Recent Chat Activity (Main Lobby)
Join Chat

Loading Chat Log...

Prefer not to see ads? Become a Community Supporter.
Page 5 of 12 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 171

Thread: House Rules. Do you have them and what are they?

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    1,020
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Prefer not to see ads?
    Become a Community Supporter.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Misfeldt View Post
    Okay, getting back on topic...

    This isn't so much a house rule as it is a home brew skill/proficiency. I'm writing it out in the 2e Skills & Powers format, for that's easily adapted into the 3.Xe d20 format (for all the "3.X Or Nothing" gamers out there).

    ROGUE PROFICIENCY: SEDUCTION

    CHARACTER POINT COST: 3

    BASE CHANCE OF SUCCESS: 7

    PRIMARY ABILITYSCORES: CHARISMA & COMELINESS

    DISCRIPTION: Using their strong personality and good looks, a rogue uses the seduction proficiency to talk members of the opposite sex out of something, whether it be information, their property, or their clothes. This proficiency bestows upon the rogue the knowledge of body language and subtle inuendo which suggests to the person targetted that she likes this rogue and wants to be with him. If he makes his proficiency check, the targetted girl makes a Wisdom Check. If she fails, she responds favorably towards him. But if she succeeds, she sees the game for what it is. Seducers/seductresses who also have the Allure trait can adjust the targetted person's Wisdom Check by as much as a -3 penalty.
    I'm not sure how proficiencies work anymore, but I'd rather see this as a skill. It would be a class skill for rogues and bards, but other classes should be able to take this. Or use a straight CHA check. Basically don't shut out the rest of the party from this sort of play.

    Fighter: "Hey beautiful, come here often?"
    Barfly: "Sorry, I only date rogues. Just like everyone else."

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Dearborn
    Posts
    7,263
    Blog Entries
    13
    Downloads
    1
    Uploads
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by c0r1nth14n View Post
    4) No attacks of opportunity unless the DM says so. Big, obvious ones, like the monster you're in melee with turns and runs? Sure. Overly complicated ones because someone crossed within 10 feet of you while you were equipped with a Glaive on a Tuesday morning after you had a cup of coffee but did NOT have oatmeal? No.
    The Peopole that care about rules in my game have voted no AoO. It complicates combat and requires you have figures on the table. I'll go with the vote as I have seen how AoO can make a combat last for freaking ever. Likewise combat feats.

    Garry AKA --Phoenix-- Rising above the Flames.
    The Dean of Old School
    The Olde Phoenix Inn
    Metro Detroit Linux Users Group

  3. #63
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Fayetteville
    Posts
    131
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Valdar View Post
    I'm not sure how proficiencies work anymore, but I'd rather see this as a skill. It would be a class skill for rogues and bards, but other classes should be able to take this. Or use a straight CHA check. Basically don't shut out the rest of the party from this sort of play.

    Fighter: "Hey beautiful, come here often?"
    Barfly: "Sorry, I only date rogues. Just like everyone else."
    Its all about the Charisma based skills.

    Sorcerer: (Bluff)Enlarge is my best spell.
    Barbarian: (Intimidate)Kurg want lovin'!
    Rogue: (Diplomacy)Aww, you look like you have had a rough day. You like like you could use some relaxation with a massage. (Bluff)I have magic fingers!

    Wizard: Hey wanna go back to my place and see my Magic Missle?
    Cleric: Come here my son! Let me lay on hands and you'll be all better!
    ... AND ON THE EIGHTH DAY, GOD SAID, "I NEED A DRINK."

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    1,020
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Kilrex View Post
    Its all about the Charisma based skills.

    Sorcerer: (Bluff)Enlarge is my best spell.
    Barbarian: (Intimidate)Kurg want lovin'!
    Rogue: (Diplomacy)Aww, you look like you have had a rough day. You like like you could use some relaxation with a massage. (Bluff)I have magic fingers!

