My House Rules

[Bleak Knight]

I now consider my house rules fit for beta testing.

There might be a few errors, but they have escaped my eyes. If you can find some, please tell me. Also, if you simply want to flame/argue about some of the stuff written, feel free to do so. You might not appreciate or see the need/balance in all of these rules, but I'm pretty certain there's something for anyone.

EDIT: They are available as a pdf download just below this text. If you'd like the word document, PM me.

[Dirigible]

Wow. Your house rules have a history of d20 appended to them



Open-Ended Rolls: Hmmm. Kind of an odd one. Have you considered the -10/30 rule, instead (ie, a 1 counts as a -10, a 20 counts as a 30)?

Fatigued: You don't 'lose hit points' to nonlethal damage. Instead,you add it up and compare it to your current HP. You might want to change the phrasing to:

When a character has lost more than half of his or her Hit Points or has suffered nonlethal damage equal to or greater than half his or her Hit Points, he or she becomes Fatigued.

Defence: At 20th level, Fighters will have Def +18, Defenders Def +20. This seems to take the edge of the Defender's usual advantage to AC, doesn't it?

Synergy: Love the icnreasing bonuses.

Feats:
Battle Dancer: This is pretty weak. Maybe a +1 to attacks as well, or a +2 to Def instead? Unless it combines really well with Spring Attack or something?
Bonus Spell Energy: Sweet. I see you went with my new method
Bounding Assault: Should the second attack be at -5, perhaps?
Combat Evasion: I like this. A lot.
Flanker Series: These are awesome - I love feats that introduce a whole new chain for warriors to pursue.
Streetfighting: This is like a more flexible, easier to acquire Weapon Specialisation. Bit unbalanced?

Shock: I like this. The fact that Shock resistance increases with level is nice. Perhaps you could rework the Defender's sunnign blow so that it instead grants a big bonus to Shock damage?

[Nifelhein]

arnon will like to see how much this is close to his own house rules.

Well, dirigible comments are good and quite to the point, battle dancer seems to be weaker than it should be as well, perhaps making it the same as the scout's (Complete Adventurer), ie, move 10ft or more get a bonus, you could make the bonus be something larger or possible to increase though, like move at least 10ft and for every 5 points above a Tumble DC15 check he gets a +1 to AC. I am prtty certain WotC has maded a feat that mirrors Bounding Assault, not sure how the requisites are, so that is no big deal.

Deadly Flanker is worse than weapon specialization and has the same effect, why one would bother? And if Dirigible dislked Bounding, why he did not even mention rapid blits? Those two could work with the idea that when using the spring attack feat the character may make an (or 2) additional attacks at at any place in his movement, you suffer no AoO for moving through  any creature attacked threatened squares.

Weapon Finesse lost sense, I want it with a greatsword, it is a melee weapon... I like the absence of spell failure from armor, they already have check penalty and the like, if he does not have the proficiency then he will be facing a dire situation, if not, why bother, he will suffer the check penalty to con checks to avoid loosing a spell.

Your combat changs make combat lethal...

I think the same I said to arnon apply here, be careful with damage builds, they may be more powerful than they used to be. And to the border, use the complete one I made, it is now on the downloads section of the site.

[smeagol]

The emphasis is put on a deadly combat system. Which is good, as it prevents players from rushing into combat headlong (which would not be very Midnight-ish).

In spirit, this reminds me of some of the Black Company d20 rules (which also made combat VERY deadly). Take it like praise.

Conclusion: a nice set of house rules, although they're not suited to my own gaming style (which is, almost no rules).

Not being a specialist of the d20 system, I really can't comment much more than that.

[arnon]

arnon will like to see how much this is close to his own house rules

There are things very similar, mainly due to the fact, i think, that we both took a good look at the combat in AGoT... and we both changed them a bit...

i'll try to hurry it up and post my combat rules...

arnon

[Bleak Knight]

Thanks guys.

Ok, answering-time!

DIRIGIBLE
- Open-Ended Dice: Yep, it's an odd one. However, I like it.
- Fatigued: Nice catch. Thanks.
- Defence: Yes it does. However, I consider the defender pretty damn powerful already.
- Synergy: Thanks.
- Feats:
Battle Dancer: Roger, a little weak. It does go pretty nicely with Spring Attack, Bounding Assault and Rapid Blitz though, and also lowers your AC penalty when charging. Perhaps a +2 AC is viable, but I'm more in favor of giving a bonus against bull rush, trip and grapple checks. Plausible solution?
Bonus Spell Energy: Yes I did.
Bounding Assault: Getting a second attack assumes you have a second attack. Unless you've invested feats in TWF, that attack is already at -5.
Combat Evasion: So do I.
Flanker Series: Again, thanks. I like the new feat chains too. They allow for more tactics and maneuvering than the old ones, I think.
Streetfighting: It's only available to light weapons. I could up the prereqs, but I've always had respect for dirty fighting.
- Shock: The rules were taken from the AGoT d20 RPG, and customized for a more giant-slaying style of play. AGoT's rules are too brutal, unless your characters never face monsters in MN. I could rework stunning blow, but I don't think it's necessary.

