D&D 4E What Changes Do You Hope They Make To The 4E Rules?

[Kae'Yoss]

Would you (or anyone else) be kind enough to explain this to me? What is it, and why is it better?

In 3.0, weapon size weren't relative to the creature that is supposed to wield them:

A longsword was medium, which meant that it was 1handed for medium characters, light for large ones, two-handed for small ones, and not usable for tiny and smaller. A greatsword was large (2h for medium) and so on.

I actually prefer the 3.5e ruling that makes a medium greatsword suitable for a medium character, and so on. The system needs a couple of tweaks, sure, but I think it's better then messing around with all the different sizes ("large creature with huge greatsword and small dagger", "medium rogues know these extra weapons because they're not too large for them" and so on)

 

[Gez]

Something so that multiclassed spellcasters are on par with multiclassed swordswingers.

A cleric 5/wizard 5 is a 10th-level character, but plays as a 5th-level character with extra HP and a bit more options open to him in combat, not as a 10th-level character. He's also useless against creatures with challenge-appropriate spell resistance.

 

[Dragonblade]

I'm on board with everything I have heard, especially when they said they will take a design queues from the new SW RPG and Tome of Battle. Both excellent books.

But hey WotC guys if you are listening, I have two suggestions:

1) NO LEVEL-BASED USE IT OR LOSE IT RESOURCE!! i.e. no Eberron-style action points, or SW Saga Force points. As a DM, I should be able to level my party at my pace without worrrying about the PCs running out of a resource they can only gain when leveling.

2) If level 30 is truly the end cap of the game, then come up with some sort of rules that make playing a level 30 character remain interesting despite the fact that no levels remain after 30. In other words, even though I hit level 30, there should still be something worth gaining that keeps me excited about playing my character. Like even if my BAB or saves cap out, thats fine but I should still be able to learn new feats or skills, or something.

I have some other pet peeves too, but most of them start to get nitpicky. Like there needs be a new way to handle energy drain. The whole notion of permanently reducing a character's level because an undead monster touched you is a ridiculous metagame mechanic that has for some reason held over since 1st edition AD&D. It needs to go.

My group actively plays D&D 3.5 and we have numerous house rules, I'd like to get in on the 4e play testing but unfortunately dndinsider.com has been down for a while.

 

[Dragonblade]

I'll toss in some other stuff I have seen too. Some of this comes from changes I'd like to see in SW Saga but not all.

- No Vancian magic. Both spell casters and warriors should have cool and powerful abilities that scale with level ala Tome of Battle. And you should be able to refresh them in combat by spending an action or something. The ability to refresh should NOT require a feat or a talent or an "action point" (I hate action points), and yes this is something that SW Saga does that I don't like. I don't like the use once per encounter force power mechanic that they have.

- SW Saga skill system is just brilliant and should be ported over to D&D 4e.

- SW Saga defenses, damage track, and the way armor works is a good system too.

- No permanent level drain

- Any action point mechanic used should be a resource that replenishes per encounter or per session, NOT per level.

- Every ability or power should be balanced per encounter. There should be no ability or class feature, such as spells, or whatever that is balanced per day.

- HP should just be a set number per level with bonus HP at level 1. Seriously does anyone roll for HP? My group hasn't rolled for HP in years. Likewise, to make the DMs job easier, just give monsters a flat HP total per Hit Die/level.

- Magic items should be cool and special but not required. Monsters should be balanced vs. the party assuming no magic. Likewise, class abilities should be sufficiently cool and flashy that a 4e character without magic should be nearly as tough as a 3e character with all the appropriate magical gear for their level.

