D&D 3E/3.5 Here's What I Wish I Could Fix About 3E/4E

[JVisgaitis]

See PHB2. The retraining rules are pure gold.

Cheers!

I have it and I've read them, but to me its a band aid. Granted they work, but they are there to fix a problem which shouldn't exist in the first place.

 

[TinSoldier]

I think that what would be needed, in a bid for simplicity, would be a template/archetype/package system. You could pick from a list of race/class combinations where most of the work is already done, with a few customizing elements. So, a new player would have the option of doing standard character building or they could pick a template.

Shadowrun used to do this (I do not know if they still do or not). It was a great way to quickly get into the game. They could create a set of 10 to 12 different templates to put into the book, with more available as a web enhancement.

Wow, sounds a lot like Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay !

 

[JVisgaitis]

I think that what would be needed, in a bid for simplicity, would be a template/archetype/package system. You could pick from a list of race/class combinations where most of the work is already done, with a few customizing elements. So, a new player would have the option of doing standard character building or they could pick a template.

The more I think about this, the more I feel this is the way to go. I'm all for keeping it easy at low levels, but I'd hate to have to get book B and find a class in there that I love and then have to dump my character altogether. Its counter productive and the same reason I hate introducing new base classes into an existing campaign. The problem with starting packages is they just feel way too bolted on. I would make them a prominate feature in future editions of D&D, and have a whole chapter later in the book devoted to custom character creation. That way, you serve both audiences and you even include fast rules for DMs to make quick NPCs. As for what I'd have in the intro section, I'd probably include three different builds of each class complete with stats and everything else. The only thing I'd let people decide on was their race and give them some gold to round out their equipment. Hmmm, I may work on something like this...

 

[MerricB]

As for what I'd have in the intro section, I'd probably include three different builds of each class complete with stats and everything else. The only thing I'd let people decide on was their race and give them some gold to round out their equipment. Hmmm, I may work on something like this...

Start with the PHB2 and see the starting packages there, then see what is lacking.

(Each class gets 3 starting packages).

Cheers!

 

[Nathan P. Mahney]

Well, that's what the current Basic set does. Fighter, Rogue, Sorcerer, Wizard -

What, no cleric? That's odd.

 

[MerricB]

What, no cleric? That's odd.

Me idiot. Fighter, Cleric, Rogue, Sorcerer.

Cheers!

 

[sjmiller]

Wow, sounds a lot like Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay !

Actually, I was thinking of a cross between Shadowrun and GURPS. Shadowrun has the system I described, and GURPS has the template with options system that could easily be used.

I do not think the starting packages shown in the PH go in the right direction. They define TOO much.

 

[Hussar]

As has been said, for completely new players, they have the starting packages for a reason. You can still use the starting packages and not use all of it. Switch out this feat or that skill, it shouldn't be terribly difficult.

The funny thing is, there aren't that many more options than there were for 2e. Race, class, skills/feats vs NWP/WP, kits (which weren't core, but used in many, many campaigns), choosing spells, etc. I'm really not sure why people seem to think that creating a character for 3e is so much more complicated than it was for 2e.

 

[Whisper72]

The issue is (IMHO) not the presence or absence of packages and such, bet more the overwhelming amount of info. A real noob would not know where to start, which options to leave out etc. It all still depends upon _someone_ knowing the game well enough to make informed decisions. To truly grow the hobby, IMHO, an intro game is needed that can be played within 30 minutes of taking the stuff out of the box, where none of the players or DM have any prior knowledge of DnD and none need to be math-whizzes or otherwise very sharp individuals.

The issue remains that there needs to be a DnD version similar to C&C. The issue here is not 'if you want rules lite, go play C&C', but to introduce ppl in a logical 'flow' from 'basic DnD' to 'advanced DnD'. In this framework, C&C is actually already a 'too complete' game, and there is little logical incentive for people to move on from C&C to 'full blown' DnD.

All just IMHO natch.

 

[Whisper72]

So, we've moved from predicting when 4e is coming out to already offering fixes for it??

Yeah.... haven't you noticed? DnD 4E is soooooo broken!!!