A few variant rules...

[WilliamS]

So, I've come up with a few variant rules that I thought I'd run by people, see if they might just be genius...

Hitting AC: I've made the change that hitting Armour Class forces a 5' step directly back. If that space is occupied, the creature behind falls prone. I know people have been complaining a bit about stationary combat and I'm one of them. This makes the battlefield a bit more active. This was, overall, inspired by a Chicken-vs-Peter Family Guy fight scene.

Weapon/Armour Damage: On a crit miss with a weapon, the weapon may be lost (depending on a Reflex) and takes 1 damage. When hit by a crit, armour takes 1 damage. Craft Matters!

No Class Skills: I've just recently considered this, and the players seem to like it. There are no longer Class Skills. Skill Points are still determined by class, but now a Fighter can lie and a Wizard can sneak.

So, any ideas?

[ChattyDM]

First of, Welcome to our Forum!

We Definitively use the no class skill rule and it's been doing great... especially in non balanced parties.

I don't personally use Fumbles as it tends to screw players much more than it screws monsters.... the DM rolls a gazzilion dice and gets more fumbles, true, but each fumble affects a monster once... a player always fumble with his PC...  Damaging armour, I'm all for it and if you play with Armour HP I'd go even as far as dealing the non-multiplied damage on the armour (minus hardness).

As for pushback with hit... as long as you don't play with pits and crevices... that's fair... but if there are... then rest assured that PCs will exploit this and drop monsters to thier death all the time... If you,re okay with that (and players are okay with having the same done to them) well go wild!




 

[Graham]

Ugh!  Fumbles suck.

We essentially do the No Class skills one, though most of my players take the class skills first for flavour anyways.

Hitting AC: I've made the change that hitting Armour Class forces a 5' step directly back. If that space is occupied, the creature behind falls prone. I know people have been complaining a bit about stationary combat and I'm one of them. This makes the battlefield a bit more active. This was, overall, inspired by a Chicken-vs-Peter Family Guy fight scene.

Hmm... one thing you need to consider is that most of the power a 3.Xe fighter-type has at high levels comes from their ability to make multiple attacks in a round.  By making this impossible to do (at least against the same opponent), you decrease their viability as a class significantly.

That said, the mini-bull-rush/trip is also very powerful.  I think it may actually be too powerful, however, as there is no way to keep from being forced over the edge of a cliff.

If the melee classes can not follow the opponent, as well, I foresee the following.

_ = empty space
X, O = creature

_XO_ <- X hits O
_X_O <- O moves back from hit
_XO_ <- O moves up and hits X once
X_O_ <- X moves back from hit

so unless they're fighting on a catwalk, or against a cliff, all you will have done is reduce the number of attacks the players (and monster) get in a round.  And, as I said before, most of the viability of a Fighter in 3.Xe is based on multiple attacks in a round.

[Yan]

There is a few weakness with the push back as describe like graham said. I personally would do the following to make it a more viable option.

It's more interesting if it gives option then if it's only and extra mechanic to keep track of.
So first you give the option to the attack to try to push is opponent or not (this removes the issue of the full attack fighter that Graham mentioned).
Secondly you gives option to the one receiving the attack to make it harder to abuse. Here's a few idea:
-He can resist the push by making an attack check with a DC equals to attacker's roll + 2 for each size categories over the attackers or -2 for each below.
-He chooses where he goes in the 3 square away from his attacker.
-Use both of these suggestion

Extra option make for fun combat. 

My 2 cents

[WilliamS]

I suppose I should have followed through completely. The attacker can follow and allow for additional attacks. We don't play with many catwalks or cliffs (yet!), so that hasn't been completely a problem. What I would imagine would be something along the line of Reflex to grab a ledge or a Tumble, Jump, whatever, to avoid a too-quick demise.

[Graham]

I suppose I should have followed through completely. The attacker can follow and allow for additional attacks. We don't play with many catwalks or cliffs (yet!), so that hasn't been completely a problem. What I would imagine would be something along the line of Reflex to grab a ledge or a Tumble, Jump, whatever, to avoid a too-quick demise.

Even with that, there's the same problem, though not as severe.

Push them to a cliff, and at most they're hanging on for their lives with no way to resist.

Push them towards a wall, boom, automatically prone with no way to resist.

This house rule makes a full attack more effective at bull rushing and tripping than bull rushing and tripping are.  And it gives the defender no viable way to resist it.


My two biggest problems with this, however:

1) Gnome vs Dragon.  Gnome makes a full attack, and pushes the Colossal Dragon back 20 feet.

This is extreme, of course, but how about Halfling VS Dwarf?  Or commoner vs level 20 Paladin?

An attacker shouldn't always be able to push an opponent back.


2) When fighting, if skilled at doing so, moving back is almost never forced, unless you're knocked over.  Rather, moving back from an attack is a conscious defensive choice.  (It can also be due to fear, but that's another story.)

As such, the defending creature should never be forced to back up (or fall prone).  He should be able to stand his ground if he chooses, and should gain some defensive benefit from moving back if doing so.



Now, after that rant, I'm actually going to be helpful here.  Try the following:

New combat option: Soften Blow

When a creature would be hit by a melee attack, he may choose to make a reflex save, with a DC equal to the attack roll.  If he succeeds on this roll, he gains DR 2/- against the attack.  (This DR is applied before, and stacks with, other DR).

Whether the roll succeeds or not, the defending creature moves directly backwards 5 feet.  The attacker may follow as a free action.

I haven't decided yet whether I'd have this movement count against their movement for the round.  It should be good either way.