Five things that would change the game forever

[Psion]

You can certainly add politics to the game, but the rules supporting politics are virtually non-existent. Why is there no "social AC" or "social hit points"?

My question, upon seeing such things, it why would I want or need them? I feel that such things would actively obstruct roleplaying.

 

[Abstraction]

Not to mention, Social AC and Social hit points would cut both ways. It is very intentional in the design of the game that control of your actions is never taken away from you. Social AC and Social hit points would do just that. It would reduce the decisions of your characters to mere dice-rolling.

 

[A'koss]

IMO, actual rules for social skills (aka PC-only skills) should either cut both ways (PCs and NPCs) or be discarded entirely (which would be my preference). I think the social skills, as written, basically stink. For example, I would never, ever, use diplomacy as written. Bluff (for the most part) and Perform are also "why bother" skills for NPCs.

I would like to see some skills grouped like stealth, perception, etc. As far as other changes I'd like to see, the sheer volume and magnitude of magic I think needs to be looked at closely. Characters are too reliant on magic and I think the balance of power should shift to the character more than the equipment. Gear is cool, but it plays too large a role. Wizards should be able to cast more spells (spells should be their sword and their shield), but with less power at higher levels. However, that could be a whole other topic on it's own... They should also improve a little in HPs and combat ability to make up for it. All magic under the arcane banner? Personally, I'd rather that clerics just had certain powers and spell-like abilities which would vary by their god rather than just another spell list.

I think alignment should stay in D&D even if I don't use it in my own games (they're not really geared around good vs evil). And I've always considered Prestige Classes to be a great idea... in theory... but in practice most so-called Prestige Classes I wouldn't give 2 coppers for. Ability scores as just bonuses? I could live with it, but there is something (maybe just nostagia) about having an "18" in an ability scores that has a certain mystique.

Cheers!

A'koss.

 

[Klaus]

I for one would NOT like to see Spot/Search/Listen bundled together, as they cover very different things (and you'd have to write Perception +5 (Listen +8), which is just as bad). Same goes for Move Silently and Hide.

 

[William Ronald]

Absolutely right. Make the most common skills used in adventuring (Spot, Listen, Move Silently, Hide, Search, Disable Device, and one or two others) into secondary character traits and ditch the rest. D&D is not about crafting, bluffing, diplomacy, or wilderness survival. It is about kicking in doors and taking the stuff of others.

There are campaignts that require a fair amount or roleplaing and interaction with other people, besides just killing them and taking their stuff. (For example, you might have to rally people to defend a fortress undersiege, try to lie to an enemy, or decide how the characters are doing as they cross a jungle to explore ancient ruins.) There are many different styles of play, and I think a D&D game should be able to support more than just a single style of play.

Some people are not just as convincing as others, but their characters can be convincing. Hence the use of diplomacy rules. (So, I would not want to consign the guy with a weird voice to never playing a charming character.) Now, I do think all DMs worth the title, should require players to try to roleplay their diplomatic actions. Perhaps it would be wise to impose a penalty for not trying to roleplay the encounter or saying, "Well, your character has to say something or otherwise, no die roll."

As for Social AC or Social HP, should not a player be able to decide how persuasive a character should be? I like to think that a good DM can work with less than perfect rules. I would not want someone to say, you have insufficient social AC or hit points to even talk to so-and-so. I have played in games where roleplaying, politics, diplomacy, and bluffing were very crucial to how the game went. I do not think everything has to be codified, but rules can help. Most of us are not great actors, con men, or orators on the level of Winston Churchill.

 

[Nyeshet]

1) Alignment is eliminated once and for all

Personally, I would not mind a change like this. When playing in my homebrew campaign, the closest we ever get to alignment is Sanctity and Taint, but neither of those are automatic for starting out characters - regardless of level or class. Sanctity means something has been 'touched' or notably 'blest' by a potent celestial or deity (regardless of their nature), and Taint is the equivalent except dealing with fiends and (other) sentient / sapient aberrations. I've never had a problem yet, so removing or replacing AL simply is not a major change - at least from my point of view.

