• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

[WOTC] Core Rulebooks to be revised?

Nightfall

Sage of the Scarred Lands
MerricB said:
It will be interesting to see what happens to the Ranger. It does have some issues. :(

There are very few spells that I think will change around - I do feel that the Ranger spell list will get an overhaul, and some of the added material will be new Ranger spells.

Cheers!

Right well, so far I don't see any truly bad things for the prestige classes in R&R 1 or R&R. But I am concerned about changes that might be made because of it.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

JoeGKushner

First Post
I actually asked about something like this months ago on the boards with the simple question of changing some skills and feats to incorporate gameplay. I'll be picking up the new editions. I understand not everyone has the money for such but those people, simply put, aren't the market that WoTC is aiming for. Their market now are the people who will be buying more books. It's like cars or operating systems. Some people are always in the market and those are the ones being targeted. In some ways it sucks because people really want the object in question. Hell, I'd love to break down and get some items but the cost is too prohibitive so I'm not in those markets.

In short, looking forward to seeing the new books, doubt that people who don't have money to buy them will be an issue, feel that many who have the money may show some initial resistance but if presentation, layout, and extra material are of top quality, they'll break down, especially if everyone else is using that material ala RPGA, etc...
 

Gez

First Post
What's the problem with haste ? I can see a point for harm, but haste, WTF ?

I've made some speculations.

The PH gets 34 new pages. They can sure put any number of new nifties, but sadly, that would be insufficient for what I expected, integrating psionics in the core book (I've guesstimated that would take about 50 pages).

The DMG gets 64 new pages. Among the PrC, there will probably be some of the splatbook; but I would also put some virtual money on the generic PrCs from the FRCS (archmage, hierophant, arcane devotee, divine champion, divine disciple, divine seeker).

The MM gets 96 new pages. Even with a more space-consuming layout, new art, and new explanations, they'll probably have enough space to add a bunch of monsters. Sure, they could adapt missing ones, or reprint some selected few; but on the other hand, I've heard the monster compendium Monsters of Faerûn was out of print. It's a 96-page, and it could be less by removing all the redundant infos and "In the Realms" section. On the other hand, if the revised books are tied with the new campaign setting, these 96 pages could be taken with "In the Realms"-esque fluff for that setting for each of the monsters.
 

Gez

First Post
As for putting the new rules and corrections to the SRD... That would be very kind from WotC. I don't expect it. As long as the current SRD is compatible with the new rules, they won't feel the need for it.
 

I can't believe the amount of complaining about this (especially given the amount of complaining there is about too much errata).

My guess is that the current print runs of the core books are likely to be out of stock by next summer. WOTC is going to print another run -- would you rather have them print another run of the current books as is, or print revised current books? No question in my mind.

Sure, the new added material is a bit of a marketing ploy to sell the minis game, and get people to re-buy the same books, but if there are any dramatic rules revisions I'll be shocked. My guess is added splatbook material and minor corrections from errata/FAQ -- I doubt the classes will be revised.

I think this is a good thing. WOTC could have punted and just reprinted the books; instead, they took the time to correct and update them, then threw in a little extra.

Those who are getting themselves in an uproar about possible rules revisions need to take a deep breath and wait until they are explained rather than running their imaginations and mouths.
 

vraad

First Post
I talked to my players last night at our weekly session. They were LIVID!!! I was a little shocked at just how upset they were with Wizards for doing this, after all, two of these people are the kind who have to have everything that's ever produced. Apparently this is the straw that broke the camels back for them.

Well, that's 7 PHBs that won't be bought.

:cool:
 


Doc_Klueless

Doors and Corners
Supporter
vraad said:
Well, that's 7 PHBs that won't be bought.

:cool:
While I don't doubt that at this moment, they are livid and totally set not to buy the new books. I'm wondering, though, if their lividity will continue for the next 6 month and survive first contact with the actual books themselves.

