What NON-OBVIOUS stuff would you like to see in Revised?

[Wippit Guud]

Revised weapon list for druids. Just get rid of being able to use metal. While they'd lose bladed weapons, they'd game a few like bows and whips.

Rules for weapons made of different materials (stone, wood)

 

[Henry]

Except that a move-equivalent action is NOT a move. Therefore, stepping 5' back (non-action,as declared by the chart in chapter 8), then loading a light crossbow (move-equivalent), then firing, is perfectly acceptable.

I must note however, two things:

1) Large creatures have a 10' reach. Don't try this with an ogre.

2) it's a light crossbow, and pretty easy to load. It does not require any special equipment to and fire.

---------------

MY wish list?

1) make reflex save affected by armor check penalties. It makes sense that if it's harder to tumble or jump in full plate, it should be harder to dodge that breath weapon, too.

2) give rangers the ability to apply virtual ambidexterity and 2WF to double-headed weapons, which strikes me as nonsensical that they couldn't use it.

3) Remove the blessed paladin and monk multi-class rule - OR, extend it to ALL classes.

 

[Moxie]

I haven't seen this suggested but then again I haven't exhausted all avenues. I would like guidelines on stripping DOWN the rules to make the game easier for new players. The Adventure Game boxed set is nice as a start, but then there's the huge leap to the Core Rules. Now it sounds like that leap is getting even larger!

It seems most avid players want MORE rules, but how are you gonna get new blood into the game? I thought that was one of WotC's goals. If they want to go for more sales to the existing audience then yeah, crank out TONS of more roolz! But how are you going to get beginners to stick with the transition?

 

[ptrpete]

Re: Re: This & that

As it stands now, there is nothing unique or unusual about the Sorcerer to warrant it being a separate class. We might as well scrap it and use the Spells Know/Spells per Day spontaneous casting system as an option for Wizards to choose at first level. Yes, the Wizard is supposed to be the "wiseman" but that's reflected by the fact that he gets every Knowledge skill as a class skill. Sorcs need other skills (especially some Cha based ones) to differentiate them. A d6 for HD wouldn't hurt, either.

I couldn't agree more, the sorc should be more focused on willpower than learning. Right now it is just a variant wizard. I think sorcs should get some charisma skills INSTEAD of Knowledge (Arcana) and Spellcraft. How much training has a sorc done? None. He knows that if he wiggles his fingers in a certain way, a flame comes out. Knowlege of how/why spells work should be left to the wizard.

Also they shouldn't have to use trivial components. Surely the power is inside them, they don't need to rely on external sources. But this is just a flavor issue, since it is assumed that wizards & sorcs have all their trivial components in their spell component pouch.

I'm not sure about the larger hit die. Sure, its just 1/level, but sorcs are plenty powerful enough as it is. They don't need extra goodies, just different ones for better flavour.

Originally posted by Oni
*secondary magical traditions that break the schools down differently to give more variety to specialist (like elemental schools, or shadow based stuff or any other wide variety of entertaining ideas). ]

Very good idea. IME, the current eight schools seem arbitary to new players, just an extra option tacked on. Elemental schools would be easy to understand, and as you say add variety. Shadow magic vs light magic would also be a good split.

 

[MThibault]

make spot and listen class skills for every class. (they are adventurers, the ability to listen or look around should be pretty universal for them)

I strongly disagree. Spot and Listen are substitutes for the old "reaction adjustments" -- they directly affect surprise. This is one of the keys to the current Ranger's competency.

Cross-class is functional enough when compared to most monsters' and opponents' Hide and Move Silently modifiers. But a Rogue or Ranger (or Bard or Barbarian for Listen) are the ones that will likely spot the really sneaky opponents.

5' step-no Aoo, 30' move-Aoo is an inconsistency that needs to be corrected.

Not inconsistent, it just looks odd in some cases. The granularity of the grid is 5 foot squares so the character is more or less 2.5 feet from the edge of that square. That is one stride for most medium sized characters.

