My group is burned out on the fiddliness of 4e D&D, so I've been drafted to run a short campaign of Lamentations of the Flame Princess.  To me, a new campaign means new house rules.  Here are the ones I've been kicking around; feel free to steal these or tell me why they suck.

The Basics
1) attributes will be rolled via the 4d6-drop-lowest method.  That's how we've done it since the 2e AD&D days and I don't see a reason to change that now.

2) Armor Class is 10 + Dex bonus, Armor bonus, etc.  I'm not sure why LotFP uses 12+, but I like combat to be low on whiff and quick to finish.

3) Max. Hit Points at first level.  

Next up, the more interesting stuff.

Skills

LotFP has a nice little compact skill system, but it annoys me a little that it is completely disconnected from that six standard attributes.  Here's my house rule to give this a bit more flavor: each skill has a related attribute; if your attribute is high enough to net you a bonus (13+) you get an extra "pip" in that skill.  

Skills and their related attributes:
Climbing - Strength
Searching - Wisdom
Find Traps - Wisdom
Foraging/Hunting - Constitution
Languages - Intelligence
Sleight of Hand - Dexterity
Sneak Attack - no attribute bonus (must be a Specialist to put pips in this skill)
Stealth - Dexterity
Tinkering - Dexterity

More Robust Classes

I'd like to have 1st level characters with a bit more oomph, since I anticipate this campaign being deadly.  Here are some additions I plan to make to the classes:

Fighter
Fighters gets bonuses to melee and missile weapon damage rolls based off their attribute bonuses.  (Other classes do not get bonuses to damage rolls).  Str for melee; Dex for missiles.  So, a fighter with an 18 Str gets +3 to all melee damage rolls.

Specialist
Specialists will get more than the normal amount of "pips" to spread out among the skills.  I'm thinking 6 or 8 instead of 4 as per the rulebook.  Probably 6.

Magic-User
Magic-users will get bonus 1st levels spells equal to their Intelligence bonus.  So, if you start with an Int of 16, you can cast 3 spells per day (1 as per normal +2 from Int.)

Cleric
Clerics get bonus spells as per Magic-users, but use Wisdom to determine how many.

Elf, Dwarf, Halfling
These don't exist as character classes.  All characters in this campaign will be human because this isn't a Tolkien rip-off.  Elves are terrifyingly capricious monsters that live int he forest and steal children; dwarfs are misshapen crafters of magic items that live in seculsion; halflings are hillbilly cannibals, etc.

Mutilclassing and Leveling

No tracking of experience points; that shit is for accountants.  Characters will all level up at the same time, when I say they do.

I am going to allow riotous multiclassing.  When you go up a level, you can either add that level to your current class or take the first level of an additional class.  So, a second level character could be a Specialist 2 or a Specialist 1/Fighter 1.

I realize that since class benefits are fairly front-loaded in LotFP having more than once class will be a very attractive option.  I'm totally ok with this because characters like the Grey Mouser or Conan definitely had a nice mix of abilities and that weird sword & sorcery vibe is what I am going for.

The only caveat is that you can't have levels in both cleric and magic-user, because of the alignment conflict that would cause.

Last one for now, but Jeff's Consolation Prize Mechanic is too cool not to use.

Good stuff.

Quote from: misterguignol;448651Last one for now, but Jeff's Consolation Prize Mechanic is too cool not to use.

My god, will you have a plate of cupcakes and a box of kleenex to console the guy who doesn't hit?

Quote from: thedungeondelver;448655My god, will you have a plate of cupcakes and a box of kleenex to console the guy who doesn't hit?

Are you one of those "the way I pretend to be a pretty elf princess is totally manly!!!" types or something?

Quote from: misterguignol;4486462) Armor Class is 10 + Dex bonus, Armor bonus, etc.  I'm not sure why LotFP uses 12+, but I like combat to be low on whiff and quick to finish.

The idea I'm guessing is to have a game that is still very lethal for low-levels, but the probability of getting killed outright is a little bit minimized. At the same time, killing the beasty might be harder as well, so it might not be such a good plan to go for the fight right away.

As a matter of opinion, I think the feeling of fragility of your character participates to the sense of dread you might get out of the game. Going through that door or charging that monster might help solve your problem, but then, you might get killed fast if you're not careful. And getting killed is actually part of the game, it's not something that breaks the game - it something that builds it, that makes sure there are consequences for failure and bad play. Survival depends on your decisions in the game, not the rules you use. Etc.

I think a lot of your house rules run counter to this. You're providing highest stats for more modifiers (4d6 drop lowest), full hit points at first level, provide perks for failure, bonus spells and damage... all these things are perfectly fine of course, it's your game, but combined, it makes it seem like what you want is a superheroic game, not a game of horror and dread where you might fear for your character's life and avoid combat whenever possible.

Depends what you want out of your game.

Quote from: Benoist;448660I think a lot of your house rules run counter to this. You're providing highest stats for more modifiers (4d6 drop lowest), full hit points at first level, provide perks for failure... all these things are perfectly acceptable of course, it's your game, but combined, it makes it seem like what you want is a superheroic game, not a game of horror and dread where you might fear for your character's life and avoid combat whenever possible.

I think there is a bit of a fallacy to the often-repeated idea that "horror and dread" are related to character "power."  In my experience, horror and dread are more about atmosphere than stats.  

Also, what's to say that any monsters won't have their stats adjusted accordingly?  The point in giving characters a little bit of a boost is both to give more flavor/options and so that I can use more powerful/interesting monsters right out of the gate without having to muck about with kobolds and the like.

