Rules in 3.5 that need fixing and what you'd do to fix it.

[Aaron L]

Classify abilities that can be used X/times per day according to a power level, so that they can be easily enhanced with standard feats and/or spells. As in Greater Ability, Moderate Ability, and Lesser Ability. Then you can have a single feat called Extra Greater Ability, which gives all Greater Abilities a set amount of extra uses per day. And so on down the line.

No more Extra Smiting, Extra Rage, Extra Bardic Music, or Extra Turning. Just a set of 3 or 4 Extra Ability feats that covers all of them. And it would also cover all future class abilities so we don't have to wait for a new feat for an "Extra Hexblade Curse" or whatever we might need.

Then they could get into meta-ability feats that could allow quickened or empowered Abilities at a cost of more than one use per day. Extended Rages or Empowered Smites or Quickened Bardic Music.

 

[Justin Cray]

Classify abilities that can be used X/times per day according to a power level, so that they can be easily enhanced with standard feats and/or spells. As in Greater Ability, Moderate Ability, and Lesser Ability. Then you can have a single feat called Extra Greater Ability, which gives all Greater Abilities a set amount of extra uses per day. And so on down the line.

No more Extra Smiting, Extra Rage, Extra Bardic Music, or Extra Turning. Just a set of 3 or 4 Extra Ability feats that covers all of them. And it would also cover all future class abilities so we don't have to wait for a new feat for an "Extra Hexblade Curse" or whatever we might need.

Then they could get into meta-ability feats that could allow quickened or empowered Abilities at a cost of more than one use per day. Extended Rages or Empowered Smites or Quickened Bardic Music.

I really like it. And there are already feats that allow you to Quicken SU abilities, it should be trivial to expand this to all abilites, but I never thought of it.

 

[ruleslawyer]

As an option maybe, but I think that clerics are pretty well designed as is. Alot of people what a less combat oriented class for priestly types, but never really consider the problem of multi-classing. A divine spell casting class without starting armor proficencies is not that penalized, because a single multi-class into something with heavy armor solves the problem. Alot of attempts at 'non combat cleric' I've seen are significantly more powerful than a cleric 20, when you build them as a Cleric 1/uber-Cleric 19, or Fighter 1/uber-Cleric 19.

A divine spellcasting class without serious combat ability would be just as penalized for multiclassing as an arcane spellcasting class without serious combat ability. We already have two of those in the core game. Moreover, the complaint was that all clerics look the same; there's no reason that you couldn't have clerics with different subsets of the cleric spell list, as in 2e; that would substantially *reduce* the power of the class.

IMHO, clerics are way too loaded down with features and have their spell access cracked too wide open, especially given the "automatic expansion of spell list when new splatbook comes out" phenomenon. I'd rather see a single spell list for all casters (like in Arcana Evolved), broken out by spell rarity and descriptor, with clerics gaining access to different categories of spell based on class and patron deity.

 

[lukelightning]

Flight maneuverability. It needs to be simplified into something like three categories: perfect, average, poor. Something like:

Perfect: Can move however it wants in the air.

Average: Must move each round or fall (so no full actions while in the air). Can make one 90' turn as a free action.

Poor: Must move each round or fall, can't change direction during that movement.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Something to argue over. That's usually good so long as everyone remains good spirited, hitches up thier asbestoes underware, and realizes that no matter how much they think they are winning the debate, they still look really silly for arguing over something so utterly pointless.

I think we're doing a relatively good job of avoiding that on this thread.

Having seen everyone's suggestions so far, here are the ones *I* would adopt:

1) Fewer classes, more customizability in class choice (WayneLigon). I'd much rather see fewer base classes with more substitution abilities and feat choices than the "one concept, one class" system we're getting in 3.5. I think you could go with fighter/caster/expert, plus guidelines for builds as WayneLigon suggested.

2) Eliminate attributes in favor of modifiers (WL). I think it does help simplify things.

3) Flexible spells (WL *again*). Yes, flavor will suffer, but that's for the adventure designers and NPC stat block builders to provide. I'd much rather see base fire, cure, charm, etc. effects than the vast proliferation of spells out there.