Certainly taking one step shouldn't provoke an AoO? Well, at least not in my opinion.

If it weren't for the complexity, I could see applying a houserule that small sized characters could only take a 5 foot step every other round and larger creatures get larger "free adjustments". But that's more trouble than it is worth IMO, and I would not vote that it become a core rule.

Sorry for the completely negative post. There are too many excellent suggestions in this thread for me to single out one or two I like most.

Cheers.

 

[Xarlen]

Re: Re: What NON-OBVIOUS stuff would you like to see in Revised?

I think it's fine as is and any change would upset the system too much and
Templates for Zombies and Skeletons is a silly idea. You have different sizes of zombies and skeletons and that's it. You don't have to make major changes to them to apply them to any type of creature and since both are mindless, I see no reason for there to be a template, other than to complicate matters unneccessarily.

Okay, let's take this concept.

So what you're telling me is that a Large Zombie is the same, no matter if the body used is a Minotaur, a Fire giant, or a Juvenile red dragon?

I Think Not.

A minotaur skeleton would still be capable of goring, for the same reason other skeletons can bite and claw. An umber hulk skeleton's claws are going to do a Lot more damage then an ogre's.

By the current rules, skeletons and zombies can't use weapons, or atleast are not proficent with them. That Doesn't Fly. We've all seen the coolness of skeletons wielding weapons in literature and fantasy stuff before.

I also agree with better grappling rules. The current ones are clunky and hard to process.

 

[brun]

There's plenty of rule-stuff that has been suggested already, so I'll go in another area.

I'd want more tips and help in creating a different setting in a the DMG. By different, I mean one that is not standard to what is presented as a typical fantasy world. What if I want a low-magic setting? How would I had flavor and consistency to the idea beside just saying "wizards and sorcerer are pretty rare here, I do not want more than one in the party"? How would I change the classes to fit this new settig?

The same goes for any setting type that differs from the "standards".

I could go for something like Requiem for a God, with a list of questions to think about, with options ad possibilities given.

 

[Greybar]

I'll throw out something:

Weaken the cleric

Yeah, I love 'em, but everybody else has trouble matching them. The more divine feats and spells you add the worse it gets (since Clerics don't even have to research new spells, they just get them instantly once the GM allows the book). Good fighting, good armor, good spells, bonus domain abilities, bonus domain spells ...

thoughts?

John

 

[Kichwas]

• I consider Sorcerer's getting CHA based skills to be obvious. Absurdly so in fact. Because of this, I believe WotC won't do it.
• Sorcerers should lose Knowledge: Arcana and possibly Spellcraft.
• Make Familiars into a feat, and then give Sorcerers and Wizards one bonus feat at level 1. This would let some people take Eschew Materials instead without changing power-levels.
• Druids should get bows. They should lose Scimitars.
• Rangers should lose two weapon fighting and instead get a bonus feat.
• On my pipe-dream list would be to see Alignment listed as a Variant rule. Keep all
  the text there, but just preface the whole section with 'Variant Rule'. Judge
  reactions, and use that to see if it should get removed entirely in 4E or kept in.
• I'd like to see some method for Sorcerers to 'unlearn' a spell so they can put
  something else in there instead. And -NOT- by taking a feat each time they do it.
  Feats are too rare as it is. It should be an automatic ability like it is in Neverwinter
  Nights.
• Bards should get it also.
• Standing up from prone should take a full round (no more stand up and attack), unless you get some kind of feat, and cost an AoO.
• Combat mods for Elevation differences and sunlight (unless they're already there and I'm forgetting this).

 

[Xarlen]

I'd like to see some information on creating new spells, spell research, better information about tinkering and making Altered Core Classes.

A better fleshed out CR system. Or, a more indepth way of telling us how to handle CRs. What if you have more then 4 players? Less then? What if your PCs are more stronger then the average 4 players? Weaker?