NIFELHEIN
More AC for more movement is a possible solution. However, this is a feat, not a class ability, and it should be slightly more limited. Perhaps +1 AC at 10+ ft., and +2 for an entire move action? Several of the feats were developed at the same time as Wizards released their PHB2 preview, and any similarity is purely coincidental.

Deadly Flanker can be utilised with any weapon, and the damage bonus stacks with that of Weapon Specialization. That's why you'd bother. As far as I know, you suffer AoOs when using Spring Attack, so you should from the better versions of it too.

Weapon Finesse has not lost sense, it is simply applied to any single weapon. I see no reason why a man with the proper training shouldn't be able to wield a large sword using speed and agility rather than strength and raw power.

Yes, my combat changes make combat lethal. That was part of my intent with these rules. Regular D&D does not punish PCs in combat nearly enough, and lets them get away with far too much to suit Midnight, IMO. Some damage builds may be more powerful using these rules than normal ones, true. Then again, those damage builds will also get hurt more than non-combat characters as the enemy will focus on them.

SMEAGOL
Actually, with this being as rules-heavy as it is, I'm surprised you raise your voice at all.
I never read the Black Company d20 RPG, but I have read a couple of the novels. I quite enjoyed them.
Thanks for checking them out anyway. There might be someting in there you can joink, despite having a rules-lite approach to MN and RPGs (such as increased synergy bonuses).

ARNON
I sent you my house rules half a year ago or so, and we quickly found out we had some common foundations for our rules.
Post your combat system, ASAP. Oh, and I'll be stealing some snippets of your rules for the next fix of my rules.

[Nifelhein]

Well,

It is a feat but then, power attack also is and has no set limit of how customizable it may be beyond your BAB, I think +2 for a full move might be too few or too much. And no, as far as i know PHB2 is not OGL, so the feats can and should be twead to be used for any sale purpose but sicne they come from previews having them hre is not a problem, much less if you tweaked them and gives them a new description and rephrasing (the most perfect scenario).

Deadly flanker is still a weak option, specially for rogues and fighters. Won't complain though. And for spring attack, you do not sufefr AoOs from the one you attack for the movement part of the feat (quoted: "Moving in this way does not provoke an attack of opportunity from the defender you attack, though it might provoke attacks of opportunity from other creatures, if appropriate.") so the ones coming after should follow that pattern and all those attacked don't get an AoO for the movement of the attacker.

Weapon finesse has lost its sense, european weapons, even a short sword or gladius was not meant to be used with finesse, whether with strength or dexterity allw eapons were meant for speed and raw power. Weapon finesse is meant for a very dexterous and agile use of a weapon, meaning it would have to be vey easily manipulated and light, the 3.5 version already applies to all light weapons and non medium weapons that qualify as very light (rapier!), making ti able to be used with any weapon is not a good opinion and will make archers with weapn finesse favor any weapon as their melee choice, they will hit nearly as often as they would with the bow int hat situation, not to say archers would normally not have large weapons around. Rogues loose any reason to get short swords for sneak atatcks, overall you are making all short weapons less used in the game and favoring large damage and sized weapons.

No matter how agile or learned in techniques you are, a greatsword stillweights 8lb, double the weight of a long and 4 times as much as a short. I have a friend that wields two katanas with his kendo techiniques, one of hsi training parts is usign weights on each hand with the wooden swords to make him able to take the weight in a real fight, even if it is only for sport. He always mentions how no living person would wear armor and weapon, weapons or weapon shield combination and stand a fight for more than a few minutes, depending on the amount of action and attacks mcuh less, maybe not even a minute.

[Bleak Knight]

My house rules allow for fast, clever and instinctive fighters as well as the strong ones. Strength still factors on damage, as long as you don't select one of the feats that let you apply another ability score instead. Despite arguments against the realism of this, it all boils down to our differing approaches to what an attack roll is, and what a damage roll is. As long as it's my opinion that one could wield an 8 pound sword (8 pounds isn't really that much, and with a long enough handle, it will balance out nicely) with a focus on speed and elegance rather than speed and power, I'll keep my version of Weapon Finesse. And a medieval archer would not favor any weapon, because he could not afford any weapon. An adventurer in a heroic role playing game is free to chose whatever weapon he wants as far as I'm concerned. Rogues will still chose short swords, because they are easy to conceal, and much cheaper. Also, they are proficient with them.

