D&D 3E/3.5 Twenty Years On. Modern 3E?

[R_J_K75]

UA is 100% fully supported at my games.

Technically its playtest material right?

 

[Imaculata]

And here boys & girls we see a prime example of how the casters, particularly the Wizard achieves their supposed superiority.
They convince the DM that tracking a vital supply is "unnecessary busy work".
Never mind that some spell components are rare & valuable things for a reason.

But it is unnecessary busy work. The idea of balancing the game by making some spells require expensive components was a dumb idea, because most groups that play any version of D&D probably didn't bother with tracking all that nonsense.

Why not simply make the spells balanced? Get rid of all that bloat that most groups don't care for anyway. I'm shocked that material components are still a thing in 5E. It has always been a bad rule.

 

[R_J_K75]

But it is unnecessary busy work. The idea of balancing the game by making some spells require expensive components was a dumb idea, because most groups that play any version of D&D probably didn't bother with tracking all that nonsense.

Why not simply make the spells balanced?

I can see your point, its like making a fighter sharpen his weapon and repair his armor, a thief replace his tools, a bard set up his lute and change the strings or a ranger renew his hunting license on an almost constant basis. OTOH I think at the higher levels a wizard is doing much more damage and can significantly change the tide of the game with a single spell. That probably was the initial reasoning behind spell components. I think the spell casting system is long overdue for a drastic overhaul in all its areas so it more universal.

 

[ZeshinX]

If anything, I'd like the 5e chassis to be used, but certain systems changed.

I'd like to see 3.x style saving throws again. Reflex, Will and Fortitude worked and honestly I feel they better fit the 5e simpler approach than the current method. Having one for each ability score guarantees there's going to be one or two that rarely see use (which currently seem to be Int and Cha). Yes, there are spells and abilities that call for those saves, but I've found they are considerably less common than the others, and the classes proficient in those saves feel like they have a wasted save proficiency. Hell, I even prefer 2e's save system over the current 5e one (not how they functioned, merely how they were organized). Some means of universal improvement (that doesn't upset bounded accuracy) should also be implemented. Even from an abstract, to say that your non-proficient saves will be pretty much the same at 1st as 20th is ridiculous. 3.x got saving throws right and I'm sure they can be used in a bounded accuracy system just as well.

Basic brainstorm:

• Reflex = Dex or Str mod, whichever better
• Will = Int or Wis mod, whichever better
• Fort = Cha or Con mod, whichever better

No class has a "set" save proficiency. Each class gets proficiency in one at 1st level, which the player can choose. At 11th level (character level), you gain proficiency in a different saving throw of your choice and can add half your proficiency bonus to your rolls for your saving throws you are not proficient in.

Needs tinkering and tweaking no doubt, as this is just a brainstorm idea, but it's more interesting than current.

I'd also like to see a slightly more robust skill system. 5e gets the job done in the most basic of ways, but for a modern-designed system, it's pretty embarrassing. The main things I'd like to see are more skills and a means to gain more through progression. I'm content with proficiency bonuses handling the improvement over time to keep it simple, but some active means (meaning other than downtime) of learning (becoming proficient) in more would be most welcome to me. 2e does skills/proficiencies better than 5e (in terms of progression)....that's also rather embarrassing.

I enjoy 5e as it is, but saving throws and skills are the two mechanics in 5e I find myself constantly shaking my head at.

 

[Teemu]

I’d also use 5e as the chassis. Needs a more 4e/3e style feat system. Change the math to 4e, I’d say (so +1 every other level). Spellcasting system could probably stay very similar. Needs more magic items. I think monsters should stay like 5e’s.

And 3.5 has a ton more alternative magic rules like psionics, and of course Tome of Battle warriors, so this version of D&D would embrace new rules instead of working with the existing ones (like 5e does; artificer uses spells; they won’t add new systems for psionics since so many don’t want to learn them).

 

[Zardnaar]

I’d also use 5e as the chassis. Needs a more 4e/3e style feat system. Change the math to 4e, I’d say (so +1 every other level). Spellcasting system could probably stay very similar. Needs more magic items. I think monsters should stay like 5e’s.

And 3.5 has a ton more alternative magic rules like psionics, and of course Tome of Battle warriors, so this version of D&D would embrace new rules instead of working with the existing ones (like 5e does; artificer uses spells; they won’t add new systems for psionics since so many don’t want to learn them).