There's nothing "superheroic" about it and I find that attitude a little insulting, to be honest.

Quote from: misterguignol;448657Are you one of those "the way I pretend to be a pretty elf princess is totally manly!!!" types or something?

You bet your ass I am.

Seriously, I can't get behind a "consolation rule" - why not just let the players say "I hit him" rather than bothering to roll dice at all?

Eh, just drop it, I don't wanna shit up your thread any more.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;448665You bet your ass I am.

That's just sad.

Quote from: misterguignol;448662I think there is a bit of a fallacy to the often-repeated idea that "horror and dread" are related to character "power."  In my experience, horror and dread are more about atmosphere than stats.

Hmm. Yes and no. Yes, you are right that lethality and power are not the ONLY elements that make a horror game neat to play, but these elements do participate in the equation. If the characters can explode the head of Godzillia with a few meteor swarms, your description might be awesome, they'll just think "Oh. neat... I attack!"

Quote from: misterguignol;448662Also, what's to say that any monsters won't have their stats adjusted accordingly?

Then all your mods are basically illusionism. They don't provide any padding to the characters, because monsters are equally more lethal. So it's a waste of time, when you could actually concentrate on what you're actually running, as opposed to "fixing" the system to make players feel better while making the game more picky, complicated, etc - which actually might turn against you, since the game ends up being just as lethal, by this logic, guaranteeing them to be frustrated, whereas getting upfront "okay. My character is fragile" prepares them for the possibility that yes, their character might die, and keeps the game rules light so as to enable quick character replacement.

It's either a waste of time because the players are already on board with the idea the game's dangerous and so on, or it's actually changing the game to the point you might just want to pick up another game and satisfy the players better, to me.

Quote from: misterguignol;448662The point in giving characters a little bit of a boost is both to give more flavor/options and so that I can use more powerful/interesting monsters right out of the gate without having to muck about with kobolds and the like.

Full hit points don't give more flavor to characters. Saying that under this particular die result, your axe does this or that isn't even warranted to add flavor to a game. You can do just that by actually describing the result of the die rolls with the system how it stands. The same way, just buffing up monsters doesn't make them more interesting. You're operating under the illusion that for something to be flavorful or interesting, it ought to be described with game mechanics. It's a reductive, and ultimately fallacious, shortcut. For a monster to be interesting and flavorful, it just has to impact the players' imaginations in the right places. There are other, simpler ways to achieve the exact same result, chief of which is actually running the game as a whole, rather than focusing on the rules it uses.

Quote from: misterguignol;448662There's nothing "superheroic" about it and I find that attitude a little insulting, to be honest.

It's not my intent to insult.

It's just that you've got to be clear first about what you want to achieve with your game, and think your stuff through before implementing houserules. I give my input, hopefully providing you with a different perspective you had not considered before, but ultimately, you know best what's going to be fun for you and your players. If I make you reevaluate your stuff and you come up with the same conclusions, that's not a waste of time, I think. It's a good thing.

Now, I'd advise you to run the game as it is first, and then, IF you run into specific issues during play, you'll be able to discuss it with the players, and you might want to fix it with a specific house rule. This way, you start with a blank slate, might find out that some elements you thought were quirky or weird with the game actually make sense in actual play, and/or actually engage your players more than you'd have expected, and correct things as you go if they don't. Then you'll have a custom version of the game that will actually fit what's being played and by whom, rather than your dry, theoretical expectations.

Just an advice. It's what I did with OD&D, and I had quite a few surprises proceeding that way. You might too, and trust me: you learn the most as a GM when you run into surprises. But then, you can just discard my advice and go about your own way. Whatever floats your boat, dude. I hope you have a blast.

Quote from: Benoist;448672It's not my intent to insult.

It seems I was unclear here; I wasn't saying *you* were setting out to be insulting.  Rather, I've seen a similar attitude promoted by others (in this very thread, in fact) that adding any benefits to characters is somehow "cheating," "power-gaming," or "playing superheroes instead of D&D."

Which is preposterous One True Wayism.

I have actually played LotFP straight out of the box and many of my house rules are oriented to changing things I didn't like.  For example, Specialists don't get enough pips to make their skills a worthwhile, class-defining set of abilities at 1st level.  Or, 1st level magic-users and clerics are little more than the sack that their one spell for the day comes in.  

Note that neither of these houserules add "padding" to characters.  Instead, they give more opportunity for options and flavor.  A magic-user who can use more than one spell is more apt to memorize an interesting utility spell along with the expected stand-bys like Sleep and Charm Person, you know?

A fighter getting more damage on attacks than the other classes helps delineate its strengths and makes it a more attractive class.  Out of the book all it has going for it is a better chance to hit, which is pretty boring in itself.

Also, you seem to be missing that the decreased AC and increased HP work in tandem: characters are easier to hit, but less fragile.  In practice, this should work out to about the same results, but with less whiffs.  This means fights will be short but brutal, not long and littered with randoms kills.  Again, this is a flavor thing, not a powergaming thing.

Yeah. I'm not getting where you read I was talking about powergaming. Might be because of the "superhero" term I used, in which case that's not what I meant. "Superhero" is actually the level title for 8th level fighting men in OD&D. Likewise, superhero RPGs don't go hand-in-hand with powergaming, in my mind. You certainly can play a superhero game without powergaming, like you can with powergaming.

Likewise, "the rules are the game, the game the rules" is not synonymous with powergaming.

In any case, looks like you've got your mind made up. I didn't want you to feel like you had to defend your choices. I'll let you go about your own way, now.