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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Man in the Funny Hat" data-source="post: 5038235" data-attributes="member: 32740">I agree that the categories for 3E work better, but they have to function as 1E saving throws do.  That is, your ability scores do not adjust your saves - they are a function of class and level only; adjusted only by magic items and the occasional spell.I, on the other hand propose that PC ability scores NEVER EVER be allowed to exceed 19 except by persistent influence of magic.Hit points are hardly excessive even with a good Con bonus.  I don't see any reason for this.THIS I think has potential.I do find it fascinating that unarmed combat in 1E, 2E, and 3E is such a useless mess.Crits should be optional and the option presented should be pretty much limited to something like double damage.  Any special results should be left not for random application but as specific effects that characters could inflict somehow.No.  Never.  Nuh uh.  NOT the 1E way.  It's Vancian magic or forget it.Definitely.EMPHATICALLY no.  This way lies DM prep load MADNESS.  Leave it in 3E where it belongs.  Monsters do what they do - they don't need to conform to ability score charts to do it.An idea worth pursuing I suppose since I've had thoughts along those lines before myself, but its ultimate worth depends on execution.  Doing this adds just one more thing to note for a "stat block" but even just ONE addition is adding to a DM's prep load.  Then there's another and another and pretty soon you have 3E's half-page stat blocks and hours of additional prep time.Just one of many tentacles that alignment has entwined in the system that need to be removed.Certainly we will have none of that Drizzt-based stuff.  Rangers need to be based first and foremost on Aragorn with a few other woodsy-outdoorsy tree-hugger bits.  If it must be spells it must be clerical/druidic spells only - NEVER wizard spells.  Wizard spells should be associated with a different "multi-class" archetype.No.  LESS complication in this area - not MORE.</blockquote>

Verification