How would you prefer D&D class abilities to be handled?

[lutecius]

I’m torn on this one.
I actually like the idea of a unique, streamlined yet modular system for every class. Just not how it’s done in 4e.
I have no problem with non-casters having “powers” but many of the “now hit someone for some completely unrelated effect” powers simply don’t make sense to me. Neither do some of the marks and “martial healing”.
If a power doesn’t fit a theme or class at first glance, maybe it’s best not to shoehorn it in. To hell with the roles. Spells and martial exploits shouldn’t be interchangeable.
The system’s granularity should allow more flexible multiclassing, though. I am baffled at how restrictive 4e multiclassing actually is.
And of course, I hate the per day / encounter economy.
All in all I think I’d still take 3e abilities, disparate and unbalanced as they are, over 4e powers.

SW talent trees sound good but I’d have to see how they’re implemented in a fantasy setting to tell for sure.

 

[Najo]

In reply to lutecius and for anyone else watching this thread, please attempt to answer me this question:

How would D&D classes look if:
* they still had some 4e attack and utility style powers (without shoehorning)
* they had more star wars style talents trees customizability and/or trees
* It was streamlined as much as possible
* they could multiclass into one another like 3.x D&D and star wars.

How would powers and talents be the same, how would the be different?
How would you allow players to choose their talents and powers as they level, while retaining balance and freedom of choice?
How would you balance the powers?
How would the power writeups look?
What about talents?
How simplfied without losing depth can the class writeups get?
What are the basic elements that the class write ups need?

 

[Najo]

Anyone want to take a stab at my inquiry?

 

[RFisher]

Yep. Of course, the lack of mechanical differences is one of the reasons I (despite starting with Holmes basic) and every other gamer I personally know eventually stopped playing pre 3e DND .

Me too, but I’m now playing pre-3e D&D again. I found a lot to like in pre-3e D&D once I choose to accept their lack of mechanical differences. I think doing so taught me things that help me enjoy 3e D&D more as well.

I don't feel that there's a dichotomy here - nothing prevents you from having distinctive characters from a combination of both in-game actions and mechanics.

I don’t think he was presenting a dichotomy. Rather he was listing two preferences: (1) Preferring simpler mechanics (2) Character distinctiveness defined more by in-game actions.

While you can have 2 without 1, 2 helps to enable 1.