What Does Your Perfect Edition Look Like?

[delchrys]

I'd like the streamlining of mechanics seen in later editions (fewer types of saving throws, high rolls are "good") with the grittiness of earlier editions.

the biggest thing to me as a DM is that there be an emphasis in the core 5E rules that everything is DM prerogative, meaning that players won't read through the rules and then come to their DM demanding to play XYZ min/maxed character with ABC powers, skills, and feats, but instead be told via the official rules "hey, your DM has ultimate discretion here; this game is made to be molded by creative DMs". it just feels like the later editions have shifted the control to the rules themselves, thereby granting rules-lawyering players a semi-legitimate basis to complain if/when their DMs don't follow the letter of the law in the rulebooks.

if folks disagree, so be it; i'm not here to argue the point. it's just my personal opinion and i love my players--i've weeded through rules lawyers and have ended up with a distilled group of players who trust my DMing and my house rules implicitly and it gives us all a MUCH more enjoyable session than the alternative.

 

[tvknight415]

and I like how the Fighter could choose an improved class at level 9 - paladin, knight, or avenger. This makes more sense than starting off as a Paladin, IMHO)

Why not only have just the four basic classes (Fighter, Cleric, Magic-User, Rogue), and then package the "sub-classes" as options at a certain level, or via options available at the start. I like the paladin/knight/avenger concept, and I think I'd add ranger and barbarian to the options on the fighter. I'm a proponent of modifying the vancian system so that casters can cast without memorizing or praying for specific spells at the start of the day, but rather just having to spend an hour a day in study or prayer or meditation or what not (type is chosen at 1st, and represents the differences between sorcerer and wizard, or cleric/favored soul). At higher levels, offer the opportunity to specialize in schools of magic, or take the druidic path.

My classes with options during advancement would look something like:

Fighter
--Paladin (limited clerical and special abilities)
--Ranger (limited druidic and rogue abilities)
--Barbarian (gain berserk rage)

Cleric (prayer or innate spell ability chosen at start)
--Druid (lose turning, gain wild shape and additional spells)

Wizard (study or innate spell ability chosen at start)
--School specialists (invoker, transmuter, necromancer)
--Elementalists
--Wild Mages

Rogue
--Assassin (gain specialized skills)
--Swashbuckler (gain combat improvements)
--Bard (gain limited magic and musical ability)
--Mystic (gain martial arts by giving up armor and most weapons)

For Paladins, Rangers, and Bards, they gain spellcasting/turning ability at 1st level cleric/druid/wizard ability, and increases level-for-level (if a fighter becomes a paladin at 9th level, when he's 13th level, he'd have 5th level clerical abilities. The option to take a sub-class could only happen at 7th or higher level, and come with some restrictions to offset their gains (paladin's code, ranger requiring light armor, mystic forswearing armor & weapons, invokers reducing the effectiveness of non-specialty school, etc.).

Multi-classed characters could take sub-class paths, but only once they were level 7 in that particular class (so, to have a paladin/invoker would require at least 7 levels of fighter and 7 levels of wizard). Muti-classing could only occur between the base classes (no barbarian/rangers, but barbarian/cleric is okay). Multi-classed spellcasters stack their spellcasting class(es) with any sub-class casting (so, if a fighter 7/cleric 3 decided to go down the paladin sub-class, he'd have cleric 4 casting ability).

I wouldn't necessarily go towards the race=class of Basic D&D, or limit what races can be what class (1/2E) but I would include some drawbacks to certain race/class combinations. For instance, I'd put in a 5% chance of arcane spell failure for a dwarf wizard due to their natural magic resistance, which can't be offset by any skills/feats/magic items, but would stack with an armor or shield penalty.

I'd also streamline skills and feats. I'd have skills simply be trained or untrained, and at character level, one could either add a new skill or get a bonus to an existing skill (like 1/2E proficiencies). Once a skill is trained, the roll is modified by level minus level the skill was first taken at. I'd eliminate feats and instead give bonuses to either skills or combat maneuvers. Some of the feat would be moved into the basic skill check (ride check to use horse as a shield instead of mounted combat feat) or as a combat maneuver (power attack).

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

For me?

• Zero-to-hero with a divine ascension endgame.
• Less math scaling so threats stay relevant over a wider level range.
• Racial classes with unique class features and powers.
• Separate rules for PCs and monsters/NPCs.
• Flexible multiclassing and class customization.
• Looser "party role" mechanics.
• Power sources as a way to group classes, with easier "dabbling" within Power Sources.
• At-will class powers for every class.
• Ritual Magic, separated by Power Source.
• Spell point mechanic for magic.
• Vitality/Wound Points, but with scaling Wound Points and improved healing.