This is not meant as a dig, but I truly think that a lot of the uproar and anger will fade over the next couple months and mostly fade once the actual books can be had. OR it'll get worse if WotC somehow screws the pooch with the books themselves.
 

Felon

First Post
Thorntangle said:
Guess the changes time:
Half-orcs get Scent
Skill Focus is now +3
Tracking becomes a skill instead of a wonky feat.
Rangers get access to Tracking skill and bonus feats instead of TWF frontloading.
Monks may multiclass
AoO get Sage diagrams inserted
Shield/Tower Shield clarified

IMO the only thing you can count on here is the tower shield clarification. A change to Skill Focus is possible--or even dropping it altogether as is done in d20 Modern in favor of double-dipping skill feats ala Alertness--but rather than make it a numerical change, they can add a feature (e.g. the skill is always treated as a class skill). This way the skill is technically still backwards-compatible.

Here are some of my personal hopes and expectations:

Elves and Half-elves-If elves' favored class is wizard, then give them a racial package that actually makes for good wizards, not good rangers. Do SOMETHING special with half-elves, or just drop them completely.

Paladins-Core classes should offer some flexibility. Keeping with that spirit, a core class should not be confined to a single alignment. It makes no sense to say that there are others sorts of holy warriors out there that are different from the paladin, and yet possess mostly the same abilities. Why is paladin core while the others are all prestige classes (e.g. Blackguard, Holy Liberator)? Good clerics and evil clerics have some profound differences, but these are accounted for within a single cleric class. Why should it be any different for paladins? Rename the class something more ubiquitous, like “Crusader” or “Holy Champion”.

Rangers-While I’ve always been able to finger the aspects of the ranger that I didn’t like (dual-wielding, spellcasting), I’ve never been able to decide what exactly a ranger should receive in their stead. At any rate, I think the only major change will be adjusting the Favored Enemy ability so that the damage isn’t dependent on the enemy being subject to critical hits. Perhaps the option for defensive favored enemy bonuses from MotW will be offered.

Clerics-Hoo boy. The most munchkin of the 3e classes, they probably still won’t receive any necessary balancing. That would require sufficient paring as to be considered a major “nerfing”, and I’ll bet the farm that there won’t be none of that. They may only start with one domain, and gain more as they advance, perhaps at the same rate that wizards gain their bonus feats. I very much suspect that at least some of the divine feats from DotF will be included (hopefully the extremely broken Divine Might feat will not be one of them). I would like prestige domains to make it in, and that perhaps clerics can access them at some point during their career (after 10th level) without taking a prestige class. I hope that the divine spells that allow a cleric to co-opt the fighter’s role are SERIOUSLY tweaked (Divine Power, Divine Favor). Oh, and PLEAE make them learn spells-don’t just give divine casters full access once they reach the proper level.

Barbarians-Stagger the fast movement ability up to 2nd-level. Damage reduction should kick in earlier. Why 4 skill points?

Sorcerers-Sure hope they don’t perform Monte Cook’s mucho-nerfed version. The appeal of playing a sorcerer is NOT less power, more skill points.

Bards-The bardic knowledge class as presented in the current PHB is pretty much just an artifact left over from 2e. We have Knowledge skills now. Give bards a bonus to those skills, and let them make untrained checks. Allow them to properly ID items for pete’s sake (q.v. the loremaster PrC).

Wizards-Compared to his divine-spellcasting counterparts, this fellow got quite a raw deal. Worst hit points and BAP, only one good saving throw, can’t wear armor, no class features other than spellcasting. The bonus feats are nice, but spread far apart. The inadequacies become obvious when designing wizzie-oriented PrCs; unlike other classes, there’s very to “barter-off” for prestige class features, so you wind up with that every-other-level spell progression rubbish.

Druids-Is anyone else as perturbed as I am that spells with animal names like Bull’s Strength and Cat’s Grace AREN’T on this bugger’s spell list? I always envisioned the druid’s party role as being the master of “buff” spells. Seems an obvious niche. Throw stoneskin on that list while we’re at it.

