Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 2958695" data-attributes="member: 29398">What would "wow" me if it showed up in a hypothetical 4e (assuming intelligent and useable design throughout; these are in no particular order except the last one): - completely and only designed as a tabletop game, without any attempt to shoehorn the system so it fits with online games, miniatures games, etc.; - spell points, even as an option; - a character cannot have more than 2 classes, period.  If you want to run another class, play another character. (I'd go so far as to say no more than *one* class, but the howls of outrage would deafen me...) <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  Even in older editions, building a party out of single-class characters just works better in game play; - then, more clearly define the roles of the different classes as per 1e - fighters fight, wizards cast (but *never* cast in melee; if you want to play a melee caster, play a War Cleric), Thieves sneak, and so on; - stop the "power creep" idea, where all that happens at higher levels is that all the numbers get bigger to the point where the die roll is nearly irrelevant - when the "+" amount is more than the size of the die you're rolling, something's wrong; - re-work skills completely: have a few (e.g. riding, swimming, boating) that anyone can do, remove all the diplomacy "skills" that are too often used as a shortcut around good roleplaying, and combine or remove some of the rest for everyone except rogue/thief-type classes; - reduce and simplify feats - there are far too many to keep track of - and for what's left, come up with suggested "tracks" e.g. if you want to build an archer, take a combat class and here's a feat track by level; - split the game into two versions defined by advancement speed - a "short" version with fast-track bumping like 3e, streamlined feats, skills, character generation, etc., designed for a 1-year-ish campaign, and a "long" version with slower advancement, a bit more optional complexity, etc. designed for a long-term (2-5+ years) campaign; - make it as far as possible backwards-compatible with all previous editions; - bring back the idea of casting times for spells, activation times for devices, etc.; - use a smaller initiative die in combat e.g. d10, cap initiative at 10 or 1 regardless of bonuses/penalties, then re-roll every round to get away from the your turn-my turn feel; - do away with stupidities like "gain a negative level" - if you lose a level, you lose a level and that's that; - bring back the idea of items by material get different saves vs. different types of damage; - assume reasonable player and DM intelligence - % dice are not the spawn of evil, and we *are* capable of figuring out how to roll under a stat - design the game for adults, and if kids want to play, they'll figure it out soon enough; - and the biggest thing (and hardest to explain clearly): bring back the mystery.  Where possible, move the bookkeeping away from the players e.g. why do they need to know their specific BAB.  Experienced players or those who have also DM'ed will figure it out anyway, and can handle the upkeep of a complex character, but I can understand any new player running in fright from the complexity of a 3e character sheet!  In 1e, it could be as simple as 6 base stats, some equipment, choose weapon proficiencies (and get spells if wizard), and drop the puck - the DM worried about the rest, and you could flesh out the character as you went along...you could get to the "wow" of learning the game, setting, etc. almost immediately.  3e has lost that, drowned in a sea of feats, skills, and numbers.Lanefan</blockquote>

Verification