Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 3271411" data-attributes="member: 4937">Which is a good point to make.  There are certain changes I want to see in the rules, which, if I were in charge of designing 3rd edition I would have done exactly the same way.  It was more important for 3rd edition to feel like D&D and in particular D&D from the 'good old days' than it was to meet some standard of elegance.I'm going to pick on you because you're actually one of the more sensible posters in this thread.Absolutely.  I suggested that myself.  I'll take it one further.  Drop the monk entirely.  You should be able to build the monk from the fighter class to within a pretty close approximation, provided the fighter is provided the sort of high quality feats it should be.  Fighters need to become more mystical at high levels to keep up with spell casting classes.  At a certain level of skill, the mundane becomes magical.There has already been some pretty good movement in that direction.  Primal Heroes is a good series on this theme which shows what you can do when class abilities become more like feats.  At the very least, its alot more interesting take on classes than these 'Complete Nosepicker' splatbooks that have been coming out.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.I do however think that the spells need more descriptors attached to them, but not necessarily for priest spheres.  That you could use them for priest spheres as an optional rule would just be a bonus.Agreed.  In fact, this was one of my suggestions as well.You can't just do that.  You have to write, "Grant all classes a Defence bonus, AND..."  Granting all classes a defence bonus depends on changing some other aspect of the game, and the problem you'll run into is that you are either a) add alot of complexity in order to make no net change on how the game works, or b) make a game that loses some thing of D&D which is important to it.I actually find the current core turn undead system rather elegant, and much more elegant than the Complete Divine version.  Note among other things that Complete Divine causes turning to not work like turning works in D&D.  Basically, the existing turn undead system works alot like an attack.  You roll 'to hit', and you roll damage.  Both rolls work very elegantly without requireing you to know any numbers other than those you would already track.  And the secret to remembering the 'to hit table' is to remember that it always breaks on multiples of '3' - 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, etc. In fact, I think that there are alot of similar mechanics to turning which I would like added to the game which could use the same table.Ok, the grappling rules are a bit complicated, but I haven't seen anything that simplifies them in a way which keeps grappling interesting.No, it isn't.  Polymorph by itself is inately as complicated as the entire combat system.  In fact, the way to simplify this spell is to make it more complicated. Almost everyone has seen the logic of that.  I suspect we'll see it become core sooner or later.It's an interesting option, but it doesn't make anything simplier.  I'm afraid I have to lump that in with my nostalgic desire to bring back the weapon vs. ac modifiers in some form.  It's a intresting option for people that want to put up with the complexity, but I'm not sure I even I want to be crossreferencing the weapons class against the targets armor bonus even though I was using touch attacks, armor bonus, deflection bonus, and so forth 15 years ago mainly as a side effect of my desire to simplify calculating the whole weapon vs armor thing.</blockquote>

Verification