More than 3.75

[Zaruthustran]

More than 3.75: classes

Seems like another wave of 4E speculation is hitting the boards. In order for such an edition to be acceptable, it's got to be a significant evolution of the current ruleset. It can't be just "3.75E." It needs to be different. Purpose of this thread is to explore changes that preserve D&D's feel but improve its mechanics.

Cleric. Wizard. Druid. Sorcerer.

Paladin. Barbarian. Fighter. Ranger.

Rogue. Bard.

Too complex; too fine a distinction. These should be boiled down to roles: Fighter, Caster, Rogue. Feats and "either/or" class features should be the source of customization, not dozens upon dozens of increasingly-granular base classes. I mean, just look at this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_class_(Dungeons_&_Dragons)

Way too many classes, there.

 

[Zaruthustran]

More than 3.75: fighting style

Seems like another wave of 4E speculation is hitting the boards. In order for such an edition to be acceptable, it's got to be a significant evolution of the current ruleset. It can't be just "3.75E." It needs to be different. Purpose of this thread is to explore changes that preserve D&D's feel but improve its mechanics.

Fighting style is an overcomplicated feature in the current rules, which is a shame. The choice of what you do with your off-hand should be fun and dynamic--and require no feats. It's too bad that in 3.5, any character who takes the TWF feat will never ever use a shield or two-handed weapon, and any character who takes Power Attack will never use two weapons. Players should be free to switch fighting style to fit their mood and situation.

Use a shield? Get AC and a big bonus against ranged attacks. Carry another weapon? Gain a floating bonus that you can assign to attack bonus (including disarm and sunder attempts) or AC--your choice each turn. Use your weapon with both hands? Gain a damage bonus. Leave your hand empty? Gain a bonus to balance, speed, and tumble--and maybe an overconfidence bonus to will save and hit points.

Point is, it's up to you--and you can change your mind. If you're a guy who usually fights with two daggers, and you find a big ol' two-handed magic axe, well go ahead and use it. Unlike the poor TWF fighter in D&D 3.5, you shouldn't be denied the benefit of the 2-handed axe (and feel like you're "wasting" your TWF feats) just because at character creation you thought it was cool to fight with two daggers.

 

[Zaruthustran]

More than 3.75: armor and defense

Seems like another wave of 4E speculation is hitting the boards. In order for such an edition to be acceptable, it's got to be a significant evolution of the current ruleset. It can't be just "3.75E." It needs to be different. Purpose of this thread is to explore changes that preserve D&D's feel but improve its mechanics.

This one's a no-brainer. It just doesn't make sense that a 10th level hero and a 1st level commoner, both with 14 Dex and wearing leather, are exactly AC 14. Heroes should be harder to hit

Speaking of which, "touch armor class" needs to go. The concept is a needless complication for new players. Just have a single Defense score based on Dex, level, and equipment bonus (shield or off-hand weapon, if any).

If you beat that score, you hit the guy. What happens now depends on his armor. Armor should mirror the purpose it serves in real life. It doesn't make it harder for people to hit you; it mitigates damage.

 

[Zaruthustran]

More than 3.75: magic system

Seems like another wave of 4E speculation is hitting the boards. In order for such an edition to be acceptable, it's got to be a significant evolution of the current ruleset. It can't be just "3.75E." It needs to be different. Purpose of this thread is to explore changes that preserve D&D's feel but improve its mechanics.

It's time we moved on from the tired spell slot system. Magic should be more mysterious, and less like a mail-order catalog. The mechanics of performing magic should be more consistent with the way other classes perform their roles. Instead of picking discrete spells (gaining instant mastery of a single spell, and absolute ignorance of whatever you didn't pick), a wizard's magical abilities should be handled like a rogue's skills or a fighter's combat maneuvers.

A rogue can be a "traps rogue", a "stealth rogue", a "social rogue", a "mobility rogue", or a dabbler in all four broad disciplines. A fighter can swing a sword, shoot an arrow, disarm, grapple, sunder or bull rush. All these actions key off of a d20 roll plus modifiers, trying to beat a DC. At low levels, characters can beat easy DCs, but they can also at least make an attempt at hard DCs--especially when aided by tools or allies.

What if wizardry worked the same way?

Say you a wizard could distribute his skill points (for lack of a better term) into any of the classic schools of magic: abjuration, conjuration, evocation, and so on. Let's take evocation for an example. If you want to hurl a bolt of fire as a touch attack, make a DC 10 evocation roll. Want it to be a guaranteed hit? Make a DC 25 roll. Want it to be a 10' burst? Take the Burst feat, and make a DC 30 roll (increase DC by 5 for every 5' radius increase). For damage, add 5 to the DC for each die of damage. Take feats to increase the size of the die, or gain access to other elemental damage types.

