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

[Lord Rasputin]

I'd use the basic mechanical structure of Star Wars Saga, though I'd have everything scale at Level/2 + 5 for class skill + 5 for Skill Focus, including combat skills and saves. Use the Unearthed Arcana weapon groups (or something like them) for individual weapon skills, and give most classes a few more skill points. Wizards won't do this, and that's a shame.

Armor Class (or Reflex Defense) goes up with level. I'd probably go armor as DR, but Wizards won't, and I can take that.

Spells become a skill roll of some sort.

Rolling hit points goes into the grave which it deserves.

Have the Warlock take the place of the Sorcerer in the core rules.

Add kobolds and orcs as core races.

I'd give thought to having a fourth core book for spells and magic items, though in the end, I'd probably reject it.

I'd consider talent trees usurping some of the role of prestige classes. I'd much rather have them than racial substitution levels or substitute class features.

Improved turn undead and metamagic, yadda yadda yadda.

 

[Obrysii]

I hope that they

*Integrate miniatures into the core rules, either making them required or play difficult without the use of a battle grid (such as what they did in SAGA and the removal of distance in any real-life term).
*Integrate the DI so that it is effectively required to play.

Realistically, the only thing I could want in a new system is a better play-as-a-monster ruleset.

 

[Aloïsius]

Um, you can not do this in 3E. Making a magic sword already requires that you have a sword, a masterwork sword at that. You, or someone else, must forge the sword first. Then you make enhance it.

And I don't like that. The process of creating and enchanting the object should be one and the same. Creating a magic sword will require a craft skill check, magical ability and specific magical component. Not "a MW sword, magical ability and a pile of gold piece".
Sure, it would be somewhat less "everything is balanced through Xp and GP", but it will be so much flavorfull... The magical craft mechanics in 3.x are really bland.

 

[BryonD]

And I don't like that.

OK, then say that instead of what you said.

The process of creating and enchanting the object should be one and the same.

I can't begin to see why a wizard shoudln't be able to improve an existing sword.

Creating a magic sword will require a craft skill check, magical ability and specific magical component. Not "a MW sword, magical ability and a pile of gold piece".
Sure, it would be somewhat less "everything is balanced through Xp and GP", but it will be so much flavorfull... The magical craft mechanics in 3.x are really bland.

Hmm, that is to bad you feel that way.
But I'll stick with my standard reply to this: I hate the idea of someone else playing the game for me. I want a sound mechanical system that works with the flavor of my own choice and development. If you are forgetting to put an interesting story into your game when someone makes a magic item, then you have no one to blame but yourself.

 

[Simia Saturnalia]

I hope that they

*Integrate miniatures into the core rules, either making them required or play difficult without the use of a battle grid (such as what they did in SAGA and the removal of distance in any real-life term).
*Integrate the DI so that it is effectively required to play.

Realistically, the only thing I could want in a new system is a better play-as-a-monster ruleset.

I'm not sure I've ever heard someone legitimately suggest "I'd like the game to shed all connection to pretending the game world matters even the slightest bit, as well as requiring a buy-in cost multiple times higher than its already industry-topper purchase price" before. This strikes me as functionally equivalent to
"Instead of gold pieces or any other easily parsed unit of fictional currency, you should get gear points, from which you select a static list of equipment, which can be broken or lost only via specific game rules - not because your forgot it or dropped it. When you gain levels, you get more gear points, which will eventually let you select magic items! Who cares where it came from? It's a game! Also, you should have to show your RPGA membership to even buy the books. Participating in a Living World should be required for play.

And is there any way I could have some more templates for my PC?"

Or in short, I pray these ideas, now that they are exposed, perish swiftly in the harsh light of the sun, under whose rays no twisted and soulless abomination may survive. Additionally, I pray any other ideas you could offer for 4th edition remain in your skull, stillborn and calcified, rather than escaping where a combination of fate and brain injury could somehow make someone include them in an upcoming edition of D&D.

 

[Aloïsius]

OK, then say that instead of what you said.

No, I think you did not understand what I said.

I can't begin to see why a wizard shoudln't be able to improve an existing sword.

He maybe able. Provided he has a forge and a skill to improve the sword. A wizard who is not even able to tell the difference between steel, iron and mithril ? No way.

But I'll stick with my standard reply to this: I hate the idea of someone else playing the game for me. I want a sound mechanical system that works with the flavor of my own choice and development. If you are forgetting to put an interesting story into your game when someone makes a magic item, then you have no one to blame but yourself.

I'm speaking from a player point of view, DMing is another thing entirely. In nearly every party I have played in 3.x, when someone wanted to craft a magic item, it was just "I buy 2500 GP* worth of components in the magic shop, and then enchant the armour".
What I want is a skill dominated system, not a feat dominated system. You can have a feat that allow you to craft better magic sword, or magic sword without such or such magic component, or a special kind of magic sword, but there should not be a feat to be able to craft at all. Just skills and spells.

