Slit518
Adventurer
Just kidding! I don't want any of those back, except maybe Save or Die and a 25 Stat cap.
D&D (2024) What stuff from 3.5e/3e/2e/1e/od&d should go into 5.5e?
- Thread starter Henadic Theologian
- Start date
Just kidding! I don't want any of those back, except maybe Save or Die and a 25 Stat cap.
pming
Legend
Hiya!
A DSG and a WSG, obviously.
Rule wise...
^_^
Paul L. Ming
A DSG and a WSG, obviously.
Rule wise...
- I'd like to see a significant reduction in HP's across the game. A PC gains HD's up to, say 9th level; then a flat amount of HP's from 10 onward.
- Reduction in Damage for, well, most things; monsters in particular (to jive with reduced HP's).
- Item Saving Throws (...wait...is this in 5e somewhere already?...)
- Armour = Movement in stead of Weight = Movement (at least as far as Armour goes)
- More "front loading" of Classes, with less goodies spread out as you gain levels.
- 1e Multiclassing at "the same time" (re; not "gain a level, pick a class")
- "System Shock Survival" and "Resurrection Survival" (1e Constitution)
^_^
Paul L. Ming
GreyLord
Legend
Since Rogues get Expertise...
Give Warriors the same privileged with their proficiency with weapons...aka...Warriors advance far quicker and better than anyone else in hitting things accurately (not just multiple attacks, 1-3rd had that as well...but ALSO had Warriors attack bonuses go up faster and further than any other class).
Keep NPC's from Tasha's and integrate them into Core. Allow options from them to be integrated as feats or options for the equivalent classes (so Spellcaster NPC options COULD be PC options) for PCs.
1st and 2nd edition options as a type of multiclassing.
Warlord
Cavalier as a class
Warden and Avengers as Classes (BECMI and 4e references on which way they want to go).
Assassin as an actual class
Include rules to make it so that those who want to can play creatures and races from the MM as classes (like Savage Species in some ways from 3e...in theory they have already done this with the NPC rules, but make them applicable to any creature one wants to play). No more making special race situations, make the entire MM and other monster books available to players who want to play those monsters, creatures, or races.
Dragonlance (not going to happen with a Core rulebook release...but hey).
Give us feats or ways to increase critical hit ranges (i.e. as in 3e).
Include an option or options for Alignment less games or changing how the alignment works so one can run alignment like they did with BECMI if they so desire (just lawful, neutral, and chaotic...no good...no evil...just law and chaos and everything in between).
Give us Melnibone and Cthulhu mythos (okay, more of a OD&D thing that was taken out...but hey...it's been a while...and Pathfinder included Cthulhu stuff so it can be done outside of the Cthulhu RPG it looks like).
Greyhawk...more Greyhawk (again...maybe not in core...refer to Dragonlance above).
Give Warriors the same privileged with their proficiency with weapons...aka...Warriors advance far quicker and better than anyone else in hitting things accurately (not just multiple attacks, 1-3rd had that as well...but ALSO had Warriors attack bonuses go up faster and further than any other class).
Keep NPC's from Tasha's and integrate them into Core. Allow options from them to be integrated as feats or options for the equivalent classes (so Spellcaster NPC options COULD be PC options) for PCs.
1st and 2nd edition options as a type of multiclassing.
Warlord
Cavalier as a class
Warden and Avengers as Classes (BECMI and 4e references on which way they want to go).
Assassin as an actual class
Include rules to make it so that those who want to can play creatures and races from the MM as classes (like Savage Species in some ways from 3e...in theory they have already done this with the NPC rules, but make them applicable to any creature one wants to play). No more making special race situations, make the entire MM and other monster books available to players who want to play those monsters, creatures, or races.
Dragonlance (not going to happen with a Core rulebook release...but hey).
Give us feats or ways to increase critical hit ranges (i.e. as in 3e).
Include an option or options for Alignment less games or changing how the alignment works so one can run alignment like they did with BECMI if they so desire (just lawful, neutral, and chaotic...no good...no evil...just law and chaos and everything in between).
Give us Melnibone and Cthulhu mythos (okay, more of a OD&D thing that was taken out...but hey...it's been a while...and Pathfinder included Cthulhu stuff so it can be done outside of the Cthulhu RPG it looks like).