Yes, a straight clobbering match will se the boy with the biggest club win. I want players to think a bit and use options other than "I whack him". Makes combat more interesting. D&D has a lot of maneuvers, and with my rules it has more. I want to see them used.

Roger on the rest, I'll take a look at Battle Dancer.

[Nifelhein]

Why don't you make a character choose whether he will apply dexterity or strength for attack rolls with melee weapons? That way you will have one less feat and one more option, other than the fighter there aren't much feats available and everyone with the weapon proficiency is already studied in that given wean's technique. Just a thought.

Since you don't want it with realism and make references to your opinion i am not debating it further, despite not agreeing with them (your opinions, that is).

In my own rule tweaking experience with D&D I have learned that despite the tweaks the combat will be as much whacking as the players want it to be, because in the end it is all about modifiers and reagrdless of how easy to die it is or how many options you give to them, they are all as good as their modifiers, which have nothign to do with description or roleplaying.

Anyway, to each his own, and also, you can use the full border on the file now, it is on the downloads section.

[PhadeOut]

You mention the Parry Feat under Accurate on Page 11.
But I don't see a Parry feat?  Am I missing something or is an error?

I like some of the rules (and many are similar to my own, especially the dying rules using Con as a major factor, it's exactly like my rules - I know I contributed to a lot of the dying rules on the old forums so maybe they started with me, maybe they didn't but the %=Con instead of a flat 10% is something I've always used... maybe it's coincidence, maybe not).

The defense rules are nicely done, like that - I've seen it done before but your's is better, using 4 different tables.

I like to try to keep my games simple as possible, so some of it is going a little far for me, but that depends on your players.

Kudos on the complete house rules, I've done up my own for C&C (SEIGE system) and it's a lot of work and constant tweaking that seems to never end.  Now if I could only manage a C&C conversion of Midnight...

Also, I like your credits - see you play with a nice crowd ;-)  I've talked to Iain a lot back in the 1E day on the old forum and Eric has his name in a lot of books too though I've never talked to him.

[Bleak Knight]

Nif: Any character can use Dex to wield a light weapon or a weapon associated with the core d20 Weapon Finesse feat. I think that's enough without a feat.

Combat will always be as much whacking as the players want it to be, but now, they have more viable options to consider besides CHARGE!

PhadeOut: Con% to stabilize and death a -Con were rules originally introduced to me by two of my own players, posting here as Albert and Torek (though Torek hardly posts...) It's a good rule though, so I'm not surprised to see you including it too.

Thanks on the defense rules, I spent a wee bit of time tweaking those tables. Simple may be good, but I also like to have a lot of options in combat. I makes fighting more exiting, and with the lower fights per game ratio of midnight campaigns, I think this is good. Lite is good too, though, as long as it doesn't end up with "I wack him" "He wacks you" "I wack him" "He dies" (with very cool descriptions though). I like to reward smart play, and these rules do that, IMO.

I'd love to see more rules opions for MN, especially if they're non-d20. Get to work, man.

Credits: Yeah, I have had a nice crowd. That was before though. Iain's MIA, but I keep in touch with Eric and Kurtis, though we don't game. The rest I think are my local players, excluding Nif of course, who lives in Brazil and helped with formatting without ever actually playing in one of my games.

[Nifelhein]

Nif: Any character can use Dex to wield a light weapon or a weapon associated with the core d20 Weapon Finesse feat. I think that's enough without a feat.

I like that.

Combat will always be as much whacking as the players want it to be, but now, they have more viable options to consider besides CHARGE!

Not necessarily, try Wushu Open *free!) and get a different feel.

[Bleak Knight]

Not necessarily, try Wushu Open *free!) and get a different feel. Wink

I meant in D&D. I assumed you did the same, since you're the one who originally stated this fact.

[PhadeOut]

I'd love to see more rules opions for MN, especially if they're non-d20. Get to work, man.

Yeah, the big problem I see with C&C SIEGE to Midnight/d20, is having to make the Channeler class since the Wizard/Illusionist class would be scrapped for a totally new one.  The rest of the classes are almost direct ports, or are dropped completely.  It's very doable in a shoddy way, but I'm too picky to release something that is hastily done or looses the original feel of the work, but one day maybe.....

