Troll Lord Games

I was refining my house rules the other day and want some opinions on this stuff, especially the multi/dual class rules:

Attribute Scores: Roll 3d6 7 times, discard lowest score, arrange as desired

EPP Bonus: 16 or higher in class Prime, +10% to EPP gained

Typical Classes: choose a non-Typical class, -20% EPP gained

Fighter: change Combat Dominance (effective against all 1HD creatures)

Ranger: add Ambush ability (add level to surprise roll in the wild)

Barbarian: Primal Fury (fatigue lasts for 4 hours minus Con mod), add Ambush ability (add level to surprise roll in the wild)

Monk: any non-Chaotic alignment

Knight: any Lawful alignment

Bard: add Alertness ability (add +2 to surprise roll)

Elf: multi/dual-classed elves can cast arcane spells while wearing Elvin Chain

Half-elf: uses standard Half-elf abilities, Human Lineage abilities, and add Twilight Vision

Starting Age/Ht/Wt

Race Age Ht (m/f) Wt (m/f)

Dwarf 60+1d10 43/41+1d10 130/110+4d10

Elf 90+1d10 55/53+1d10 90/70+3d10

Gnome 50+1d10 38/36+1d6 70/60+5d4

Half-elf 18+1d10 60/58+2d6 110/90+3d12

Halfling 20+1d8 32/30+2d8 50/40+5d4

Half-orc 14+1d4 66/64+2d8 160/120+6d10

Human 16+1d6 60/58+2d10 140/100+6d10

Initiative: 1d10 + Dex Mod

Shields: bucklers and small shields, +1 to AC; medium and large shields, +2 to AC

Spell Preparation Time: 8 hours of rest, 15 minutes per spell level study/prayer time

Natural 20: automatic hit with double damage

Natural 1: automatic miss with loss of next turn

Multi-classing:

1 any two classes (baring alignment restrictions)

2 must have Prime for both classes

3 all EPP must be divided evenly between classes

4 1st level, add HPs from both classes, divide by 2, add Con mod; when a level is gained roll appropriate HD, add Con mod, divide by 2 (fractions round up)

5 gain best To Hit bonus of both classes

6 use least restrictive weapons list of both classes

7 use most restrictive armor list of both classes

8 gains abilities of both classes; cannot combine abilities

Dual-classing

1 must start with one class

2 after gaining at least 2 levels in starting class, may switch to any class (baring alignment restrictions) as long as the character has the Prime attribute of that class; character may not return to previous class

3 can gain only a total of 10 HD

4 gain best To Hit bonus of both classes

5 use least restrictive weapons list of both classes

6 use most restrictive armor list of both classes

7 gains abilities of both classes; cannot combine abilities

Thanks everyone.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

It all looks pretty good to me. The one problem I have is the -20% EPP for non typical classes. This prevents players from picking interesting cominations of class/race that would lead to good role playing. If the penalty was only 10% then a high prime would offset and give the palyers %5 EPP bonus, not as good as playing a non-typical, but still not a punitive. You don' want to punish good role-playing. One of my all time favorite characters was a halfling barbarian, I wouldn't have played them if such a rule had existed. I like the other rules and may steal some of them.
_________________
CK the CK
"My goddess touched me at an early age."

-Grikis Valmorgen, Paladin

The beginnings of my homebrew campaign world and info for my play by chat game:
http://kbdekker.googlepages.com/home

If you use a "round up when dividing by 2" philosophy, when gaining a level it's better to divide the hp of each class by 2 separately then add them together afterwards...can pick up an extra point if both numbers were odd.

i.e. let's say the character received 7 hp for fighter and 5 for thief

7+5=12 then divided by 2 equals 6

or the better way

7/2=4 and 5/2=3 then added together equals 7

Brian Miller

Depending on what you consider an ability, there may be a paradox in your multi-class and dual class characters.

"Can't combine abilities" contradicts "least restrictive weapon". Also, it seems redundant regardless since a spell caster can't have a weapon in their hand when they cast non-verbal-only spells anyway.

i.e. Normal rules: A wizard can wear a sheathed sword, he just can't have it in his hands when he casts a spell. When he acts as a fighter, he draws the sword and swings, then drops it or puts it away to cast another spell.

The same holds true for the best to hit bonus...which also sounds like combining abilities.

Personally, I'd just drop the "least restrictive weapon" clause, and the "most restrictive armor" goes without saying so you don't need that one either, and the best to hit bonus could go too. Then "Can't combine abilities" pretty much covers it. Either that or drop the "Can't combine abilities" since it's subject to interpretation and may cause confusion.

You want to be clear on the wording or sooner or later someone will insist that you told them something else simply because they interpretted the ruling the wrong way and "remembered" the interpretation as if it had come from your mouth. Then if you debate it, they think you're changing the rules in the middle of the game. It's happened in my campaign more than once and probably many others. Clearing it up may save you a delay in game down the road.

i.e. one player's fighter/wizard always drops his sword to cast a spell while the other player's character fights with it in their hand, and both insist they're going by the rules (the second arguing that by the rules, his character "gains the abilities of both classes"). The first guy feels cheated because he did it the harder way all along or the other guy feels like a cheater when he didn't mean to cheat.

That's why I just say, "Use one class or the other each round. No cross-overs." Short. Simple. Distinct. Leaves no question in the mind what the rules are. Like I said, I only bring it up because I've run into this problem myself.

