Kryx's Houserules

[Ugganaut]

I'm curious why those changes were made, and what problem they intended to solve.

I think its the same reason as moving combat maneuvers from Battlemaster to core Fighter. PHB locked things that should be common to all in that class, to an archetype. His houserules for fighter no longer has an archetype that really suits the dex/mobility fighter in our current game. I wish it did, he is way better at this balanced housrules stuff than I am, but its not his job to cater to me. I've tried(and posted) my own effort, but I feel like I'm out of my depth.

Open Hand had the push, trip stuff, that all monks should have access to. Any time I've seen a monk portrayed, thats the sort of stuff they all do - as well as punch and kick
But after you move all that stuff to the core class, the Open Hand is left with Quivering Palm. I agree his houserules are missing the Open Hand flavored monk, he's said so too.
If you want him to add one, then best you can do is make some suggestions, and hope they at least inspire him to make something that works. He doesn't get paid to provide us this stuff though.

[Ugganaut]

* Add half Str modifier(min 1) to damage. (would give a high str/dex character more incentive to go bow)
* Once per round, when you don’t have disadvantage on a creature, you can target a second creature no more than 10 feet apart, with disadvantage on both rolls. You don’t add your ability modifier to damage against the second target. (Double Shot - something like this that could set the bow/crossbow apart)
* Reaction move 5ft after a melee attack.
* If you hit a hostile creature within 5 feet of you with a ranged weapon attack, the attacker has disadvantage to hit you on its next attack before the end of your next turn. Also, ranged weapon attacks you make while a hostile creature is within 5 feet, doesn't impose disadvantage on your attack roll if the target is not within 5 feet..

Another idea to replace the Bow Experts dex/d10, "During your turn, if you make a melee attack against a creature, that creature can't make opportunity attacks against you for the rest of your turn.", and give proficiency with arrow(dex/d4) So you could do an arrow stab, step back and fire. Can't stand toe to toe like a Crossbow Expert, but gives you more mobility, and gives the melee a change to step in and stop the target from following. It steps on the toes of Mobile feat, but not sure thats an issue.

[Secret Wizard]

Kryx, just trying to be constructive here.

For a purely martial Monk archetype, how about you consider adding Ki Blast as an archetype feature, rather than a baseline one for starters...

...and then have this archetype be based around Superiority dice instead of spells?

Or at least gimme a Rogue or Fighter archetype.

[Badidea]

My expected value was on actions and in addition spell slots. The edge case I was pointing out is "A player takes an action to cast a spell that targets one enemy and has no effect on a successful save". Which covers a large number of spells in your will save category, like charm person. Your system would harm those spells far more than spells with "on successful save" conditions.

I know you're not going to respect me, but just fix your math. You clearly have an error in Fort saves for monsters and you never recalculated it with 2d10. Which should show you that both systems together only work if all players are min maxing. In particular anyone with a secondary spellcasting focus like an arcane trickster will have a DC too low to succeed consistently.

[Kryx]

His houserules for fighter no longer has an archetype that really suits the dex/mobility fighter in our current game. I wish it did, he is way better at this balanced housrules stuff than I am, but its not his job to cater to me. I've tried(and posted) my own effort, but I feel like I'm out of my depth.

Side topic: A Knight, Samurai, and Warlord could all be Dexterity based. I believe your player wanted a swashbuckler and I suggested making a fighter version of it for him. I think it totally works as a fighter and it could bring the flavor you desire. If you've created such a thing that fits with my rules I'd love to see it.

I think its the same reason as moving combat maneuvers from Battlemaster to core Fighter. PHB locked things that should be common to all in that class, to an archetype.

Open Hand had the push, trip stuff, that all monks should have access to. Any time I've seen a monk portrayed, thats the sort of stuff they all do - as well as punch and kick
But after you move all that stuff to the core class, the Open Hand is left with Quivering Palm. I agree his houserules are missing the Open Hand flavored monk, he's said so too.

