House Rules Revisited Q&A

[waysoftheearth]

This Thread Has Been Superseded: Please See HERE For the 2014 House Rules!

This thread is for any questions you may have about the house rules revisited.
Ask here and I will try to answer.

I'll also update the house rules thread as necessary.

edit: pointed link to new host.

[waysoftheearth]

verhaden wrote:
I updated my character sheet to reflect the changes. My rolled HP was 1+2 (+2 con) for a result of 8, but the rules now reflect 1+3 for fighters--should I just add 1 or do you want to re-roll? Or keep as is? Any is fine with me.

--

Class vs. ability score chances of success: I've found that ability score chances of success for feats has worked well at the table for me, but I understand how bothersome it can be in a PBP format, where the players are unable to call out their respective chances.

[waysoftheearth]

waysoftheearth wrote:

I updated my character sheet to reflect the changes. My rolled HP was 1+2 (+2 con) for a result of 8, but the rules now reflect 1+3 for fighters--should I just add 1 or do you want to re-roll? Or keep as is? Any is fine with me.

We'll leave all the rolled hp "as is" for now.

The extra "+1" hp that were added to fighters were put in to replace the additional, "fighter only" fiddling around with the constitution adjustment. In essence, a possible 1 or 2 extra hp for some fighters was replaced by an absolute 1 extra hp for all fighters.


--

Class vs. ability score chances of success: I've found that ability score chances of success for feats has worked well at the table for me, but I understand how bothersome it can be in a PBP format, where the players are unable to call out their respective chances.

Agreed. I like the "chance in 6" based on abilities conceptually, but it's not worth the extra effort for the ref in a PBP. Compared to the "4 in 6 for class feats, or 2 in 6 otherwise" method, it usually amounts to either no difference or only a 1 in 6 difference anyway.

When running a big PBP, convenience counts for a lot [img]images/smiley/smiley.png[/img]

[waysoftheearth]

sulldawga wrote:
Where does Mads' Cold Iron Axe fit into the new weapon damage rules? Is it a pole axe? A battle axe?

[waysoftheearth]

waysoftheearth wrote:

Where does Mads' Cold Iron Axe fit into the new weapon damage rules? Is it a pole axe? A battle axe?

Mads' Cold Iron Axe has always been a battle axe. It is designed to be used single-handed, but there's no reason it can't be used two-handed by a Dwarf.

Is there any mechanical reason to do so?

Using a suitably sized one-handed weapon (e.g., a battle axe or sword, but not a hand axe or dagger) with two-handed means a PC is less likely to drop his weapon if struck by surprise (he would have to fail two rolls instead of one). Additionally, his attack adjustment is increased by +1.

[waysoftheearth]

sulldawga wrote:

Mads' Cold Iron Axe has always been a battle axe. It is designed to be used single-handed, but there's no reason it can't be used two-handed by a Dwarf.

Is there any mechanical reason to do so?

Using a suitably sized one-handed weapon (e.g., a battle axe or sword, but not a hand axe or dagger) with two-handed means a PC is less likely to drop his weapon if struck by surprise (he would have to fail two rolls instead of one). Additionally, his attack adjustment is increased by +1.

A battle axe is already +1 to hit. Using it with both hands means it becomes +2 to hit?

And it's possible to be used one-handed by Dorgan, if he so wishes?

I believe the answers to both questions are "yes" but might as well confirm with the boss while I have your attention.

[waysoftheearth]

waysoftheearth wrote:

A battle axe is already +1 to hit. Using it with both hands means it becomes +2 to hit?

And it's possible to be used one-handed by Dorgan, if he so wishes?

Yes to both [img]images/smiley/smiley.png[/img]

[waysoftheearth]

sulldawga wrote:
Any rule allowing bonuses to defense if fighting with a 'main gauche' in the off-hand, rather than a shield?

Or 'main droite' in Dorgan's case?

[waysoftheearth]

waysoftheearth wrote:

Any rule allowing bonuses to defense if fighting with a 'main gauche' in the off-hand, rather than a shield?

Fighting with two weapons (main gauche/droite) will improve frontal AC by 1 pip.

This should be weighed against shields, which improve frontal AC by 2 pips. Looking at the weapon versus armour figures, you will also note that shields are more effective versus piercing weapons, but less effective against axes. Shields will also, in general, ablate a fatal blow, which a main gauche will not.

[waysoftheearth]

danhem wrote:
Regarding the capacity of spellbooks:

A spellbook can contain many spells -- about eight 1st-3rd level spells, or six 4th-6th level spells, or four 7th-9th level spells will fit into a typical tome.

Ulric's Grimoire contained 13 spells (10 first, 1 second, 1 third, and 1 fourth level) at the time of the rules changes. Should I consider it "full" at this point or would you prefer to make changes as to where some of these spells are located to keep it within your guidelines above?