D&D 3E/3.5 Conceptual Problems with 3E/3.5E and Desired Solutions for 4E

[Torm]

Drop them altogether. They are a needless complication.

Yes. And we all know that real world medieval monetary systems had no needless complications....

And, my characters frequently carry platinum. Admittedly, not electrum so much, but I consider electrum like American $2 bills - not really essential, but a NEAT feature of the currency system.

If anything, I wish D&D had a more archaic and less organized schedule for money, like 8 copper to 1 silver and so forth. Like some of the settings tack on.

 

[Wraith-Hunter]

this is part of the concepts that linger from previous editions.

encumbrance is more than weight.

otherwise you end up with an elf carrying 40 full quivers of arrows and 12 bows.
edit: and still being able to fire multiple times.

No it is not. It is not listed in there at all RAW. The weight issue is one that bugs the crap out of me too. In the PHB it says this is how much the item weighs.

 

[Graf]

The 3.5 magic system is lame. It's time to move to spellpoints.

Not to try to start something but this precisely the kind of ‘criticism’ that is the problem.

The 3.5 magic system is a spellpoint system. It just calls the spellpoints “slots” and allocates them in (arbitrarily complex) manner.

There are probably a dozen systems available that have directly (changing rules) or indirectly (new feats, classes, magic items, etc etc) peeled off the “slots” layer and used something else instead.

You aren’t asking for a conceptual change, you’re asking for a new coat of paint.

 

[roguerouge]

Changes

Dare I say consider abandoning d20 for the three d-6 system? I don't know the math involved, but I know some people get highly.... exercised... about the importance of the random die roll until your character's modifiers get obscene. They seem to think that 3d6 solves that problem. Sure, it won't happen and no, I don't especially favor this one way or another, but it's something I typically see.

Other concepts: Your Mileage May Vary
Have Sorcerers work off a separate spell list from wizards? Or introduce some artistic randomness to their repertoire? Have their familiars be different? Make them distinguishable from walking artillery by something other than their fashion sense?

FLAVA: Put description blocks for every spell you print. Use the manifestation description to expand that approach for them, so that spells have a smell, a psychic memory, and such.

Bards should have songbooks, like musicians do, and function like wizards off their spell list and not like now as kissing cousins to sorcerers. This would make them slightly less ... well, you know. Alternatively, just admit that the Beguiler's a decent way to build a bard and ditch the bard song?

If it's remotely possible, stop DnD from morphing into a super-power game after the characters reach 12th level or so? I've found that spells trump everything after a certain level.

More personalized summoning? Animals, fey and plants for druids, chaos creatures for sorcerers, the pretty monsters for the bards, etc.? ooh! Or how about this concept: a selection for the basic nine alignments, so that conjurers aren't bouncing all over the alignment spectrum?

A reputation system to replace the alignment system?

 

[Glyfair]

Weights for weapons and equipment are way over the top. Those need to be brought down to reasonable levels. No way in hell someone could wield a 15 lb. weapon.

Edit: I type like a git.

Of course, weight isn't the primary problem with how hard something is to carry. I work at a warehouse and often a huge 25 lb. box is harder to carry than a 50 lb. box in a manageable size. Maybe they should have a completely new encumbrance system to simulate this (similiar to RQ's old "things" mechanic). That or make large unwieldy things "weigh" more systemically (but call it something other than weight).

 

[DaveyJones]

No it is not. It is not listed in there at all RAW. The weight issue is one that bugs the crap out of me too. In the PHB it says this is how much the item weighs.

i guess i didn't explain what i meant well enough.

in the previous editions encumbrance included more than just weight. so a sword was listed at a higher value than weight. it changed a little between 1ed and 2ed due to the shift from 10 coins / lb to 50 coins / lb.

but the numbers from 2ed to 3ed didn't for the most part. just the label. they don't call it encumbrance now. even though that is what they mean by double axe 15 lbs. perhaps if they had shifted the numbers and the label i would agree with you.

 

[Vrecknidj]

There are variances in the game, such as how the different monster types advance, and how different monster types are affected by things (i.e. turn undead) that throw a wrench into the game.

I'm a fan of the concept behind a cleric having special power over undead. And, I like that there are feats and other stuff that can be "powered" by "spending" turn attempts. But, I'd like all of that to be re-considered and converted into something easier to fold into the other existing mechanics.

Dave

 

[Wavestone]

Of course, weight isn't the primary problem with how hard something is to carry. I work at a warehouse and often a huge 25 lb. box is harder to carry than a 50 lb. box in a manageable size. Maybe they should have a completely new encumbrance system to simulate this (similiar to RQ's old "things" mechanic). That or make large unwieldy things "weigh" more systemically (but call it something other than weight).

I agree with your points..

One of the interesting things from the first RPG I played, a swedish game called Drakar & Demoner ("Dragons and Demons",yes, rather similar sounding to D&D - used completely different rules though. Originally BRP, so I guess it is a "cousin game" to Runequest).. it didn't use weight, but instead a sort of "weight equivalent carrying" points - in swedish it was BEP. Bulky equipment had BEP in excess of its weight.. Armor had low BEP for its weight, when worn as intended. Str determined amount of BEP you could carry.

D&D right now do use similar thinking, but have never come out and said so, instead artificially padding the weight. Then you get 15 lb longswords, and other inaccurate weights. Would be more honest to come out and say "these weights are in pseudo-pounds, not real pounds", or use some acronym like BCW - bulk corrected weight.

 

[Roman]

A lot of people still feel like specific rules changes are conceptual changes.
(Drop LA/ECL, make wisdom work differently)

Well, the way I envisioned a 'conceptual problem' is a problem that does not necessarily have impact on the enjoyment of the game through unstreamlined mechanics, but that irks the person, well, conceptually.

I can see, though, what your point is, since conceptual change might also refer to a paradigm change rather than mere tinkering with the edges.

 

[DonTadow]

The one problem dungeons and dragons has always had is that whereas everything else plays out in "real time" combat plays out like a turn based console game. I move, then he moves, then he moves then checkmate.

There are some good fixes for this in the homebrew section, but even still they seem to add or take away from the game.