Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Merlion" data-source="post: 1770029" data-attributes="member: 10397">Li Shenron: I'm not sure why so many people are bringing up the whole classless thing, in the way that they are. We know DnD isnt ever going to go to a classless system. I am trying to keep this discussion in 2 seperate areas...things we think may actually happen in 4th edition, and things we'd like to see happen. I realize some would like to see classless DnD, but it should be prefaced as something they want...its one of those things I dont think will happen in any addition of D&D.Darklone:  Its certainly a *heck* of a lot more realistic than the idea that wearing full plate makes you harder to strike with a weapon. More importantly, its a lot more *logical*. Now yea you can say armor keeps you from "being hit" in a way that does damage...but isnt that...damage reduction?But really I would rather actually discuss things than argue over wether this or that is realstic or not. I tend to agree. The Cleric needs a single definite class role like everyone else. Of course if they become just the healer, they are no longer really a Cleric (Cleric is simply another word for priest, and being a priest doesnt have anything inherently to do with healing).  Why?FireLance: I agree about Magic Rating, and since it was published in UA, it wouldnt really shock me to see it get included in a new edition. Save or Dies: They do need tweaking. I dont think however that they should just be powered down (as Monte Cook didnt in Arcana Unearthed). If they are made "more survivable", then I think the detirmental effects suffered if a save is made need to be increased a bit, instead of being nearly meaningless. To me their main problem is that currently they are basically all or nothing.Modularity: I partially agree with this, to a point. In some ways I think D&D is currently catering a little to much to beginers. What I really think (and this also plays into the Mounts and Animal Companions issue) is that there needs to be a lot more coverage of this concept: Its ok to change the game, and Heres Advice on How to Do It.Although as far as the whole Animal Companion/Mount thing I dont see the big deal. If you want to roleplay questing for an animal companion or mount, do it. Just ignore where it says its automatic, and roleplay it instead.BelenUmeria: Ok first and foremost, I dont have an arguement. I am speculating about 1) what I think will happen in the next edition and to a lesser extent 2) about what I and the rest of us would like to see happen in a new edition. 1) I am not sure this is entirely true. Or at least exactly true. I think a lot of people do enjoy them, but I think at least as many people would not like to be quite so bound by them. In particular, I dont think many people like sacrificing balance or logic in the name of "sacred cows."Also, the single biggest reason they remain is because, correct or incorrect, WOTC doesnt want to loose its player base. Bear in mind, they considered changing some of those things in 3rd edition (like Vancian magic).2) I am not talking about killing sacred cows, especially not in terms of what I am saying I think will happen in a new edition. Things like Armor as DR and CBDB do not interfere with sacred cows. I think this is unlikely to happen given the massive popularity of prestige classes.I really dont see why some people dislike them. Yea theres huge scads of them, and quite a few individual PrCs are silly or whatever, but having a glut of a thing is inevitable in D&D. Its just like theres loads and loads of spells, and many of them are either silly or broken, but nobody talks about removing spells.However, what you mention about Feats is interesting. Although many Prestige Class type abilities, especially supernatural ones, are unlikely to be made into Feats, becase feats are to accessible, and limiting their accessibility to much violates the nature of feats. I agree that more room for DM freedom needs to be injected into D&D. This is linked to the catering to much to beginers idea. They want everything to be easy to understand and every detail layed out, which can be good, but there needs to be a lot more reminders of the fact that the game can be changed, and the rules are subject to interpretation</blockquote>

Verification