This is exactly the reason I moved Open Hand into the monk class. Basic kicking and punching techniques are something that is central to the monk class. Additionally it helps fill the gap left by moving stunning strike away.

======

Another idea to replace the Bow Experts dex/d10, "During your turn, if you make a melee attack against a creature, that creature can't make opportunity attacks against you for the rest of your turn.", and give proficiency with arrow(dex/d4) So you could do an arrow stab, step back and fire. Can't stand toe to toe like a Crossbow Expert, but gives you more mobility, and gives the melee a change to step in and stop the target from following. It steps on the toes of Mobile feat, but not sure thats an issue.

This sounds like a more flavorful option than the melee with a bow part of Bow Expert. I'd still keep the other bullet of increasing damage die for mechanical balance unless you also had a good solution there.

EDIT: This is what it looks like now:

Bow Expert

• You deal d10 damage with a longbow or d8 damage with a shortbow.
• Using the Attack action, you can make a special melee attack with an arrow. You are proficient with it, and you add your Dexterity modifier to its attack and damage rolls. Its damage is piercing and its damage die is a d4. If you’re able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this attack replaces one of them. If you hit a creature with this attack you can move up to half your speed without provoking opportunity attacks from the target of your attack.

======

how about you consider adding Ki Blast as an archetype feature, rather than a baseline one for starters...

Sounds like you're using a much older version of my houserules. See the version linked in the OP.

have this archetype be based around Superiority dice instead of spells?

I don't use superiority dice in my houserules. What they were is now part of the Fighter class.

But what you're talking about is already part of the monk chassis and subclasses: Ki features. A martial monk would definitely use those (see Kensei), but an implementation for a punching and kicing monk needs inspiration and time. If you have suggestions for ki features that would be specific for a punching and kicking monk please do suggest them. I'll also happily pilfer from other WotC sources.

=====

My expected value was on actions and in addition spell slots. The edge case I was pointing out is "A player takes an action to cast a spell that targets one enemy and has no effect on a successful save". Which covers a large number of spells in your will save category, like charm person. Your system would harm those spells far more than spells with "on successful save" conditions.

Again I would point you to my saving throws spreadsheet which shows that charm person by RAW has a 44% success rate vs monsters. In my rules that success rate drops to 43%. The expectation that you have in not in line with the system that WotC designed.

I know you're not going to respect me.

This sounds hypocritical - you're asking for respect while also being incredibly disrespectful. I have tried to address your concerns with clarifying questions so I can further understand. I was met with hostility. I don't welcome that kind of hostile discussion and eventually block people who continue to do it.

You clearly have an error in Fort saves for monsters and you never recalculated it with 2d10.

2d10 just changes the average from 10.5 to 11. That increases the chance of saving throws across the board by about 2.5%. It would have no major impact on the rules otherwise. I haven't adjusted that sheet to use 2d10 for 3 reasons:
1. It takes a lot of time
2. Other people use that sheet to understand the system. Most of them don't use 2d10
3. The impact is very small and applies on all saves

In particular anyone with a secondary spellcasting focus like an arcane trickster will have a DC too low to succeed consistently.

Save	RAW	Houserules
Dex / Reflex	39%	44%
Con / Fortitude	52%	45%
Wis / Will	44%	43%

So the goal was consistent saving throw success rates across all saving throws so spells could be balanced to that success rate and to remove extreme outliers like a dumped int/cha/str/dex(high CR monsters)
So what you'll actually notice is that dex type spells like fireball now are 45% instead of 39% - meaning they are less likely to apply. Con type spells (typically a condition) are 45% instead of 52% - meaning they are more likely to apply. Wis type spells are 43% instead of 44% - meaning they are slightly more likely to apply.

So that kind of bursts the idea that Dex type saves are stronger - they actually got weaker in my rules.

Outlier saves with incredibly low success rate like int/cha were purposefully removed - that was a design goal.