Prestige Classes-What’s it been, three years? And I have yet to see a warrior/mage PrC that’s worth a darn. Let’s get moving on that.

Armor-Would be nice if a warrior had more complex decisions when walking into the local armor shop than High Dex = chain shirt, Low Dex = full plate. For all the penalties that it incurs, the best medium armor you can get provides only one more point of AC than the best light armor? Did anybody spend any time whatsoever mulling this over? Designers? Playtesters? Anyone? Bueller? Anyone?

Rogues-No complaints here, except that they should have proficiency with slings. Go read a Gray Mouser story sometime.

Weapons-I can’t stand the fact that bows were made flat-out superior to every other ranged weapon in existence in every respect. Crossbows have more going for them than just being simpler to wield. Thrown weapons should have their advantages, (such as not drawing attacks of opportunity) and I know a lot fighter/rogues out there who would love to be masters of throwing knivers, and are quite annoyed that they can only toss one per round (even though nocking an arrow obviously takes longer than hurling a blade).

Spells-Fix Shield so it gives a more reasonable AC bonus and clarify whether or not two Shield spells can give a character 3/4 cover from all directions. Insert all of the ability score enhancement spells from the splat books. Let's see the end of no-save, no-defense spells like Harm and Time Stop, as they screw up the game at all levels of play. Lessen the material comp cost of Stoneskin. And most importantly, have some rhyme and reason to how a powerful a spell should be for its level. It's stupid how fireball and lightning bolt are such a MASSIVE step up from any 2nd-level spell, and even more stupid that they're better artillery than some higher-level Sor/Wiz spells (e.g. Ice Storm).

Items-Seems that the designers assigned a low gp value on items that grant a lot of mobility (boots of speed, boots of striding & springing, wings of flying), and that was a real mistake. Spell activation items should require some sort of level restriction. Gettng pretty tired of seeing 4th-level wand monkey priests of Boccob/Wee Jas in full plate with Shield wands getting AC’s of 30+ while tossing fireballs and lightning bolts.

Skills-Follow D20 Modern's lead here. Lots of copying and pasting.

Feats-Divine feats from DotF (drop Divine Might, very broken), Wild shape feats from MotW, 2-weapon feats from MotW, Toughness feats from MotW, Sneak attack & bardic music feats from SaS, metamagic feats from DotF and ToB, parrying feats from Dragon magazine. Certainly expect to see all of the non-epic feats that were presented in the ELH. Please WotC, pretty please, embrace the concept of feat chains so that fighters have something to work towards as they ascend to high levels. And insert more dual-skill feats like Alertness (again, take a cue from D2M).

Combat-Definitely hope that the new PHB specifically states an unarmed character does not threaten the 5' area around him without the Improved Unarmed Strike feat. It's stupid to slow the game down because a wizard wants to make a feeble 1d3 unarmed strike as some foe moves past him (which, being an unarmed attack, provokes an AoO from the person he's attacking; lame waste of time!). Also would be nice to have more 5-square-grid diagrams. Throw in the section on flanking large creatures from SaS, and some elaboration on how reach extends the threat radius around a creature.

Monsters--Utilizing the same format adopted in MM2. Expect to see ECL's and "Society" notations for most monsters. Expect abilities to be more clearly explained. Expect grapple check bonuses for creatures with Improved Grab.

OK, I realize most of that stuff is just wishful thinking, but if they act on even a tenth of that, I'll be happy to cough up another $90.
 