Greyhawk...more Greyhawk (again...maybe not in core...refer to Dragonlance above).
GreyLord
Legend
I really miss 3.Xe's more detailed magic system. Much crunchier details about "Magic A is Magic A, Magic B is Magic B" type stuff.
Lyxen
Great Old One
We do, almost all our campaigns end up at high level, usually 20. Honestly, why play D&D if it's to play sword and sorcery at a low level, there are many more better adapted systems? I'm partially joking here, but D&D scalability to epic tiers is certainly one of the thing it does best, better than most other systems which have tried it.
On the other hand, due to bounded accuracy, 5e is probably the edition which is the least suited for this...
Ath'kethin
Elder Thing
Amen to this one! Having every encounter be an assumed combat, and every combat a battle to the death, is such a time sink and so ridiculous.
I, too, dislike having my monsters in alphabetical order!
The binder would be fine if each monster took up two full pages (one page front and back), but if they don't - and let me be clear that I really think it would be silly and wasteful if they DID - things get out of order the second you add more monsters to the binder.
Ahh, the good old days.
1) and 1a) I'm in on this one too. I like multiclassing at 1st level, which hasn't been seen since the 3.0 DMG.1) Multiclassing where each class advances independently, rather than additive multiclassing.
Example: a Fighter-4/Cleric-4 is a 4th-level character in two classes (using the best attack matrix, save matrix, etc. of each class) but is in no way an 8th-level character!
1a) Classes advancing at different rates, and by extension a greater design-level acceptance of variable levels within a party
1b) Mechanisms for sudden level loss (e.g. undead) or level gain (one-shot magic item effects)
2) Death at -10, unconsciousness rules from 0 to -9, no more 5e-style "death saves".
3) Slower natural hit point recovery (though not as slow as RAW 1e!).
4) ... I could go on for ages ...
2) Death saves have been around since at least the Rules Cyclopedia and I don't mind them, but I also like the -10 or -CON death point.
3) I've totally come around to the "heal all at once" philosophy. After all, there aren't any epic stories where Conan or Fafhrd spend a week convalescing. I'm cool with my wizard/dragon games having their heroes at full strength every episode.
-------------
For myself: I like themed spell lists and/or opposed spell schools. Wanna be a master blaster? Cool! No shapechanging for you (or equivalent).
I love and miss Weapon Mastery. We can restrict it to Fighters, with maybe a reduced rate for Paladins and Barbarians and Rangers - if we stick with al la carte leveling any character can still benefit. And if not, it just makes the weapon wielders the best at wielding weapons.
Drawing from their 2e incarnation, Bards should be half-casters and use spellbooks. They're far more interesting hat way IMO, and I absolutely detest the Spells Known paradigm to the core of my being.
Hussar
Legend
LOL.
Sorry, not the binder I meant. I meant the 3e class of the Binder. As in what the Warlock became.
No, I most certainly don't want that 3 ring binder back. Blech.
Ath'kethin
Elder Thing
Oh, THAT Binder.
I bought the Tome of Magic when it came out, mostly because I loved the idea of True Name magic. I was highly disappointed by the book and never actually used it.
Looking at the Binder class now, it does seem to be a far more intense version of the Warlock. I remember the Warlock from Spells & Magic, and I liked the idea, though we never used the class; I thought the Warlock in 3.5 was silly and didn't play enough 4e to really get a feel for it. Fast forward to 5e, and the Warlock is just about my favorite class in the edition - though it feels incomplete and kind of half-baked to me.
I think now that what I'm looking for is a Binder, not a Warlock - making a forbidden pact with an unknowable entity should have a real cost, and involve real struggles, and the Binder evinces that really well. I also like how the Tome of Magic dives into the intersection between faith, religion, and heresy as in-game-world concepts, and that is right up my alley. Five bucks says Ari Marmell did the heavy lifting here - the concepts, themes, and detail seem very much like his work.
So I'm in. I want a Binder in the next revision/edition too!
Hussar
Legend
If you're interested @Ath-kethin - Mage Hand Press has a 5e version of the Binder that I am just dying to play. Book of Binding
