jmucchiello
Hero
This precisely describes my version of "simplifying" d20. It works nicely.Torm said:
D&D 3E/3.5 Conceptual Problems with 3E/3.5E and Desired Solutions for 4E
- Thread starter Roman
- Start date
Keldryn
Adventurer
Roman said:
I've done this, not really for D&D but earlier, when creating a set of attribute scores for a computer/console RPG design. My own set had (mostly independently-arrived-at) analogues to what are Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, and Intelligence in D&D (different names for some), but I ended up creating Awareness and Presence.
Awareness represents the acuity of your physical senses and the degree to which you are "in tune" with your surroundings. An exceptionally high Awareness means that not only are your physical senses very sharp, but you also have this sort of "sixth sense," as your awareness of your surroundings begins to extend into the otherworldly, the mystical, the spiritual... Empathy. Intuition remains a part of Awareness, as it does not represent ideas arrived at through the process of logic, but ideas which just suddenly you (quite possibly from what you are able to pick up on, either consciously or unconsciously).
Presence takes on most of what Charisma does and becomes more of a measure of inner strength. Personal magnetism, persuasiveness, the ability to lead -- or more specifically, the ability to make people want to follow you. Willpower definitely belongs as an aspect of this attribute. It's all about how people perceive you, and that projection of inner strength to the outside world -- confidence and self-assuredness -- is what lies behind many of these aspects that tend to attract people to you in droves. Physical attractiveness plays a role, but would be a fairly minor aspect. And I think that "Presence" is a better description of the D&D attribute "Charisma" even without the added Willpower aspect.
So this cleans up Wisdom and make it make a little more sense. Awareness is still a critical attribute for Rogues, Rangers, and others that make use of skills like spot or listen. It still makes sense as the primary attribute for Clerics and Druids and perhaps is a bit more focused on relevant aspects than when Willpower was part of the package. Awareness should perhaps have some effect on social interaction skills, perhaps depending on the circumstances, due to possibly being more perceptive of and in tune with another's emotional/mental state and a genuinely empathic understanding of his or her situation.
Presence makes Charisma a more useful/valuable stat than it was previously, as it would obviously replace the Wisdom bonus to Will saves. And I think the re-worked "Presence" fits as the primary attribute governing Sorcerers' and Bards' spells a little better as well.
Hmm, I think I might implement these changes in the next campaign that I run (which has been in the works for some time).
Keldryn
Adventurer
I've got a couple of conceptualizations that I'd like to see changed, right off the bat:
Divine vs Arcane magic distinction. Get rid of it -- it's arbitrary in the first place and becomes more meaningless and meaningless over time. The only real driving "logic" behind it is that "wizards can't heal." There really isn't much more to it and as more new Cleric domains are created, there are fewer and fewer wizard-only spells left.
All of the "x times per day" stuff. It's completely arbitrary and illogical and creates goofy rationalization about how Elves only need 4 hrs of meditation to rest, but have to spend another hours doing NOTHING before they can prepare spells again. That's goofy. And spell-like or supernatural abilities that can only be used x times per day are even weirder, as it makes one wonder who or what exactly is imposing these limits?
One conceptualization that I would like to see is a reduction in the number of base and prestige classes that you need to create to get a specific character type. The proliferation gets a bit out of control after a while, and we're getting a lot of redundant ones where it makes little sense to have both in the same game (Holy Liberator vs Paladin of Freedom, Spellsword vs Duskblace, Knight vs Cavalier, etc). I loved the idea of prestige classes when I first read about them, but I've been really disappointed in how they've been implemented.
Rather than have a set of core base classes that advance from levels 1 to 20 and then a set of prestige classes that can advance (generally) either 3, 5, or 10 levels. But they currently have to be balanced so that they aren't so good that it's a clear-cut choice to advance in that class instead of your original base class. And for a character like a Sorcerer, there aren't a lot of reasons to go back to advancing as a Sorcerer once you've taken pretty much any prestige class with "+1 spell caster level of existing class."