Last edited:

KDLadage

Explorer
Elves and Half-elves-If elves' favored class is wizard, then give them a racial package that actually makes for good wizards, not good rangers. Do SOMETHING special with half-elves, or just drop them completely.
Agreed on both accounts.
Paladins-Core classes should offer some flexibility. Keeping with that spirit, a core class should not be confined to a single alignment. It makes no sense to say that there are others sorts of holy warriors out there that are different from the paladin, and yet possess mostly the same abilities. Why is paladin core while the others are all prestige classes (e.g. Blackguard, Holy Liberator)? Good clerics and evil clerics have some profound differences, but these are accounted for within a single cleric class. Why should it be any different for paladins? Rename the class something more ubiquitous, like “Crusader” or “Holy Champion”.
Or drop it. Make it a Prestige Class (which is what the darned thing should be anyway!)
Rangers-While I’ve always been able to finger the aspects of the ranger that I didn’t like (dual-wielding, spellcasting), I’ve never been able to decide what exactly a ranger should receive in their stead. At any rate, I think the only major change will be adjusting the Favored Enemy ability so that the damage isn’t dependent on the enemy being subject to critical hits. Perhaps the option for defensive favored enemy bonuses from MotW will be offered.
Take a look at teh Crusader class from Volume IV of Umbragia. Let me know what you think. Then, once I get Volume VI out you will see how I feel that a ranger should be handled...
Clerics-Hoo boy. The most munchkin of the 3e classes, they probably still won’t receive any necessary balancing. That would require sufficient paring as to be considered a major “nerfing”, and I’ll bet the farm that there won’t be none of that. They may only start with one domain, and gain more as they advance, perhaps at the same rate that wizards gain their bonus feats. I very much suspect that at least some of the divine feats from DotF will be included (hopefully the extremely broken Divine Might feat will not be one of them). I would like prestige domains to make it in, and that perhaps clerics can access them at some point during their career (after 10th level) without taking a prestige class. I hope that the divine spells that allow a cleric to co-opt the fighter’s role are SERIOUSLY tweaked (Divine Power, Divine Favor). Oh, and PLEAE make them learn spells-don’t just give divine casters full access once they reach the proper level.
Again, look over the Volume IV stuff we are working on right now. Clerics are getting a major overhaul in that book. If what you say above is what you are looking for, I think ou will be pleasantly surprised to see what we have done.
Barbarians-Stagger the fast movement ability up to 2nd-level. Damage reduction should kick in earlier. Why 4 skill points?
These are a strange class that I flip-flop on what to do with...
Sorcerers-Sure hope they don’t perform Monte Cook’s mucho-nerfed version. The appeal of playing a sorcerer is NOT less power, more skill points.
Agreed.
Bards-The bardic knowledge class as presented in the current PHB is pretty much just an artifact left over from 2e. We have Knowledge skills now. Give bards a bonus to those skills, and let them make untrained checks. Allow them to properly ID items for pete’s sake (q.v. the loremaster PrC).
Good ideas... where were you when I was putting Volume III together? :)
Wizards-Compared to his divine-spellcasting counterparts, this fellow got quite a raw deal. Worst hit points and BAP, only one good saving throw, can’t wear armor, no class features other than spellcasting. The bonus feats are nice, but spread far apart. The inadequacies become obvious when designing wizzie-oriented PrCs; unlike other classes, there’s very to “barter-off” for prestige class features, so you wind up with that every-other-level spell progression rubbish.
Interesting... gets me thinking...
Druids-Is anyone else as perturbed as I am that spells with animal names like Bull’s Strength and Cat’s Grace AREN’T on this bugger’s spell list? I always envisioned the druid’s party role as being the master of “buff” spells. Seems an obvious niche. Throw stoneskin on that list while we’re at it.
Again, you might want to look over at the Volume IV discussions in the UMBRAGIA boards... :)
Prestige Classes-What’s it been, three years? And I have yet to see a warrior/mage PrC that’s worth a darn. Let’s get moving on that.
