House rules discussion

[TheFred]

No, but then not all spell levels are created equally either (see e.g.: Wizard vs Healer). I was more wondering how paying character points for spell levels stacks up to the other options.

[Avaday Daydream]

Random and bizarrely specific question; if Rope Trick or a similar extradimensional space is used deep underwater, where pressure damage is an issue, is the inside of the extradimensional space under the same pressure conditions as outside, or is it atmospherically normal for the caster? Can you get the bends from going from a high-pressure environment deep underwater to a depressurized extradimensional space? If you had a Bottle of Air, could you use it to slowly drain and depressurize a flooded extradimensional space?

[Lord Foul]

Regarding the defence bonus, your change to the rule as noted in UA is to reduce its effectiveness; is that what you intended?

For instance, a 9th level character with any amount of fighter in the UA version gets +9, but your version gives a 9th level fighter (BAB 11) only +6.

And that's the best anyone can get. Max ranks in Tumble would also give +6.

Not saying I object, just want to clarify your intent here.

Additional question: is it on all the time, or are there conditions for when it applies.

 

Edited February 19 by Lord Foul (see edit history)

[dalamb]

@Avaday Daydream: The inside of the extradimensional space is normal pressure. I can't see wanting to inflict the Bends for moving into a supposedly safe space, but I guess I'd listen to an argument as to why that was being too kind to player characters.

Everyone: See the house rules changes post for today, which @Lord Foul alluded to.

@Lord Foul: good point about defensive bonus. It'll definitely still be of the same flavour but I will consider whether to match the UA maximum, or match what a "typical" fighter should have as AC at high level, or make some other adjustment. I see that UA didn't make it conditional on circumstances, so for now at least it's "always on."

Edited February 19 by dalamb (see edit history)

[TheFred]

The new defence bonus is also based purely on BAB, right? Previously it was about the armour you wore, so this kinda favours lightly-armoured classes over heavily-armoured ones. Not necessarily a problem, but a change.

[dalamb]

I'm not sure how to think about it @TheFred; I suspect characters will only be motivated to wear armour if there are magical properties the armour has that they value above the increased chance of drowning (though characters with water breathing won't care).

@Lord Foul I thought over your concerns, and have changed the formula to use /2 instead of /3.

[TheFred]

What I mean is, the UA defence bonus has the idea that heavily-armoured characters will have a higher AC and are therefore giving up more by not wearing any. I guess it's debatable whether heavy armour is even all that good these days, mind you.

[namo]

Regarding the new iteration of "skill spells": do you still need Skill Focus in each skill you want to unlock the spells for?

Or 1 point + Skill Focus unlock all spells (depending on ranks, of course) for the corresponding ability score (i.e. if I have Skill Focus: Hide and pay 1 point, do I get the spells from Move Silently, and other Dex skills)?

[dalamb]

You only get "extraordinary skills" (spells known) from the skills for which you have skill focus.

[namo]

OK. Paying 1 point (which can give 3 feats), or more, and several feats (Skill Focus) for those spells make them much less appealing, I have to say.

But it's fine; not every build / PC needs to pick them up.

Edited February 19 by namo (see edit history)

[Lord Foul]

10 minutes ago, namo said:

OK. Paying 1 point (which can give 3 feats), or more, and several feats (Skill Focus) for those spells make them much less appealing, I have to say.

I think it does make this feature more balanced with actual spellcasting, though, which costs 3 points per spell level.

To my mind this is a great feature for non-casters, such as rogues, to get something roughly equivalent without the need to take actual spellcaster levels.

 

[TheFred]

So you need to take Skill Focus *and* spend a character point to unlock the abilities? With the buff to Skill Focus there are characters who might want it, but I don’t think it’s worth the extra point as well (conversely, 1 point to unlock Bard-like spellcasting would be rather powerful if Skill Focus weren’t required, even with the very narrow list of options). Especially not if it stays at 1 point for 3 feats (which I do still think is rather a lot) - there are feats which grant SLAs already and they’re not even great feats.

[dalamb]

I am prepared to believe character point costs need to be adjusted slightly, but I'm not convinced skill focus plus the "extraordinary skills based on a particular ability score" is too expensive. Bear in mind that the original rules had a spell progression for each skill with skill focus, which was far too many spell pools, and was complicated because I wanted to use the associated ability score to give additional spell slots. I suppose we could consider dropping the requirement for skill focus, but that might make the option of having a few extraordinary abilities a bit too attractive.

As is often the case, I will think about it and make a decision after a night's sleep. Feel free to weigh in.

[TheFred]

This is an interesting system but, I agree, that’s a bit much. I just think that, we’ll, I wouldn’t spend a feat for 1 or 2/day of most of these spells, and if I already have to have Skill Focus (in the matching skill) it becomes even less likely. If it’s a choice between these and three feats? Nope.

In terms of simplification, Skill Focus just just auto give you maybe one spell/day chosen from the list, or you just get one pool for all spells automatically (but then you’ve got diminishing returns). I’d be tempted just to charge skill points or something for these (a la skill tricks) just because those are cheaper than feats. Having it mirror actual casting has some pros but does just make things kinda more complicated for what’s not going to be a very major system given the entry requirements.

[Arbuthnott]

I don't know, I think it makes a lot of sense. It's not a point per skill, but a point per group of skills. Think of it more like '1 point for 3 feats, or 1 point to make skills Uber good', which is pretty equivalent in a game where you need 3 points to access a level of spells