Non-Ranger 3.5E Changes

[Balgus]

The way they wrote up the sorc kinda irked me. I was hoping mopre of a scaling magic, rather than a "choose your spell" character.

A sorc should, at char creation, choose a elemental, or thematic path. And as he gains levels, the spells get more powerful.

Like at level one, he has cantrips like produce flame. Level 2 is something like flaming sphere. At level three, burning hands. Then fireball. Then flamestrike, and meteor storm.

A spell progression is already laid out, and he is able to modify it somewhat- but like completely choose off the wall combinations.

Of course, they would have some choices like haste, inv, and levitate. I guess I was thinking more like psionics... where there are themes, and each has its strengths and weaknesses.

 

[Lord Rasputin]

Re: Re: Re: Things I'd like to see

Well, I'd hate to hijack into a social skills thread, but I was thinking of reshuffling the social skills to "Mislead", "Convince", and "threaten". Use "Mislead" to feint or lie, "convince" when you're trying to change someone's mind or achieve a goal through honest conversation, and "threaten" when you're trying to scare someone.

Or, since that scheme is not much more than renaming the skills, something like "Feint", "Converse", and "Scare". Feinting is for achieving a physical response (in combat, or to make someone look away). "Converse" is when you use language to achieve a goal. "Scare" is when you make someone fear for their lives (with the effect of inducing the "Shaken" and "cowering" conditions).

I'd like to see feinting taken out of the Bluff skill. What does feinting have to do with BSing guards? This should be a ability based on the BAB, not the Bluff skill.

Make Intimidation Str-based, always.

Like I and others have said, paladin and monk multiclass restrictions are best as a house rule.

More spell descriptors. Monte Cook adding "plant" is just the starter. Really, I wonder if some of those spells like "fireball" could be easily "acidball" or "sonicball," like the Energy Substitution feat, but not needing the feat.

Make some skills, like Craft, Profession, Speak Language, maybe Listen, Spot, Sense Motive, universal.

Skill Focus should be +3, not +2. I think it will be that, based on D20 Modern and Cthulhu.

How about monks always having Weapon Finesse (unarmed)? It's pretty much needed at 3rd level. My own monk gained a +2 bonus to hit when he took that, and that looks to be normal.

 

[John Crichton]

Make Intimidation Str-based, always.

Naw. Just because someone who is large is intimidating, doesn't mean they have actual skill in it. Besides, an 18 STR doesn't always mean hulking large. Maybe some kind of synergy bonus.

Make some skills, like Craft, Profession, Speak Language, maybe Listen, Spot, Sense Motive, universal.

That could be interesting. Would only serve to make individual classes more diverse.

Skill Focus should be +3, not +2. I think it will be that, based on D20 Modern and Cthulhu.

I think this one is a given. We all agree.

How about monks always having Weapon Finesse (unarmed)? It's pretty much needed at 3rd level. My own monk gained a +2 bonus to hit when he took that, and that looks to be normal.

No need to be giving out free feats...

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Things I'd like to see

Make Intimidation Str-based, always.

No. Intimidation should never have been allowed to be strength based in the older editions, and I'm glad they've fixed it.

Even in the skill description, it mentions forms of Intimidation that have nothing to do with Strength. Ever been called by a bill collector? That's intimidation, and it has nothing to do with physical violence-- unless you owe money to the wrong kind of people.

For the best depiction of intimidation in use, I'd reccomend watching the Princess Bride, and Westley's threat to duel "to the pain." Or, in a non-fantasy vein, Batman. Especially Batman comics.

 

[Tarrasque Wrangler]

Concerning skills, open up Decipher Script's availability a bit, to at least include Wizards and Clerics, if not everyone. Read Lips is another one.

Give some more examples of info that can be gleaned with a Gather Information check. That's a skill I've always liked, but the description is just too vague.

Get rid of Intuit Direction. Collapse it into the new Survival skill.

Please, please, please make Jump easier to figure out at a glance. I don't want to have to do math just to see if the PC cleared the 10' gap.

Perform is just...bizarre. Get rid of that "You are capable of one form of performance per rank" thingy. I've never heard of anyone who can play 20 different instruments, all at master level. I don't think it's too limiting to make a player buy separate skills for different performance types.

That Scry skill's always cheesed me off. It is of little use if you don't have a high-level spell or a magic item with scrying capability. I don't think the game loses too much if you get rid of it, and just build that mechanic into the individual spell or magic item.

 

[John Crichton]

Perform is just...bizarre. Get rid of that "You are capable of one form of performance per rank" thingy. I've never heard of anyone who can play 20 different instruments, all at master level. I don't think it's too limiting to make a player buy separate skills for different performance types.

Hmmm.

I know a few folks who can play about 6-8 instruments quite well. Some folks can just do it. I guess the question you have to ask yourself is this: If you don't have a problem with characters calling lighting from the skies to smite your foes, hurl balls of killing flame and transform others into whatever their minds can think of with a simple spell then is someone being able to play 20 different musical instruments that much of a leap?

 

[Lord Rasputin]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Things I'd like to see

No. Intimidation should never have been allowed to be strength based in the older editions, and I'm glad they've fixed it.

Even in the skill description, it mentions forms of Intimidation that have nothing to do with Strength. Ever been called by a bill collector? That's intimidation, and it has nothing to do with physical violence-- unless you owe money to the wrong kind of people.

For the best depiction of intimidation in use, I'd reccomend watching the Princess Bride, and Westley's threat to duel "to the pain." Or, in a non-fantasy vein, Batman. Especially Batman comics.

That's Bluff. Intimidation is gaining what you want through the threat of force.

 

[John Crichton]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Things I'd like to see

That's Bluff. Intimidation is gaining what you want through the threat of force.

Ah, not true. Intimidation is gaining what you want through threats in general. That could mean threats of phyical pain as well as threats of emotional, economic or future pain. Sure, Bluff is part of it but only if you are making it up.

 

[Dark Helmet]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Things I'd like to see

No. Intimidation should never have been allowed to be strength based in the older editions, and I'm glad they've fixed it.

Even in the skill description, it mentions forms of Intimidation that have nothing to do with Strength. Ever been called by a bill collector? That's intimidation, and it has nothing to do with physical violence-- unless you owe money to the wrong kind of people.

For the best depiction of intimidation in use, I'd reccomend watching the Princess Bride, and Westley's threat to duel "to the pain."

Ah. But remember, Westley was BLUFFING!

 

[drnuncheon]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Things I'd like to see

Originally posted by Lord Rasputin That's Bluff. Intimidation is gaining what you want through the threat of force.

Westley may have been bluffing when he described "to the pain", but it was still Intimidate.

WESTLEY: To the pain means the first thing you lose will be your feet, below the ankles, then your hands at the wrists, next your nose.

HUMPERDINCK: -- and then my tongue, I suppose. I killed you too quickly the last time, a mistake I don't mean to duplicate tonight.

WESTLEY: I wasn't finished -- the next thing you lose will be your left eye, followed by your right --

HUMPERDINCK: -- and then my ears, I understand. Let's get on with it --

WESTLEY: Wrong! Your ears you keep, and I'll tell you why -- so that every shriek of every child at seeing your hideousness will be yours to cherish -- every babe that weeps at your approach, every woman who cries out, "Dear God, what is that thing?" will echo in your perfect ears. That is what "to the pain" means. It means I leave you in anguish, wallowing in freakish misery forever.


Hmm. "Gaining what you want through the threat of force"? I think that qualifies nicely.

It was a nice use of the synergy bonus from Bluff, though.

J