What NON-OBVIOUS stuff would you like to see in Revised?

[Mouseferatu]

Well, test it out. Take a CR 8 creature. Advance it to double its hit dice. Then put it up against a party of 16th level characters.

I'd put money on the idea that, all else being equal and assuming a good spread of party abilities, they'll wipe the floor with it.

 

[Zander]

My wish list (some of which have already been mentioned):

• Half-ogres as core race
• Ranger to specialise in ranged weapons (in addition to two melee weapons?)
• Make sickle or war sickle a new weapon. Let druids use it, not scimitar.
• Better spell selection for necromancers. I have the Mongoose supplement to necromancy. Similar spells in the PHB.
• Simpler AoO rules
• More uses for polearms, perhaps pole arm specific feats
• Monkey grip (from S&F) in core rules
• Multiclassing for paladins and monks. Monk-fighters (like the characters in Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon), monk-clerics and paladin-clerics make perfect sense IMHO.

 

[Li Shenron]

1) Updated and complete explanation to several class abilities, such as Rebuke/Command Undead and Wildshape

2) Ready-to-use stats for animal companions, familiars, mounts and summoned creatures

3) Revised multiclass penalties, to get rid of players who like taking 1-level-of-this and 1-level-of-that to blatantly buff themselves up

4) Rewrite of Bardic Music, with number of known effects based on level and not only Perform, and at least 3 times that amount of possibilities

5) Monk unarmed BAB stacking with non-Monk unarmed BAB

6) Change Wizard's scribing costs to generic "research" costs which don't need to be paid again if the spellbook is lost

7) Add the Good/Evil/Chaotic/Lawful descriptor to more spells

8) A quick reference table for skills with indication of untrained use/take 10/take 20/DM secret or player's roll/possibly a collective roll/basic tools needed...

9) Spell research benchmark added to DMG

10) Dragon's articles on how to write a PrCl and a monster

11) Revise Druid equipment restrictions: either come out with a clearly consistent list or make it completely a DM's discretion and provide only guidelines

12) Improve a little MM's creatures description, such as adding touch AC and flat-footed AC. If the will is to switch to a monster-per-page layout, include base stats to re-write an individual without reverse-engineering the whole thing (e.g. provide a briefing of ability modifiers, total skill points, numbers of feats, base saves, bab...)

13) A picture from every monster

14) Giving a few races more than 1 favored class

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
extra notes...

Toughness: it's ok for me if it is useful only to low-level Wizards and Sorcerers. After all, there are feats which are useful for 1-2 classes only.

Skill Focus: I don't mind it being +2 only, but I would like to count as Ranks for the only purpose of qualifying for a PrCl earlier

 

[Knight of Neraka]

Changes

I would like to see:

1) A +3 bonus given for certain feats (ie Skill Focus, Spell Focus) as Monte Cook had once spoken about.

2) I would also like to see a defense system set up like Star Wars the RPG Revised, wherein armor reduces the amount of damage done, while you also gain a defensive bonus for class levels making you harder to hit. To me that makes a bit more sense.

3) Make the Paladin less top heavy by spreading the abilities gained through a longer progression. Paladins gain most of their abilities in the first few levels. Afterwards their number of times per day or per week is the only thing that changes.

4) Under certain classes give variations of the class that the player could choose from. For example the Paladin again. Lets

say you don't want a straight Paladin, you instead want to play an Undead Hunter. Instead of taking something like Detect Evil, you can choose Detect Undead...you give up an ability to gain an ability. This would create unique characters. Not all Paladins would be the same. Another example would be Sorcerers. Say you do want to play your character as a descendant of some dragon...you should be able to build them by trading special abilities. Unfortunately with the sorcerer you don't have special abilities besides Summon Familiar, but maybe you give up spell slots instead.

5) Give certain classes some abilities during progression. Give the Sorcerer bonus feats or actually give them feats such as Still Spell, Silent Spell, Quicken Spell at designated levels. Give the Fighter something extra than a limited skill list and bonus feats. This is when alternate packages would really come in handy. Clerics would also benefit from a few bonus feats thrown here
and there, but give them another domain at certain levels.

6) Give Druids domains they can choose from, with gained abilities for their domains. Nature, Plant, Healing, Air, Earth, Fire, Death, Rebirth, Life, etc. are a few suggestions of current domains and domains that could be developed.

These are just a few ideas.

 

[JoeBlank]

One overall fix for the PHB that I think would help would be to simply specify which portions of a class description are "flavor" and which portions are needed for balance. Many of the rules we complain about (paladin and monk multi-classing, druid weapon restictions) have been referred to as "flavor" text, and it has been said that these can be altered without affecting balance. So just say so in the class descriptions.

For instance, add to the format for class descriptions a final section called "Flavor" (or hopefully something better then that). Sort of like in the alignment descriptions, the little paragraphs that start out "Lawful good is the best alignment because . . . " This section could start out "Most Paladins . . . " and follow with things like "are not allowed to multiclass, as their deity requires complete devotion and dedication to the calling", or "Most druids undertake an oath that forbids them to use certain weapons because . . . "

If it says right there in the PHB what class features and restrictions are in place to create balance, and which are "optional", it will be much easier to agree on changes to a class without risking upsetting balance. This fits the stated purpose of the 3.5 changes by providing options rather than restrictions.

 

[Mercule]

6) Change the current partial/standard/move-equivalent/free/etc. action system to something slightly more streamlined and easier to explain. (This one might count as obvious.)

I agree this could be explained better. As far as how it works, I think it does well as-is.

One thing I _don't_ want to see is what they did in d20 Modern: change the name of the "standard action" to "attack action". Talk about difficult to explain.

GM: "Okay, a spellcaster can cast a spell as his 'attack action'."
Newbie: "So, if I get a +6 BAB, I can cast two spells in a round, right?"
GM: "No, because the multiple attacks you get aren't 'actions', just 'attacks'."
Newbie: "So, an 'attack' isn't an 'attack action'? Can I use my move-action to attack?"
GM: "No, but you could combine it with your 'attack action' to get a 'full round action' which could give you up to four attacks, depending on BAB."
Newbie: "But those aren't 'attack actions'? Arrrrgh!!!"

What were they smoking?

Keep the terminology, just explain it better.

 

[s/LaSH]

I'd consider changing the way a cleric casts spontaneous spells.

Instead of being able to spontaneously cast healing or inflicting spells, why not allow a spell of equal or lower level from one of their domain lists?

That's simple enough, and it makes domains much more effective. A healing priest is now a healer; a fire priest is now a burner. With that level of flexibility, I can see enough people taking Cleric to discover any little... problems the class might have outside its flavour of servitude.

Is that a good idea? Or are the domain lists unbalanced? (In which case... well, that's what this thread's about.)

 

[hong]

I'd consider changing the way a cleric casts spontaneous spells.

Instead of being able to spontaneously cast healing or inflicting spells, why not allow a spell of equal or lower level from one of their domain lists?

Geez man, the cleric is already gross enough that it doesn't need even more powering up.

 

[s/LaSH]

Geez man, the cleric is already gross enough that it doesn't need even more powering up.

Precisely my point... I was too subtle in my post, in hindsight. When you give a cleric powers devoted to their domains, you suddenly realise that they are, in fact, quite powerful and have to tone them down.

Including that little tweak would necessitate balancing the rest of the class.

This is why I like classless systems... they've got built-in balance (hopefully).

 

[Oni]

I have a very simple one that wouldn't cause any problems with backward compatability.


Have at least two spells per school per spell level. Think of the specialists.