And really, if you are a Wizard or an Sorcerer and have finally achieved the reknowned Archmage prestisge class, why should you go back to the basics?
Even before 3e came out, I was an advocate of having a small number of base classes -- your typical Fighter, Magic-User, Thief, and (maybe) Cleric, and then creating all specialized character types via skill and feat selection and prestige classes. And that approach could work, I think:
When you create a 1st-level character, you would have a fairly small number of choices of base classes: Fighter/Warrior (obviously trained in combat), Rogue/Thief/Knave/Scout (your nimble, swift and/or sneaky character trained in a multitude of non-magical non-combat skills), and Apprentice (just learning to cast magic spells or spell-like abilities). Perhaps there could also be an Artisan (expert, craftsman, entertainer, etc), a Noble, and a Scholar (well-educated but no magical abilities) class as well.
Unlike the 3.x base classes, these new base classes do not have full 20-level progressions, and instead top out at perhaps 3-5 levels. These classes would have some alternate abilities (such as given in the Player's Handbook II and Unearthed Arcana) to allow for customization, and characters would receive feats a little more often, and perhaps gain more skill points -- at least in these basic classes.
Once you hit the limit in these classes, you would then need to select an advance ("prestige") class to continue advancement. Now this is where the more specialized classes appear. For example, if you wanted a character who was a Ranger, then you would have likely started out as a Warrior or Rogue/Scout. By the time you hit 4th or 5th level, you would have some combination of those two classes to provide the basic Ranger abilities... melee combat, use of the bow, stealth and the ability to perform a "sneak attack," survival skills, riding, the tracking feat, etc. When you take the "Ranger of the North" advanced class, you can advance through to 20th level, gaining abilities that suit your more specialized role but building on what you obtained in your basic classes. Or if you have all of those base abilities but aren't interested in the druidic spell-casting ranger, you could choose a Hunter of the King's Watch advanced class instead and focus on the pure non-magical skills.
All spellcasters would require 2 or 3 levels of the Apprentice class to gain the background in magical study required. Once the prerequisites are met, you could take advanced classes such as Illusionist, Healer, Druid of the Sacred Groves, Embermage, Spellsword (with enough Warrior abilities), Beguiler, Conjurer, Master of Shapes, Warmage, Artificer, Savant, Necromancer, etc).
Your basic Rogue/Knave/Scout class would lead to advanced classes such as Assassin, Bandit, Thief-Acrobat, Bard, Fence, Swashbuckler, Dread Pirate, etc.
Missing from all of this is the Cleric. If there is no divine/arcane distinction, then the Cleric need not exist as a class. All spells would be learned and cast in the same way -- which should be campaign-specific, and unless the DM wants to have a dozen and a half entirely different rationales and methods for spellcasting, she can just pick one that fits the tone of the campaign or culture.
Characters who represent divine agents on earth would be realized as advanced/prestige classes with granted powers (rather than "spells" as we know them). A member of any class could be a priest in a church, but only a very select few have the divine favour to be agents of their god(s), and their powers don't simply replicate existing spells.
And then there could be high-level, "super-prestige" classes such as "Archmage" or "Divine Champion" that are for characters who have mastered (or nearly so) their more advanced professions. Why would an Archmage ever want to go back to just being a "Wizard" or "Sorcerer" once they reach that point? (Because the books only give them 3-5 levels of advancement and they're done, that's why).
Everything builds on the foundation of the base classes. The abilities which you will learn as you advance into more specialized classes are "set up" by how you work your optional class abilities, multiclassing, and feat/skill selection. By the time you take that advanced class at 5th level or so, you have already built the basic archetype of the advanced role you wish to play. And also, there is nowhere left to go in your original class, so the advanced classes are balanced with one another, but don't need to be so concerned with not overshadowing what you get as a 14th-level Sorcerer or Fighter.
