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

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

A new way to deal with magical items.

I hope the Magic Item Compendium was a sneak peek. I hope old school staffs are gone for good, with runestaffs replacing them.

I'd also like to see every monster "type" be designed from the ground up as an NPC class, balanced against PC class levels. So a 1 hit die fey is a comparable challenge to a 1 hit die aberration, etc. Which, in turn, would let level equal CR, and make that number much more meaningful.

I'd also like them to PRINT THE FREAKING XP CHART ON THE INSIDE COVER OF THE DMG! I hate having to flip through it every time I award XP. (I play online, so even Kenzer's terrifying screen is of little use to me.)

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

It's not specifically a rule, but I sure wish they'd bring the Metasetting back.

Given the woman with ram horns in the sample art, you may be getting your wish.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Eliminate the half-breeds and maybe gnomes or halflings (but not both)

I would merge the two, and create a pair of racial feats (available at 1st level) that would add on the flavor and additional crunch (one's got bonuses with slings and sneaking, the other has minor magical powers, etc.). This sort of "kit" (!) approach would work for elven subraces as well.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

So many things:

• Balanced races.
• Getting away from per-day and balance everything per-encounter.
• Less classes that are more versatile, with "fx abilities" for all of them (to steal a term from d20 Modern - of course, they should have a more fantastic name). So each class might have the works (attack bonus, saves, HD, and so on), talents (like d20M talents), many feats, and fx. Then, they have three things they can make crunch out of, PrCs won't be necessary any more.
• Make multiclassing better
• No more favoured classes and the like
• Less reliance on magic items
• More flexible monster types.
• Problem abilities (turn undead, grapple) improved
• No absolute DCs for things that should be contested/depending on the opponent (like tumble being a flat DC 15)
• No special cases in the direction of trapfinding.

 

[Cadfan]

Obvious changes-

Fix spell resistance.
Fix grappling.
Fix turning.
Fix miss chances.
Fix tumbling.
Fix defensive casting.

Fix means "make them simple, consistent with the rest of the d20 mechanic, and with the rest of the game world."

Less obvious-

Set it up so that increasing in skill level doesn't have a plateau where further advancement is a waste of time. See balancing as an example.

Eliminate rules overrides. These are places where the normal rules use one system, but magic skips over the system and operates in a different manner. For example, there is a system for climbing. Spider Climb makes that system close to useless. Changing Spider Climb to be compatible with the rules (Climb +20 for duration, maybe) would avoid rendering a rogue's skill points obsolete: a wizard with spider climb might scale a wall, but a rogue with spider climb might scale rain slicked glass.

Fix caster levels, and how they affect multiclass spellcasters. In particular, fighter/wizards or similar classes should have the ability to use what spells they know in an effective manner even at high levels, instead of having their abilities grow slowly obsolete as their caster level trails further behind their character level.

Eliminate legacy foolishness. WOTC has gotten better and better at this, but it needs to become perfect. If something was popular in a previous edition, it shouldn't necessarily be included in the present edition.

Firm division between rules and fluff. A paladin's code should be written in as advice to the player, not as a rule. Divine punishment for straying from the code should be roleplayed by the DM and the player, with advice from the players handbook, but not with strict rules. I am aware that experienced DMs often do this already, but it should be suggested in the rules rather than left to the DM to realize that he ought ignore the rules and do things by hand. This is simply one example, but its an important general rule- including fluff in the rules discourages creativity by making people feel that their idea isn't playing "right."

 

[Cadfan]

Oh yeah, and either eliminate the assumed possession of magic items from the assumptions used in balancing enemies, or make these assumptions explicit in the DMG. And no, "wealth per level" doesn't do enough. The game assumes that a fighting character's fort save will be within a certain range at a certain level, as an example. Make this explicit.

 

[ArmoredSaint]

How does the Star Wars Saga Edition handle armour? I had heard that it was represented as DR, but as I haven't looked at it, I'm not sure...

 

[psionotic]

I'm in agreement with most people here on where I'd like 4e to go...

1) Make high level D&D playable/fun. I have to end all my games by level 13 or so, b/c above that, combat drags to a standstill. Between iterative attacks, Mass Dispels, stacks of buffs and effects causing everyone to recompute their rolls eternally, etc., it is currently a bit of a nightmare.

2) Love the Saga style reversal of Saves > Defense Values. Only 'active player' rolling dice.

3) Find some way to make Spell Resistance and Immunities a little less onerous, and more 'fun.' The 'all or nothing' approach to SR that we have currently just feels weird and wrong somehow, if there was a way to easily incorporate partial effects without more dicework, it would seem more realistic, and make high level combats less about wild swings of luck.

4) I like Armor as DR, and Reflex/Defense the same essential value. For lore creatures like werewolves, perhaps have a parenthetical, slightly lower Armor value for those who have Silvered Weapons.

...which brings me to...

5) End the Golfbag of situational weapons & mundane magical items. 3.5 make the 3.0 system of per + DR look archaic, but it did introduce the inane multiple weapon problem we have now. Magical weapons should be *magical*, and finding some way for them to scroll upwards in value automatically would be really sweet. I would love it if we could get back to the discovery of a magical sword being an epic event, one that the PCs would remember as their few relics grow and gain powers with them..

6) Change the naming convention for spell levels, tweak or abandon the Vancian system for something more flexible. Whether that's per encounter casting or spellpoints or whatever works out best.

7) Classes: Some Bard loving? They sucked in 3.0, and got upgraded to severely underpowered in 3.5. Bards are Love.

As far as classes go overall, I like the idea of a talent/feat system for extra customization: hundreds of different concepts should be doable with your PHB toolbox. If some crazy wizard wants to spend three of his feats to wear heavy armor and large shields, let him do so without giving up his class abilities...!

Multiclassing system that involves tradeoffs, but doesn't unduly punish spellcasters, monster classes, etc....

8) Less or no reliance on miniatures. Rules for minis are fine, but there has to be a way to make, for example, Sneak Attack useful (even if its implementation is slightly different!) in your head as well as on a grid.

9) Digital Initiative supports the DM and the players, doesn't enslave them.

10) Echo the grappling, turning, etc., complaints. Try to steamline or eliminate any rules subsystem that can currently only be used by looking up a table.

 

[drothgery]

How does the Star Wars Saga Edition handle armour? I had heard that it was represented as DR, but as I haven't looked at it, I'm not sure...

Nope. In SW Saga, armor adds a bonus to reflex defense (which functions much like AC) and often to fortitude defense (analagous to fort saves), but it replaces your class-based bonus rather than stacking with it, unless you spend two (soldier) talents on it.

Armor rules are one of those things that probably need a substantial reworking between Saga and D&D 4; Saga assumes high-level heroes don't wear armor unless they really want to, while D&D assumes non-wizards wear at least some armor.

 

[WotC_Dave]

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.