 

[Spinachcat]

To be blunt, what would your ideal game be?

Mazes & Minotaurs (its free!)
M&M

I have yet to discover a RPG that makes me as happy to GM and play as Mazes & Minotaurs. It is so rocking in actual play. The only thing that would make it more ideal would be if M&M had a serious marketing budget to spread the word of its awesomeness so eventually I may get to play in a campaign instead of always being the GM.

Swords & Wizardry: White Box is pretty close to ideal too. The OD&D framework is the perfect starting position for most fantasy games.

But I look for stuff that is fast, loose and flavorful. If a game "needs" anything, as long as its a simple system, I am happy to create whatever I need, usually on the spot.

4e did the fantasy skirmish boardgame hybrid thing really well which made me happy. I don't know what 5e will do for me, if anything, but I am happy to try it out.

 

[Lanefan]

My ideal D&D:

Would be largely based on pre-UA 1e except:

- no xp for treasure (replace in part with story or dungeon bonus, but advancement is intentionally kept SLOW)
- simpler combat, no weapon speed or weapon-vs-armour-type, etc.
- optional inclusion of some of 4e's combat movement effects
- individual d6 initiatives re-rolled each round, simultaneous actions are possible and allowed
- grappling and chase rules that make sense
- include fumbles and criticals
- percentile strength broken out into individual numbers (so Str 18.00 becomes 24, a Hill Giant becomes 25, etc.)
- all classes get Cavalier-style percentile stat increments
- a slightly wider range of core classes - Bard, Necromancer, toned-down Cavalier, War Cleric, a few others - and Bard is not a proto-prestige class
- all casters work like 3e sorcerers, i.e. Vancian but no pre-memorization
- quite a few class alignment requirements eased or abandoned
- most class level limits abandoned, some remaining ones eased; Elves racial abilities toned down to compensate
- has the depth and variety of settings of 2e
- has a greater range of monsters to allow the game to scale well into the teen levels - 3e has some good ones
- include an optional bolt-on skills system for those that want it, being careful not to impinge on the niches of skill-based classes, using a roll-under-ability mechanic
- a form of Body/Fatigue points or Wound/Vitality points to break out real damage from fatigue/luck/vitality "damage"
- includes a well-tested selection of spells etc. from later editions, and each spell write-up at least dabbles with the "what if" scenarios presented by that spell
- ascending or descending AC, doesn't matter, but have it start with '0' being 'no armour' and going from there, instead of '10'

I could go on all night...

Lanefan

 

[steeldragons]

Wow this is a tall order...and very little chance I will think of all of the elements that would make it so...but we'll start with the following and add/edit as necessary:

The Game
-a focus on imagination and creativity above numbers/crunch
-a focus on adventure and exploration above, but including, straight combat
-a focus on guidelines and tips on everything from sandbox v. story driven play to plot hooks, "dungeon" building and campaign/world building.
-a focus on character development and growth above skill/feat acquisition and power-gaming (i.e. "a novel" or "adventure module" instead of a "video game.")


The Guts
-Classes: meaningfully defined/fluffed archetypes with secondary/supplemental specialty ("sub" or "prestige") classes. I think 12 to start and 16 or 20 tops should cover it.
-Races: the "traditional" 7 plus, say, 3 or 4 more...no more than 12. No "preferred racial classes". Meaningful/flavorful special abilities. I'm ok with "Class limitations", for flavor purposes, but not "Level max-es/restrictions".
--Skills (including things such as "Feats") are fine. Just not unending pages thereof. A few per [base] class and a few more that anybody could take would suffice.
-Meaningful/flavorful differences between arcane, divine, natural (and potentially "primal" as a separate 4th) types of magic.
-Spell casting defined in/with "vancian" and "spontaneous" and/or "both" options.
-Alignment: 9-point, 3-point or "none" options and guidelines.
-Resolution of skills as ability checks, as well as just allowing ability checks for anything a PC wants to do (but may not be a defined "skill").
-Saves/Defense: I really don't care how this is done so long as they are clear for the DM on what to use for what situations and the DM can decide, simply, if they have some weird occurance that doesn't immediately meet/fit the breakdown.