Secondary spellcasting classes like Arcane Trickster were unchanged besides outliers. Their success rates will likely lag behind a full caster by about 5-15%, just as it is in RAW. Such characters that do not focus their spellcasting ability are better off picking utility based spells, which is the exact same situation as RAW.

[Kryx]

The attack makes sense for Spell Sniper, there should just be a feat version of Cantrip Initiate that allows attack or save options.
Maybe a "basics" trait, that just allows things like Prestidigitation, Thaumaturgy, Druidcraft etc. Then a feat that allows any cantrip, alongside Spell Sniper.

Edit: Or any two cantrips, going with the half-feat Magic Initiate.

I'll introduce "Magid Dabbler" in the next version, which is the cantrip part of RAW Magic Initiate:

Choose a class: bard, cleric, druid, sorcerer, warlock, or wizard. You learn two cantrips of your choice from that class’s spell list.

Your spellcasting ability for these spells depends on the class you chose: Charisma for bard, sorcerer, or warlock; Wisdom for cleric or druid; or Intelligence for wizard.

[Terra Reveene]

Bow Expert

• You deal d10 damage with a longbow or d8 damage with a shortbow.
• Using the Attack action, you can make a special melee attack with an arrow. You are proficient with it, and you add your Dexterity modifier to its attack and damage rolls. Its damage is piercing and its damage die is a d4. If you’re able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this attack replaces one of them. If you hit a creature with this attack you can move up to half your speed without provoking opportunity attacks from the target of your attack.

Wouldn't it have been simpler to change "a bow" to "an arrow" and remove the two-handed property? I could easily see an arrow being capable of dealing 1d10 damage as a makeshift knife (think of how much damage a rogue can deal with a normal knife. It wouldn't be entirely unrealistic).

I do think I prefer what you have already though, but I just thought I'd ask. One of your main concerns was that it should keep up in damage after all.
You could also quite easily keep what you already have and change the damage die to a d10. As said, wouldn't be unrealistic.

[Kryx]

d10 is too much for an arrow imo - the thing is designed to be aerodynamic, not to provide stabbing force when held in the hand. d4 seems appropriate as it matches tavern brawler's improvised weapon damage.

The arrow attack as part of an Attack action also allows you to move up to half of your speed which is quite good. The damage is less than a crossbow when both are forced into melee, but the bow has slightly longer range and the move part. If we wanted to improve that comparison we could allow the arrow to be used on a reaction as well, but I'm unsure if that's necessary since the mobility aspect is strong.

[Ugganaut]

Side topic: A Knight, Samurai, and Warlord could all be Dexterity based. I believe your player wanted a swashbuckler and I suggested making a fighter version of it for him. I think it totally works as a fighter and it could bring the flavor you desire. If you've created such a thing that fits with my rules I'd love to see it.

I went with Skirmisher and Scout as the options, just fixed up the post. Not great at design, so used the UA material, the Fancy Footwork from Swashbuckler, and your features which seem balanced. They still need some work I think.

Bow Expert

• You deal d10 damage with a longbow or d8 damage with a shortbow.
• Using the Attack action, you can make a special melee attack with an arrow. You are proficient with it, and you add your Dexterity modifier to its attack and damage rolls. Its damage is piercing and its damage die is a d4. If you’re able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this attack replaces one of them. If you hit a creature with this attack you can move up to half your speed without provoking opportunity attacks from the target of your attack.

Looks good. The second point seems overly complicated.
1. Arrow is an improvised weapon, which you are gaining proficiency in. So "proficiency and [d4, piercing, Light, Finesse]" are all you need, then it works normally with Extra Attack.
2. Is the granted no-OA movement part of your normal movement? If yes, then its not necessary to mention half your speed, unless you are making movement cost double. If no, then you could just say "increase speed by X feet and you don't provoke opportunity attacks from the target of your attack".
You could basically grant the Mobile feat benefits, but only while using the arrow as a melee weapon.