 

[Mighty Halfling]

Mind if I add a few more to my suggestions above? OK, thanks!
Languages -- I've never been crazy about multiple languages. Sure it's OK for highly exotic creatures, but they just seem pointless from a game standpoint. How about a standard common, sylvan, undercommon, draconic and a few planar languages and then pitch everything else. Of course, you could still have a bunch of ancient dead languages too.
Dinosaurs -- I love dinosaurs and all, but do they really need to be core? I think I can wait for them in a nice prehistoric/primitive supplement.
Animals -- Animals were handled perfectly as an appendix in the Monster Manual, but they could probably be handled in a massive graph that just gives their stats, followed by a quick, appendix-like description of abilities, if one is even needed. That way you could offer more of them right away.
Monster templates -- Please include Lycanthropy, vampirism, dire, legendary, titantic, elemental, aligned planar (axiomatic, celestial, etc.) and giant (you know for Giant Eagles and stuff, but different from titanic). There's probably more I should include.
Undead -- As far as I'm concerned, most undead listings should actually be templates, not straight write-ups.

 

[Son_of_Thunder]

• Different Magic System - no Vancian
• no cross-class skills
• smaller, more condensed skill list
• less reliance on what items a character has
• no arcane spell failure
• a damage system other than hit points
• armour as damage reduction

 

[Baby Samurai]

Ditch copper pieces…

Even at level one and a half it's usually not worth the weight to carry.

 

[Cadfan]

Fix prestige classes.

There are two systemic problems with them that I see, both relating to the PRC ending before level 20.

First, capstone abilities. Lets say a prc can end at anywhere between level 15 and level 20. This means that the capstone ability can't be reliably calibrated for power level. It either becomes too strong at level 15, or too weak at level 20. And often it is an ability that doesn't synergize so well with the class features the character will be getting after it leaves the prc to pursue its base class once again. As a very strong example, look at the shadowcaster prc that lets you have a pet shadow elemental. At level 15, the pet elemental is very, very very good. At level 20, it is... not good. That's just one particular example of a problem that's intrinsic to the present system.

Second, look at prcs that combine character classes into one prc. These allow characters to essentially gain the power of two classes at one time, but at a reduced rate. The problem is, once these prcs end, the character has to return to his original class. A mystic theurge at level 16 is probably 3 levels behind in both wizard and cleric abilities, and this is considered balanced. At level 20, he may be 3 levels behind as a wizard, and 7 levels behind in cleric. Either the power ratio was acceptable back at level 16, and should be maintained, or it was unacceptable and should not have been granted. The fluxuation in relative power level over character level is not a good thing.

Both of these could be fixed by making the entry level for the PRC level 11, with 10 levels, ending at level 20. This might entail rewriting the prc a bit to adjust power level, but as the designer would know what base class level each prc level has to match up against, it would be easier to accomplish.

 

[jeffh]

Both of these could be fixed by making the entry level for the PRC level 11, with 10 levels, ending at level 20. This might entail rewriting the prc a bit to adjust power level, but as the designer would know what base class level each prc level has to match up against, it would be easier to accomplish.

This "fix" would make the Theurge completely useless for the levels most people actually play at. The "problem" seems preferable to the "solution" you propose.

What I could get behind, though, is redoing things like how caster level works to just get rid of the problems classes like the Theurge are patches for. If the problems caused by the independence of caster level across classes in the current system didn't arise in the first place, we wouldn't need classes like the Theurge to solve them.

 

[rounser]

I'm not going to do a point-by-point reply to any of these, but I can tell you what my reaction is after seeing your collective lists: a sigh of relief.

We're thinking along the same lines as many of you.

Like I said, it's not fair to do a point-by-point, if for no other reason than the game's not done yet. But you can bet your assassin that I'm mentally checking them off as I read them.

And my mental monologue is going something like this: "Yes...yes...yes...yes, but not in the way that they think...yes...yes...doesn't apply anymore...yes...yes...kinda...yes...well, no, that's just dumb...yes...yes..."

So yeah. I'm seeing a lot of things on your lists that have figured prominently on our whiteboards here at work.

--David Noonan, game designer, Wizards of the Coast
...who wishes he had time to respond to every thread.

Having seen the result, I think this is a point in case of "be careful what you wish for". Those asking for no more vancian magic indeed got their wish, and a whole lot more.

Core PC race dragonborn and core class warlords are on my "no, that's just dumb" list.