Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="wedgeski" data-source="post: 1792886" data-attributes="member: 16212">No, not really. And there's nothing about 'Remove the classes' that makes the game simpler, I don't think, which was the intent of the original poster. All that would succeed in doing is making the game almost impenetrable to new players. Plus not make it D&amp;D any more. Which would be bad.&nbsp;I have few pet-dislikes in 3.5:&nbsp;1. Grappling. It's used all over the place and many, many monsters have it, so why does my group still have to refer to the PHB so many years after 3ed arrived? (answers on a postcard!) In particular, the list of available actions needs to be slimmed down/streamlined dramatically. There is no elegance to that list at all; we need to be able to decide if an action is possible without having to refer to a list.&nbsp;2. AoO's. I enjoy the strategy this brings to the battlemat (and I enjoy the battlemat), but again, the ludicrous plethora of exceptions that exists all over the rules must be dispensed with. I would also actually prefer it if AoO's didn't factor so heavily in movement and combat decisions, perhaps by reducing the efficacy of the attack (a blanket penalty to AoO attack rolls? some kind of opposed skill check to see if the attacker even reacts in time?). This would allow characters to move more freely about the battlemat without fear of getting taken down.&nbsp;3. NPC generation. Creating high-level NPC's with their massed skills, feats, templates, and all of the various prerequisites that are, or are not met in the course of their levels, is a pain in the rear end. However, given that I like the skills, feats, and templates systems, this is probably just something I'm going to have to live with. <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&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> &nbsp;That's about it really. I think d20 is (for the most part) a really good mix of well-designed subsystems hung on an elegant central mechanic, and am pretty happy with it overall.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="wedgeski, post: 1792886, member: 16212"] No, not really. And there's nothing about 'Remove the classes' that makes the game simpler, I don't think, which was the intent of the original poster. All that would succeed in doing is making the game almost impenetrable to new players. Plus not make it D&D any more. Which would be bad. I have few pet-dislikes in 3.5: 1. Grappling. It's used all over the place and many, many monsters have it, so why does my group still have to refer to the PHB so many years after 3ed arrived? (answers on a postcard!) In particular, the list of available actions needs to be slimmed down/streamlined dramatically. There is no elegance to that list at all; we need to be able to decide if an action is possible [i]without[/i] having to refer to a list. 2. AoO's. I enjoy the strategy this brings to the battlemat (and I enjoy the battlemat), but again, the ludicrous plethora of exceptions that exists all over the rules must be dispensed with. I would also actually prefer it if AoO's didn't factor [i]so[/i] heavily in movement and combat decisions, perhaps by reducing the efficacy of the attack (a blanket penalty to AoO attack rolls? some kind of opposed skill check to see if the attacker even reacts in time?). This would allow characters to move more freely about the battlemat without fear of getting taken down. 3. NPC generation. Creating high-level NPC's with their massed skills, feats, templates, and all of the various prerequisites that are, or are not met in the course of their levels, is a pain in the rear end. However, given that I like the skills, feats, and templates systems, this is probably just something I'm going to have to live with. :) That's about it really. I think d20 is (for the most part) a really good mix of well-designed subsystems hung on an elegant central mechanic, and am pretty happy with it overall. [/QUOTE]

Verification