All for now...sure there's more to come.
--SD

 

[Number48]

Wow this is a tall order...and very little chance I will think of all of the elements that would make it so...but we'll start with the following and add/edit as necessary:

The Game
-a focus on imagination and creativity above numbers/crunch
-a focus on adventure and exploration above, but including, straight combat
-a focus on guidelines and tips on everything from sandbox v. story driven play to plot hooks, "dungeon" building and campaign/world building.
-a focus on character development and growth above skill/feat acquisition and power-gaming (i.e. "a novel" or "adventure module" instead of a "video game.")


The Guts
-Classes: meaningfully defined/fluffed archetypes with secondary/supplemental specialty ("sub" or "prestige") classes. I think 12 to start and 16 or 20 tops should cover it.
-Races: the "traditional" 7 plus, say, 3 or 4 more...no more than 12. No "preferred racial classes". Meaningful/flavorful special abilities. I'm ok with "Class limitations", for flavor purposes, but not "Level max-es/restrictions".
--Skills (including things such as "Feats") are fine. Just not unending pages thereof. A few per [base] class and a few more that anybody could take would suffice.
-Meaningful/flavorful differences between arcane, divine, natural (and potentially "primal" as a separate 4th) types of magic.
-Spell casting defined in/with "vancian" and "spontaneous" and/or "both" options.
-Alignment: 9-point, 3-point or "none" options and guidelines.
-Resolution of skills as ability checks, as well as just allowing ability checks for anything a PC wants to do (but may not be a defined "skill").
-Saves/Defense: I really don't care how this is done so long as they are clear for the DM on what to use for what situations and the DM can decide, simply, if they have some weird occurance that doesn't immediately meet/fit the breakdown.

All for now...sure there's more to come.
--SD

These have been stated as in, so unless they change their minds...

This is kinda there. You can ban one option or the other in your game, but both options seem assumed.

 

[Hassassin]

To be blunt, what would your ideal game be? What core assumptions? What rules? What classes? What races?

I'd like something like this (probably with more, but this is a good skeleton):
-Players start small, but become truly legendary and god-like
-Enemies scale with the players
-Players gain meaningful power over the world
-To the above, stronghold rules and leadership rules
-Varied and diverse, but balanced classes
-One vision for game-play
-Benefits for good tactics

So that's what I want. What do you want?

From your seven, I'd hate to see one vision or scaling enemies forced down my throat. God-like is fine for epic levels, but I wouldn't want that before then, either.

I'd like to add:
-Simple rules, with universal mechanics so that when you learn first level play everything else is simple.
-Make everything that at least a large minority feels is anti-simulationist optional. No action points, healing surges etc. as assumed part of game balance.
-Ditto for magic items.
-Fix the economy. If we have copper, silver and gold, why is 99% of equipment priced in gold, 0.99% in silver and 0.01% in copper?
-Make faster combat possible. Long battles are fine against BBEGs.

 

[hanez]

Mechanically - Monte Cookes Arcana Evolved with the fluff of 2nd edition AD&D

Simple rules but complex spell, power, and other action descriptions, that bring the mystery back to what specifically a power does and the responsibility back to the DM to make the game incredible. Think the difference between Mirror Image in 3e and 4e, almost no difference. But the way its written prior to 4e makes it much more interesting, and allows for more judgements by the DM who is also a player.

Also bring back all the lil class requirments (Paladins must be LG, Druids must fight an Archdruid at x level to continue, fighters get followers). These make the DEFAULT version of the class interesting, which makes the average game more interesting. Put optional sidebars next to them (how to make a LE Paladin, other variants to fighting ArchDruids) ect.

Make magic items interesting, cursed, mystical, complicated and in the DMs handbook. I should be able to create the wackiest item, and hand it out and my players shouldnt be able to know if I just dreamed it up. It shouldnt have to follow some cookie cutter format. The items made by WOTC should be varied and different from eachother.

Make MELEE items more powerful (this should be a way of making the melee characters more magical). Let the fighter fly just like the wizard, but with something he found in a dungeon. Remove magical item creation from the default rules, except for maybe brew potion, definitely not scribe scroll.

 

[Number48]

From your seven, I'd hate to see one vision or scaling enemies forced down my throat. God-like is fine for epic levels, but I wouldn't want that before then, either.

I'd like to add:
-Simple rules, with universal mechanics so that when you learn first level play everything else is simple.
-Make everything that at least a large minority feels is anti-simulationist optional. No action points, healing surges etc. as assumed part of game balance.
-Ditto for magic items.
-Fix the economy. If we have copper, silver and gold, why is 99% of equipment priced in gold, 0.99% in silver and 0.01% in copper?
-Make faster combat possible. Long battles are fine against BBEGs.

Already stated that economy is moving to silver.