The advanced classes can be built so that you don't need the flavourless prestige classes like Mystic Theurge that exist only to accomodate the game mechanics needed to multiclass a specific class combo. With only a handful of level available for these base classes, the loss-of-specialization penalties for multiclassing are pretty minimal and are easily compensated for by choice of advanced class.
If "Spellsword" is your advanced class representing the warrior-mage archetype, then you don't need to worry about Fighter/Wizard multiclassing and how lousy their spells are, feats to help keep the caster level relevant, the Duskblade class to handle this sort of character from first level, but also a Spellsword prestige class to handle this type of character when Duskblade wasn't an option at 1st level.
In the current system, we have a few very culturally-neutral base classes (Fighter, Rogue), generic but still Western-based (Cleric, Wizard, Sorcerer), and then some classes that start to fill very specific roles (Barbarian, Bard, Druid, Ranger, Paladin, Monk). But the prestige versions of the Ranger, Paladin, and Bard in UA are kind of poorly done, and players might find it a long time to be able to take on those roles. The base classes which I proposed are more culturally-neutral and are intended to be flexible enough to build up the major archetypal abilities (or prerequisites anyway) to build on once specialized roles are taken on. It would be easy to tailor any of these to an Asian-themed setting, for example, and including Samurai, Sohei, Shugenja, Ninja, etc as the specialized classes.
Ack, it's getting late. I hope that was coherent. Basically, the bulk of the character's adventuring career will be spent in the advanced/specialized classes, while the basic classes will be left behind quickly (maybe only 3 levels of them). These more mundane basic classes could be integrated with some of the NPC classes as well, to streamline things a bit. There is only a certain degree of expertise than can be gained with that level of training, and anything higher than that roughly 3rd level requires advanced training and/or the extremes of life-or-death adventuring.
Divine vs Arcane magic distinction. Get rid of it -- it's arbitrary in the first place and becomes more meaningless and meaningless over time. The only real driving "logic" behind it is that "wizards can't heal." There really isn't much more to it and as more new Cleric domains are created, there are fewer and fewer wizard-only spells left.
All of the "x times per day" stuff. It's completely arbitrary and illogical and creates goofy rationalization about how Elves only need 4 hrs of meditation to rest, but have to spend another hours doing NOTHING before they can prepare spells again. That's goofy. And spell-like or supernatural abilities that can only be used x times per day are even weirder, as it makes one wonder who or what exactly is imposing these limits?
One conceptualization that I would like to see is a reduction in the number of base and prestige classes that you need to create to get a specific character type. The proliferation gets a bit out of control after a while, and we're getting a lot of redundant ones where it makes little sense to have both in the same game (Holy Liberator vs Paladin of Freedom, Spellsword vs Duskblace, Knight vs Cavalier, etc). I loved the idea of prestige classes when I first read about them, but I've been really disappointed in how they've been implemented.
Rather than have a set of core base classes that advance from levels 1 to 20 and then a set of prestige classes that can advance (generally) either 3, 5, or 10 levels. But they currently have to be balanced so that they aren't so good that it's a clear-cut choice to advance in that class instead of your original base class. And for a character like a Sorcerer, there aren't a lot of reasons to go back to advancing as a Sorcerer once you've taken pretty much any prestige class with "+1 spell caster level of existing class."
And really, if you are a Wizard or an Sorcerer and have finally achieved the reknowned Archmage prestisge class, why should you go back to the basics?
Even before 3e came out, I was an advocate of having a small number of base classes -- your typical Fighter, Magic-User, Thief, and (maybe) Cleric, and then creating all specialized character types via skill and feat selection and prestige classes. And that approach could work, I think:
When you create a 1st-level character, you would have a fairly small number of choices of base classes: Fighter/Warrior (obviously trained in combat), Rogue/Thief/Knave/Scout (your nimble, swift and/or sneaky character trained in a multitude of non-magical non-combat skills), and Apprentice (just learning to cast magic spells or spell-like abilities). Perhaps there could also be an Artisan (expert, craftsman, entertainer, etc), a Noble, and a Scholar (well-educated but no magical abilities) class as well.