 

[WayneLigon]

What I think we'll probably see:
Some form of talent tree/feat variation like either d20 Modern or SW Saga.
Some skill consodilation.
Classes will have more skill points across the board, or a set amount of basic skills modifed by race, or skills will be cheaper.
There will be more in the way of substitution levels and alternate class abilities.
I think we might well lose a race or two, and maybe a class or two. I could see the Monk and the Barbarian go away, perhaps replaced with other classes, perhaps not. What I would like would be for the Ranger, Barbarian, Paladin, Druid, Sorcerer, and Bard to be createable with talents and feats, leaving us just Fighter, Wizard, Cleric, Rogue.

What I'd Like to See:
Two of my biggest hopes have probably already been shot down: we know there will be three core books. Like as not, that means the spell system is likely not going to undergo a change of any real significance unless they find something else to fill up the PHB. We'll also probably have a DMG that's mostly magic items instead of GM advice. I hope I am wrong about this.

Eh, I don't think I'll play this game anymore. I love speculating about what would happen and what will happen mainly on the tiny off chance that what I said would be taken into account. All that's over, now; I would be almost positive that what's going to be in those three books has already been decided, at least in the broad-to-medium detail. The next few months will be tweaking and fixing and deciding what art and layouts and stuff like that to use. So... not really all that much point to it anymore, I would think. We'll be seeing idbits and design notes sometime in the near future.

 

[Obrysii]

Or in short, I pray these ideas, now that they are exposed, perish swiftly in the harsh light of the sun, under whose rays no twisted and soulless abomination may survive. Additionally, I pray any other ideas you could offer for 4th edition remain in your skull, stillborn and calcified, rather than escaping where a combination of fate and brain injury could somehow make someone include them in an upcoming edition of D&D.

Thanks ... I think.

It was merely showing a focus that other revisions have had that emphasize miniatures over role playing -- the SAGA edition is a good example.

 

[jeffh]

Basically, a lot of streamlining. Follow Einstein's maxim that things should be made as simple as they can, but no simpler.

Fewer, more flexible classes (via talent trees or something like it). First on the chopping block should be the Ranger, a conceptual mess in every edition of the game; I've never met two people with the same idea of what the hell the Ranger is supposed to be, and I recently realized I have no such idea at all. Anything salvagable in there is done better by the Scout. Close behind are several other base classes in the current rules that could just be talent trees. You can probably cut the PH ones right down to the core four and still have a way to duplicate every class in the current core rules. Except maybe the monk, but I wouldn't exactly be heartbroken to see that one go away. Then fill back up to six to eight classes using concepts from other books. So something like:

Fighter
Rogue
Cleric
Wizard and/or Sorcerer
Scout
Warlock
Duskblade
Swordsage

as your core selection.

Make races more interesting. Eliminate the half-breeds and maybe gnomes or halflings (but not both) and add one or two hitherto non-core races that have proven especially interesting. Give them all more interesting abilities rather than the very mundane handful of plusses most of them currently get - perhaps use the Birthright versions as a starting point.

I was initially in two minds about the streamlining of skills from SWSE, thinking it might be coming at the expense of useful detail, but it certainly seems to get the job done. Certainly the streamlined DCs and the bonuses coming in 2s, 5s and 10s only are good changes.

Definitely streamline the hell out of various combat actions like tripping, grappling and turning undead. There's no reason for any of these to be as complex as they currently are.

I don't mind the three defenses of SWSE, either their static nature or their replacing of the AC system, but please do not follow that system's lead in making them virtually uniform across classes. And let armour be DR rather than a Reflex bonus, for heaven's sake, even if it requires rescaling weapon damage in a big way.

I approve of most of the changes to combat in SWSE, such as the slightly different action system, the Recover action, and the damage bonuses by level (though maybe making them a function of BAB rather than level would be a good refinement).

Bo9S/SWSE per-encounter balancing is definitely a good thing, especially if spellcasters had only a very limited number of spells prepared (perhaps from a larger list known) to greatly simplify preparing them as NPCs. (This might make them harder, or at least no easier, to play as NPCs, though; a problem which deserves some attention).

Basically, do much of what was done in SWSE, but keep key D&Disms in some form.

 

[drothgery]

I'm echoing a lot of people up-thread with this, but here goes...

- borrow heavily from SWSE for the basic structure for all the reasons people have mentioned up-thread (simpler skills and skill mechanics, more flexible classes, tougher 1st-level characters, attacker always rolls)
- relatively evenly multi-classed spellcasters should be viable without patch prestige classes and/or special feats/talents
- reduce the magic item baseline

A few broad-stroke suggestions
- massively pare down the spell list; there are a lot of spells in the PHB (let alone the Spell Compendium) with very similar effects and a lot of spells that just aren't ever used
- massively pare down the magic item list; there are a lot of items that I'm not sure why anyone would use (either because they're kind of silly, or because no one under 20th level could afford them) and a fair amount of redundancy

And a few layout suggestions
- Since we're cutting down the class list, spell list, and magic item list a lot, move the core prestige classes and magic items into the Player's Handbook (because, despite what some old-school DM's think, this is player info), even if this means you've got a 320 page PHB and a 224 page DMG
- although putting background images on pages (ala 3.x chapter openings) or using something other than black text on a white background might sound good to the art department, don't do it; it's annoying that the first page of nearly every chapter of every D&D book is the hardest to read