4) Set the default for character wealth at ZERO, with magic items providing a bonus to ECL. This allows you to play all levels of wealth without having to seriously tweak the system as in numerous d20 variants. (Okay, this one is probably nearly impossible, but if it could be done, I'd be ecstatic!)

5a) Fewer buffing effects. If we're assuming anyway that everyone is going to have +x to AC, +y to their prime attribute, +z to saves, and so on, why not just build those things into the character itself via a class defense bonus, faster stat boosts by level, and better save bonuses, respectively?

5b) On the buffing topic: Do what Monte suggested and build magic buffs and minor powers directly into the caster class(es) as constant-use or long-duration spell-like or supernatural abilities. Give them fewer spells per day and make those spells really count. This would *radically* simplify bookkeeping while retaining the same resource-management dynamic that Vancian magic currently has.

6) Eliminate cross-class skills. Just give the skill monkeys a LOT more skill points plus the ability to gain max ranks equal to level +x, where x > 3. Or use something like Iron Heroes' skill groups. (Lots o'folks) While I agree with Psion that skills are essential to defining certain class niches, I'd rather start from a baseline of 1 skill point = 1 rank and work *up* from there, rather than down. The halving mechanic of cc skills really annoys me.

7) Eliminate favored classes. No one needs them. If you really want something like this, then give them bonus feats as in OGL Conan.

8) Easy pregen NPCs/monsters as per IH's villain classes. (Gundark)

9) Eliminate equipment weight in favor of encumbrance value (EV) as in C&C. Why do we need a table for something as mundane as carrying stuff?

10) Fix turn undead. Oh please, please fix turn undead. IMHO, the easiest way to do it (and I'm sure there are a million others out there) would be to substitute a generic "channel positive/negative energy" class feature for it. Good clerics could cure damage or harm undead; evil clerics could inflict damage or cure undead. A cleric could give up a certain number of dice of damage (or curing) to force a Will save to repel (or control) undead instead.

11) Iterative attacks: I am quite skeptical of the potential of any solution to adequately compensate fighter-types for the loss of those attacks. One easy solution I could see would be to give the fighter Bo9S-type abilities that triggered on a standard action, so that as he got to higher and higher levels, he'd be using whirlwind attack, death from above, overwhelming critical, etc. as his single attack. It'd actually probably be cooler than the 5' step + full attack routine that we see now at high levels.

12) Polymorph: If we go with the fewer base spells + more customizability model, then polymorph should be easier to handle. Just go with access to different forms, or make it a straight-up ability, movement, natural armor, and natural attacks buff.

13) Monster types: We need this many why? I'd like to see animal, construct, humanoid, magical beast, ooze, outsider, plant, undead. Dragon could merit its own type if it were *really* necessary; personally, I think it wouldn't be a problem for them to be magical beasts, just with more HD.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

Just play 1st edition. I'm talking about what I'd like to see in 4th.

So am I.

 

[DragonLancer]

1. Drop AoO's except for spellcasting, scrolls and wands.
2. Allow Paladins to multiclass freely.
3. Reduce the number of feats.
4. Make an alternate item creation mechanic.
5. Drop CR's and leave it up to DM discretion.
6. Remove the reliance on miniatures from the game.

 

[JVisgaitis]

OMG. I have to write this whole thing over. Stupid EN World log in...

But however you implement your class specific buffs, it will still be by its very nature more complicated and harder to remember than the rules for which skills are class and which are cross case.

If I was writing it, I can certainly make it elegant enough that it wouldn't be complicated.

These are basically feats.

No they're not feats. Their class abilities. Technically, if you're saying that anything that is given as a bonus to a character is a feat, then yeah I suppose its a feat. But by your same reasoning, I suppose picking up a new spell or having a rogue choose a special ability are feats too.

Its interesting that you are taking skills away from the direction of being specific to classes, but are actually taking feats toward being more specific to a class by essentially making alot of 'class feats'. The fact that your design is incoherent like that suggests to me that you know what you want, but you don't quite know how to get there.