I'll introduce "Magid Dabbler" in the next version, which is the cantrip part of RAW Magic Initiate.

Perfect

[Badidea]

KRYX = Houserule saves and 2d10

DC 15 save (Mind blast from a Mind Flayer)
RAW +0 bonus = 30%
KRYX +0 bonus = 21%
KRYX +1 bonus = 28%

DC18 save (Mind Blast from an Elder Brain)
RAW +0 bonus = 15%
KRYX +0 bonus = 6%
KRYX +1 bonus = 10%

DC10 save (death save)
RAW +0 bonus = 55%
KRYX +0 bonus = 64%

Against DC 12 charm person (Arcane trickster lv 3, 14 int)
RAW +0 bonus = 45%
KRYX +0 bonus = 45%
RAW +1 bonus = 50%
KRYX +1 bonus = 55%
RAW +2 bonus = 55%
KRYX +2 bonus = 64%

Do the math. You average too much stuff.

Note that for KRYX houserules, it likely gives a +1 to will saves over RAW. Fort and con saves have equal bonuses, because there is functionally no change except 2d10 which you didn't calculate for your saves or spreadsheet. Let me point this out again, you changed nothing for fort but half the fort numbers on page 2 changed. Reflex saves will have about equal bonuses if you average everything, but likely lower in practice since most PCs will not have both high STR and high DEX. So for DEX favoring PCs (wizards/sorc/warlock, finesse, rogue/bard, monk...) they have lower saves vs fireball and higher saves vs being knocked prone.

Frequency on 2d10 [11=10%], [10,12 = 9%], [9,13 = 8%], [8,14 = 7%], [7,15 = 6%], [6,16 = 5%], [5,17 = 4%], [4,18 = 3%], [3,19 = 2%], [2,20 = 1%].

[Kryx]

I went with Skirmisher and Scout as the options, just fixed up the post. Not great at design, so used the UA material, the Fancy Footwork from Swashbuckler, and your features which seem balanced. They still need some work I think.

You party really hates rogues, huh? I'm having a bit of an internal debate. Rogue is definitely more applicable to the swashbuckler and scout theme than a Fighter is. The question is, should they be duplicated on the fighter? I'm not sure. I wasn't a fan of the fighter implementation of a scout in the UA.

I'll check these out later.

Looks good. The second point seems overly complicated.
1. Arrow is an improvised weapon, which you are gaining proficiency in. So "proficiency and [d4, piercing, Light, Finesse]" are all you need, then it works normally with Extra Attack.

I can simply the improvised weapon part, that's true, but otherwise the wording here is a mix of Shove and Monk's Martial arts. I know of no example where weapon terms like light and finesse are attached. Improvised with proficiency and ability to use Dex seems far more in line with 5e and would also prevent things like TWF with arrows or using an arrow for defensive duelist that you'd get from attaching the light or finesse term.

2. Is the granted no-OA movement part of your normal movement? If yes, then its not necessary to mention half your speed, unless you are making movement cost double. If no, then you could just say "increase speed by X feet and you don't provoke opportunity attacks from the target of your attack"

See Manuevering Attack from the Fighter - the wording is very similar. Also Blade Flourish (Mobile Flourish) from the UA: "You can then immediately use your reaction to move up to your speed to an unoccupied space within 5 feet of the target." I'll add a reaction cost to my version.

Thanks for the critiques. I'll clean up the wording a bit.

EDIT:

When you use an arrow as an improvised melee weapon you are proficient with it, and you can use your Dexterity modifier instead of Strength for the attack and damage rolls with it. If you hit a creature with this attack you can then immediately use your reaction to move up to half your speed without provoking opportunity attacks from the target of your attack.

[Kryx]

Houserule saves and 2d10

Your complaint is really about the 2d10 system having a non-linear progression. (anydice).