Unlike the 3.x base classes, these new base classes do not have full 20-level progressions, and instead top out at perhaps 3-5 levels. These classes would have some alternate abilities (such as given in the Player's Handbook II and Unearthed Arcana) to allow for customization, and characters would receive feats a little more often, and perhaps gain more skill points -- at least in these basic classes.
Once you hit the limit in these classes, you would then need to select an advance ("prestige") class to continue advancement. Now this is where the more specialized classes appear. For example, if you wanted a character who was a Ranger, then you would have likely started out as a Warrior or Rogue/Scout. By the time you hit 4th or 5th level, you would have some combination of those two classes to provide the basic Ranger abilities... melee combat, use of the bow, stealth and the ability to perform a "sneak attack," survival skills, riding, the tracking feat, etc. When you take the "Ranger of the North" advanced class, you can advance through to 20th level, gaining abilities that suit your more specialized role but building on what you obtained in your basic classes. Or if you have all of those base abilities but aren't interested in the druidic spell-casting ranger, you could choose a Hunter of the King's Watch advanced class instead and focus on the pure non-magical skills.
All spellcasters would require 2 or 3 levels of the Apprentice class to gain the background in magical study required. Once the prerequisites are met, you could take advanced classes such as Illusionist, Healer, Druid of the Sacred Groves, Embermage, Spellsword (with enough Warrior abilities), Beguiler, Conjurer, Master of Shapes, Warmage, Artificer, Savant, Necromancer, etc).
Your basic Rogue/Knave/Scout class would lead to advanced classes such as Assassin, Bandit, Thief-Acrobat, Bard, Fence, Swashbuckler, Dread Pirate, etc.
Missing from all of this is the Cleric. If there is no divine/arcane distinction, then the Cleric need not exist as a class. All spells would be learned and cast in the same way -- which should be campaign-specific, and unless the DM wants to have a dozen and a half entirely different rationales and methods for spellcasting, she can just pick one that fits the tone of the campaign or culture.
Characters who represent divine agents on earth would be realized as advanced/prestige classes with granted powers (rather than "spells" as we know them). A member of any class could be a priest in a church, but only a very select few have the divine favour to be agents of their god(s), and their powers don't simply replicate existing spells.
And then there could be high-level, "super-prestige" classes such as "Archmage" or "Divine Champion" that are for characters who have mastered (or nearly so) their more advanced professions. Why would an Archmage ever want to go back to just being a "Wizard" or "Sorcerer" once they reach that point? (Because the books only give them 3-5 levels of advancement and they're done, that's why).
Everything builds on the foundation of the base classes. The abilities which you will learn as you advance into more specialized classes are "set up" by how you work your optional class abilities, multiclassing, and feat/skill selection. By the time you take that advanced class at 5th level or so, you have already built the basic archetype of the advanced role you wish to play. And also, there is nowhere left to go in your original class, so the advanced classes are balanced with one another, but don't need to be so concerned with not overshadowing what you get as a 14th-level Sorcerer or Fighter.
The advanced classes can be built so that you don't need the flavourless prestige classes like Mystic Theurge that exist only to accomodate the game mechanics needed to multiclass a specific class combo. With only a handful of level available for these base classes, the loss-of-specialization penalties for multiclassing are pretty minimal and are easily compensated for by choice of advanced class.
If "Spellsword" is your advanced class representing the warrior-mage archetype, then you don't need to worry about Fighter/Wizard multiclassing and how lousy their spells are, feats to help keep the caster level relevant, the Duskblade class to handle this sort of character from first level, but also a Spellsword prestige class to handle this type of character when Duskblade wasn't an option at 1st level.
