Break These Houserules!

[PsyBomb]

I've seen this around here before, but in order to test the waters a bit before applying these in the group I run I ask that anyone here try to spot where things can go horribly wrong. While I am experienced in CharOp and in the systems, I'm not perfect and my players for this group are ENDLESSLY creative (though will generally refrain from game-busting shenanigans). I am asking specifically for either 3.5 or PF, since the group is playing PF but 3.5 stuff allowed with DM approval.

Rule #1: Stacking DR
-All sources of DR with identical penetration conditions stack. For example, a 7th level barbarian wearing Adamantine Chainmail would have DR 3/-. I am trying to encourage alternate defenses here, since otherwise it is very difficult for players to get meaningful amounts of DR (Energy resist does not suffer this problem, for the most part)

Rule #2: Feat Prerequisites
-You may take any feat without needing its prerequisites. However, the feat is only active while all of its prereqs are met, by whatever means. For example, you could take Large and in Charge without being permanently Large size or larger, but unless your friendly spellcaster casts Enlarge Person on you it won't be doing anything. Intent is to allow class features and item effects that emulate feats but don't actually give them to be used as the prereqs.

Rule #3: Stacking SR
-SR sources stack, though each past the first contributes 10 less than its stated amount. If an Incarnate has Spellward Shirt shaped for 17 SR and put on armor enchanted with Greater SR (19), he would have 26 SR total. Again, trying to encourage its use. Haven't had it pop up on any player willingly outside of class features that give a ton in one go (AKA Diamond Soul).

Rule #4: Masterwork Clothing
-A set of clothing can be made Masterwork by adding 300g to its cost. This will allow it to be enchanted like armor (which just happens to have +0 AC and no ASF/Max Dex), without counting as wearing "armor" for class features and such. Let the monk have a +1 Fortification Gi!

[phaedrusxy]

For #2, does that also disable all feats which require the "disabled" feat? For example, I want Divine Metamagic (Persistent Spell). I get Extend via some temporary means, take Persistent, and also take DMM (Persistent). Then the effect granting me Extend expires. I still have Persistent (but it is disabled). So I technically still qualify for DMM: Persistent? Or is it also disabled?

I'm sure someone could come up with a way to abuse the stacking SR and DR, but honestly those things are so infrequently used, and are purely defensive, so I doubt it would even matter much to the overall game.

[kitep]

Stacking DR - this all depends on how optimized your group is.  Or really, how optimized the monsters are.  If they're charging and doing 400 points of damage, stacking DR won't matter.  OTOH, if they're doing a d8, stacking will soon negate all damage.  There's probably a sweet spot, which will of course change as they level up.

I'd say try the changes and see what happens.  But let the players know this is a trial period and you reserve the right to cancel them (which should come with the right for them to rework their characters somewhat if they make decisions based on the new rules).  Or even make it into an adventure with the gods of chaos playing with the rules of physics.

Good luck!

[ksbsnowowl]

The SR stacking could allow the DM to make monsters that are untouchable by any "SR: yes" spells.  But, as the DM, you can keep those in check.

[CaptRory]

The more the players abuse the rules, the more the DM has license to abuse the rules.

Just let the players know you're trying something new and if it doesn't work out they may have to adjust a few things.

[Iainuki]

The amounts of DR available to players would be hard to stack up to the point that they'd be effective even with stacking, and even then, monsters with high-damage attacks should have no trouble getting through, and of course abilities that don't do HP damage wouldn't be affected under most conditions.  I doubt I would bother stacking DR even if I could.  Stacking SR is similar, only in many respects having SR is bad for PCs because it prevents members of your own party from casting spells on you in combat unless you waste actions lowering it first.  It will stop monsters with SLAs but not those with other forms of offense.  I would still actively avoid getting SR.  I've always assumed that the rule you use for feats is the default position (you weren't letting magic items count for ability score prerequisites before?), and I seriously doubt letting people enchant clothing will break anything.  I don't see any of these causing serious problems, particularly if you're on top of things with the monsters.

[PsyBomb]

For #2, does that also disable all feats which require the "disabled" feat? For example, I want Divine Metamagic (Persistent Spell). I get Extend via some temporary means, take Persistent, and also take DMM (Persistent). Then the effect granting me Extend expires. I still have Persistent (but it is disabled). So I technically still qualify for DMM: Persistent? Or is it also disabled?

I'm sure someone could come up with a way to abuse the stacking SR and DR, but honestly those things are so infrequently used, and are purely defensive, so I doubt it would even matter much to the overall game.

It would disable the entire chain. A disabled feat would lose all effect, including acting as prerequisites to other feats. I will admit, part of the SR/DR shtick is to allow me to put together a boss encounter much like the Twin Emperors from WoW, where one is effectively magic-immune and the other is effectively physical-immune.

