Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 4372158" data-attributes="member: 19675">Personally, I don't have problems with most of the stuff people in this thread want to change, like strengthening multiclassing spellcasters, or changing the way they managed resources.I always felt that multiclassing was a choice between power and flexibility.&nbsp; If you multiclass, then you're not going to be spending as much time improving yourself as a caster.&nbsp; The resultant power drop is logical and internally consistent.I always liked the resource management style of spellcasters in D&amp;D, and it forced me and other players of my acquaintence to learn how to play spellcasters without &quot;going nova&quot;...or at least being competent in something else for when I ran out of spells.&nbsp; However, I also agree that the Reserve feats were a stroke of genius (much better, IMHO, than the 4Ed system) that should be expanded...and could even be incorporated into the full caster classes as a class feature.My dislikes?Critter sidekicks were too vulnerable in a standard, high-magic D&amp;D campaign (a problem not new to 3.X).&nbsp; IME, the only ones to survive more than a few game sessions were Paladin mounts.The vocabulary.&nbsp; It seems to me that there were many instances in which the game's designers tried to get fancy with the lingo, and by doing so, caused endless chains of confusion, speculation and probably a bunch of unneccessary house rules.&nbsp; See the innumerable threads on Natural Weapons/Unarmed Strikes/Manufactured Weapons for a good example (including various and sometimes conflicting responses from WizCustServ).&nbsp; My fix?&nbsp; There are only Natural &amp; Manufactured Weapons- everything else is just some flavor of one or the other.&nbsp; (&quot;Unarmed Strike&quot; would then be exactly what the PHB glossary and WizCustServe repeatedly told me- a successful strike using no manufactured weapon.)Simpler, clearer language &amp; resultant mechanics would probably have made the game much more enjoyable.XP for crafting didn't bother me much.&nbsp; The one change I made was at least 50% of the XP had to come from the intended end user.&nbsp; IOW, if the spellcaster was making something for himself (or an unspecified spellcaster), he paid the full XP amount.&nbsp; If, OTOH, he were making something for someone in his party, that PC would have to contribute at least half of the XP involved in item creation.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dannyalcatraz, post: 4372158, member: 19675"] Personally, I don't have problems with most of the stuff people in this thread want to change, like strengthening multiclassing spellcasters, or changing the way they managed resources. I always felt that multiclassing was a choice between power and flexibility. If you multiclass, then you're not going to be spending as much time improving yourself as a caster. The resultant power drop is logical and internally consistent. I always liked the resource management style of spellcasters in D&D, and it forced me and other players of my acquaintence to learn how to play spellcasters without "going nova"...or at least being competent in something else for when I ran out of spells. However, I also agree that the Reserve feats were a stroke of genius (much better, IMHO, than the 4Ed system) that should be expanded...and could even be incorporated into the full caster classes as a class feature. My dislikes? Critter sidekicks were too vulnerable in a standard, high-magic D&D campaign (a problem not new to 3.X). IME, the only ones to survive more than a few game sessions were Paladin mounts. The vocabulary. It seems to me that there were many instances in which the game's designers tried to get fancy with the lingo, and by doing so, caused endless chains of confusion, speculation and probably a bunch of unneccessary house rules. See the innumerable threads on Natural Weapons/Unarmed Strikes/Manufactured Weapons for a good example (including various and sometimes conflicting responses from WizCustServ). My fix? There are only Natural & Manufactured Weapons- everything else is just some flavor of one or the other. ("Unarmed Strike" would then be exactly what the PHB glossary and WizCustServe repeatedly told me- a successful strike using no manufactured weapon.) Simpler, clearer language & resultant mechanics would probably have made the game much more enjoyable. XP for crafting didn't bother me much. The one change I made was at least 50% of the XP had to come from the intended end user. IOW, if the spellcaster was making something for himself (or an unspecified spellcaster), he paid the full XP amount. If, OTOH, he were making something for someone in his party, that PC would have to contribute at least half of the XP involved in item creation. [/QUOTE]

Verification