more than 8 sides	+1
HD has less than 8 sides	-1
4 - 6 HD	+1
6+ - 9 HD	+2
9+ or more HD	+3

Each point of strength above 14* = +1
Each +1 "to hit" adjustment* = +1

Each point of strength below 7* = -1
Each -1 "to hit" adjustment* = -1

Natural AC of 2 or less = +1
Monks = +1

*Strength is proving to be one of the hardest factors to include simply because monster strength is so inconsistant. If I use actual strength scores for monsters like ogres and giants, then this short changes other large heavy creatures. If I use strength scores for PCs but not for large humanoids, then very strong humans will have overbear values about the same as giants. For the moment, I am simply fudging strength adjustments for monsters. Of course the size and HD categories already account for creatures that are strong (or weak) due to size.

Yeah, I know, this looks very complicated, but all of the work can be done outside of game time. It certainly doesn't eat up as much time as using those DMG modifiers do.

Let's run through a couple examples for calculating the overbear value.

A 1st level fighter with a strength of 16 and a dexterity of 15:
Size is medium, so the base number is 8.
As he has only 2 legs, and normal movement and jumping ability, there are no modifiers there.
His hit dice have more than 8 sides, so he gets a +1 there.
He has 2 points of strength above 14, so he gets a total of +2 for strength.
His dexterity doesn't affect the base number, but his normal defensive adjustment for dexterity will apply toward his overbear value as it normally would for AC. This way, if dexterity is negated for some reason the creature's base value stays the same.
So his total overbear value is 8 (base) + 1 (HD) + 2 (strength) = 11.

Now let's look at a giant ant:
Size is tiny, so the base is 2.
It has 6 legs which gives a bonus of +2 (equal to the base number).
It also has a movement rate of 18", which gives a bonus of +1 (1/2 the base).
However, I assume that ants have poor jumping ability (can't really leap up on a taller creature) so it gets a penalty of -1 (1/2 the base).
Its hit dice are normal and below 4 so no adjustment there.
Currently it is up to the DM to fudge monster strength. Personally, I wouldn't assign any penalty in this case (the value will be low anyway, and ants are supposed to be quite strong).
Total overbear value for giant ants is 2 + 2 + 1 - 1 = 4.

Finally, I will calculate the overbear value for a rhino.
Base is 10 (large creature)
4 legs = + 10
Base move = 0
Poor jumping = -5
8-9 HD = +2
Strength (fudging) = +0 OR +1 when charging (based off damage values)
Total is 10 + 10 - 5 + 2 = 17 or 18 when charging (in addition to the normal +2 for charging).

[PapersAndPaychecks]

My best house rule is that anyone who wants to play a bard has to dress in pink spandex, wear lipstick and prance around the room three times.

Then I tell him he can't be a bard.

[dzubak]

Not a best house rule but rather looking for feedback.

How do you guys feel about giving MUs & Illusionist bonus spells for high intelligence?

Either along the guides of a cleric's wisdom or alternative bonus (e.g. 15- 1st, 16 -1st, 17 -2nd, 18-3rd)?

[BonesMcCoy]

I love it. Never did it but I think it's a great concept.

[mistere29]

Considering how well foster is playing with just one spell, i would say it's not neccessary.

[AxeMental]

Dz we used to play that way until about a year and a half ago when I tried to dump my house rules. Although it has a big impact at low levels, once your mid level you don't seem to miss the boost as much as you might think.

The biggest difference is that you end up casting the same spell at first (picking sleep usually). But, hey thats AD&D for you. Once you get to 3rd though, it's not a big deal.

I have thought about replacing unarmed combat with something like this:

1.Punch or kick= normal attack 1-2 dmg plus half str. bonus

2. Grapple or hold= normal attack if hit the attacker must make str. role (3d6) and if suceed the attacker can counter and break free doing the same role (str. 3d6). So, fighter Franco (16 str) attempts to grapple fighter Phil (str. 10), Franco roles 3d6 if he roles below or on a 16 he holds his opponent then Phil roles 3d6 and roles a 9 remaining held. The player can say what type of hold position they want to attempt.

3. Push past= I'm not sure if there is an official rule for this (if there is please let me know), if someone wants to attempt to get past a line of guys he can charge at it and attempt to plow through. This would be Str of charger rolled on a 3D6 if succeeds the defender gets to make there str. roles to attempt to stop it (3d6).

So in this case a fighter wants to get past 3 kobolds and attack their magic user master behind them. He is out of missiles and charges through (like a lineman). The fighter has a 12 str. and roles 3d6 rolling a 12. He is getting through. The kobolds each role (say there str. are each 9), and one roles a 8 (from 3d6). The fighter is stopped. If all three role higher then 9 the fighter gets through and can attack the MU next round. However, the fighter is still subject to normal attacks.

If he gets through the defender must role a save vs. petrifaction or be knocked down.