The amounts of DR available to players would be hard to stack up to the point that they'd be effective even with stacking, and even then, monsters with high-damage attacks should have no trouble getting through, and of course abilities that don't do HP damage wouldn't be affected under most conditions.  I doubt I would bother stacking DR even if I could.  Stacking SR is similar, only in many respects having SR is bad for PCs because it prevents members of your own party from casting spells on you in combat unless you waste actions lowering it first.  It will stop monsters with SLAs but not those with other forms of offense.  I would still actively avoid getting SR.  I've always assumed that the rule you use for feats is the default position (you weren't letting magic items count for ability score prerequisites before?), and I seriously doubt letting people enchant clothing will break anything.  I don't see any of these causing serious problems, particularly if you're on top of things with the monsters.

Nah, default rules state than non-permanent effects cannot be used as prerequisites unless the feat/PrC/etc specifically states otherwise. Eventually, if this works out I intend to use it to include PrCs as well (losing all class abilities that key off the emulated feature if you lose the feature).

Glad to see that overall these won't be game-shattering. For the most part it is just to explore further possibilities and loosen up some of the harder roadblocks. Like I said before, these players are VERY creative, and half the fun of DMing for them is watching to see how they solve some of the problems that crop up.

[Iainuki]

Nah, default rules state than non-permanent effects cannot be used as prerequisites unless the feat/PrC/etc specifically states otherwise. Eventually, if this works out I intend to use it to include PrCs as well (losing all class abilities that key off the emulated feature if you lose the feature).

Where?

[phaedrusxy]

Nah, default rules state than non-permanent effects cannot be used as prerequisites unless the feat/PrC/etc specifically states otherwise. Eventually, if this works out I intend to use it to include PrCs as well (losing all class abilities that key off the emulated feature if you lose the feature).

Where?

No where, unless he's talking about another house rule. I'm quite sure there is no such rule within D&D 3.5.

[PsyBomb]

I'd need to search for it, but I'm pretty certain it's there. If not then I've been playing it wrong for a while.

EDIT: Huh, looks like I was wrong. It doesn't say it anywhere that I can easily find.

[Jackinthegreen]

On the subject of prerequisites, there is the ruling in Complete Warrior page 16 talking about not meeting prereqs.  Here's the full text spoilered and as written in the PDF:

(click to show/hide)

Meeting Class Requirements: It’s possible for a character
to take levels in a prestige class and later be in a position
where the character no longer qualifi es to be a member of the
class. An alignment change, levels lost because of character
death, or the loss of a magic item that granted an important
ability are examples of events that can make a character ineligible
to advance farther in a prestige class.
If a character no longer meets the requirements for a
prestige class, he or she loses the benefi t of any class features
or other special abilities granted by the class. The character
retains Hit Dice gained from advancing in the class as well as
any improvements to base attack bonus and base save bonuses
that the class provided.

[phaedrusxy]

I'd need to search for it, but I'm pretty certain it's there. If not then I've been playing it wrong for a while.

EDIT: Huh, looks like I was wrong. It doesn't say it anywhere that I can easily find.

It's a very common assumption/unwritten house rule. You're not the first.

[PlzBreakMyCampaign]

Not possible.

[Captnq]

Who needs masterwork clothes?

BONDLEAF WRAP - ARMS AND EQUIPMENT GUIDE (3.0) Bondleaf wraps are each crafted from a single enormous leaf found on magical trees. A bondleaf wrap is inactive until worn for 24 hours. During this time, it grows into the skin, drawing water and nutrients from its host. Afterward, as a standard action, you can command it to wrap around your body.

For 1,000 gp you can have a leaf that wraps around your body as a standard action. It provides AC 1 and no ACP or ASF or MDP.

Now, strange things is, I don't believe this leaf is masterwork, so it would cost you another 150 gp to be able to enchant it. However, I would go so far as to say, if it's part of my body, it's not "armor" as far as monks are concerned. But that's just me.

BTW...

A masterwork suit of armor or shield costs an extra 150 gp over and above the normal cost for that type of armor or shield.

Why the masterwork clothes cost 300 gp?

[CaptRory]

Because its almost impossible to find someone with Craft: Tailor?

[Maat Mons]

With the feat thing, you could, for example, take Robilar's gambit at first level, even though you'd have to wait until 12th level to use it.  With feat retraining, it means your feat "slots" no longer have varying utility based on when you first got them. 

Arms and Equipment Guide has rules on page 130 for adding armor special abilities to bracers of armor.  This would basically be the same thing for a different body slot. 

[Raineh Daze]

On the one hand, the leaf gets around the armour thing. Maybe. On the other, 'enter symbiotic relationship with plant' doesn't seem like it should be required for monks to get armour enchantments.

[Unbeliever]

I think #1 will be fine.  DR isn't easy to get without a significant commitment.  The same might apply to #3 as well.  But, I'm more confident that the DR won't wreck things significantly. 

As Ksbsnowowl touched on, it's actually a lot easier for NPCs to gain both DR and SR, namely through templates, etc.  So, I'd be worried these house rules are actually going to work pretty heavily against the PCs rather than inducing them to change their builds too much.  Just something to keep an eye on.