I'm being asked to run a 4th Edition game--House Rules?

[Orion]

So I'm running a game for a group of people who have played 4th edition, briefly, and have no other RPG experience. I offered to run aWoD instead, but they really like their swords and sorcery. Normally I would just make them learn 3.5, but I expect the game to go about 8 sessions before the person who instigated it moves away, so it hardly seems worthwhile. So far I've got


ITEMS
--Items have an enhancement bonus equal to Your Level/5, rounded up.
--there is no GP economy. Items are found as treasure and bartered for other items. Item drops are plentiful.
FEATS
--Everyone Gets +1 to hit per tier.Monsters get -1 defense per tier. Weapon/Implement Expertise are banned.
--you get one feat per level
POWERS
--keep all of them
STATS
--You get +1 to 3 stats at 4th and 8th
--You get +2 to any stat your race doesn't get a bonus to
RACES
--Half-elves can use appropriate implements for Dilettante
--Eladrin can use a longsword for any weapon or implement power.
PARAGON (though ending at heroic anyway)
--Paragon multiclassing only requires the first multiclass feat
--Paragon Paths have no class requirements
DESTINIES (though I'm not expecting to get past heroic)
--Demigod Banned

[CatharzGodfoot]

Drop racial attribute adjustments. I've never played the game, but supposedly that should fix a few problems.

Also, don't stick people with a single stat array even if it is optimized, unless it is very generous. According to Lago, some characters actually need to spread things out a bit to meet feat prerequisites. Maybe with your other changes that won't be an issue, though.

And why is Demigod banned? Because it's good for just about every class combo?

[The Man Who Killed Death]

Something I'm doing in my low level 4E game is let encounter powers be used at will. It speeds up combat and makes the game feel more deadly. Of course, look at the powers to make sure nothing gets too over the top. I typically keep utilities at where they were and only change the attack powers for each class. So far things have run smoothly, just make sure to use slightly stronger monsters.

I've only played a few sessions and the PC's are only at 3rd level, but so far I like how the game has been running compared to stock 4E. I tried to get my group to change to 3.5 Tome, but they like all their standardized classes that do the same shit.

[schpeelah]

I think you'd like to give everyone a free +2 to two attributes of choice instead of racial modifiers. The game engine assumes you picked the "correct" race for your build and have plusses to two main stats.

[ggroy]

[Windjammer]

Just to say that I really think you've drawn up a GREAT list of houserules.

You've only left out the obvious one of dividing all hp in the game (PCs and monsters) by 2 or 1.5, to speed up combats. If you left it out intentionally, I'm interested to hear why.

[Orion]

Demigod is banned for being boring. The 21st and 24th level features are shockingly effective but just push numbers around. Seeker gives you abilities you wouldn't otherwise have, Archmage lets you use interesting spells more often, and at least trickster lets you roll more dice.

[Username17]

If you're only going to go 8 sessions, why bother with anything that affects the later tiers? You'll never get there. Even at a level a session, your characters will hit level 9 and then the game will split up. You can ignore all the Paragon and Epic level bullshit for the same reason that the designers of the game did - you'll never get there.

Of course, no one does Paragon Multiclassing, because what they actually do is take a Paragon Path of their multiclass class. Paragon Multiclassing is an option so underpowered that I don't even know why it got into the book. What you should really do is just throw open the flood gates and let anyone take any PPs they want, and damn the prereqs. That way people will just take the PPs that are good, and no one will be taking obscure multiclass feats for classes they don't give a shit about just to be given the option of taking a PP that actually works with their stat array (I'm looking at you: Razor Clerics).

-Username17

[Funswoggle]

Instead of giving a blanket +1 to hit per tier, just subtract it from the Monsters' stats.

Also, you might want to look into jacking down the monster HP and boosting damage, in essence making fights quicker and more brutal (closer to 3.x at least in THAT regard)

And why give characters a feat at every level? 4E already got rid of the dead levels, so players won't be lacking in options from level-to-level.

[Lago PARANOIA]

And why give characters a feat at every level? 4E already got rid of the dead levels, so players won't be lacking in options from level-to-level.

It really blazes my balls when people say this. It's 'true' but it's true in a pissy and useless way that completely undermines the idea of WHY empty levels are bad. Which wouldn't make me so mad if the people parroting this talking point actually understood why empty levels, which originated in 3E, were bad in the first place.

