Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Scurvy_Platypus" data-source="post: 5502851" data-attributes="member: 43283">Hmmm... Well, that being the case...My ideas:Simplified skills, like what you see in Fantasy Concepts or the Alpha release of Pathfinder Beta... err... you know what I mean. <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=":)" />Drop iterative attacks. Maybe allow for a second attack to be possible through spending a feat (I think Star Wars Saga did this). To make up for the lack of iterative attacks, a character's BaB is added as a damage bonus. Yes, that means a Fighter that's level 11 with an 18 Str and a longsword will do 1d8+15 points of damage, before adding in anything like Power Attack or whatever. I'm quite comfortable with that.Shift Saving Throws over to Defenses. Meaning, players don't make a Saving Throw; instead an attack is rolled against their Defense. Sorta what you see in 4e, but initially put out there in the Players Roll All the Dice thing from UA.Change feats from allowing a character to do something, to providing a bonus when doing something. Improvised Weapon? Stuff that, anyone can use an improvised weapon without penalty; pick up the feat and you get a _bonus_ to smashing that drunk dude with an ale tankard. [This is probably the biggest "WTF?!?!" in terms of re-design and mostly likely to not be adopted by anyone other than myself]Switch from a 3-19+ attribute scale and simply go with the bonuses. Other than slicing things even thinner and bragging about how one character is incrementally better than another, nobody cares about 18 vs 19. They care that it's a +4 bonus.Toss AoO. If a player wants to do something like that, a GM can decide on the fly how to handle it, but yank it from the rules; that way folks running/playing the game don't have to worry about it. It's always easier to add complexity, so those that fiend for it can insert the rules from the "advanced" game.Fixed hit points. The amount that's gained can vary depending on class if you want (i.e. casters get 4, Fighters get 8), but remove the random element.Fixed weapon damage. Take the average of the damage, that's the weapon base. If you feel that's too low, add a couple of feats to the game; the first one will add half again the base damage of the weapon, the second one doubles it. For example, longsword goes and becomes 4 point base damage. Don't like it, add the feats. With the one feat, the damage increases to 6 points base damage. Depending on how you word the 2nd feat and how worried you are about weapon damage, the 2nd feat will either change the base damage to 8 (double the original starting base damage) or the base damage will be changed to 12 (double the augmented base damage of 6). Fixed damage can be brutal, but it's much faster and you can tweak the values if need be.Simplify action types. Full round, move, and free. It might seem arbitrary to people, but again we're looking for simplicity. If you want to "count" how the actions work: 2 free actions= 1 move action. 2 move actions = 1 full round. Attacking is considered a "move" action. Assuming you've gone with the "no multiple attacks unless you have a feat", the 2nd attack from the feat would be using the 2nd move action. Simple yes, "realistic" probably not, much quicker I'd say.That's what I've got off the top of my head. I might poke back later if I feel praticularly moved. <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=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification