My little box of Homebrew I-III

Rules Discussion House Rules
1

Hello, there everyone!
I’ve been uploading Open Legend homebrew to the Open Legend subreddit three months in a row now under the name “My little box of homebrew”. But I’ve given it some thought and now that Reddit is on fire it feels like a good idea to migrate here. Not only is this website more appropriate for things like this but it is also, in fact, not on fire.

So, here you go. Here are three months worth of Open Legend homebrew. And, also, a little disclaimer: A lot of this is barely playtested, highly experimental and/or something I’ve personally lost faith in. Enjoy!

First one

Second one

Third one

2 Likes
2

This looks really interesting. Can you elaborate on which ones have turned out more/less helpful? And which ones have you lost faith in?

3

Well, I should begin by clarifying that I’ve only really playtested a few of these rules properly. Most of these are just ideas that I’ve written down and posted and I would really appreciate if anyone has any ideas or criticisms after trying any of these rules.

That being said, here is what I think about my own rules:

Clearer improvised actions: I still think this is a pretty good idea. I wanted a more concrete rule and that’s what I got. u/TrinitysEnd had another idea about balancing by adding a “no attack action” restriction and keeping it a Major action instead of a Focus action and I honestly don’t know which one of these I prefer, I go back and forth.

Death Rolls: I have tried this one and I’ve found that the intended effect was achieved, it made combat a bit more dangerous and death a bit more likely. However, it is a bit wordy and long and if you wanna avoid that then brianfeister commented a much simpler version when I posted it.

Custom Extraordinary Attribute: Still in love with the idea, a bit unsure about the execution. I always thought that categorising super powers was impossible and, although OL does a good job with their 8 extraordinary attributes, I just wished that you could pick and choose super powers without it costing a fortune in attribute points and getting a lot of other abilites that you don’t want. The version of this rule that I posted was my third draft and I was satisified enough to post it but I still felt that there had to be some better way that I wasn’t seeing. Maybe someone else will find it, who knows?

Feat: Master Imitation: Yeah, this one is pretty meh for me. I made it for a friend and he was satisfied with it but I really agree with u/TrinitysEnd again about making it Concealment based instead of Phantasm based, I just haven’t gotten around to actually updating it.

Cascading Dice: I never really had any problems with exploding dice so this always felt like a fix to something that ain’t broken. I posted it nonetheless in case anyone else had any issues with explosions.

Three Actions: I have played a pathfinder 2E one-shot since I posted this and by far the best thing about it was the three actions. Not sure how it would translate to OL but if it’s even half as fun as it was in PF2E then I have to use it. The most debatable thing about this rule was it’s “no repeats” restriction which, again, I haven’t playtested so idk how it is in play.

Wealth Points: I actually playtested this one. This rule was a more simple version of RemixTheIdiots rule and I think that it fits very well with the type of game I was playing, a D&D 5E convert. It works well with the typical “Loot and plunder” campaigns that I’ve played a lot but for some campaigns I prefer OL’s vagueness as it’s way smoother and requires little to no bookkeeping.

Seperate attack and damage rolls: This comes from my roots as a D&D 5E player and I’m still unsure if I prefer a single attack roll or seperate hit and damage rolls. I’m currently leaning towards seperate but that can change very quickly with me lol.

Expendable, Auto-Hit, Combo Banes and Boons: This one hasn’t aged very well for me. It was my attempt to reintroduce more complex and expendable spells into OL and I don’t really like it anymore to be honest. I’m currently working on another Mana system which I think is an improvement from Preperations at least. If someone else sees these and have a good time with them, then more power to you but I have just lost faith in this.

Attribute merge: I’m still in love with this. I’ve grown to think that OL could use fewer attributes and some people may disagree with me on that but it’s what I feel. The way I tried to balance out removing an attribute could use some work but I’m still in love with the idea itself.

Flaw Feats: I’ve wanted these in the game since I first started reading up on the rules. I really love them and I’m excited to post more example Flaw Feats if I can come up with any.

Languages known: Works for some campaigns, works less for others. I just want it to be available in case I feel like using it in a future campaign. I’m really happy with the execution, it feels very elegant, it’s just not a very game changing thing.

Weapon Training: Again, I kinda miss this from D&D 5E. It could have turned out a little bit better but I’m pretty happy with it as it is. I also understand that, again, it works better for some campaigns than others and I just want it to be available in case I feel like using it in a future campaign.

If I missed anything or if you have follow up questions just let me know and sorry for the long reply

1 Like
4

Thank you for the detailed reply! : )
I don’t have a comment for each mechanic, but here are my thoughts as someone who has been running OL for about 6 years.

Clearer improvised actions: I agree with TrinitysEnd here. Especially on the point of not letting characters attack outside of their turn. That seems like it could be easily abused.

Custom Extraordinary Attributes: I can see where you’re coming from, but my group and I never found this to be an issue in practice. In my personal experience players are ok with limiting themselves and not using abilities they could in theory mechanically access. But that might not be true for every group. I’m not sure, if this needs a proper house rule, since what abilities make sense heavily depends on the character and the setting. That’s why I’d usually try to rule this on a case-by-case basis and come to an understanding with my playgroup.

Three Actions: I’m very interested in this, because I have found that players heavily favor damaging attacks, if the encounter doesn’t provide additional incentives for using banes. Maybe my players just haven’t realized the power of Stun, Demoralized, etc. (even though they complain about how strong those banes are when I use them against them). But there are a lot of risks here with the action economy and the interaction with or invalidation of other feats.
Something I do in my campaigns is giving minor actions special emphasis. Like letting a character analyze an opponent with Learning, Logic or Perception to gain some kind of advantage. Or letting players manipulate the battlefield with minor actions. This is not exactly the same as your idea, but it feels like it’s going in a similar direction since it increases the characters’ agency by allowing them to do more with their turn.

Wealth Points: I agree with this one. I also used RemixTheIdiot’s system for one of my campaigns and my group really enjoyed it. But as you say, it depends on the kind of game you’re running. There are a lot of games where the abstract WL is preferable.

Expendable, Auto-Hit, Combo Banes and Boons: Some players and GMs seem to miss some sort of resource system in OL. Usually I advise them to use Legend Points for that, but I can see there are some issues with this on a meta-level. I’m fond of the idea of having more complex powers that are limited by how often they can be used, but I feel like the system for building extraordinary items can handle this quite well.
I might try this one out some time in the future, but that could take some time (we’re talking months or years here).

Flaw Feats: I really like the idea of these. Emulating certain kinds of elemental weaknesses with Flaws has always felt a bit lackluster to me. Not sure about the number of points they should give, but that’s an easy fix, if something goes awry.

Languages known and Weapon Training: Both depend on the setting and kind of campaing you’re running, but for some games I can see them being useful. In my longest running campaign (about 4-5 years) I just used Perks to represent a character’s ability to use a certain type of weapon and went with a more loose system of giving disadvantage to those who were untrained with a weapon. For languages I just went with whatever made sense on the spot. But your system certainly is more rigid and I can see the benefits of that. I think, I’ll also give that a try.

I might use some of your ideas in my own games, but don’t hold your breath. My group and I are currently playing different systems and it could take some time until we get back to OL (although we definetly will some day, since it’s our go-to system for most games).
But I’ll definetly discuss these ideas with my group. Thanks again for your reply! : )