Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kae'Yoss" data-source="post: 810020" data-attributes="member: 4134">There's d20M and Call of Cthulu for games with more general classes (I haven't seen Mutands and Masterminds, so I don't know whether it's similar). You can get most of the changes in the SRD, at the cost of NULL. And the changes they make are massive: they change the monster layout, change the monsters, add a tactics part. They're qualifying many things in combat, seriously change a lot of spells, change many classes, change some races, change several game mechanics (most notable DR). I'll get the new books, if only to have all the changes since the first printing of the core rules (which I have) written down nicely.They keep on spilling out accessories and FR stuff. And enworld has the Dragonlance Campaign Setting on the release schedule for some time now.Some people aren't. But most are, I think. AC is a better term than Defense, and it's classical D&D. d20M has class bonuses to defense because it doesn't use magic per default, and you have to come up with something. Since magic is an integral part of D&D, I don't see class bonuses to AC for it.I don't like classless systems. Classes are D&D! More generalized classes are OK for d20 M, but I still like my archetypes, combined with the mix-and-match system that is multiclassing, and I think classes are here to stay. If I want to play a classless system, I go play GURPS or WoD (which I don't, or rather do only seldomly).Well, that's something, don't you think? Spells are pretty good (and he has domains, so there are different spells for different clerics, plus many spells are alignment-based).Clerics are on the verge of being to powerful as it is, so I don't see that happening, except at the cost of either BAB, saves, or HDAnd you can customize your cleric with feats, including Divine feats which give you new options to use your turning.If you don't want to use house rules, quit playing RPG's. It's one of RPG's strong points: you don't like some rules, you change it. It's done in card and board games, too. It's what I really like in games.If you're saying you won't buy the book just because you don't like the new ranger, they surely can do without you money. I'm sure amongst those who don't like the ranger either, there are enough who won't make their decision whether to buy the book just on that little fact, cause it's only a very small part of the changes.I won't stick to my old car just because I don't like some small detail.You know what? I play a ranger, which is an archer. And he was that even before there was an option to get free ranged feats. I took him because he had more skill points than a fighter, because he had spot, listen, move silently and hide on his class list and still got the big BAB, and because it fittet the character concept.If I plan to play a wilderness warrior, I'll stick to the ranger, even if he'll fight with a polearm, or a big big club. It's not just about fighting prowess, or I'd take fighter.So you're saying that Bruce Lee the barehands fighter defines the monk, but Robin Hood the Woodlands Archer doesn't define the ranger? What about those Martial Artists that combine their unarmed attacks with attacks from the Katana? Or ninja's, fighting with nunchaku, shuriken and ninjato, and with their bare hands if they must? Why isn't it possible to portray those with the use of the monk class, AND retain all the benefits of the class? But I might still play them AND play a monk (or monk/rogue) for the OTHER benefits of the class: good AC even without armor, good saving throws, evasion, high speed.... It's not munchkinism, where every single class feature must make me more powerful, but I'll still enjoy the character...No, just tell the DM you don't want them. He can hardly argue with that, and the rules aren't set in stone. You might even convince him to get something else in exchange. Then don't buy the special model with $5000 worth of car hi-fi equipment! Get the the standard model. Of course, you'll have to pay extra for the leather seats, the air conditioning, the moonroof and the power windows. And the special model costs only $5000 extra, while you have to pay for your optional choices an additional $6000, even without the car stereo (values not in proportion).Sure, if you don't want the other extra stuff, you'll get the standard model.And that's how it works in D&D: You don't want to have those archery feats, but you'll take the ranger anyway, because he has good skills, good saves, good BAB, and gets some spells. If you don't need the BAB and the spells, you'll be better off with, or fighter/rogue, and if you don't want skills you'll be straight fighter, and a better warrior than the ranger. You mean those feats in the paths? Well, none of my characters uses heavy weapons or a shield, and most of them got the proficiencies. And I never feel cheated.Or do you mean the ranger class in the new PHB? Say it takes up 10 pages, than that will be 3% of the book, or a little less than 1$.Considering I still have to play a druid, or a halfling, or a half-elf, and probalby there are some races and classes won't play in the next couple of years, I have "wated" more, and I don't regret it.What about "I won't buy the books, I'll vote with my wallet"? Was that a quote from your last ranger character?To get a good BAB, to get masses of skill points, to get spells, to get favored enemies, and, to get some bonus feats. I probably won't use all of it, but some of that really make a difference (I won't use the medium armor proficiency, either).I'd send you a photograph of me, since I have taken more than one level of ranger (but I have none scanned). And the idea of taking two levels of ranger to get one feat is the supidest thing I have heard today. (But then, I haven't met many people so far today).</blockquote>

Verification