If you had to cut one element from the D&D game...
Angel Tarragon
Dawn Dragon
Other: Initiative
Jack Daniel
dice-universe.blogspot.com
I've cut the following out my D&D game:
- Feats
- Skill points (and the skill list is condensed to exactly 30 skills)
- Attacks of opportunity
- Law and Chaos
- The full attack action (if you can attack, you can make all your attacks)
- Monstrous characters
- Templates
- Base classes other than the 9 permitted in my setting (monk, fighter, rogue, noble, cleric, shaman, mage, psychic, and scientist)
- Prestige classes other than the 12 permitted in my setting (berserker, samurai, paladin, ranger, mystic, templar, engineer, bard, ninja, sorcerer, sage, and oracle)
- Distinctions between simple, martial, and exotic weapons
- Increased threat ranges and critical multipliers
- Most everything complicated about grappling
- Differences in the way spell-casting classes learn, prepare, and cast spells (all magic-users keep spell-books, prepare spells, and cast their prepared spells with spontaneous slots)
- Size modifiers to hit and AC
- Dex adjustments to Initiative
- Overly detailed monster stats (ability scores, skill lists, etc.)
- XP penalties for multiclassing (and racially favored classes)
- Epic spells (epic everything else, too, now that I think about it)
Some things, after all, worked better just the way they were before the d20 System appeared. Come to think of it, as I look over all the complications that I've decided to strip away from my game, the only good things that 3rd edition has brought to my game have been multiclassing and the "roll a d20, add a modifier, beat a DC" mechanic. Everything else... pfft. Gimmie my Rules 'Cyclopedia.
- Feats
- Skill points (and the skill list is condensed to exactly 30 skills)
- Attacks of opportunity
- Law and Chaos
- The full attack action (if you can attack, you can make all your attacks)
- Monstrous characters
- Templates
- Base classes other than the 9 permitted in my setting (monk, fighter, rogue, noble, cleric, shaman, mage, psychic, and scientist)
- Prestige classes other than the 12 permitted in my setting (berserker, samurai, paladin, ranger, mystic, templar, engineer, bard, ninja, sorcerer, sage, and oracle)
- Distinctions between simple, martial, and exotic weapons
- Increased threat ranges and critical multipliers
- Most everything complicated about grappling
- Differences in the way spell-casting classes learn, prepare, and cast spells (all magic-users keep spell-books, prepare spells, and cast their prepared spells with spontaneous slots)
- Size modifiers to hit and AC
- Dex adjustments to Initiative
- Overly detailed monster stats (ability scores, skill lists, etc.)
- XP penalties for multiclassing (and racially favored classes)
- Epic spells (epic everything else, too, now that I think about it)
Some things, after all, worked better just the way they were before the d20 System appeared. Come to think of it, as I look over all the complications that I've decided to strip away from my game, the only good things that 3rd edition has brought to my game have been multiclassing and the "roll a d20, add a modifier, beat a DC" mechanic. Everything else... pfft. Gimmie my Rules 'Cyclopedia.
Last edited:
painandgreed
First Post
I'd get rid of spending XP to make stuff or cast spells. That's the one thing about the current mechanics that makes me grit my teeth.
.
PhantomNarrator
First Post
Honestly
Nothing. I wouldn't change much at all, really. I like prestige classes, AoO and feats.
I'd maybe change some spell levels around and nerf a feat here or there, but people who want to get rid of Vancian magic, or classes, or alignments - you do realize there are several games that already accomodate you, like Fantasy Hero and GURPS Fantasy?
Seriously, if you want to get that radical, why even play D&D at all? I suspect some of these people would be happier with another system, but refuse to make the jump for nostalgic reasons or because they know their players will balk at having to learn a new set of rules (seeing as how lazy the average gamer is, they're probably right to think this).
Nothing. I wouldn't change much at all, really. I like prestige classes, AoO and feats.
I'd maybe change some spell levels around and nerf a feat here or there, but people who want to get rid of Vancian magic, or classes, or alignments - you do realize there are several games that already accomodate you, like Fantasy Hero and GURPS Fantasy?
Seriously, if you want to get that radical, why even play D&D at all? I suspect some of these people would be happier with another system, but refuse to make the jump for nostalgic reasons or because they know their players will balk at having to learn a new set of rules (seeing as how lazy the average gamer is, they're probably right to think this).
Enforcer
Explorer
These games are way different system-wise than D&D/d20. And they don't accommodate me or I'd be playing them.PhantomNarrator said:
Because while D&D doesn't do everything the way I want (I don't like Vancian magic, I don't like the reliance on magic items, etc.), I still like it better than any other game system. That's why I play D&D (and I play it pretty much as written too).
I haven't read all 4 pages of replies, but after the first page I was surprised no one had said hit points yet. I really like the M&M, Blue Rose, True d20 mechanic of the health indicators (bruise, injured, unconcious, dying, dead) and toughness save with weapon damage being like spells (make a touhgness save DC15). It makes way more sense to me rather than hit points.
Similar Threads
- Poll
