Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kae'Yoss" data-source="post: 1076625" data-attributes="member: 4134">I don't think every combat should be a fixed number of rounds, and changing the rules so it enforces such a thing would be unnecessarily complicated IMO.The random element should indeed remain important in fights between enemies of equal power, but we should not forget strategy. This should be at least as important as the random element. And again the change isn't worth it if it makes the game to complicated.That sounds OK, IMO.I don't like that at all. It sounds like AD&D. The rules should be the same from 1 to 20. Also, con is con. You should get something out of it on every level (you get your Int bonus to skills every level, after all)A fixed HD would be acceptable, since it is in line with the epic attack and save progression.I do think that the stats are more important at the beginning, where the experience-based bonuses (bab, skill ranks etc.) are lower and the stats can easily outshine them.I think that this was one of the best changes in 3e and should stay in any case. Now there is a difference between a dumb apprentice trying to charm you and the master enchanter using the same spell. And the stats affect your saving bonuses, too, after all.If you nerf the spellcasters you'll have to give them something else to compensate for that: more spells per day and/or per round (maybe you get a different AB for physical combat and magical combat, and wizards get iterative spells - this MAB could also improve the spell DC somehow), or they will be much weaker than fighters and others who use weapons (they often are already).But I do think save-or-die spells should stay in (but then again I don't think every combat should be a fixed length)Again, I like the way the core rules apply to all 20 levels equally. Everything else is to AD&D IMO.I also don't like the ways you want to compensate the fighters: other classes can also have high Str and these magic Items (noone keeps a wizard from buying or using a magical weapon). Plus, your changes would mean that many would abandon the fighter classes at higher levels, for other classes offer the same combat abilities at that point and then some. A Fighter 20 should be a better warrior than a Fighter 10/Wizard 10.Yes, a mid save progression would be OK (and maybe a retooling of the others, as long as they stay based on a relatively easy formula).Another thing I really don't like, and not only because it makes the  tables with the class skills to big. I do think these things don't necessarily improve with level, and thus should remain skills. You might increase the number of skill points everyone gets and make these skills class skills for more classes, but no class progression!It would be a part of making magic items less important, which would be OK I think (though I can live with the current situation, too).</blockquote>

Verification