I would bring back some abilities. Old school magic resistance (d20 roll based off 2E) and perhaps +1)+2/+3 weapons required to damage them.

 

[Voadam]

Assuming Pathfinder 2 or 4E had gone in a different direction what would you like in a new 3.X?

What would you take from 4E, 5E, and Pathfinder 1/2. What would you cut?

From 4e:

Monster Roles, minions, elites, solos, all easily applicable to 3e games.

Class roles I felt were good design, give rogues their sneak attack against everybody, give ranger their favored enemy bonus against everybody to be strikers,. I love the defender role and mechanics from 4e.

I loved the at will and encounter power stuff and even the daily for the entire encounter powers.

I might even allow 4e class powers as graft on level in x class feats.

I'd want everybody having good BAB, monks and rogues should not suck at accuracy in combat and wizards will still suck at swinging swords.

I'd want at will cantrips with 4e at will attack abilities to be decent options instead of d3 insignificant wastes of everybody's time after low levels.

Skill system less fiddly.

A Warlord class.

A workable skill challenge system.

Option for 3 slot magic system.

DMG2 inherent bonus system option.

Healing surges.

Encounter as a duration.

From 5e:

Concentration.

Unified proficiency bonus.

Spells scaling up.

Spells designed to be saved against so less save or die or save and SUCK.

Full attack as action.

No AoO for engaging a foe.

Cool bonus action options for rogues.

Legendary and Lair stuff for monsters.

An OGL warlock.

Everybody gets at least 4 skills including two not determined by class.

Less fiddly skill system.

Skill Failure option to succeed with complications.

Advantage/disadvantage instead of fiddly small conditional bonuses.

0 HP is the lowest you go.

From Pathfinder 1e

Spells having more save each round option when failed.

Alchemists. Witches. Gunslingers.

Cool Martial Arts options.

Boatloads of monster options.

Changes from 3e

Less x/day mechanics and more at will or easily rechargeable stuff.

More recharge magic UA variant if possible and spontaneous caster cleric option.

Fractional save bonuses from UA.

Generally save or die change to save or dieing or something else.

I am sure there is more but that is the start that comes to mind.

 

[Teemu]

I think PF2 could be the closest equivalent to a new sleeker take on 3.5. It’s got more mechanical heft than 5e, but it’s still streamlined and keeps the spellcasting system separate from other abilities. To me, 4e is the sweet spot between 3.5 complexity and 5e simplicity (in terms of PCs and monsters), but if 4e is not an option, PF2 looks to be between 3.5 and 5e too.

 

[Zardnaar]

I think PF2 could be the closest equivalent to a new sleeker take on 3.5. It’s got more mechanical heft than 5e, but it’s still streamlined and keeps the spellcasting system separate from other abilities. To me, 4e is the sweet spot between 3.5 complexity and 5e simplicity (in terms of PCs and monsters), but if 4e is not an option, PF2 looks to be between 3.5 and 5e too.

PF2 numbers still overly large. And feats still fiddly and to many eh ones.

 

[ccs]

But it is unnecessary busy work. The idea of balancing the game by making some spells require expensive components was a dumb idea, because most groups that play any version of D&D probably didn't bother with tracking all that nonsense.

The idea is fine. That many groups (probably) ignore it doesn't change that.
What changes is that the casters end up with essentially unlimited ammo & are only constrained by their available slots.
And then you all complain that the casters run rampant, demand that they get fewer slots, etc etc etc.

Why not simply make the spells balanced? Get rid of all that bloat that most groups don't care for anyway. I'm shocked that material components are still a thing in 5E. It has always been a bad rule.

Because you can't "balance" the spells. Not effect wise beyond anything that cause damage. The best you can do is group them in lvs & assign them varying limitations on their casting - time, components, ever fewer slots at higher lvs.....

Getting rid of what you call bloat wouldn't change anything for you/whoever's already ignoring it.
But it would deprive others of options. Just because you & yours aren't using a spell or components doesn't mean someone else isn't.
And in the case of getting rid of spell components? That'd be really inconvenient for those of us who use them. If removed completely we'd have to do alot of work adding them back in. If made optional? Well, there's really no better location to print them other than in the spell description.
Worse, if removed completely, new players would not come into contact with this idea. This will limit their imagination.
These negatives here are not worth appeasing people like you who choose not to use options.