Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="iblis" data-source="post: 1772176" data-attributes="member: 20429">I can sympathise. I haven't tried AU though, so I have no idea what that's like.Ditto, regarding the running a heavily houseruled thing, and some of the rest, like using UA variants.I think UA will stay where it is, in terms of book category and content type.D&D - Cleric != D&D. I'll expand on that (in a minor way) in a bit.What problems? Could you specify? And if you have, and I've missed the post, my apologies.Restrictions on roleplaying? Eh? Could you clarify that one for me too? Maybe I'm being obtuse. Sorry, if so. :\ As for classes and alignments, they're pretty open at the moment I'd say (not that I particularly care, as I mostly ignore alignments where possible). It's a very easy to get around 'problem' anyway. Just ignore what it says! Works a treat, as I'm sure you're aware already.Yes, that'd be nice. A bit like point-buy for nearly everything, just sans the point. Er. But I do concur.Hmm, dunno about the whole Cleric as opposed to Priest as opposed to Cleric thing here, but I agree that they could do with some toning down. Not every party should require one for survival's sake. Exaggeration aside, there's still a problem with this core class as it stands, IMO.Yep. I've gone some way to doing this IMCs (taking the 'Fix' option that is). Ah, much better, i.e. fairly balanced <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Agreed. Add 2 or maybe even 4 to every class's Skill Points progression. Works much better, IME. Oh, and chuck in a few more skills for good measure.Something like the aforementioned Unearthed Arcana, then? Personally I imagine they will keep it as Unearthed Arcana, a supplement / 'optional corebook'.I hope they include a Defense Bonus in the core rules, and I believe it's got a chance at being there. My own 'special' way of utilising it is unlikely to see print...um, anywhere probably. I give all beings a Defense Bonus that does stack with armour bonuses etc., based on character level or equivalent. I just find it evens up the odds so to speak, for example when high-level fighters can normally hit pretty much anything all the blessed time.I also like Spell Points (with a bit of tweaking here and there.) It's a smooth system, IME, though I am aware many do not like it. Fair enough. So we probably won't actually see that one in core rules. But then, I'm a sucker for the Psionics + Power Points system, and it's virtually identical. Hoola, why not make it 'even more identical'. Like, "Each additional Spell Point spent increases the damage by one die...", yada yada. Go, flexible magic! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Which brings me to the expansion on the D&D minus Cleric thing above. Insert any of the following in the place of Cleric, and the formula will (no doubt) still work : Wizard/Sorcerer/Mage/Magic User/Spellcaster, Fighter/Warrior, Rogue/Thief, Paladin, Bard, Ranger, Druid, Monk, Barbarian, Elf, Half-Elf, Dwarf, Gnome, Halfling, Orc, Helf-Orc, Drow, HP, AC, HD, Saving Throws, Levels, XP, Gold-Silver-Copper (100-10-1), Common, Magic Missile, Bigby's X Hand........and the rest.Too many iconic things there. At least until the 'old guard' are all dead or otherwise incapable of voicing public opinion, i.e. those who migrated from a previous version of D&D (like me, for example).That's the catch really (or one result of it anyway) : It's genuinely great that WotC has listened to players and actually implemented some of what they heard was desired but at the same time (I believe) while keeping those same ears close to the ground, they must've heard overwhelming resistance to deleting/replacing some of the staples of D&D since prehistory.Unless it was and is just a judgement call. But no, I really can't believe they don't listen to players...er, consumers. No reason not to. Another explanation is that the people involved in the makeover are themselves fans of some of the old staples. Or finally, maybe they are devoted worshippers at the shrine of Ifit Aintbroke, deity of data persistence.*shrug* Whatever. Can't see them changing these things in a hurry, in any case.</blockquote>

Verification