So please don't say this anymore, 'kay?

[Username17]

Instead of giving a blanket +1 to hit per tier, just subtract it from the Monsters' stats.

Also, you might want to look into jacking down the monster HP and boosting damage, in essence making fights quicker and more brutal (closer to 3.x at least in THAT regard)

This is a generally good idea. 4e keeps the player and DM side of the equation very separate. Meaning that any time you are giving a bonus to the PCs, you could give an equal penalty to the NPCs and get the same effect - and the players wouldn't even need to know you were doing it. It's more total transforms, but it means that there are less rules for the players to learn and your house rule list will look more compact.

All you have to say is that you are banning Demigod and Weapon/Implement Expertise because they are too good to not take. Then apply the equivalent transforms on the back end to the NPCs and call it a day.

And why give characters a feat at every level? 4E already got rid of the dead levels, so players won't be lacking in options from level-to-level.

4e is fucking chock full of empty levels. However, I agree that giving out a feat every level is a bad idea. Feats don't do good things. There is a design guideline for 4e that they (Wizards) have talked about and even provided a name. It's called "make it a power" and it basically boils down to the idea that if any feat does anything you care about that you should remove it from the game and put an equivalent power into every class that would want to use it. See: Power Attack.

So those few feats that provide some benefit that is in any way noticeable at the table are actually against design criteria! Furthermore, as levels rise, the available "correctly written" feats like the Improved Critical feats all get more and more extreme and implausible prerequisites. Meaning that their proximal effect is to completely ass rape people who didn't make the right kind of build. Being a Dex/Wis Avenger with a giant hammer is pretty viable at low levels, but at high levels it totally expires because you can't qualify for any of the hammer specialization nonsense.

Much better would be to just get rid of feats full stop and let everyone use At-Will powers as basic attacks and let anyone Multiclass for free.

I think you'd like to give everyone a free +2 to two attributes of choice instead of racial modifiers. The game engine assumes you picked the "correct" race for your build and have plusses to two main stats.

Something has to be done about Dual Attribute Dependency and Racial Determinism, that's for damn sure. I think that the most elegant solution is a blanket rule that any time you have a power that mentions two different attributes, you can use one of the attributes for each of the modifiers. That lets people play Tiefling and Eladrin Rogues without feeling stupid and it makes the Con/Cha Starlock viable in one go.

Of course, I think it would make the Bugbear Brutal Scoundrel able to benefit from Sly Flourish and thus do more damage than other rogues. But that still isn't Ranger damage, so I don't care.

-Username17

[Lago PARANOIA]

Why empty levels are bad in the general sense: When a player doesn't feel like their character is getting anywhere, especially when the opposition is improving, it frustrates and disengages people.

Why empty levels were especially bad in 3E: Because the classes were generally unbalanced so this is a key reason why fighters kept falling behind. But also because with the open multiclassing system people had a huge incentive every level to bail out when the going got rough. The fact that the PrC system was cooler than the regular class system helped smooth over ruffled feathers out of people who didn't want to give up their Ranger levels, but damn.


Obviously, since classes in 4E are locked onto rails we don't really give a care about the biggest minus to empty levels in 3E. So lets look at the other arguments against empty levels: that of making players feel short in the pants against opposition and that of making players feel short in the pants against fellow players.

4E's universal advancement schedule doesn't really help bridge the power gap between classes. Wizards start off stronger than warlocks, warlords stronger than bards, etc.. and the gap only increases over time. So that bad feature of empty levels still exists.

But the 'make it so that you're gaining something' is a powerful enough reason that it should work on its own, right? Well, not so fast. Unless you're dumpster-diving like crazy, you're losing ground against monsters as time goes on. A heroic-tier battle takes like 3-5 rounds of combat, an epic tier takes like 6-8. Why is this? It's because the feats by and large don't fucking do anything but push numbers weakly around. Occasionally you get jawsome tactics-changing feats like Polearm Gamble and Heavy Blade Opportunity, but this was apparently a bug. Feats are seriously supposed to be more like Nimble Blade.


And I don't know about you, but I'm not really excited by bigger numbers. But that's what 4E feats mostly are. So why exactly should I care that every level is filled with 'options' if the options are mostly bullshit like 'gain a +2 bonus to damage in certain situations'.