    Wizard: Hey wanna go back to my place and see my Magic Missle?
    Cleric: Come here my son! Let me lay on hands and you'll be all better!
    This could be a thread of its own, but I have no ideas. I can't get past a druid talking about his wood.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    337
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Valdar View Post
    I'm not sure how proficiencies work anymore, but I'd rather see this as a skill. It would be a class skill for rogues and bards, but other classes should be able to take this. Or use a straight CHA check. Basically don't shut out the rest of the party from this sort of play.

    Fighter: "Hey beautiful, come here often?"
    Barfly: "Sorry, I only date rogues. Just like everyone else."
    Well, I still use many 2nd ed terms. In 2nd ed proficiencies were skills, they just weren't called skills. So in 3rd ed, 4th ed, or any future edition that uses skills & feats, it would be a skill. I just call it a proficiency because I'm still using the Character Point system from the 2nd ed book Skills & Powers. While it is a rogue proficiency/skill, other classes can learn it. It just costs them extra skill points/character points/proficiency slots (or whatever system you're using).

    Quote Originally Posted by Valdar View Post
    Thank you! Basically, the noncombat game mechanic is that the DM sets a DC for an encounter, and decides on a certain number of successes and failures that will determine success or failure for the encounter. The players have the option of an "easy" roll (five less than the DC), "average" (the DC), or "hard" (five more than the DC). Failing an easy roll counts as two failures, and succeeding at a hard roll grants +2 to the next roll. Players then take turns rolling against a skill, with a justification of why the skill applies to the given encounter.
    This rule could have a built in flaw. While it would certainly keep the roll players interested in the game, it could be abbused and used to turn role playing opportunities into roll playing scenarios. Granted, players who themselves are less than glib and want to play characters who are silver tongued should be able to give their characters skills and proficiencies that allow the character to do in game what the player can't do in real life. However this rule should not be used as a crutch by players too lazy to actually role play or to allow the more introverted players to stay in their protective shells. If handled carefully, it could be used as a tool to coax introverted players out of their shells. If not, it could turn the entire role playing experience into a bunch of people sitting around rolling dice.
    Last edited by Farcaster; 05-22-2008 at 11:28 AM. Reason: Use Multi-Quote

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    1,020
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Misfeldt View Post
    Well, I still use many 2nd ed terms. In 2nd ed proficiencies were skills, they just weren't called skills. So in 3rd ed, 4th ed, or any future edition that uses skills & feats, it would be a skill. I just call it a proficiency because I'm still using the Character Point system from the 2nd ed book Skills & Powers. While it is a rogue proficiency/skill, other classes can learn it. It just costs them extra skill points/character points/proficiency slots (or whatever system you're using).
    Aha- that works then. I just never played with proficiencies much in 2e.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    1,020
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Misfeldt View Post
    This rule could have a built in flaw. While it would certainly keep the roll players interested in the game, it could be abbused and used to turn role playing opportunities into roll playing scenarios. Granted, players who themselves are less than glib and want to play characters who are silver tongued should be able to give their characters skills and proficiencies that allow the character to do in game what the player can't do in real life. However this rule should not be used as a crutch by players too lazy to actually role play or to allow the more introverted players to stay in their protective shells. If handled carefully, it could be used as a tool to coax introverted players out of their shells. If not, it could turn the entire role playing experience into a bunch of people sitting around rolling dice.
    That is a problem. I suppose I'll have to come up with a way to reinforce the RP if it comes down to that, like rejecting a given skill if there's no good explanation, and having that player miss his turn.

    GM: "The noble seems obstinate- his prized horses will not be yours for the taking unless you give him some reassurance you won't just leave them outside a dungeon to get eaten."
    Player: "I uh, roll... climbing..."
    GM: "You most certainly do not. Next please?"

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    337
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Valdar View Post
    That is a problem. I suppose I'll have to come up with a way to reinforce the RP if it comes down to that, like rejecting a given skill if there's no good explanation, and having that player miss his turn.