2d10 is an item mentioned on 1 page of my houserules. If you don't like 2d10 then don't use it. It is a highly subjective topic and is not required for my houserules, at all. We've been trying it and enjoying it so far.

Note that for KRYX houserules, it likely gives a +1 to will saves over RAW.

This is very incorrect. Looking at first level:
A Wizard who previously had 65% on intelligence saves or a Cleric who had 65% on Wisdom saves now has 55% on Will saves, most likely. A Wizard's Dex save has likely gone from 65% or 50% to 45%.
A Martial character likely has Wisdom as their tertiary stat in RAW which gives them 50% while in my houserules that'd be 45%.

So the exact issue you bring up is actually the exact opposite if you look at my success rates sheet.


Your dislike of 2d10 is entirely your choice and I have no intention of trying to convince you that it's right for you - that's a decision you and your group would have to make. But you're spreading entirely incorrect information in other regards. Almost everything else you've brought up is entirely incorrect and you'd see so if you looked at the spreadsheet.

[Ugganaut]

You party really hates rogues, huh?

hehe, don't hate rogues For all of the 90's, our main game was a thief based city campaign in Waterdeep(started in 2nd edition). One of the characters was a medium armored fighter, dual scimitars, with hide and spot skills, and he was our lookout and muscle, but very uncharismatic. He was into parkour type stuff, and hit and run tactics. In our current game, set in Mirabar, that character has taken up the adventuring life with our current group. He was the dark broady sort, so while the Swashbuckler fighting style fits, the flavor doesn't. The definition of Skirmisher fit him quite well, which is why I think it'll suit him. Expert Flanker has a rogue vibe(we use the Flanking=Advantage from DMG).

I'm having a bit of an internal debate. Rogue is definitely more applicable to the swashbuckler and scout theme than a Fighter is. The question is, should they be duplicated on the fighter? I'm not sure. I wasn't a fan of the fighter implementation of a scout in the UA.

The Scout in the UA seemed a bit...shoe horned with the superiority dice. Not saying mine is any better, but your system allows more room to explore some other features. Personally, the fighter scout is something I was after. In that Mirabar game, I'm playing a Barbarian 5/Ranger(without spells) 3. This was before Scout came out. I took ranger, because I wanted to be a great tracker, hunter and guide, but it was hard to do outside ranger - a class with nature magic, which I didn't want him to have. A Scout, with the Natural Explorer feature, is exactly what I was after, a martial survivalist type without magic.
Scout is such a general term, it fits a number of classes, including fighter, ranger and rogue in my opinion.

I can simply the improvised weapon part, that's true, but otherwise the wording here is a mix of Shove and Monk's Martial arts. I know of no example where weapon terms like light and finesse are attached. Improvised with proficiency and ability to use Dex seems far more in line with 5e and would also prevent things like TWF with arrows or using an arrow for defensive duelist that you'd get from attaching the light or finesse term.

This is why you get paid the big bucks I didn't even think of TWF/DD etc.

See Manuevering Attack from the Fighter - the wording is very similar. Also Blade Flourish (Mobile Flourish) from the UA: "You can then immediately use your reaction to move up to your speed to an unoccupied space within 5 feet of the target." I'll add a reaction cost to my version.

Ah ok, so its in addition to your normal movement. That is nice, get some extra distance at the cost of your reaction.

[Strill]

Your complaint is really about the 2d10 system having a non-linear progression. (anydice).

2d10 is an item mentioned on 1 page of my houserules. If you don't like 2d10 then don't use it. It is a highly subjective topic and is not required for my houserules, at all. We've been trying it and enjoying it so far.

What about this is subjective? He's pointing out that 2d10 messes up saving throw math, which is calculated under 1d20. I think it's rather important to be informed that using all of your houserules at once, does not function as described.

This is very incorrect. Looking at first level:
A Wizard who previously had 65% on intelligence saves or a Cleric who had 65% on Wisdom saves now has 55% on Will saves, most likely. A Wizard's Dex save has likely gone from 65% or 50% to 45%.
A Martial character likely has Wisdom as their tertiary stat in RAW which gives them 50% while in my houserules that'd be 45%.