In the current system, we have a few very culturally-neutral base classes (Fighter, Rogue), generic but still Western-based (Cleric, Wizard, Sorcerer), and then some classes that start to fill very specific roles (Barbarian, Bard, Druid, Ranger, Paladin, Monk). But the prestige versions of the Ranger, Paladin, and Bard in UA are kind of poorly done, and players might find it a long time to be able to take on those roles. The base classes which I proposed are more culturally-neutral and are intended to be flexible enough to build up the major archetypal abilities (or prerequisites anyway) to build on once specialized roles are taken on. It would be easy to tailor any of these to an Asian-themed setting, for example, and including Samurai, Sohei, Shugenja, Ninja, etc as the specialized classes.
Ack, it's getting late. I hope that was coherent. Basically, the bulk of the character's adventuring career will be spent in the advanced/specialized classes, while the basic classes will be left behind quickly (maybe only 3 levels of them). These more mundane basic classes could be integrated with some of the NPC classes as well, to streamline things a bit. There is only a certain degree of expertise than can be gained with that level of training, and anything higher than that roughly 3rd level requires advanced training and/or the extremes of life-or-death adventuring.
Keldryn
Adventurer
I would also like to see a move away from (or at least more alternatives to) the necessity of magical healing. It forces people who don't want to play clerics to play them because the party needs a healer. If you allowed a wizard type to use healing spells, the only problem that I foresee is that they'd spend all of the spells on healing, then get bored the rest of the game because they can't even be a secondary fighter.
The Vitality/Wound system addressed this (with Vitality points returning much faster that Wound/Hit points), but had too many other issues.
Something built into the core rules so that high-level characters don't have to rest 10 days to heal half their hit points or else get a large number of healing spells cast on them. Vitality/Wound could work, but not with the current Critical Hits, Sneak/Skirmish attacks, etc. Make the Heal skill less laughable.
The Vitality/Wound system addressed this (with Vitality points returning much faster that Wound/Hit points), but had too many other issues.
Something built into the core rules so that high-level characters don't have to rest 10 days to heal half their hit points or else get a large number of healing spells cast on them. Vitality/Wound could work, but not with the current Critical Hits, Sneak/Skirmish attacks, etc. Make the Heal skill less laughable.
Sejs
First Post
Glyfair said:
Have it where items have two ratings: Weight and Bulk.
Anyway, my suggestion as far as conceptual changes: less dependence on gear for character ability, particularly for the non-magical classes. Not sure exactly how to do this, though something based on the ToB maneuvers system might be a start.
Every spell being a unique rule with special range, size, duration, saves, components etc. has to go.
Clerics are the healers, druids can somewhat heal but not deal with afflictions very well, and paladin/ranger/bard can waste an action to apply a bandage has to go. Healing needs to be spread out more.
Cleric damage spells being limited, oh, add a book, sound lance, assay, tada, you're now a primary damage dealer, has to go. Books should improve the game, not be must-buy power-ups.
Dropping a dagger on your foot should not be a death sentance for a 1st level wizard. The disparity of HP should go, d4 should not be a HD, constitution should not be giving as many HP as it does at higher levels and shouldn't be able to be giving so many HP that at higher levels it's often giving more than the character's HD does!
Capping skill points based on class level makes no sense, a shopkeeper can't get a decent appraise skill for instance. Basing skills off d20 likewise makes even moderate ranks in a skill, like 10 points, still be very unreliable. Making very basic skills such as spot require skill points, then giving many classes very few skill points... and for many classes spot is cross-class makes no sense either. Healing not be a class skill for fighter, but it is for clerics who get cure spells? Jumping distance based on skill? Huh?
Massive Damage... a 1/20 of something falling over dead. 50 points is a lot to a 20th level wizard who has 40 HP total. It isn't to a barbarian with 300.
Clerics are the healers, druids can somewhat heal but not deal with afflictions very well, and paladin/ranger/bard can waste an action to apply a bandage has to go. Healing needs to be spread out more.
Cleric damage spells being limited, oh, add a book, sound lance, assay, tada, you're now a primary damage dealer, has to go. Books should improve the game, not be must-buy power-ups.
