Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
D&D 3.1E: What to change?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Wolfen Priest" data-source="post: 286383" data-attributes="member: 3909"><p>That's why I think all my suggestions <em>work</em>, and I don't think (m)any changes other than that are needed. I propose giving the ranger more power (in places he already has it, no less) at later levels, giving people a reason to continue playing as one, <em>without</em> changing the rules for those who take one level of ranger only.</p><p></p><p>Further, I think my rules on multiclassing would work great, giving every race "favored class = any," and eliminating all multiclassing restrictions for half-elves (and possibly giving them a +1 to CHA as well). Otherwise, who would play a half-elf? Most people play humans for the bonus feat & skill points anyway, so I doubt these rules would disrupt the game much, if at all.</p><p></p><p>Also, I would make point-buy the 'standard' way to make a character; screw rolling dice, there's not enough player control, and everyone (OK fine, <em>almost</em> everyone) cheats anyway.</p><p></p><p>I would probably throw out all the domain powers for clerics too. I mean come on, sometimes when I play a cleric I'm almost ashamed to bring it up that I have domain powers, clerics are simply too powerful. Getting rid of this won't change that, it will be just enough, IMO.</p><p></p><p>EternalKnight: I agree with you. Getting rid of hit points, changing armor and spells, all those ideas are too radical (and I <em>don't</em> mean radical, as in "radical, dood"). I wouldn't want to play the game if it changed that much. It wouldn't be D&D anymore. Leave the basics alone, I say just tweak the small stuff. Combat (especially AoO's and action types) needs to be re-written and clarified though. </p><p></p><p>I think WotC would make a lot of money selling a very bare-bones book solely about combat. It wouldn't be very interesting, but would just address all the different combat options that are possible, using elaborate mini's for illustrations. Who _wouldn't_ buy that? </p><p></p><p>Just my .002 pp. <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=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Wolfen Priest, post: 286383, member: 3909"] That's why I think all my suggestions [i]work[/i], and I don't think (m)any changes other than that are needed. I propose giving the ranger more power (in places he already has it, no less) at later levels, giving people a reason to continue playing as one, [i]without[/i] changing the rules for those who take one level of ranger only. Further, I think my rules on multiclassing would work great, giving every race "favored class = any," and eliminating all multiclassing restrictions for half-elves (and possibly giving them a +1 to CHA as well). Otherwise, who would play a half-elf? Most people play humans for the bonus feat & skill points anyway, so I doubt these rules would disrupt the game much, if at all. Also, I would make point-buy the 'standard' way to make a character; screw rolling dice, there's not enough player control, and everyone (OK fine, [i]almost[/i] everyone) cheats anyway. I would probably throw out all the domain powers for clerics too. I mean come on, sometimes when I play a cleric I'm almost ashamed to bring it up that I have domain powers, clerics are simply too powerful. Getting rid of this won't change that, it will be just enough, IMO. EternalKnight: I agree with you. Getting rid of hit points, changing armor and spells, all those ideas are too radical (and I [i]don't[/i] mean radical, as in "radical, dood"). I wouldn't want to play the game if it changed that much. It wouldn't be D&D anymore. Leave the basics alone, I say just tweak the small stuff. Combat (especially AoO's and action types) needs to be re-written and clarified though. I think WotC would make a lot of money selling a very bare-bones book solely about combat. It wouldn't be very interesting, but would just address all the different combat options that are possible, using elaborate mini's for illustrations. Who _wouldn't_ buy that? Just my .002 pp. :) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
D&D 3.1E: What to change?
Top