So the exact issue you bring up is actually the exact opposite if you look at my success rates sheet.

All of the calculations in your success rates sheet are done using 1d20, so it's not really relevant to what he was arguing.

[Kryx]

What about this is subjective? He's pointing out that 2d10 messes up saving throw math, which is calculated under 1d20. I think it's rather important to be informed that using all of your houserules at once, does not function as described.

2d10 changes the game, I haven't refuted that. I'm refuting his claim that my combination system is broken due to 2d10. The same non-linear scaling issues he's raising exist if you use 2d10 with the RAW rules so the complaint isn't about my rules, but is about 2d10 in general.

2d10 is a subjective choice. Each person will view the pros and cons differently.

All of the calculations in your success rates sheet are done using 1d20, so it's not really relevant to what he was arguing.

He said that +1 was easier to get in my system of combined saves. Those percentages show the exact opposite of what he said.

[Badidea]

Players will place their stats where they do the most good. In your system players will recognize that a 14, 10, 8 (from std array) in mental stats is a strict average improvement on savings throws over RAW, particularly with the 14 in int and the 8 in wis. So it will push them to select 1 primary mental stat (likely casting stat) and 1 mental dump stat. And never dump stat a physical stat. Min-maxers will always recognize this.

RAW [ +2, +0, -1 ], KRYX [ +1, +1, +1 ]. So players net +2.

And if you look at your numbers, comparing Monster/NPC will save to NPC int, wis and cha saves. It is a 5+% increase on int at all levels, which is what you set out to do. This is the same as a plus 1 save bonus at low levels. This is partly why I added that note about KRYX +1 is about equal to RAW +0 for will. But it's almost +6 at 20. You did this intentionally, I was merely pointing it out again so people compared similar saves. But if we look more closely at high levels Will saves beat all three other saves. Cha saves are consistently 3% below Will, which is okay but why do these effects need the nerf. In particular almost all the cha save effects are PC actions, so this is hurting player choice. Wis saves at about level 13 are hitting that +1 difference/5% gap, again a nerf to mind effects. These are just things the stand out in the table.

Even if Cha and Int saves are rare, wisdom saves are common and many classes do not use wisdom. Also as a reminder I picked Charm PERSON, as it has restricted usage. It only works on humanoids NPCs, so characters with Cha, Int or Wis scores that are similar to PCs. It is also a low level spell where your averages suggest it works better, but your averages are for ALL monsters not the subsection of humanoid monsters. So cutting out everything not humanoid you might see that those int and cha average scores go way up, wisdom might even rise. So this is a strict nerf to charm person, as many NPCs will have that extra +1 or +2 that the averaging gives PCs. As they are basically PCs. So a wizard is suddenly less likely to be charmed. And since charm person has no "on successful save" effect it makes the spell less useful and less likely to be known by any PC.

You are too focused on averages. Examples matter, particularly when they are typical cases.

A rogue with a high dex (18) and low str (10) will be hurt more by fireball (+10% on 1d20, for 2d10 it could be as high as +19% but more likely 9 -15%). This also makes evasion less powerful. So fireball is stronger in your system. And since dex is a more common stat compared to str, it hurts many classes against AoE damage effects. Reflex saves are just lower than dex saves for most classes.

But this rogue will resist being knocked prone more, which is a AC buff at range and an AC penalty in melee. So we see your system has effects on combat choices your players will make, a rogue is more likely going to be in melee range. Because being knocked prone is less likely and it reduces the chance a fireball will hit the rogue.

And I pointed out the 2d10 issue, because it negates your main reason to change the system. A character with a low will save is even more likely to fail saves against mind flayers on the 2d10 system.