I have seen very few Prestige Classes that actually fit the role defined for them. I could care less what combo the PrC is designed for -- make it fit the role a PrC is supposed to fill, and I will listen.
Armor-Would be nice if a warrior had more complex decisions when it comes to armor than “What’s it going to be? Chain shirt or full plate?” For all the penalties that it incurs, the best medium armor you can get provides only one more point of AC than the best light armor? Did anybody spend any time whatsoever mulling this over? Designers? Playtesters? Anyone? Bueller? Anyone?
Using a more 'damage reduction' concept could help here. Even if it were combined with the 'better AC' concepts as well.
Rogues-No complaints here, except that they should have proficiency with slings. Go read a Gray Mouser story sometime.
Preach on, Brother!
Weapons-I can’t stand the fact that bows were made flat-out superior to every other ranged weapon in existence in every respect. Crossbows have more going for them than just being simpler to wield. Thrown weapons should have their advantages, (such as not drawing attacks of opportunity) and I know a lot fighter/rogues out there who would love to be masters of throwing knivers, and are quite annoyed that they can only toss one per round (even though nocking an arrow obviously takes longer than hurling a blade).
{takes notes}
Spells-Fix Shield so it gives a more reasonable AC bonus and clarify whether or not two Shield spells can give a character 3/4 cover from all directions. Insert all of the ability score enhancement spells from the splat books. Let's see the end of no-save, no-defense spells like Harm and Time Stop, as they screw up the game at all levels of play. Lessen the material comp cost of Stoneskin. And most importantly, have some rhyme and reason to how a powerful a spell should be for its level. It's stupid how fireball and lightning bolt are such a MASSIVE step up from any 2nd-level spell, and even more stupid that they're better artillery than some higher-level Sor/Wiz spells (e.g. Ice Storm).
Have you read over the Volume III material? We will be revisiting that portion of teh UMBRAGIA setting in the near future, and would love to have your comments and ideas when we do.
Items-Seems that the designers assigned a low gp value on items that grant a lot of mobility (boots of speed, boots of striding & springing, wings of flying), and that was a real mistake. Spell activation items should require some sort of level restriction. Gettng pretty tired of seeing 4th-level wand monkey priests of Boccob/Wee Jas in full plate with Shield wands getting AC’s of 30+ while tossing fireballs and lightning bolts.
:) Good points.
Skills-Follow D20 Modern's lead here. Lots of copying and pasting.
I have not yet got my copy, but I have been reading teh Modern SRD. I tend to agree here.
Feats-Divine feats from DotF (drop Divine Might, very broken), Wild shape feats from MotW, 2-weapon feats from MotW, Toughness feats from MotW, Sneak attack & bardic music feats from SaS, metamagic feats from DotF and ToB, parrying feats from Dragon magazine. Certainly expect to see all of the non-epic feats that were presented in the ELH. Please WotC, pretty please, embrace the concept of feat chains so that fighters have something to work towards as they ascend to high levels. And insert more dual-skill feats like Alertness (again, take a cue from D2M).
Yes, I see your point here.
Combat-Definitely hope that the new PHB specifically states an unarmed character does not threaten the 5' area around him without the Improved Unarmed Strike feat. It's stupid to slow the game down because a wizard wants to make a feeble 1d3 unarmed strike as some foe moves past him (which, being an unarmed attack, provokes an AoO from the person he's attacking; lame waste of time!). Also would be nice to have more 5-square-grid diagrams. Throw in the section on flanking large creatures from SaS, and some elaboration on how reach extends the threat radius around a creature.
Must re-read the AoO rules, I think you are reading at least one part of this incorrect... (or perhaps I am). Can an attack that is generated as an AoO itself generate an AoO against the attacking character?
Monsters--Utilizing the same format adopted in MM2. Expect to see ECL's and "Society" notations for most monsters. Expect abilities to be more clearly explained. Expect grapple check bonuses for creatures with Improved Grab.
All yes. Plus, read my review of the MM -- I have a lot of issues with this book.
OK, I realize most of that stuff is just wishful thinking, but if they act on even a tenth of that, I'll be happy to cough up another $90.
Same here.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top