2) Ability scores are no longer numbers but simply bonuses

This is also a relatively minor change. Only in the recent edition has ability scores even resulted in a bonus half the time. Recall that in 2e one had to have a 15+ to have a bonus from an ability score, and I think one had to have a number lower than 8 for a penalty! Now that things are stream lined, it seems like the game is heading in that direction anyway. I haven't used anything like this yet, but I know a few DMs (and have heard of a few third party systems) that do.

If a 4e ever comes out, I would not be surprised if this was present as part of it. Except for carrying capacity and poisons / diseases, where do the ability scores (rather than modifiers) really apply, after all? Just increase the distance between levels where such is gained (every 6 to 8 levels instead of every 4), state that diseases / poisons cannot reduce you to lower than -10 (at which point, for Con, you die), and redetermine the means by which Str (mod) determines carrying capacity and you are already there. I expect if I read a few of the third party systems that use this (mods, not scores) I would already find this or something like it.

3) All spells, songs, and psionics are simply arcane magic (i.e. god's do not grant spells, magic is just magic)

This has already been done in so many third party systems it may as well be core. I've known of many DMs and players that have played with such a system, and I myself am slowly converting to one form of such a system (EoMR). It would necessitate a redefinition of the Priest / Cleric class, I think (perhaps lay on hands, and curing of other ails based on using multiple lay on hands points? maybe a few other changes? perhaps both a non-caster priest class and a caster class?), but otherwise it could work with little effort. I doubt it will be in 4e, however, as Vancian magic has become too strong a sacred cow to readily remove. Maybe it has DR vs whatever material the sacrificial knife is made of.

4) Skills fall into one of 12 categories instead of the oppressive number that's out there now

Okay, now you've confused me. Are you talking about skill proficiencies / groups - as can be seen in (for instance) the up-coming Iron Heros system? Or do you mean the skills should be parsed down to just 12 skills? Do you mean replacing the rank system also? I need more details to figure out exactly what you mean.

I think what you mean is to replace skills with skill categories. But how would this work for knowledge or craft? Would you join Climb, Jump, Swim into a single skill, despite their many differences? I can swim very well, but I cannot rock climb and I cannot run hurdles. I cannot see that much similarity between the three. It might also mess up the way speeds grant bonii and other benefits when using the equivalent skill. In my view, if it has a speed type (climb, swim) then it should be a separate skill. In fact, I would place Burrow and Fly as skills (removing fly aptitude) while stating Fly could not gain a rank unless the character had a means of flying. Having Burrow as a skill would be borderline useless in most situations, considering the lack of speed any humanoid likely would have. But this is all just my view on the movement skills.

I can see Balance folded into Tumble and perhaps - just perhaps - even with Jump. I can see Listen and Spot - and maybe Search - folded together, as well as Open Lock and Diable/Repair Device made into one skill. And Hide / Move Silently would have to be folded together if Listen / Spot were. But there are many skills not so readily folded in with others. What of Craft (painting) and Craft (carpentry)? What of Knowledge (local) and Knowledge (arcana)? What of Forgery, Disguise, and Use Magic Device? And what about the feats granting bonii to skills that fall - by this method - into diffent categories? Of course, if they are in the same category you could use Skill Focus to get a better benefit instead.

Simply put, I do not think it is possible to winnow down the number of skills to just 12. Perhaps about twice that number (20 - 25) would be possible, as there are currently around 30 - 40 skills in the game.

5) Every prestige class can also be a core class

This I cannot see, ever. PrCs have requirements that cannot be met at first level. Of course, I suppose everyone can start with and gain levels in a paragon racial class. Then, once they have enough whatever to meet the requirements they can take thier first level in the PrC.

On the other hand, if you mean that every PrC should have 20(+?) levels, well they allow for such already (at least for those with 10 levels), although they have the odd rule of waiting until epic character level before you can advance that far. Personally, I would allow normal progression past 10th, but would limit the bonus feats gained to non-epic feats prior to epic level. There. Now we can do as you suggest.

As it is, there is already a not-so-odd similarity between classes and PrCs. Consider the requirements for being a PrC, then consider the Paladin class. It has already been argued many times before that this makes more sense as a PrC than as a class. In theory, one might argue the same for the Bard, and one could also - in theory - separate out the mystic elements of the Monk, place those in a PrC for a non-mystic monk-like class readily enough.