[Strill]

Players will place their stats where they do the most good. In your system players will recognize that a 14, 10, 8 (from std array) in mental stats is a strict average improvement on savings throws over RAW, particularly with the 14 in int and the 8 in wis. So it will push them to select 1 primary mental stat (likely casting stat) and 1 mental dump stat. And never dump stat a physical stat. Min-maxers will always recognize this.

He accounts for that in his spreadsheet. He has three different stat spreads in the spreadsheet. One "Fighter", one "Rogue" and one "Wizard".

[Badidea]

He accounts for that in his spreadsheet. He has three different stat spreads in the spreadsheet. One "Fighter", one "Rogue" and one "Wizard".

I know he accounts for it. I've read his spreadsheet. But he commented that I was "incorrect" that will save is likely at +1 bonus compared to RAW, where he showed that 2 classes have "lower" rates. But I am correct in saying that most classes get a extra +1 bonus on Will saves, which is why I mentioned it is "likely". And the fact it is in his Table shows that he should agree with me, but he doesn't.

It's not a huge point, just frustrating dealing with someone who doesn't even acknowledge their own system's facts. It's either that or he's not reading all of my posts.

[Kryx]

I know he accounts for it. I've read his spreadsheet. But he commented that I was "incorrect" that will save is likely at +1 bonus compared to RAW

I dont think you have read my spreadsheet as you keep bringing up topics that have been addressed there. For example:

RAW [ +2, +0, -1 ], KRYX [ +1, +1, +1 ]. So players net +2.

Using standard 27 point buy and a good race at level 1:
"Fighter": +5 Strength, +5 Secondary ability (likely Con), +2 tertiary ability (likely wis), +0 other ability, +0 other ability, -1 other ability
"Fighter": +5 Fort, +1 Ref, +1 Will
So Con/Fort remains the same. Strength goes down by 4 while Dex goes up by 1. Wis goes down by 1. Int goes up by 1. Charisma goes up by 1.

"Wizard": +5 Int, +4 Wis, +2 Dex, +2 Con, -1 Str, -1 Cha
"Wizard": +4 Will, +0 Ref, +2 Fort
So Con/Fort remains the same. Int goes down by 1, Wis stays the same, and Charisma goes up by 5. Dex goes down by 2 while Str goes up by 1.

Most of the "strong" saves are either the same or slightly down. The biggest change is in the outliers of Charisma and Intelligence. Those outliers being brought in line was by design of the combined system. The RAW system encourages 5-15% success rates, which this avoids.


This will be my last post in reply to you on this topic. It sounds like you don't like the goals of my system, so don't use it. We don't need to spam other users with your disagreement.

[Badidea]

Ignoring relevant criticism does not help you. You don't see the flaw with a rogue having a much worse save against fireballs and dragon breath attacks? And how that harms abilities that are based around saves. Or that charm effects against undead, constructs and oozes are part of your calculations for low level will saves. Suggesting your numbers are low. Which would raise your overall rate likely in the 3-7% range. And as I have said, mind effects are more vulnerable to failure rates.

I don't like your system because it's sloppy and hurts players in a number of in game ways that are difficult to notice. And you have it as part of your signature and nested in a set of other house rules, as if it is perfectly balanced both independently and in your houserules. But it's a lie, playtesting would highlight the flaws I am pointing out.

But if you won't reply. I will just point out that Kryx's Fort system is identical to Con saves, which Kryx acknowledged as an outlier for having too many successful saves. And Kryx decided to balanced Reflex and Will to have similar rates to the outlier Con saves. The premise is wrong.

[Kryx]

September 16th, 2017
Feats

• Removed variant ASI progression
• Added Magic Dabbler
• Bow Expert changed to be less mechanical and more flavorful in its differences from Crossbow Expert

Magus

• Cantrips moved back to 2nd level

Monk

• Added Way of the Open Hand
• Removed Stunning Strike from Long Death (it's part of Open Hand). It has Touch of Death instead

[Ugganaut]

Not seeing the changes in the OP.

[Kryx]

It should be updated now.

