Things that have bugged you since 1E

[johnsemlak]

It's always bugged me that the only official clergy for sophisticated mainstream religions is the cleric class, though I can get my mind around pagan religions having their own versions of the crusader military orders as a subset of the priesthood. When I think of an Egyptian priest I think of a guy in a skirt performing daily rituals, doing magic, interpreting dreams and performing various beurocratic functions. I don't think I'm being too literal minded or too much of a stickler when I have trouble associating his functions in the scheme of the religion with the cleric class.

It wouldn't take much space at all to put in a generic NPC priest class that lost the combat related stuff and fortitude save but had the same spellcasting abilities and 4 skill points. I'd be entirely happy with the extra vermisilitude it would give if just that much were in the core rules, though it would be nice if it were elaborated a little more.

For our games I'd prefer a full PC class (or classes) but we can use our own or get them from other sources.

The <i>Netbook of Classes</i> (the latest version) has an NPC cleric class varient, the Ecclesiastic. Less combat oriented (d4 HP, only one good saving throw). They are modeled after Medieval European priests (they gain an ability called church authority) and probably wouldn't fit the Egyptian priest theme you mentioned. Actually, I would like to see a core priest class that fit that description.

You can find the NBoC at www.fancc.net, but the site is periodically down. There is a direct link to the download, but I don't have it.

 

[Gellion]

I totally agree there. Elves should be more magical, more than human. They are getting closer as the game grows, but elves could use more of a boost. Lets face it, Tolkien inspired DnD, no matter how many times various people want to deny it. Why not borrow more and give them an additional boost to set them apart?

hellbender

Bah

 

[Staffan]

Two weapon fighting crap. In the 1E DMG there was about 1 paragraph with very clear rules, and it wasn't easy.

Every edition since, it's gotten easier and I suspect the next edition will make your secordary weapon at a better bonus than the first.

No, it hasn't gotten easier between 2e and 3e - at least not if you used Combat & Tactics and/or Complete Fighter's Handbook for 2e.

Base 2e: Off-hand weapon must be smaller than primary weapon. You get one extra attack. Primary weapon gets -2, off-hand weapon gets -4.

Complete Fighter's Handbook: If you take Ambidexterity, you get +2 on the off-hand attack. If you take Two-weapon fighting specialization, you get +2 on both attacks and can use the same size weapons in both hands.

Combat & Tactics: As CFHB, except they made Two-weapon fighting have two levels: the first gives +2 to both attacks, and the second allows equal weapons.

Base 3.0e: You get one additional attack with the off-hand weapon. The primary weapon gets -6, and the off-hand gets -10. The off-hand attack only gets half Strength bonus. Using a light weapon in the off-hand gives +2/+2, the Ambidexterity proficiency gives +0/+4, and Two-weapon fighting gives +2/+2. If you take Improved two-weapon fighting, you get another attack with the secondary weapon at an additional -5.

Base 3.5e: As 3.0, except Ambidexterity and Two-weapon fighting are combined. Improved Two-weapon fighting has a lower prerequisite, so you can take it at the same level you get your second attack with the main weapon. Greater Two-weapon fighting is added, giving a third off-hand attack at the same level you get a third attack with the main weapon.

I'd say there was a pretty sharp decline in the power of two-weapon fighting between 2e and 3e. Not that I mind, I always thought two-weapon fighting *should* be a suboptimal use of feats.

 

[Belphanior]

I'm sick to death of overspecialized elves. It's not like they're seperate cultures.. it's just a gimick. And you don't see this with other races.. just elves. You don't have 90 types of halfling running around. Or heaven forbid different stats for different 'subraces' of humans - that wouldn't be very PC would it.. but it's okay for elves. Pah.

I can recommend Midnight to you. While there are 4 types of elves, there are also 3 types of humans. There are also 2 types of dwarves and halflings, though the differences aren't as pronounced as with elves and humans. (Especially humans.)

But I can really recommend Birthright. One type of elf, but 5 types of humans.

How do you like them apples?


The only thing I dislike about D&D is the whole "must slay" feel. I know, DMs can and should give xp for roleplaying and ideas as well, but the main method of advancement is still by slaughtering people.
(No, I don't want to hear about your urban political campaign that proves me wrong. I've done it myself as well, but you've got to agree that it doesn't feel as normal D&D.)

 

[CleverName]

Alignment - d20 modern has a much better and more generic system.

Fighters are, by definition, trained to kill things - in fact, with their lousy skill points, it is about the only thing they _are_ trained to do. Why is it then that rogues are the only ones that have bothered to study anatomy and therefore gain sneak attack? The only reason is the the mythic "game balance."

 

[Darkness]

arcady, I have to echo Drew in this. That stuff all makes up D&D. There are plenty of other RPGs out there that would fit the bill for anyone who dislikes so many of the core tropes of D&D. Instead of wanting to remake D&D as another game altogether, I'd simply play another game.

More flexibility for the character classes would be a good thing, though.

