Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="irdeggman" data-source="post: 1847698" data-attributes="member: 16285">knifespeaks,If they haven’t tried to do this there is most likely no reason for them to do it.  The weapons in 3.5 have sufficient differences in damage, critical hits, and being two-handed or not to keep this from happening.  There are also DR and material types to cover most of the issues you want to address.   Actually this will add quite a lot of effort if you haven’t gotten that from the other posts yet.  It will slow down combat and increase record keeping a lot. Heck if you really wanted something tactical – get a hold of Unearthed Arcana and check out the armor as DR variant in there.And yet you have the time to make massive changes to the rules as written in order to replicate things that were done in 2nd ed.  This seems to fail the logic test to me.  The changes may not seem massive to you when you think of them as concepts but by the time you put pen to paper and try to keep everything in balance it will end up being quite extensive.What?  As written, they can’t be taken more than once for a reason – they will get swiftly out of hand and defeat the armor benefits that you are trying to get to be more effective in the first place.  There are multiple levels of each in 3.5, which should accomplish what you are trying to get to (greater weapon focus and greater weapon specialization).  I again refer to 2nd ed as a source of why things are the way they are.  2nd ed had weapon focus and weapon specialization that stacked. (Again from PO: Combat & Tactics) and also multiple levels of specialization.  Only fighters could take more than 1 level of specialization and pretty much only a character with the appropriate number of fighter levels can take specialization in 3.5 too, there are some prestige classes that are exceptions.If you haven’t noticed yet every time you try to make a “simple” change to the rules as written to incorporate something the result ends up being that many other things end up being likewise “tweaked” to maintain the balance of the system.I thought you pointed out that you had thought the combat system of 3.5 was too complex (and yet not complex enough since you had wanted to add in casting times for spells) but when you actually ran it you and your players discovered it worked fine.  I don’t know if you included that casting time for spells change or not.Again at the point of being redundant almost everything you are proposing to do to the 3.5 rules was included in the Player’s Options system of 2n ed.  If these are things you really want to do – don’t reinvent the wheel - get copies of the books, should be easy enough from ebay if you can’t get the D&D core rules and expansion CDs.</blockquote>

Verification