[Leveling] "It's not your toys, they're just beside you..."

[doorknobdeity]

On the Wizards site at http://wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dd/20051216a, there's a houserule that appeals to me:

Stephen “Shoe” Schubert, Developer
It’s You, Not Your Gear: Treasure is reduced 10-15% and permanent ability score boosting items are banned. Instead, characters get a stat increase at every even level (instead of every four levels) and a feat at every odd level.

This seems like a bit much to me; instead, feats are gained at levels 1, 3, 5, 7 , etc., and ability score increases are gained at levels 3, 6, 9, etc. I'd like some advice regarding the impact this would have in a game. I already figured out some: suboptimal feat chains like two-weapon fighting will be more viable, because you can afford spend more feats. Fighter-types won't be nearly so reliant on their equipment. Spellcasters won't be able to fall back on wands, scrolls, etc. quite so much. However, with this increased feat availability, will the fighter be obsolete? Will PrCs be too easy to enter?

[Maldraugedhen]

Fighters won't be obsolete with added Fighter Feat variety to boost their selection--which we have plenty of on this board. PrCs would definitely become simple to enter, though. If you're planning on having PrCs in a campaign with this variant, I'd just recommend boosting their ability prereqs to compensate.

[Erk]

Not necessarily: you could just add a strong RP requirement to PrC's as well. Don't allow a player to enter any PrC unless they have been somehow indoctrined into it. Unearthed Arcana has some decent rules on this although a little too rigid - not every PrC should have a "test" but every one should have some trigger that gets you into these new sets of skills.

Realistically with such a system it is the GM who decides what PrC's to allow and how the PC's get chances into them. PC's can ask and advise what they want but are no more guaranteed chances at certain PrC's than they are at certain equipment. Obviously that is a matter of taste; that's how I like my campaigns to go :)

[JaronK]

The effect would be that classes that don't need gear much, but like their feats (Druid, Shadowcraft Mage, and generally most casters) get a lot stronger, whereas classes that need gear but generally already have enough feats (Fighter, Warblade, Psionic Warrior) get weaker.

Since the first catagory includes nearly all the top teir classes, and the second includes many of the weak classes, this could result in some noticeable problems.

JaronK

[brian c]

The effect would be that classes that don't need gear much, but like their feats (Druid, Shadowcraft Mage, and generally most casters) get a lot stronger, whereas classes that need gear but generally already have enough feats (Fighter, Warblade, Psionic Warrior) get weaker.

Since the first catagory includes nearly all the top teir classes, and the second includes many of the weak classes, this could result in some noticeable problems.

JaronK

Actually, my first thought is that this variant would almost overpower anyone with Vow of Poverty, if the DM didn't realize it and kept the ascetic bonuses as-is. Monks in general have a lot to gain from getting more feats, and VoP especially would kick ass.

[Caduceus]

Vow of Poverty, from the tales of most people who talk about it, is overpowered anyway. I've never used it in a game, and probably never will, simply because it's not in a book that anyone in my group would ever be likely to buy.

You've given me a good idea for my own campaign, however. Hadn't thought of anything like that.

[Gralamin]

Vow of Poverty is Overrated, as you can't fight anything that can fly and attack in the air.

I also like this houserule.

[GryffonDurime]

Vow of Poverty is Overrated, as you can't fight anything that can fly and attack in the air.

I also like this houserule.

That's a rather gross overgeneralization. VoP Sorcerer with Eschew Materials. VoP Druid. VoP Warlock...strange, yes, but entirely within the scope of the material.

[Icewalker]

Well, I don't like the idea of the game being almost entirely mechanized. I almost never include loot in my adventures. If they have the time to kill and loot something, I'll roll the tables, but I usually also throw in custom-made items for my characters, then almost ignore the loot tables, scaling the difficulty of adventures accordingly.

[spinningdice]

Meh, I just give out reduced treasure, and rely on my crap dice rolls to compensate. I don't kill characters often.

[NullAshton]

Vow of Poverty is Overrated, as you can't fight anything that can fly and attack in the air.

I also like this houserule.

Yes you can! Get the wizard to cast an overland flight spell or fly spell on you. Suddenly you CAN fight anything that can fly and attack in the air. Wizards aren't blasting maniacs, they can prepare support spells for their allies as well.

[Roderick_BR]

I thought about making feats and ability boost easier to get as you are suggesting (feats: 1,2,4,6,... ability: 3, 6, 9, ...)
I wouldn't get rid of stats boosting items, though.
That, of course, would allow a lot of overpowered builds. Be ready for it. You'll have to adjust monsters as well.

[Matthew]

I would happily drop Attribute Modifying Items, but this just seems a bit silly. The game is set up to take these things into account. If you reduce Treasure in D&D, the game gets harder and the DM adjusts the EL of encounters. Full Spell Casters are already a significant balance problem, regardless of treasure to level ratios. Feats are a dead end, the increasing drive towards making more and more available or the creation of more powerful Sub Feats is a symptom of the disease.