[Bleak Knight]

Bump. Update.

- Fixed the errors you guys found.
- Joinked Arnon's rule for number of feats.
- Simplified reach.
- Created a new rule for full attacks, making it a viable option from level 1.
- Some minor formatting fixes.
- Other stuff I don't remember right now.

[Smarts]

I have not read it all yet, but I have noticed some huge piles of errors

In the part about the extra attack you wrote that the rogue at level 1 would have an attack with +1 bab and one with -5, while the fighter has one with +1 and one with -4. You might want to fix that.

You still get extra attacks every time you should, right?

Oooh simpler reach rules, now I can die happy.

[Bleak Knight]

Huge piles of errors, eh?

Ladies, say hello to Smarts, one of my players from Trondheim, and the proud owner of the e-mail adress izrador@gmail.com, which he sadly doesn't use.

The way I was thinking, characters would always have two attacks, but not gain a third before they reach BAB +11(/+6/+1). I guess I should expand those rules to clarify some stuff then.

now I can die happy.

Good, because the ninjas are already in position. They've been waiting for years, actually. Goodbye.

[Albert]

Masterworking... No armor can have its Check Penalty... increased by more than 2 points.

Perhaps a rather poor choice of words? I'm kidding, I'm reading through your newest incarnation of your house rules now. God, can you remember what they were like back in the 1.1 days?

Edit:

A creature's size is both a blessing and a curse. For every size category above medium a creature is, it suffers a -1 penalty on AC against ranged Attack Rolls and Armor Class against ranged attacks,

You mean attack rolls and ac right, not armor class and ac?

[Bleak Knight]

Heh. Yes I do. Attacks and AC it is...

[Land Outcast]

Wow... Shock System rules are pretty brutal (although at low levels, a wound able to Shock someone is likely to kill him right away).

aside from that, handling AoOs as you do, how do you handle the AoO provoked when attempting to disarm/trip someone? given that generally the disarm/trip fails if the AoO connects.
Applying your HR plainly would give the attacker a -2 to AC and no chance to fail due to AoO, is this the case?

[Land Outcast]

Also, excellent Surprise and Multiple Attackers rules (I actually use those rules when DMing... yes, the same rules).

Regarding Severe Injuries, does every class have Heal as class skill now? (or at least, do fighters?) In normal D&D logically noone would invest skillpoints in Heal -excepting clerics and certain spellcaster who was highly interested in how our mortal vessels work... but I digress- Midnight is a -really- different story.

[Bleak Knight]

Wow... Shock System rules are pretty brutal (although at low levels, a wound able to Shock someone is likely to kill him right away).

They are brutal, but do not kill you outright, like low HP systems do. Most of the time, Shock is the result of critical hits or a combination of excellent luck for the attacker and bad luck for the victim. They also do an excellent job of keeping mid and high-level characters on their toes.

aside from that, handling AoOs as you do, how do you handle the AoO provoked when attempting to disarm/trip someone? given that generally the disarm/trip fails if the AoO connects.
Applying your HR plainly would give the attacker a -2 to AC and no chance to fail due to AoO, is this the case?

Correct. The only way he can fail is by the defender outrolling him, not smacking him in the head when it's not his (the defender's) turn.

Also, excellent Surprise and Multiple Attackers rules (I actually use those rules when DMing... yes, the same rules).

Thank you. They are quite common, I think.

Regarding Severe Injuries, does every class have Heal as class skill now? (or at least, do fighters?) In normal D&D logically noone would invest skillpoints in Heal -excepting clerics and certain spellcaster who was highly interested in how our mortal vessels work... but I digress- Midnight is a -really- different story.

Nope, every class does not have Heal as a class skill. Adding it to fighters and barbarians might be cool, though. Opinions, anyone?

[arnon]

Just because a skill is more usefully does not mean that its more accessible, still...

... my personal take on skills is to allow all skills to be bought on a 1:1 ratio, but still enforcing the class\cross-class max ranks.

So... i guess i don't see any problem with doing that.

[Albert]

Heal as a class skill makes sense because: Soldiers are generally around wounds a lot more often than other people. They would have more need of, and more opportunity to use, the heal skill.
It doesn't make sense because: Fighters in D&D fight, period.

Since we, in general, aim more for a logically consistent, not to mention fun, game, than a game that follows all D&D stereotypes, heal as a class skill for fighters might fit. I'll think I might include this in my game.

[Radovarl]

Hippocrates (the "Oath Guy"): "War is the only proper school of the surgeon." (or something along those lines).