[mlangsdorf]

Suggested house rules:

Give everyone their choice of +2 on any stat that doesn't already have a Racial bonus. You still get some iconic race/class combos but people aren't locked onto rails as badly. Also, let people raise 3 attributes, instead of 2, at 4th and 8th levels.

Double the number of dice that people roll for damage. This should make the high W powers worth a little more, and makes bullshit bonuses like Iron Armbands less necessary. Possibly add 2 regular monsters (an elite, 2 regulars, 8 minions, whatever) to every combat to make up for the increased deadliness. It's up to you.

Get rid of the stupid weapon/implement feats and just give everyone a +1 to hit at 5th, 15th, and 25th levels.

[Orion]

I'm not opposed to increasing damage, but would prefer to do so in a way that makes weapon die size vaguely relevant. It's saddening that nobody uses greatswords or rapiers in 4E.

[ggroy]

[Orion]

Frank:

Interesting heroic feats from the PHB

--Alertness
--Dragonborn Senses
--Dwarven Weapon Training
--Eladrin Soldier
--Enlarged Dragonbreath
--Escape Artist
--Expanded Spellbook
--Hellfire Blood
--Ferocious Rebuke
--Mounted Combat
--Quick Draw
--Shield Push
--Skill Training
--Weapon Proficiency

Now, that's admittedly a disgracefully short list. And people tend not to *take* those feats--they tend to take Weapon Focus and Nimble Blade and Backstabber and other boring-ass number-boosters. But my hope was that by giving out more feats, people would be able to take the number-boosters they need and also some fun stuff.

Then there are some straight-up numbers feats that nonetheless make the game (IMHO) more fun. Mostly they take the form of feats that upgrade class features to make them less insulting. A lot of these are, by themselves, shitty and insulting conditional bonuses, but I think they add something. Consider Improved Dark One's Blessing. It gives you 3 temporary HP whenever you kill something that you curse, which is kind of stupid. However, if you're a level 1 Fiendlock, you already have to give yourself 1 THP for each kill. Bumping that up to 4 makes you hate your life a little less. Similar arguments apply to

--Dragonborn Frenzy
--Blade Opportunist (for fighters)
--Healing Hands
--Improved Fate of the Void
--Lethal Hunter (if you're using longswords)
--Inspired Recovery

Maybe I should just select my favorite racial and class feats and add them to the classes/races directly.

[RobbyPants]

When fighting slightly more powerful monsters, I usually adjusted the monster's AC and other defenses such that the players have at least a 25% probability of hitting the monsters with their main at-will powers. (An exact 25% to-hit probability is what I sometimes used for the 4 or 5 player party fighting a single solo "big bad end boss" type monster).

Couldn't you accomplish the same thing by just saying that a natural 16 or higher auto-hits, instead of fiddling with each monster's AC separately?

This gives everyone a base 25% minimum chance to hit.

[ggroy]

[ggroy]

[Funswoggle]

This is a generally good idea. 4e keeps the player and DM side of the equation very separate. Meaning that any time you are giving a bonus to the PCs, you could give an equal penalty to the NPCs and get the same effect - and the players wouldn't even need to know you were doing it. It's more total transforms, but it means that there are less rules for the players to learn and your house rule list will look more compact.

All you have to say is that you are banning Demigod and Weapon/Implement Expertise because they are too good to not take. Then apply the equivalent transforms on the back end to the NPCs and call it a day.

I wholeheartedly endorse the sentiment that houserules should be segregated to the DM's side of the screen as much as possible.

[RobbyPants]

For 4E with the players using their primary stat attacks, this would largely be the case.

For players not using their primary attacks, such as a wizard with an 8 or 10 STR trying to use a sword, a natural 16+ doesn't always hit.

Perhaps I misunderstood your point.

[ggroy]

[Josh_Kablack]

I find that at heroic tier, the "cut monster HP in half, drop monster level by 1" houserule greatly reduces the padded sumo effect and lets PC's big attacks and critical hits do meaningful damage. "You bloody him" is a lot more exciting to my players than "he looks somewhat more hurt, two more hits and he might be bloodied"

[ggroy]

[Lago PARANOIA]

If my DM ever pulled that shit on me I would finish the battle as quickly as I could, say my farewells, and walk. No question.