[Ugganaut]

Yep, that worked. Open Hand looks simple but nice.

Clerical stuff: The Blur duration is missing "Concentration", and the Open Hand Stunning Strike is missing "Starting at level 11".

Clarifications.
1. Rapid Strike: On every attack, or just once per turn?
2. Barbarians Rage and Danger Sense features: Do these now both give advantage to Reflex saves in your system(Fort/Ref/Will)?
3. I noticed Magus owns GFB and Booming Blade. Did you remove melee attack cantrips from the general populace for balance reasons?

[Kryx]

Open Hand looks simple but nice.

Thanks!

The Blur duration is missing "Concentration"

The Spell? That's purposeful to buff Blur to compete with Mirror Image by taking away Blur's Concentration.

the Open Hand Stunning Strike is missing "Starting at level 11".

Will fix, thanks!

1. Rapid Strike: On every attack, or just once per turn?

Rapid Strike is from the UA. I will readd the bonus action cost on the next version of my rules.

2. Barbarians Rage and Danger Sense features: Do these now both give advantage to Reflex saves in your system(Fort/Ref/Will)?

Rage would give advantage on Strength checks and Reflex saving throws.
Danger Sense would give advantage on Reflex saving throws.

There is some overlap in combat, but Danger Sense is still a great ability. It would apply for dungeon crawling with traps, rounds in combat before the barbarian has raged, or rounds in combat when the babarian is out of rages.

3. I noticed Magus owns GFB and Booming Blade. Did you remove melee attack cantrips from the general populace for balance reasons?

Yes, those cantrips are removed. They are nothing close to the balance of the other cantrips in the game according to my spell balance calculations.

[Ugganaut]

The Spell? That's purposeful to buff Blur to compete with Mirror Image by taking away Blur's Concentration.

Ah ok, makes sense.

Rapid Strike is from the UA. I will readd the bonus action cost on the next version of my rules.

Don't know all the UA stuff too well, missed that. Bonus action makes sense.

There is some overlap in combat, but Danger Sense is still a great ability. It would apply for dungeon crawling with traps, rounds in combat before the barbarian has raged, or rounds in combat when the babarian is out of rages.

Agreed, just wanted to make sure I had it right.

Yes, those cantrips are removed. They are nothing close to the balance of the other cantrips in the game according to my spell balance calculations.

I'll miss them

Thanks for the quick response.

[Ugganaut]

Illusion of Calm(1st lvl spell): If creatures can’t see you moving, and just sees an illusionary double standing still, then effectively you are invisible? Is this one minute invisibility with a built in illusionary distraction, or is it supposed to be only while you're in that square?

[Kryx]

Illusion of calm in mechanical terms: Movement doesn't provoke opportunity attacks (like Dodge), but for 1 minute. The illusonary duplicate is on top of you, not left in a spot you leave.

It's kind of a bad spell tbh. It's a port of http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-sp...lusion-of-calm which is stronger due to PF's rules about opportunity attacks and spellcasting.

[Ugganaut]

Yeah, I don't really get it. So an illusion of you standing still moves around with you. That would look....odd

Edit: That spell does say its the first square of movement, so it is only while you're in the same square. I'd say it should be "invisibility while you're in the square, until you attack, or until you leave the square". Would grant you non-attack benefits like picking a pocket, adv on first attack, disadv to enemies attacking you until they hit.

[Kryx]

Ignore the wording I currently use, it's confusing. The spell has nothing to do with invisibility or even spaces. Try: "You create an illusory double that makes it look like you are standing still, even when you are not. While under the effects of this spell, your movement doesn’t provoke opportunity attacks."

Essentially you have an illusionary facade that others see. I also increased it to 10 minutes to make it decent.

Adding other factors like "creatures have disadvantage to notice you using a Finesse check" or something similar would be flavorful. Disadvantage on attacking would be too strong - see blur. Advantage on the first attack could possibly work.