Dropping a dagger on your foot should not be a death sentance for a 1st level wizard. The disparity of HP should go, d4 should not be a HD, constitution should not be giving as many HP as it does at higher levels and shouldn't be able to be giving so many HP that at higher levels it's often giving more than the character's HD does!
Capping skill points based on class level makes no sense, a shopkeeper can't get a decent appraise skill for instance. Basing skills off d20 likewise makes even moderate ranks in a skill, like 10 points, still be very unreliable. Making very basic skills such as spot require skill points, then giving many classes very few skill points... and for many classes spot is cross-class makes no sense either. Healing not be a class skill for fighter, but it is for clerics who get cure spells? Jumping distance based on skill? Huh?
Massive Damage... a 1/20 of something falling over dead. 50 points is a lot to a 20th level wizard who has 40 HP total. It isn't to a barbarian with 300.
Last edited:
ThoughtBubble
First Post
Seriously?
Alignment.
Also, character creation.
Also, party creation.
Also, adventure creation.
Also, an actual section on building flavor into/out of the mechanics. "And here are 6 changes to make a swashbuckling friendly game."
Perhaps a little bit explaining some of the whys or hows so that changes don't have to be made quite so blindly.
4 or 5 ways to handle the economy. Patrons, caches of aincient stuff, disposable items, family heirlooms that power up, and piles of cash.
Less linear stacking of modifiers. I mean, seriously, aren't we tired of the "well, if it can go a round with the fighter, no one else can actually hit it" syndrome?
Also, the skill system.
Also, feats. They need to be a little more ironed out before the game really hits its stride. Especially the Feat trees and feats as requirements for PrCs. Jumping through hoops hurts when you consider that it's one feat every 3 levels.
Also, semi-organic character growth. Even as an option, it would be nice to have some potential rules for "I go seek out a teacher and learn to read".
Also, alignment. Even something as simple as. "I'm lawful good. I'm lawful, because I always do what my commanding officer says. I'm good because I punch evil things in the face and give money to orphans."
Alignment.
Also, character creation.
Also, party creation.
Also, adventure creation.
Also, an actual section on building flavor into/out of the mechanics. "And here are 6 changes to make a swashbuckling friendly game."
Perhaps a little bit explaining some of the whys or hows so that changes don't have to be made quite so blindly.
4 or 5 ways to handle the economy. Patrons, caches of aincient stuff, disposable items, family heirlooms that power up, and piles of cash.
Less linear stacking of modifiers. I mean, seriously, aren't we tired of the "well, if it can go a round with the fighter, no one else can actually hit it" syndrome?
Also, the skill system.
Also, feats. They need to be a little more ironed out before the game really hits its stride. Especially the Feat trees and feats as requirements for PrCs. Jumping through hoops hurts when you consider that it's one feat every 3 levels.
Also, semi-organic character growth. Even as an option, it would be nice to have some potential rules for "I go seek out a teacher and learn to read".
Also, alignment. Even something as simple as. "I'm lawful good. I'm lawful, because I always do what my commanding officer says. I'm good because I punch evil things in the face and give money to orphans."
Nebulous
Legend
I sort of like the Vitality/wounds approach, but the Star Wars model makes it too easy to get killed by a lucky shot. Maybe they can arrange it in 4th edition so that your "Luck" factor is your Vitality, and this is what recharges quickly. Your wounds are tied to your constitution, and they scale much more slowly than your luck. Healing spells will target your Life, not your Vitality, which is what emulates dodging blows because of higher experience, or Indiana Jones getting shot in the arm, grumbling a bit, and then shrugging it off later. This can be introduced as a scalable system, so that DM's can adjust their game accordingly, to make it easier or more difficult.
Grim Tales had a neat way of doing this with three views: Grim, Gritty, Grittier. It would be cool to see D&D take a similar approach.
Grim Tales had a neat way of doing this with three views: Grim, Gritty, Grittier. It would be cool to see D&D take a similar approach.
Similar Threads
