D&D (2024) Things You Think Would Improve the Game That We WON'T See

[MichaelSomething]

WOTC hiring a sociologist for D&D.

 

[DammitVictor]

I've got some axes I've been grinding for a long time about elements of TSR D&D that I think WotC/Paizo D&D sorely lacks, but to spare this thread those arguments I'll stick to things that are basically within 5e's design philosophy.

I agree with @the Jester about lowering hit points, and I'll go further: 1d4 for Wizards, Sorcerers, and Warlocks; 1d6 for Rogues, Bards, Clerics, and Druids, 1d8 for Fighters, Rangers, Paladins, and Monks, 1d10 for Barbarians. Add Constitution score to Hit Points at 1st level instead of CON bonus per level. Add CON bonus and half class HD to Hit Dice.

Link magical healing to Hit Dice.

Two subclass axes per class. They could overlap, like Cleric Domains in 3.X, or not, like the Warlock's Pact and Pact Boon.

Fix multiclassing, again. There are a lot of ways they could do this that I might be satisfied by... but they won't do any of them. My preference would be for a multiclassing feat that makes certain class/subclass levels stack with levels in other classes.

Replace Subraces with 1st level and progressive racial options and more racial feats. Separate Drow from Elf if necessary.

 

[Remathilis]

We won't see unified subclass progression that would facilitate subclasses that work with multiple classes.

We won't see unified spell lists that would allow for easier spell access and better arcane casters, along with potential list swapping the the option for different lists later (psionics).

We won't see druid templates that allows for customized forms rather than a small list.

We won't see short rests phased out to alleviate mandatory Union Breaks in the adventuring day.

We won't see Epic boons be part of the natural progression but instead remain an optional rule for the DM to ignore.

We won't see any attempts to unify redundant systems (such as some subraces becoming lineages and others becoming separate species) or attempts to use the same mechanics in multiple places (using templates for beastmaster pets or summons but stat blocks for wild shape and familiars). Or proficiency bonus per day uses. Or all subclasses getting bonus spells for sorcerer and ranger.

And i doubt some of the worst offensive broken spells are being touched.

What could have been...

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Yeah, agreed. I've seen several options over the years: Expert, Thief, Sneak, Jack-of-all-Trades, etc. None of them are great.

IMO Jack is solid, as is Rogue. They’re all rogueish. Not JoAT, just Jack. Being a Jack is an actual thing in English that means you’re a professional at a job, and when used derogatorily can mean a scoundrel, a poor quality tradesman, or simply be a classist insult.

But no one is insulting anyone when they refer to lumberjacks, steeplejacks, or Jack tars.

the Jack is a professional, and not of the upper classes at all. These are skilled folk that are often overlooked for doing physical work that isn’t as pretty as some, and they’re skillful and right solid bastards, every man Jack.

Just rings truer than “Expert” to me.

this seems to fiddly.
there is a reason that Bear totem is most popular. it's simple,

It’s not fiddly, it’s an increasing benefit.
And the Bear totem is popular because it’s powerful and evocative.

Rage:
you can rage on your turn. No action.
you have advantages on all attacks, saves and checks with STR and CON
all attacks have advantages on you
you have resistance to all damage.
gain bonus damage per barbarian table
duration 1 min
"insert normal requirement for sustaining rage"

No thanks. I’ll keep letting barbarians choose when to use reckless attack and when not.

Not everything needs to be distilled down to the simplest possible expression of the general idea.

 

[ART!]

Matching spell levels to character levels, i.e. you get 3rd level spells when you're 3rd level.

They won't do this because of tradition. I can see it happening somewhere down the line, like for a someday maybe, imaginary 6th edition.

And yes: making the ability score and the modifier into one thing. Hell, get rid of ability save proficiencies while you're at it.

 

[mellored]

Matching spell levels to character levels, i.e. you get 3rd level spells when you're 3rd level.

They won't do this because of tradition. I can see it happening somewhere down the line, like for a someday maybe, imaginary 6th edition.

At very least they could rename it to 3rd circle or something like that.

 

[lolsworth]

High level (11+) good. For DMs and players.

Best in slot spells being toned down eg shield, absorb elements, banishment

Spells that circumvent entire scenarios
being revised eg goodberry, pass without trace, tiny hut

Just use ability modifiers (not scores)

Get rid of alignment

 

[bedir than]

Exhaustion dropping Hit Dice that can be spent.

I think that would help make exploration meaningful

 

[overgeeked]

Oh man. So many things.

Dropping ability scores. Rebalancing resources around encounters instead of days. Monster stats by chart, a la MM on a Business Card, Forge of Foes, or Doctors & Daleks. Dropping save or suck (aka to-hit rolls). Removing feats. Removing subclasses. Removing multiclassing. Splitting combat and non-combat spells. Martials who can keep up with casters. Graded successes. Revised skill challenges.

So many things we’ll never see and all of them would make the game better.

 

[overgeeked]

Matching spell levels to character levels, i.e. you get 3rd level spells when you're 3rd level.

They won't do this because of tradition. I can see it happening somewhere down the line, like for a someday maybe, imaginary 6th edition.

It happened in 4E.

And yes: making the ability score and the modifier into one thing. Hell, get rid of ability save proficiencies while you're at it.

That would be great.