    GM: "The noble seems obstinate- his prized horses will not be yours for the taking unless you give him some reassurance you won't just leave them outside a dungeon to get eaten."
    Player: "I uh, roll... climbing..."
    GM: "You most certainly do not. Next please?"
    That's not quite the problem I was referring to. I was referring to a scenario where the DM goes through alot of time, trouble, and effort to create an important NPC with a distinct personality who has important information or other forms of aide to offer and the player simply says "I roll Bluff, Diplomacy, Fast Talking, Intuit Motive, Danger Sense, Observation, and Information Gathering. What do I get?" Instead of several minutes of ROLE playing vital to the overall plot, the player decides to ROLL play for about 60 seconds of rolling dice and calculating successes and failures.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    1,020
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Misfeldt View Post
    That's not quite the problem I was referring to. I was referring to a scenario where the DM goes through alot of time, trouble, and effort to create an important NPC with a distinct personality who has important information or other forms of aide to offer and the player simply says "I roll Bluff, Diplomacy, Fast Talking, Intuit Motive, Danger Sense, Observation, and Information Gathering. What do I get?" Instead of several minutes of ROLE playing vital to the overall plot, the player decides to ROLL play for about 60 seconds of rolling dice and calculating successes and failures.
    I think the DM would have the authority to put a situational modifier on this to the extent that just rolling dice and not describing what you're doing would be an auto-fail. Though if a player didn't "get" roleplaying (or decided to stick to the "I can just roll dice" interpretation of the rule), then yeah, that would be a pretty tough problem to get around.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    houston
    Age
    43
    Posts
    650
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Misfeldt View Post
    That's not quite the problem I was referring to. I was referring to a scenario where the DM goes through alot of time, trouble, and effort to create an important NPC with a distinct personality who has important information or other forms of aide to offer and the player simply says "I roll Bluff, Diplomacy, Fast Talking, Intuit Motive, Danger Sense, Observation, and Information Gathering. What do I get?" Instead of several minutes of ROLE playing vital to the overall plot, the player decides to ROLL play for about 60 seconds of rolling dice and calculating successes and failures.
    i would theorize that if you were the type of dm that wanted to role play that situation, you'd probably have a group where that was understood. if one of my players reached for a die in that situation, i'd likely as not turn on the playstation, sit them in front of it and say "here, this is more your speed. now, let the grown ups play d&d..."

    but then, im kinda weird like that...
    "well, g'night! dont let the flesh eating demon bed babies bite!!"
    facebook.com/houstonderek

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Dearborn
    Posts
    7,263
    Blog Entries
    13
    Downloads
    1
    Uploads
    1
    I'll let a guy I know is a lousy talker fall back on the dice, if he at least gives lip service to describing what he is trying to do. You don't have to posses a silver tongue yourself, but at least tell me what you want to happen.

    "Ah, I like, tell the guy that we ah, want to help free the ... princess ... but like we ... ah need some stuff."

    Garry AKA --Phoenix-- Rising above the Flames.
    The Dean of Old School
    The Olde Phoenix Inn
    Metro Detroit Linux Users Group

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    houston
    Age
    43
    Posts
    650
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by tesral View Post
    I'll let a guy I know is a lousy talker fall back on the dice, if he at least gives lip service to describing what he is trying to do. You don't have to posses a silver tongue yourself, but at least tell me what you want to happen.

    "Ah, I like, tell the guy that we ah, want to help free the ... princess ... but like we ... ah need some stuff."
    dont get me wrong, i dont expect my players to be master thespians or anything, i was more referencing the "munchkin/power gamer everything has to be a heavily modded ("or why would i pour so many skill points into diplomacy and bluff???")" type players.

    i have a knack for getting the wallflowers involved, and if they can only express themselves in modern vernacular, i, to use the street idiom, aint trippin'.

    i think a lot of us who have been playing for a while (and probably many who havent been playing long at all, for that matter) can really enjoy a session where the only die rolled is to see who springs for the pizza that night...
    "well, g'night! dont let the flesh eating demon bed babies bite!!"
    facebook.com/houstonderek

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    337
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by tesral View Post
    I'll let a guy I know is a lousy talker fall back on the dice, if he at least gives lip service to describing what he is trying to do. You don't have to posses a silver tongue yourself, but at least tell me what you want to happen.