If WotC were to publish an optional classless system (with point costs for all SAs/SQs, etc.), that would help a lot - not only for classless play, but also for class creation and class modification (whether setting-based). Consider, it would be a valuable aid not only for individual DMs, but also for d20 producers (and WotC employees). Really, prestige classes especially vary wildly in power; a more clearly laid-out standard would help a lot in that regard.
Hm. Maybe it would be similar to the class creation system in the 2e DMG, only balanced.

 

[Tsyr]

I can recommend Midnight to you. While there are 4 types of elves, there are also 3 types of humans. There are also 2 types of dwarves and halflings, though the differences aren't as pronounced as with elves and humans. (Especially humans.)

But I can really recommend Birthright. One type of elf, but 5 types of humans.

How do you like them apples?

Soverigen Stone did this too. One race of elves, many subraces of humans.

 

[Tonguez]

Overspecialized Elves.

There's 8 billion unique subraces of elves, each with their own special powers.

Yep got to agree entirely with this I hate subraces of all varieties -and IMC's there is only one type of human, orc, gnome, dwarf or elf etc etc. (I've also made elfs fey able to use obscuring mist and not a PC option)

Vancian magic is lame

Reliance on Magic items is lame

Alignment - don't use it...

(oh and CleverName I make all first level class abilities feats - so fighters can take Basic Sneak Attack IMC)

 

[Tsyr]

Overspecialized Elves.
*SNIP*
If you want Drow, they don't have to be ECL 3, have magic resistance, and all manner of silly crap like that. Change their alignment, cultural facets and m.o and bam - scarey outcast underground elves that worship a demon queen.

So you suggest giving a race of subterranian elves no ability to see in the dark, just in dim light? Boy, lots of that a mile below the earth...

And you suggest not giving elves that live under water the ability to breath down there?

On a more world-centric note, those aren't drow. Those are dark skinned evil elves living underground. Dark Elves, as it were. But they are not Drow with a capital D. Drow with a capital D are a sub-race of elves with spell resistance and innate magical abilities. It's just what they are. Change that and they aren't Drow anymore, but something else. I mean, if you took away a dragons breath weapon, spellcasting ability, innate magic, ability to fly, and it's intelligence, it's not, in a DnD sense, a dragon anymore. Oh, sure, it's some sort of dragon (Since real world dragon myths run the gamut of characteristics), but it's not a standard DnD dragon anymore. Same thing with Drow.

I mean, heck. Why do we need different species of Dragons? Let's make them all the same species, and let them pick alignments more freely. And you know, we don't really need those other subraces of dwarves, halflings, and gnomes... lets get rid of them too. And you know, I'm sure there are two many species of wolves out there... Why, we have Wolves, Dire Wolves, Winter Wolves, Worgs... Why not get rid of them all and just have a generic wolf? Same with Demons and Devils... Why do we need all those seperate types of Demons and Devils? Why not just have a generic "Demon" and a generic "Devil"?

 

[Tonguez]

So you suggest giving a race of subterranian elves no ability to see in the dark, just in dim light? Boy, lots of that a mile below the earth...

And you suggest not giving elves that live under water the ability to breath down there?

On a more world-centric note, those aren't drow. Those are dark skinned evil elves living underground. Dark Elves, as it were. But they are not Drow with a capital D. Drow with a capital D are a sub-race of elves with spell resistance and innate magical abilities. It's just what they are. Change that and they aren't Drow anymore, but something else. I mean, if you took away a dragons breath weapon, spellcasting ability, innate magic, ability to fly, and it's intelligence, it's not, in a DnD sense, a dragon anymore. Oh, sure, it's some sort of dragon (Since real world dragon myths run the gamut of characteristics), but it's not a standard DnD dragon anymore. Same thing with Drow.

I mean, heck. Why do we need different species of Dragons? Let's make them all the same species, and let them pick alignments more freely. And you know, we don't really need those other subraces of dwarves, halflings, and gnomes... lets get rid of them too. And you know, I'm sure there are two many species of wolves out there... Why, we have Wolves, Dire Wolves, Winter Wolves, Worgs... Why not get rid of them all and just have a generic wolf? Same with Demons and Devils... Why do we need all those seperate types of Demons and Devils? Why not just have a generic "Demon" and a generic "Devil"?

Um Actually Tsyr I do have only one type of True Dragon (they come in various colours and sizes due to habitat, and I don't use Alignment) which breaths fire or gas and which can also spit acid.
I also have Mystic Dragons (Oriental Weather Spirits) and Sea Dragons (big winged eels that breath acidic vapour) - these are NOT True Dragons

and no we don't need subraces of dwarf, gnome or halfling.

As far as I'm concerned an evil subterranean race with spell resistance, dark vision and various spelllike abilities can be called Drow without having to be a type of elf. IMC I have a slightly built humanoid race that lives underwater it is NOT an Elf. And frankly if I'm going to include a race with wings then why does it have to be an elf? why not an entirely different race?

Winter Wolves and Worgs imc are as much wolves as a Manticores are Lions - it might have similarities it is not a subtype