Incoherent? First off, stop calling them feats. They're not. They're class abilities and I think that's confusing you. Also, who said I'm making feats specific to a character class? I said that Weapon Specialization as a feat is stupid and it is because it requires you to be a fighter of level x. Would it make sense to make Turn Undead a feat that only clerics can take? Of course not, it should be a class ability. How is that incoherent? It makes perfect sense.

Take my word for it that keeping cross-class skills is a good idea for the very same reason it is a good idea to replace most classes fixed class abilities with a selection of player options.

Um, you need to read my post again. I said:

I would spec all of the initial classes as generic concepts keeping the core themes: fighter, arcane caster, etc. but have a lot of class abilities that are chosen throughout the character's career.

So on one hand your telling me doing the classes the way I propose is bad, but on the other hand your telling me that you want a lot of player options which according to your definition are "feats". Which is it? You can't have it both ways...

What you are failing to understand is that the fighter already has actual class abilities. They are called 'fighter bonus feats'. Those are actual class abilities, particularly the ones like 'weapon specialization' that don't appear on any other classes' list (or shouldn't).

Actually I'm not failing to understand anything. The fact that a fighters schtick is "bonus feats" is stupid in my opinion. What's interesting about playing a character that any other class could emulate (with the exception of Weapon Specialization though there are feats around that anyway). Give me a character that has his own unique skills and abilities not something dry and boring that takes away from the coolness of me being a fighter.

What you are actually doing is making the rest of the classes' class abilities look more like the fighter's class abilities.

I don't know what you're reading, but I'm not suggesting anything of the sort. Fighters pick feats. You yourself said you want more player options and I'm suggesting that. I don't know, maybe I just can't explain this clearly.

 

[The Grackle]

Classify abilities that can be used X/times per day according to a power level, so that they can be easily enhanced with standard feats and/or spells. As in Greater Ability, Moderate Ability, and Lesser Ability. Then you can have a single feat called Extra Greater Ability, which gives all Greater Abilities a set amount of extra uses per day. And so on down the line.

No more Extra Smiting, Extra Rage, Extra Bardic Music, or Extra Turning. Just a set of 3 or 4 Extra Ability feats that covers all of them. And it would also cover all future class abilities so we don't have to wait for a new feat for an "Extra Hexblade Curse" or whatever we might need.

Then they could get into meta-ability feats that could allow quickened or empowered Abilities at a cost of more than one use per day. Extended Rages or Empowered Smites or Quickened Bardic Music.

I was thinking about this the other day.

There could be one pool for all X/day abilities. A character could dip into a class for one level to pick up Rage, Turn Undead, Smite Evil, Breath Weapons, or whatever (which is what happens anyway). Even a crazy multiclass build w/lots of tricks would still be limited by their pool/reserve.

The pool could be = 1/2 ECL+1 maybe?

It could even be a pool of daily Action Points, for games that include them.

 

[delericho]

Actually I'm not failing to understand anything. The fact that a fighters schtick is "bonus feats" is stupid in my opinion. What's interesting about playing a character that any other class could emulate (with the exception of Weapon Specialization though there are feats around that anyway). Give me a character that has his own unique skills and abilities not something dry and boring that takes away from the coolness of me being a fighter.

Actually, I find the 'bonus feats' thing a very useful and flexible facet of that class. What is lacking (in the first PHB) is a sufficiency of high-level feats. However, using the expanded lists in Complete Warrior, Player's Handbook II and other sources allows the creation of a very wide range of Fighter archetypes. And, short of building a new base class precisely for that purpose, it is difficult to build a character that is actually better than the Fighter in most fighting styles.

The PHB Fighter is actually the best (base class) two-weapon combatant in the game. It is the best 'expertise' combatant in the game. It is actually the best archer, or mounted combat specialist in the game. And so on. It's all really just a matter of focus.

(However, the proliferation of new base classes, and especially the overuse of Prestige Classes to cover specific fighting styles really cuts into this niche. That's one reason I feel a great many PrC class features should actually be feats.)