Is this a bad house rule?

General topics, including off-topic discussion, goes here.
CrudRollingCrusader
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2023 2:05 pm

Is this a bad house rule?

Post by CrudRollingCrusader »

Im starting my campaign next week and I’m thinking of implementing a house rule I thought of to buff fighters. My idea is to remove attack bonuses from the game except for Fighters. All other characters still have their standard str and dex bonuses but no attack bonus expect for fighters. I feel like this just makes leveling up as a fighter more exciting. Wizards and clerics get to look forward to new spells and thieves get better at their skills but what does a fighter have to look towards? Is this a bad idea or not? Thanks
User avatar
Dimirag
Posts: 3613
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 1:24 pm
Location: Buenos Aires (C.A.B.A.), Argentina
Contact:

Re: Is this a bad house rule?

Post by Dimirag »

Lamentations of the Flame Princes uses that rules, its not bad, its not good, its different.
It will impact on how useful characters are on combats, which may be a big part of your game.
It will cut the cleric's combat prowess.
It will put a lot more strain on the fighter.
There are lots of option to make them "better/more interesting/etc", removing the other classes' combat skill is not the the way in my opinion.
Sorry for any misspelling or writing error, I am not a native English speaker
Drawing portfolio: https://www.instagram.com/m.serena_dimirag/
CrudRollingCrusader
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2023 2:05 pm

Re: Is this a bad house rule?

Post by CrudRollingCrusader »

Thanks for the reply.


“There are lots of option to make them "better/more interesting/etc", removing the other classes' combat skill is not the the way in my opinion.”

Any suggestions on a better way to make fighters better/mores interesting?
User avatar
Dimirag
Posts: 3613
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 1:24 pm
Location: Buenos Aires (C.A.B.A.), Argentina
Contact:

Re: Is this a bad house rule?

Post by Dimirag »

The "Combat Options" Supplement deals with some new perks for fighters.
The "Dimirag's Fighter Options" Supplement deals exclusively with perks for fighters.
Sorry for any misspelling or writing error, I am not a native English speaker
Drawing portfolio: https://www.instagram.com/m.serena_dimirag/
User avatar
SmootRK
Posts: 4230
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Nashville, TN

Re: Is this a bad house rule?

Post by SmootRK »

I agree w Dimirag.
The other classes do not measure up in a fight after mid levels anyhow, though I can see why someone would think this way at the lowest levels.
In general, cutting down something does not make another thing better in my opinion, (equity line of thinking does not really work).
Find ways to enhance, even if just within the parameters of role play. Perhaps most warriors of the setting have access to guilds, training centers, esteem from common folk, etc, while others are second fiddle in the region.
Is it really the end, not some crazy dream?
User avatar
Solomoriah
Site Admin
Posts: 12451
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 8:15 pm
Location: LaBelle, Missouri
Contact:

Re: Is this a bad house rule?

Post by Solomoriah »

If you haven't run the game using the standard rules, you don't know what is or is not balanced; indeed, it takes some time to internalize the consequences of how the game is written. Things aren't always as obvious as they seem.
My personal site: www.gonnerman.org
User avatar
Boggo
Posts: 1381
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2022 7:17 pm

Re: Is this a bad house rule?

Post by Boggo »

Honestly it's been my experience that fighters don't need any real buffing to be the most effective combat characters by a comfortable margin already, removing AB from the other classes will make them far less survivable in my opinion, though it will most definitely increase the combat abilities between them and fighters!
No matter where you go...there you are
Seven
Posts: 836
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2020 11:17 am

Re: Is this a bad house rule?

Post by Seven »

At the lowest level, I just make sure the fighter has a decent armor.
User avatar
Metroknight
Posts: 1396
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 7:26 pm
Location: Alabama, USA

Re: Is this a bad house rule?

Post by Metroknight »

Instead of removing something, try adding an untrained penalty for weapons with the provision that fighters and their subclasses are trained in all weapons. There is a section in the core rules on page 151 called Weapon and Armor Restrictions. You could tweak that by applying the Magic-user weapon limitation to all the classes but Fighter.

Snipped from the corebook "These characters are simply untrained in any weapon other than those normally allowed to them, and should suffer a -5 attack penalty when using any prohibited weapon."
User avatar
Dimirag
Posts: 3613
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 1:24 pm
Location: Buenos Aires (C.A.B.A.), Argentina
Contact:

Re: Is this a bad house rule?

Post by Dimirag »

If the idea is to give fighters something "new" at every level, use weapon proficiencies
Fighters starts with 4 and gain 1 per level
Clerics and Thieves start with 3 and gain 1 per 2 levels.
Magic Users star with 2* and gain no new proficiencies.
*If you let the MUs use more than the 2 core weapons increase the other classes initial proficiencies.
Note that a fighter will have training up to 23 weapon if they live that much, so you may want to bring weapons from the Equipment Emporium.
Sorry for any misspelling or writing error, I am not a native English speaker
Drawing portfolio: https://www.instagram.com/m.serena_dimirag/
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 35 guests