    "Ah, I like, tell the guy that we ah, want to help free the ... princess ... but like we ... ah need some stuff."
    Exactly. If you don't know how to bluff, or fast talk, or the diplomacy skill, or what have you, then certainly you should be able to determine the outcome by rolling dice. But you should at least try to ROLE play the situation and give me the gist of what you're trying to do. If you want to maintain the interpretation that you can just sit around rolling dice for every possible situation, including ROLEplaying, then I like that auto-fail rule idea.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Fort Worth
    Posts
    119
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by agoraderek View Post
    dont get me wrong, i dont expect my players to be master thespians or anything, i was more referencing the "munchkin/power gamer everything has to be a heavily modded ("or why would i pour so many skill points into diplomacy and bluff???")" type players.

    i have a knack for getting the wallflowers involved, and if they can only express themselves in modern vernacular, i, to use the street idiom, aint trippin'.

    i think a lot of us who have been playing for a while (and probably many who havent been playing long at all, for that matter) can really enjoy a session where the only die rolled is to see who springs for the pizza that night...
    No. I'm one of the hasn't been playing long crowd, and while I can certinly enjoy a good session where the Roleplaying is as important as the rollplaying...I'd rather not sit through an entire session of "Ok, talk your way out of this one!" With my old group our DM ran the last campaign I was there for this way, the entire campaign, not just a session. We had, in 5 sessions of gaming for about 6 hours each session, 3 fights, yet our characters ended up being like 14th lvl. I had a fairly interesting build set up, but I got no use out of it as it wasn't RP conducive at all.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Dearborn
    Posts
    7,263
    Blog Entries
    13
    Downloads
    1
    Uploads
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by agoraderek View Post
    dont get me wrong, i dont expect my players to be master thespians or anything, i was more referencing the "munchkin/power gamer everything has to be a heavily modded ("or why would i pour so many skill points into diplomacy and bluff???")" type players.

    i have a knack for getting the wallflowers involved, and if they can only express themselves in modern vernacular, i, to use the street idiom, aint trippin'.

    i think a lot of us who have been playing for a while (and probably many who havent been playing long at all, for that matter) can really enjoy a session where the only die rolled is to see who springs for the pizza that night...
    The diceless sessions can indeed be some of the most fun.

    As to players I have everything from a guy that is my equal in experience and willingness to ham it up, to a real wallflower that has been playing with me longer than the Ham.

    I do not typically push people out of their comfort zones. We are having fun, not doing therapy.

    The munchkins never play long with me. A few sessions at most. I'm just too hard on the whole mentality. I know something very simple. The easiest thing for a GM to do is kill the characters. There is really nothing to it, and I don't care how big a gun boat Munchkin boy comes up with, I can squash him like a bug, and make it look like his fault. I always have an NPC that is more of what ever you have, always.

    "There is always a bigger fish." --Qui-Gon Jinn.

    Garry AKA --Phoenix-- Rising above the Flames.
    The Dean of Old School
    The Olde Phoenix Inn
    Metro Detroit Linux Users Group

Page 5 of 12 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. [D&D] Save My Game: Rules for Rules' Sake
    By PnP News Bot in forum News
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-07-2012, 02:58 PM
  2. house rules for Saga Edition
    By Inquisitor Tremayne in forum Sci-Fi / Futuristic
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-03-2010, 04:43 PM
  3. house rules for the RCR
    By jisan74 in forum Sci-Fi / Futuristic
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 04-27-2009, 03:14 AM
  4. Shadowrun (Looking for house rules)
    By MortonStromgal in forum Sci-Fi / Futuristic
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-18-2008, 10:25 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •