My Thoughts on DnD, and the next Edition (Long, rambly)

[Merlion]

glass

I'd like to see the cleric's spellcasting ability toned down (unless they choose magic related domains), and the druid's too. Sorc and wis should be the best, as they have nothing else going for them

This I strongly agree with. Well mainly the Cleric part...I dont really see Druids as that much of a problem.

Really, if they dont want to totally overhaul the the Cleric completely so it actually fits into an archtype, they should return it to basics...7 levels of spells etc. Keep spontaneous cure casting so it wont be "forced" into the "healer role" if a player doesnt want to do that.

I'd like to see a wound point/vitality point system. Not the one in Star Wars and Unearthed Arcana, which strikes me as backwards.

I like the idea of a system of this kind, and if a new edition changed to anything that would most likely be it.

However, they've always said Hit Points are a never-gonna-change sacred cow. But I could see WP/VP being made an "official variant".


BelenUmeria:

My point is that they used to be optional. A paladin did not need a mount. If a player wanted one, then they went through the GM. The same stood for Druids and Rangers.

You talk a lot about roleplaying, but you seem to forget that in an RPG, everything is optional.

 

[Evilhalfling]

The most important thing I want in 4th ed ?
A long time coming. The other editions have lasted on average 8 years
I ran the numbers on a previous thread.

it looks like action points are going core - with there inclusion in Eberron.
I haven't tried them Im still not sure I want to.

I think that CBDB and armor as DR are linked, without DR armor becomes useless for a lot of builds, and breaks down the logic of medievil armies wearing any armor at all - why bother with that extra expense if all your soilders start with CBDB of + 6 ? It would drive me nuts if CBDB was included without the other.

 

[Merlion]

A long time coming. The other editions have lasted on average 8 years

As I mentioned, this thread isnt about when a new edition will or should come out. Its about what we think will, and what we would like to have, in it.

Although I dont foresee it taking as long as most would like given current trends.

I think that CBDB and armor as DR are linked, without DR armor becomes useless for a lot of builds, and breaks down the logic of medievil armies wearing any armor at all - why bother with that extra expense if all your soilders start with CBDB of + 6 ? It would drive me nuts if CBDB was included without the other.

I kept forgetting to mention this...your entirely right. The two were pretty much made for each other, and if CBDB did go core armor as DR pretty much certainly would as well, as otherwise it would do away with the fantasy image of knights in armor etc.

 

[DragonLancer]

Dragon Lancer: I think maybe you are misunderstanding some of what I am saying, lets see what we can do here..

I dont really have a problem with hit points myself. They are a little too abstract, and I like say the wound/vitality point system also, but its not a big beef with me. I dont foresee any change to it in 4th edition, save perhaps vitality/woundpoints being made an "official variant."

I don't think hit points nor armour class will change in 4th edition, simply because they are one of the "sacred cows" of D&D. There are aspects to the game that are part of it fundamentaly, and as such won't and shouldn't be changed.

And again, I am not saying anything about removing HP or AC. Class based defense bonus is simply something to add to/work with the Armor Class system, not replace it. It just seems strange to me that you get better at attacking, but never any better at defending yourself.

But then AC is not about avoiding being hit, its avoiding damage. A guy in platemail is going to be hit, but the armour takes the brunt rather than him. But that again is a debate for another time. Surfice to say that I don't think it will change.

A big part of RPG design is balancing simplicity and ease of play with content and custimizability. 2nd edition had almost no way to mechanically customize characters, especially warrior types. Feats allow that. Now yea theres a whole bunch of feats, and I'm sure it can be bewildering for a new player. But the same is true of spells for instance. They are always going to take something like that and make lots of it, and a lot of it is going to be dreck. It comes with the territory.

[snip]

How so? Especially, how so with feats?

In my experience, feats (and to a smaller extent PrC's) have boosted the powergaming level of the game. With feats its now possible to perfrom greater damage, more kills, boost your AC amongst otherthings. Now unlike prior editions, where you didn't have that and fights were as tough or as dangerous as the DM could do them, the power balance can (can, not always) be easily swayed. With feats, players can pull off damage or actions, in excess of what they would have done without those feats.

Don't get me wrong, I don't hate feats - in fact they were a good idea, but with them the game has shifted in its power level.

Under 2nd edition where characters were pretty much the same as one another (Fighter being the typical example), the game didn't have a real powergaming basis because outside of a few spells and magic items there was nothing to make you any different from your fellow adventurers. You didn't have feats to specilise.

In all my time playing and DMing 2nd ed AD&D I never saw powergaming. So I'd love to hear how it was possible (no thats not a sarky comment, but a genuine question) without the Skills & Powers books.

I hope to see the number of feats in the game reduced under a 4th edition.

 

[Belen]

In all my time playing and DMing 2nd ed AD&D I never saw powergaming. So I'd love to hear how it was possible (no thats not a sarky comment, but a genuine question) without the Skills & Powers books.

I hope to see the number of feats in the game reduced under a 4th edition.

Kits were the main source of powergaming. However, it was difficult at best to powergame core 2e. That is not the case with core 3e where enough options exist in the core books to add a layer of cheese to your burger.

Not to say that is bad. I like cheeseburgers.

Personally, one thing I would love about 4e would be to replace the advanced combat options with a single mechanic. Grapple, trip etc could all be reduced to one check that made it easy to understand. The feats associated could be removed. This would allow a more varied and robust combat option, while reducing some of the drag on the game. It would allow for some more innovation from players as well.

Merlion: Feats could be easily supernatural. There are some FR feats that allow you to cast 0-level spells! Not to mention that the bloodline feats are supernatural or the metamagic feats that allow for added spice to spells.

Whether it be talents or feats, it can be done. Personally, I would like to see a talent that provides a d6 sneak attach die every other level etc. Something that progessed with the character. This way, you'd be able to recreate all the class features. Multi-classing would be easy because you'd tie the feat/ talent to the class, so only fast/ charismatic classes would allow advancement.

In any event, I detest the Armor as DR thing. It is a clunky mechanic that just adds to combat confusion. Either the player or the GM has to remember to subtract damage every hit. It is clunky and would slow down combat. It may work for d20 modern because the damage is way less than DnD and no one starts with Armor feats, so fewer people use armor. It would be horrid for DnD.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

First, I'll state what I don't want 4e to be:

• A step back to AD&D
• Class-less. It's one of the things that makes D&D D&D.
• Feat-less. One of the best concepts they ever put in the game.
• HP-less. Not realistic, but I don't give a damn about realism. Realism flies of the window as soon as demons and wizards walk in the door
• Alignment-less
• Skill-less. Another great system, with a lot of potential.

There are a couple of things I'd like to see, some of which have already be stated:

Sorcerers need to be more than spontaneous wizards. They are the only class (at least in the core rules) that doesn't have its own spell list. Good avenues would be the concepts of bloodlines or a wild mage.

We need a core class that casts divine spells spontaneously. The favoured soul is a nice base for that (being favoured of a deity and getting spells because of that), but we need more than a spontaneous cleric, of course. For example, they could make the druid a spontaneous caster.

Tone down the cleric. I might add that the cleric as is is nice enough besides being too powerful. Different spell lists for every god would be a mess, especially in worlds like the Forgotten Realms. They could make more use of Domains, though. They could be made similar do psionic disciplines, containing several spells per level (and a lot of stuff would disappear from the general lists). The domains could govern more than spells, too. You'd get a better BAB if you got the war domain (just as an example), or better saves for the protection domain. Toughness domain would grant you more HP. Of course, these would change the BAB and so on to the level they are today, not further up (a normal cleric could have d6 and weak bab). They could make those domains strong, medium and weak, and you can have 1 strong and 1 weak, or 2 medium, or 1 medium and 2 weak, or 4 weak, or something. Of course, all this would mean that the developers would need to put more thought into the domain selection of the deities (or every domain would have a weak and a strong from)

Less dependency on magic items.

Divine Warriors for all corners of the alignment matrix, not just LG (like paladin of honour, freedom, tyranny, slaughter), meybe for every single alignment. This, of course, should be one class with mostly similar abilities, with some specials to spice it up.

Racial weapon for every race, not just dwarves and gnomes.

 

[Scribble]

Heh, someone mentioned the bard and paladin seeming more the prestige classes then regular classes, and well thats because they were... Back in first edition, you didn't start as either.

I haven't looked at the rules in a while but if I remember right, it was actually pretty hard to become a Bard. (ugg that rhymed..)

I agree with the original thought that the UA book has a few things that are being tested for 4e... In my opinion thats part of what the whole combat and tactics, skills and powers thing was about...

As far as Classless D&D, I can see it possibly moving along the lines of the way Modern does it. With no classes to start out, but by third level being able to branch into a prestige class..

Now the whole DR for armor thing. Eh I'm not a fan of this. I think if you want to get technical, anythign that misses your base plus your dex actually missed you. Anything that would have hit you were it not for your armor, has glanced off of or been stopped by, your armor. Anything that would have hit your base plus your armor if not for your shield, is because it hit your shield. Anything that would have hit you despite your base + armor + shield if not for the cover bonus, hit the cover... And so forth...

I believe there was a mechanic in 1st edition that gave certain bonuses or penalties to different weapon types depending on the armor you wore... But I never used it in any edition. And I think the reason the removed it was because it took unessesary time. But who knows.

 

[Nisarg]

Anyway, this got me to thinking about the eventual next edition of DnD ( we will assume it will be called 4th edition, since that’s what it will be).

Actually, the good folks at Wizards have cut it down to three possible choices:

1. D&D EXXTREME!!!

2. Professor Gygax's Frantabulous Splendifilous Dungeon-Game

or

3. I can't believe its not Tolkien!

Nisarg

 

[Nisarg]

Nice little rant Merlion, but if they follow your ideas for 4th edition I wouldn't buy it.

What I would like to see is the eliminate of feats, or at least a severe narrowing down. Feats have turned D&D from a roleplaying game (admittidly one that has more than a fair share of combat) into the breeding ground for powergamers.

I'd leave the classes, AC, hit points, and spells alone. Theres nothing wrong with them. I would drop things like AoO's (far too fiddly in my mind, you can't do jack without someone getting a swipe at you! ).

Amen on all of these points. There has to be a better way to do feats. The concept, of being able to do some cool things that help further individualize your character, is a great concept.
Sadly, in practice feats usually amount to a power-gaming-palooza, where everyone looks for feats that will max out their killing capacity, or spellcasting capacity, or what have you. Its also a sad phenomenon that newer books seem to make bigger and bigger feats each time, contributing to the overall power creep.

AoO are another serious problem; nothing over-complicates combat more than this rule.

But the one you missed was Prestige classes.. you want to talk about power-creep? Prestige classes are the number one culprit. Never has what started out as such a good idea for roleplay turned into such an excuse to put powergaming above roleplay every time.

Nisarg

 

[Henry]

or

3. I can't believe its not Tolkien!

Moooove over, White Wolf?