Consider also that Swashbuckler, Samurai, etc were once PrCs (3.0) but are now full classes (3.5). They have been altered significantly, granted, but this suggests that any PrC that does not have major / numerous prerequisites might be made into a class with little trouble.

- - - - - -

So, except for the last issue (5), what you are arguing for is already possible (via simple house rules) &/or already present (via third parties). And the latter is becoming more possible as the number of official classes and PrCs continue to blur the line between what necessitates being a PrC and what can function as a class in its own right. Tell me, those that do not see this, when 3.0 first came out, would anyone have seen a Hexblade, Spellthief, or Scout as a class rather than a PrC? As it is, I've overheard some ask why a Dervisher is a PrC while the Scout is a class. Of couse, I've also had asked why the Paladin is not a PrC.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I, for one, would hate to see the dissolution of the dichotomy between arcane and divine magic. It has plenty of flavor as well as being well grounded in the mythologies of the Real World.

And if there WERE to be such a dissolution, I'd go in the direction of the divine...

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

Now that we're going on year 5, it's time to bring up the big pointless rules things that could change D&D forever. I consider these the largest and most pointless things about the game that D&D has faced since growing out of 1E:

1) Alignment is eliminated once and for all
2) Ability scores are no longer numbers but simply bonuses
3) All spells, songs, and psionics are simply arcane magic (i.e. god's do not grant spells, magic is just magic)
4) Skills fall into one of 12 categories instead of the oppressive number that's out there now
5) Every prestige class can also be a core class

Without being a house-rule's post, any other thoughts?

jh

1) The problem I see with alignment is that the odd player will not have read or understood what it is there for and how to use it. Getting rid of it is merely hiding it from sight, it still is there because it is a declaration of intent on how the character is going to be played. The LG & CE characters should still not see eye to eye even without the alignment system but even worse, the dm did not have a shorthand way to identify these conflicting characters without having to read the pages of background or long discussion with each player.
2) Do they start negative or at 0?
3) A condensed magic list could be interesting, I'd imagine it would be horizontally divided by utility & different classes would determine the breadth of choice & depth of competency.
4) Endless skill proliferation is a problem but too few choices would lead to cookie-cutter characters.
5) Yuck, most PrC don't deserve to exist. They should be accomplishable by feat & skill selections.

****

5 ways I'd change d&d forever would be:

1) Move away from a group dynamic to loosely related major characters.
2) Characters start the game with better than average ability, low levels being represented by 'early character options' with specific mechanics.
3) Point based ability & health.
4) The referee being somehow made redundant so all can be players.
5) The Charisma ability would directly affect a 'drama' mechanic which could interupt & override any other resolution mechanic (especially combat) to create a beneficial dramatic scene. Charisma as a dump stat would disappear overnight.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

4) The referee being somehow made redundant so all can be players

Metagames (from which would spring Steve Jackson Games) did this in their "The Fantasy Trip" (Melee/Wizard/In the Labyrinth/Advanced Melee/Advanced Wizard) games. They released adventures that had all of the options spelled out, and you'd pick your way through.

You've seen this before as books- the adventures were like "Encounter 1: empty room with 2 doors. Choose Door #1 go to Encounter 34, Choose Door #2 go to Encounter 112..." Adventures cost about $3-6, and ran about 20-30 3"x5" pages.

It worked out allright, but, no matter how many options you were given, the adventure still ran on rails. Multiple sets of rails, to be sure, but rails nonetheless.

Was it still fun? For the most part, yes. But The Fantasy Trip was probably the simplest RPG ever designed- 4 stats Str, Dex, Int, HP, and only a handfull of skills and spells- character design took 5 minutes. (Very convenient if there was a TPK.) There simply were NOT many options in game play.

A game as complex as D&D? Equivalent modules would cost $50 and be 300pages long, just to accomidate the wide variety of PC abilities, spells, tactical decisions, etc.

And I mean that for ANY edition of the game.

Edit: Of course, now that I think about it some more.... a 3rd party publisher could possibly do this as a product line- either for solo adventures or party adventures. Hmmmmmmmmm.

 

[am181d]

Did no one mention changing Armor Bonuses to Damage Reduction???