Well, like I said, there must be a rule like this already in the DMG someplace. If so please point the way.

[foster1941]

mistere29 said:

Considering how well foster is playing with just one spell, i would say it's not neccessary.

I hope you didn't just jinx me, mistere! ;D

Seriously, I've been having a lot of fun playing a character with only one spell. The extreme limitation of resources forces you to be cautious, think tactically, and make tough choices, all of which are good things to learn whatever class you're playing. The accepted conventional wisdom among whiners and 3Etards seems to be that playing a 1st level magic-user is no fun because all you do is use your one spell and then spend the rest of the game standing around hoping not to get killed, and that allowing more spells would therefore give the character more to do and thus make the game more fun for the player, but that's a very shallow and shortsighted view to take. Not to mention that allowing extra spells without limitation (thus allowing a 1st level magic-user to have up to 3 sleeps or 3 charm persons) would be a significant power-inflation that would throw many of the 'balance' assumptions out the window, even moreso than weapon specialization.

I'm firmly of the opinion that for people who claim 1st level play is no fun because characters are too weak/fragile the answer isn't to make 1st level characters more powerful (by giving extra spells, weapons specialization, 20 HP kicker, etc.) but rather to start the campaign at a higher level -- 2nd, 3rd, or even 4th (for those who want 'heroic' campaigns; 4th level fighter = 'hero'). Note that EGG started the characters in his latest OD&D campaign at 3rd level for this very reason -- he wanted to let them get into the thick of things right away without the cautious 'trial & error' period that 1st level characters have to go through.

[francisca]

dzubak said:

Not a best house rule but rather looking for feedback.

How do you guys feel about giving MUs & Illusionist bonus spells for high intelligence?

Either along the guides of a cleric's wisdom or alternative bonus (e.g. 15- 1st, 16 -1st, 17 -2nd, 18-3rd)?

I do that in my AD&D Greyhawk game, granting bonus spells to MUs for INT, at the same rate Clerics gain them for WIS.

[order99]

Foster, Wizards in 3E start off with several Cantrips,plus bonus spells for an Int of 12+(mind you,it won't stop the whining) ;D
I normally use Cantrips from 3E in AD&D(i'm not a purist)and while I noticed an increase in versatility I haven't seen any problems from a game balance POV.I've never allowed bonus spells for INT,but if I did i'd nix the Cantrips-the combination might be too much.
One house rule i've used over the years is Ritual Casting-essentially,the MU chooses not to memorize one or more spells.For every spell of that category not memorized,the MU can now cast directly from his spellbook...this normally takes 10-20 minutes or more.The MU trades some quick power for much greater flexibility-and not incidentally gives the MU a more traditional feel.Mind you,some spells are already ritual in nature,and for those I require memorization as a component.

[PapersAndPaychecks]

Hi Order99, and welcome to the boards.

[order99]

Glad to be here...and thank Dragonsfoot,it left a trail of breadcumbs to lead me here.

[foster1941]

order99 said:

Foster, Wizards in 3E start off with several Cantrips,plus bonus spells for an Int of 12+(mind you,it won't stop the whining) ;D
I normally use Cantrips from 3E in AD&D(i'm not a purist)and while I noticed an increase in versatility I haven't seen any problems from a game balance POV.I've never allowed bonus spells for INT,but if I did i'd nix the Cantrips-the combination might be too much.

I don't know a thing about 3E, but in C&C (3E-derived) I know that a lot of the non-combat-oriented 1st level spells (stuff like Light, Read Magic, Comprehend Languages, etc.) were re-categorized as '0-level spells' (cantrips) and a m-u could use several of these in addition to his normal 1st level spells (sleep, magic missile, etc.). This isn't like the 1E cantrips (from UA) which are both significantly less powerful/versatile than 1st level spells and also must be taken instead of (rather than in addition to) 1st level spells -- a magic-user can trade one 1st level spell slot for up to 4 cantrips. C&C magic-users, who could thus memorize a number of valuable 'utility' spells without worrying about reducing their combat effectiveness, seemed overpowered and less interesting than 1E magic-users (for whom the choice whether to memorize Sleep or Read Magic can become the most important decision in the game!).

One house rule i've used over the years is Ritual Casting-essentially,the MU chooses not to memorize one or more spells.For every spell of that category not memorized,the MU can now cast directly from his spellbook...this normally takes 10-20 minutes or more.The MU trades some quick power for much greater flexibility-and not incidentally gives the MU a more traditional feel.Mind you,some spells are already ritual in nature,and for those I require memorization as a component.

So by leaving a spell slot 'blank' the magic-user can then cast any spell (of the appropriate level) directly from his spellbook, with an increased casting time? Interesting idea. UA included rules for magic-users to cast spells directly from their books. I don't remember the specifics (because I never used them), but ISTR there was a chance that any spell cast directly from a book would disappear (like a scroll). Have you seen those rules and if so what did you think of them?