What's your 3.5e wishlist?

[Desdichado]

Re: Minor tweaks

Rangers could be cooler, yeah, but the things I really want to see are fairly simple:

Take the rules for Delay, Jump, and Stabilization from d20M and drop them into 3e unchanged.

Seriously. All of these make way more sense in d20M than they do in 3e.

I'd also like to see more variant rules presented in the DMG. E.g., incorporating level-based defense bonuses to AC for use in low-magic campaigns, how to import the VP/WP mechanic properly, ditto armor as DR, etc.

I'd also love more "toolkit" advice, e.g., how to make *balanced* prestige classes, how to properly design monsters, and all that.

You've hit it exactly, buzz. That and the clarified language from things like attacks of opportunity, and I'm good to go! As long as they don't introduce the phony "subdual" damage replacement of d20 Modern -- that's the only mechanic from that game that I don't like, although I can see the "prototype" for it in tons of action movies, so I can understand why they did it.

Oh, and great alt.ranger, Darkness. In fact, one of the better ones I've seen!

 

[buzz]

Re: Re: Minor tweaks

Oh, and great alt.ranger, Darkness. In fact, one of the better ones I've seen!

Yes, I like this one a lot. Porting the "talent tree" concept from d20M is a neat idea.

Still, I'd actually be happy with the current ranger if:

• Favored enemy bonus was to hit, not damage (like the alt ranger above)
• Some more skill points
• TWF talents were spread out over more levels, instead of all at 1st

That's all that really bugs me. Otherwise, they're okay. Of course, it'd better if they were really freakin' cool instead of just "okay".

Oh, and I second Cashel's vote for a better index. I'd like to see something like the index in HERO5e for each core book.

 

[Psychotic Jim]

I'd just like to see some minor revisions to skill lists. Some Knowledge skills for the rogue (at least Knowledge (local)) and Sense Motive for at least the cleric and paladin. And maybe some social skills for the sorceror.

 

[buzz]

Spell chains

An issue of Dragon (the one with the githzerai on the cover) had a cool feat for psions that I think needs to be ported for sorcerer/bard use (the Editor's Note may even have said "sorcerers are going to want to steal this one").

Basically, you got to choose a "chain" of powers (read: spells) in which you were allowed to "progress."

I.e., if you took the summon monster chain, you were allowed to drop the weaker version of the spell from your repetoire once you learned the more powerful version. E.g., once you learned summon monster II, you could "forget" summon monster I and replace it with a power of that level that would be mroe useful, seeing as you didn't need to hold on to the less powerful summoning power anymore.

Seeing as "spontaneous" casters need more rules support anyway (wizards have tons of "backup" since they've been around so long), this would be a welcome addition.

Oh, and if they decide to revise the content of the splats, I'd prefer (as probably would WotC) to see all of the best bits collected in a "Players' Handbook II" hardcover.

 

[The_Gneech]

How about a PC character/monster generator that allowed you to create custom classes? 0 =)

-The Gneech

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

Use the d20 Modern version of Two-Weapon Fighting, including Small ranged weapons. It's useless for any kind of crossbow, anyway-- not only is reloading an action, but you can't reload one Hand Crossbow if you have another in your other hand.

 

[PA]

Re: Spell chains

An issue of Dragon (the one with the githzerai on the cover) had a cool feat for psions that I think needs to be ported for sorcerer/bard use (the Editor's Note may even have said "sorcerers are going to want to steal this one").

Basically, you got to choose a "chain" of powers (read: spells) in which you were allowed to "progress."

I.e., if you took the summon monster chain, you were allowed to drop the weaker version of the spell from your repetoire once you learned the more powerful version. E.g., once you learned summon monster II, you could "forget" summon monster I and replace it with a power of that level that would be mroe useful, seeing as you didn't need to hold on to the less powerful summoning power anymore.

Seeing as "spontaneous" casters need more rules support anyway (wizards have tons of "backup" since they've been around so long), this would be a welcome addition.

Oh, and if they decide to revise the content of the splats, I'd prefer (as probably would WotC) to see all of the best bits collected in a "Players' Handbook II" hardcover.

Maybe simply allowing the Sorcerer to "forget" (= replace) a number of spells per level equal to his Charisma bonus would help, without the need of define chains (or to use some which already exist but are not numerous).

 

[Tzarevitch]

I fogot this in my earlier post. In the 3e PHB/DMG reprint I would like them to toss the CR system in favor of flat XP. As a DM I loathe it with a passion. The 2e flat xp system was much easier to use, combine it with the 3e unified experience table and you're in business.

In alternative, in the DMG they should include USEFUL ideas on alternate xp schemes. The current blurbs in the DMG about faster and slower xp are anything but helpful because they are based on the same CR system that I so despise. The suggestion that DMs can always use free-form xp is nothing more than restating the obvious.

What I really want is for them to publish some of the alternative xp systems that they thought up when they originally created 3e. I know that the current CR system could not possibly have been their first attempt. It involves far too many steps to have been a first attempt.

I would really like to see the other proto-xp systems that they brainstormed before they settled on the CR system made into workable alternative xp systems. Some alternative xp systems do show up in other 3e products but I am tired of chasing through all of the books for them. All I really ask that they consolidate the alternatives in the new DMG where they belong.

Tzarevitch

 

[Zaruthustran]

Fair enough, but why is it a mistake? It's a somewhat exclusive ability that the Ranger is known for. It's like Barbarian rage or Monk unarmed strikes. I'd just like to know what people would have in place of it if it were removed.

(as an aside, I really detest the way they handled Tracking in 3E)

Kith: see my post on page 1 of this thread.

To summarize: I'd like to see the Ranger get more wilderness skills (such as gear optimization, fast overland travel, and the ability to lend these benefits to his party). The Ranger should be less like a Fighter, more like a real-world guide/outdoorsman.

The problem with most alt rangers is that they're essentially Fighters with a different feat selection. Such alt rangers are boring, lame, and not actually fixes. After all, a ranger that arbitrarily has TWF and Ambi is no different than a ranger that arbritrarily has PBS and Rapid Shot. Or any other choice of feats from a re-jiggered Fighter-like feat list.

No, the Ranger class needs much more work than a simple re-allocation of feats. It needs outdoor flavor and unique abilities. Again, see my post on page 1 for specifics.

-z, who also detests Track in 3E.

 

[Sixchan]

I'd like a more detailed section on technology in the DMG. It'd be nice if they drew from the IRs here to give a few adventure hooks. They gave an idea on how the campaign could be affected by the existence of firearms, but how it would be affected by their INVENTION!