Then again, it's home rules...perhaps am I being too picky.

Brian Miller

"If it sounds confusing, it must be 3rd Edition."

Combat_Kyle wrote:
It all looks pretty good to me. The one problem I have is the -20% EPP for non typical classes. This prevents players from picking interesting cominations of class/race that would lead to good role playing. If the penalty was only 10% then a high prime would offset and give the palyers %5 EPP bonus, not as good as playing a non-typical, but still not a punitive. You don' want to punish good role-playing. One of my all time favorite characters was a halfling barbarian, I wouldn't have played them if such a rule had existed. I like the other rules and may steal some of them.

I did have the penalty a -50% at one time. It was the closes to restricted racial classes as I wanted to go. But then I thought about it and changed it to -20%.

This is my reasoning behind a penalty: each race has a set of classes that they are strongly associated and fimilar with. The race can freely take their "typical" because of tradion, training, physiology, mental predisposition, etc. Whereas, a "non-typical" class is one in which the race is unfimilar with, as a society, and the mind set for those classes is as alien to the race as the mind set of an elf is different a dwarf.

Therefore, the -20%, still allows a character with a non-typical class to be played, but because the class is foriegn to their culture, it is harder for the character to gain levels. now if they have a high attribute score, that can off set the penalty somewhat, but not all the way.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

miller6 wrote:
Depending on what you consider an ability, there may be a paradox in your multi-class and dual class characters.

"Can't combine abilities" contradicts "least restrictive weapon". Also, it seems redundant regardless since a spell caster can't have a weapon in their hand when they cast non-verbal-only spells anyway.

i.e. Normal rules: A wizard can wear a sheathed sword, he just can't have it in his hands when he casts a spell. When he acts as a fighter, he draws the sword and swings, then drops it or puts it away to cast another spell.

The same holds true for the best to hit bonus...which also sounds like combining abilities.

Personally, I'd just drop the "least restrictive weapon" clause, and the "most restrictive armor" goes without saying so you don't need that one either, and the best to hit bonus could go too. Then "Can't combine abilities" pretty much covers it. Either that or drop the "Can't combine abilities" since it's subject to interpretation and may cause confusion.

Brian Miller

"If it sounds confusing, it must be 3rd Edition."

Although BtH, weapons and armor are class features, they aren't class abilities.

As to can't combine abilities, that is so characters can't use two abilities in the same round. For example: The Fighter/Wizard that you menched above. The character has the Fighter's Extra Attack ability. The character also has the Wizard's Spell ability. The character can't combine the two abilities to attack with a weapon, then cast a spell all in the same round.

I may have to clear that up. But FWIW, these rules are essentially taken straight from CZY with a few minimal changes.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

Rigon wrote:
Although BtH, weapons and armor are class features, they aren't class abilities.

R-

True. As a home rule, I just prefer having a greater separation of classes which coincides with my tendency to discourage having more than one class in my campaign. Chalk it up to personal preference. I'm not really fond of multi or dual class characters. Before play, most of the time I tell my players "one class only".

Brian Miller

Rigon wrote:
I did have the penalty a -50% at one time. It was the closes to restricted racial classes as I wanted to go. But then I thought about it and changed it to -20%.

This is my reasoning behind a penalty: each race has a set of classes that they are strongly associated and fimilar with. The race can freely take their "typical" because of tradion, training, physiology, mental predisposition, etc. Whereas, a "non-typical" class is one in which the race is unfimilar with, as a society, and the mind set for those classes is as alien to the race as the mind set of an elf is different a dwarf.

Therefore, the -20%, still allows a character with a non-typical class to be played, but because the class is foriegn to their culture, it is harder for the character to gain levels. now if they have a high attribute score, that can off set the penalty somewhat, but not all the way.

R-

I like the 20% penalty, that it means only players really wanting to play an unusual race/class combo will play it.

As for the rest, many look similar to house rules we use or have used in the past.
_________________
Never throw rocks at a man with a Vorpal Sword!

I really pared my rules down to make them fit onto 1 page and to use as many of the "core" rules as I could. My group has used most of these rules during our 10 run of 2e, so they are fimilar with a lot of them.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

Rigon wrote:
I did have the penalty a -50% at one time. It was the closes to restricted racial classes as I wanted to go. But then I thought about it and changed it to -20%.

This is my reasoning behind a penalty: each race has a set of classes that they are strongly associated and fimilar with. The race can freely take their "typical" because of tradion, training, physiology, mental predisposition, etc. Whereas, a "non-typical" class is one in which the race is unfimilar with, as a society, and the mind set for those classes is as alien to the race as the mind set of an elf is different a dwarf.

Therefore, the -20%, still allows a character with a non-typical class to be played, but because the class is foriegn to their culture, it is harder for the character to gain levels. now if they have a high attribute score, that can off set the penalty somewhat, but not all the way.

R-

I agree with Combat_Kyle, the XP penalty is a buzz-kill.

Why not give the XP bonus, based upon prime only if the character is using a class that is "preferred" to their race, but if they are using a class that isn't preferred, they simply cannot get the XP bonus.

In my gameworld, I do have a few "exclusive" classes that are specific to each culture. They do place limitations upon which cultural group/race a character belongs to. The reason I do that is to create a flavor and real "living" world kind of feel to my campaign world.

Not everyone can be an Elven Archer, in fact only Elves and certain Half-Elves can be Elven Archers. (As one example.)