Maybe they've got a masterwork wand, and get +2 to rolls. Maybe their buddy helps power the spell, lending another +2. Maybe they took Spell Focus: Evocation and get to add +3. You can see that even low level wizards, if properly equipped and supported, can at least roll for higher level effects. But there's always the risk of failure, always drama, always fun. You're not just flipping a switch. You're rolling a d20 to do your thing, just like fighters and rogues.

Under this system you can be a "blaster mage", or a "transport mage", or a "crowd control mage", or "enchanter" or "summoner" or a dabbler in everything. Even if you focus everything in, say, Necromancy you can at least make a roll for the other skills and accomplish minor effects.

Oh, and the distinction between divine and arcane magic should completely go away. Needlessly complex, and arbitrary since later supplements gave clerics blast spells. Magic should just be magic, and not "come from" gods. Instead, the divine stuff should be cool extra abilities (such as divinations) granted as feats or class features--not spells.

 

[Zaruthustran]

More than 3.75: damage and healing. Or, "Kill the Cleric"

Seems like another wave of 4E speculation is hitting the boards. In order for such an edition to be acceptable, it's got to be a significant evolution of the current ruleset. It can't be just "3.75E." It needs to be different. Purpose of this thread is to explore changes that preserve D&D's feel but improve its mechanics.

No one likes to be the cleric. Sure, the cleric class (as a collection of powers and abilities) is very powerful, with divine feats, impressive spells, domains, and so on. People have built incredibly strong characters by using the class. But those are clerics in name only--they are destroyers, chargers, archers, smiters. They aren't healers. They aren't clerics.

No one likes being the cleric because when everyone else is beheading monsters or hurling fireballs, it sucks to be the guy running around replenishing hit points. If you do your job right, every turn all you're doing is pouring hitpoints into a leaky bucket. It's an unfun, thankless job. But somebody's got to do it.

So, get rid of the need for the cleric by getting rid of in-combat healing. Change the way damage is handled, so that all players naturally recover (to some extent) after each encounter.

Or perhaps change "hit points" from tracking physical damage to tracking morale. Allow *any* character to attempt to rally the troops during combat with a shout or stirring words. Allow any character to pull out an heirloom or token, to recall a loved one at home, and draw inspiration. Convert the whole concept of hit points into "will to fight".

In short, eliminate the cleric. Sure, keep gods, faith, and minor miracles (stuff like resurrect and restoration). But remove the burden of a single class having to provide in-combat healing.

 

[Zaruthustran]

More than 3.75: wizard spell selection

Seems like another wave of 4E speculation is hitting the boards. In order for such an edition to be acceptable, it's got to be a significant evolution of the current ruleset. It can't be just "3.75E." It needs to be different. Purpose of this thread is to explore changes that preserve D&D's feel but improve its mechanics.

I posted a thread about removing Fly, Improved Invisibility, and Teleport from my campaign. The responses were passionate, to say the least. "Those are the best spells in the game!", "You're crippling your players!", "D&D assumes players have access to those spells!"

Well, if that's the case--if the wizard's choice of spell selection isn't really a choice at all--that there are "must-haves", then I say just be done with it and grant these abilities as class features of the Wizard class.

So at 1st level you get Force Magic, and can choose each round to either have a Shield or to fire off Magic Missiles. At 3rd level you can Fly. At 5th you can zip you and your friends back to town with a snap of your fingers. And so on.

In short: identify those spells that the game "assumes" you have, and change the assumption to a known. Thereby removing a false choice and ensuring that a group of players will not be screwed by a poor choice/innocent mistake.

 

[Flynn]

No one likes to be the cleric.

Ummm, I like to be the cleric.

With Regards,
Flynn

 

[Bayushi Seikuro]

I don't think that the cleric role is nessecarily required to be the Healbot 2k7.

To me, clerics in general are there to be healers, warriors, morale boosters. In my mind, it goes back to people trying to convert others by example.

Right now, I've been playing a cleric of Lathander/combat medic. Taking combat medic as a PrC allows me to pick up slack in other directions. I assure you, I have more to do than heal and turn undead into their subatomic pieces.

I like the concept of the will to fight, and morale, etc. But, I think using it as a reason to ditch the cleric class, and all of its roles - warrior, scholar, etc - isn't exactly something I agree with.

Just my humble opinion.

 

[Nifft]

Could you maybe do this in ONE thread?

Thanks, -- N

 

[Doug McCrae]

Healing Belts and Helms of Glorious Recovery from MIC. That and a wand of CLW as backup means you don't need a cleric.