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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Merlion" data-source="post: 1772509" data-attributes="member: 10397">I didnt say anything about UA's book catagory or content type changing.I think that some of the matieral in UA is more or less being tested for possible inclusion in the next edition of the game (much as seemed to happen with Skills and Powers providing a lot of stuff that got incorporated into 3rd edition).In particular, I think CBDB, Armor as DR, and Spontaneous Metamagic are likely inclusions because they dont slaughter any sacred cows, and they add either logic, realism, balance or some combination thereof. And they particularly add or change things that many people dislike about the game, and in ways in which some have already changed it themselves. Like that if you create a class that casts spells, and call them an "arcane" spellcasting class because their power is innate or learned rather than coming from the "divine" (or from faith in something divine, they dont seem to be able to decide which it is), and give it access to healing spells people have fits and say "arcane spellcasters are supposed to heal!" (Despite the fact that it is stated that Arcane and Divine magic can each do anything....its the classes that have actual restrictions on what kind of magic they do or dont use).And like how I've heard people complain that bards shouldnt be able cast Cure Light Wounds because its a Divine spell (Despite the fact that its the caster that determines what a spell is, not the spell itself).Basically, its just terminology, and has little actual mechanical effect, but people think it does. It usualy just seems to create confusion. And what little mechanical effect it does have could be much more neatly handled on an individual class by class basis.Plus it removes another restriction. You can create a class and have its magic work however you want, without having to put it into a catagory of either innate/learned magic or "from an outside source" magic. I didnt prhase that first part well. What I mean is, alignment restrictions on base classes, and specfic roleplaying restrictions on classes (such as the Paladin's code). Trouble is, if your a player, you dont get to choose to do that unless the DM lets you. Unbalance aside, the Cleric has archtype issues. One beyond question is that its trying to fill too many...at least 3 ("Priest" "Crusader" and "Healer"), and second in my opnion, the Priest archtype in particular is not even one that should have a base class. Thats the important part. As it stands the Cleric is considerably more powerful over the total span of levels than any other class...only the druid really comes close. The Wizard doesnt compete until basically 17th level. Every party doesnt require one now, but because they designers think they do, the Cleric got overpowered. Right now it isnt an optional corebook. Its just optional. And I dont care wether its a seperate book or included in the DMG or whatever, there needs to be extensive stuff telling people yes, it is ok to change the game to suite the desires of you and your players. Here are some examples of how to do it. I dont follow this. Are you saying you can or cannot remove those things and still have D&D?I realize that they will *never* remove the Cleric from DnD. That I can cope with. I will however be inexpressibly unhappy if in 4th edition the Cleric is still unbalanced as it is now. I would be surprised not to see it, or something like it. Several other d20 games, at least one of which is produced by Wizards uses such a system. Its logical. And again given that they made UA Open Game Content it just seems to make it more likely.And if they include CBDB they will include either Armor as DR or something similiar, so fighters and paladins will still have a reason to wear armor. There are things that they will not ever change. Although I think the list slowly gets shorter. The two things that I think will never be removed and never even be meaningfuly altered are the fact of D&D as a relatively rigid class based system, and as a system with lots of base classes for many different roles, as oposed to a small number of very generic classes and ways to make them other things (although obviously it has and will continue to present this in variant form).I dont think Armor Class will ever be replaced (such as by an oposed defense roll sort of system), and Hit Points I think will remain or maybe some day go to something different but extremely similiar like VP/WP.But they have already changed some things more than I would expect some times.</blockquote>

Verification