Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Optimized_Commoner 05-19-07, 11:14 AM	If you were trying to condense all of the current features of D&D into a best of version but had to fit them all into a 3 book core set, what would make the cut? Conversely what would be the first things you'd ditch? I'm asking because that's pretty much what I'm planning on doing, to simplify the huge number of books and rules that we have at our table currently I'm going to cherry-pick the best features from all the 3.5 books our group has and say "this is the new core". I'd like some feedback on this, so I don't miss anything and so I have a chance to reconsider some of the lesser choices. (obviously this is something I'll be asking the players as well). So what do you think are the best and worst things in 3.5? Please be as specific as possible, since I'm more looking at individual classes, feats, etc rather than entire books.
Optimized_Commoner 05-19-07, 11:20 AM	Here are my thoughts so far. Best: Warlock Reserve Magic Teamwork Benefits Artificer Worst: The many variants of sneak attack Companion spirits Sacred Vows
Morwen 05-19-07, 11:37 AM	Please be as specific as possible, since I'm more looking at individual classes, feats, etc rather than entire books. As far as feats go, you'll find that most of the useful feats from outside the PHB have PHB-feats as prerequisites. This is also the case for most PrCs. So you'd have to keep most, if not all, of the PHB feats in order to allow for prerequisites, if nothing else.
the_Luggage 05-19-07, 02:50 PM	Worst Feats: Exhalted feats, vile feats, heritage feats. Best feats: Tactical feats and core feats.
Edymnion 05-19-07, 03:04 PM	A lot of it has already been done for you. Core Rulebooks, Expanded Psionics Handbook (should have been Core Rulebook IV), Spell Compendium, and the Magic Item Compendium. If they'd just publish a PrC Compendium and a Feat Compendium, we'd be set.
Prof. Pacali 05-19-07, 10:20 PM	Best: magic item creation feats from PHB Metamagic feats (except Sudden Metamagic feats) Warmage (much better "blaster" class than Sorceror) Skill Tricks Druids (even with the polymorph erratta they are one of the most powerful classes from the PHB) Worst: Warlock (too powerful at 1st level compared to a wizard or sorceror, but a 5th level warlock pales in comparision to a 3rd level wizard. Go figure.) Wilders (no reason not to play a psion instead) Spellthieves (way too complicated) Magic Item Creation feats from outside the PHB (When was the last time someone took Sanctify Relic?) Arcane Archer (the first level is pointless, since enhancement bonuses for arrows and bows no longer stack)
Xavier_of_Cormyr 05-19-07, 11:19 PM	Item Creation has to be rethought.
Ongorth 05-19-07, 11:53 PM	Item Creation has to be rethought. I completely agree. The entire wealth=power system has to be rethought. Definately one of the worst parts of the edition. Let's see what else. Green Ronin's Shaman, Witch and Psychic are pure gold. Definately keepers. Martial adepts are a solid concept. They work great as a measuring stick for other classes, bridging the gap between per day and all day. That's a keeper. The Leadership feat. Not a good idea. I'd drop it, along with the druid's animal companion. Which makes me think of the alternate druid shapechange from PHB 2. That's a definate keeper. Things that cost XP. This as a cost mechanic is terrible, particularly since XP has a built in "catch up" factor. Should be dumped along with wealth=power to form an entirely abstract measure of character power. Spell access isn't very good in this edition. So many spells overlap between lists and so many classes have access to "all" of their spells that in spite of the massive amounts of spells and spellcasting classes in print you often don't get either the variety or the differentiation that you might desire. This is something I'd work on, even in the case of just the core casters, but definately it you started adding others. Spells are their main class feature, so their lists should feel different. If a wizard's schick is that he can have all sorts of different spells, he needs a more significant pinch in some other areas, like fewer spells per day. The specialty casters (Beguiler/Dread Necro/Warmage) are stepping in the right direction, so long as you update their spell lists from other sources! Tactical feats are a great idea. These are a keeper. In fact, they are so much a keeper, you should make more by combining bunches of other, individually less desirable feats and making them into new tactical feats. The monster creation rules are one of the highlights of the system. These are a total keeper. However, effects that are dependent upon a creature's HD are problematic. These often need to be dumped, particularly ones that grant a benefit limited by a number of hit dice. We know who I'm speaking of! That's what I have for now.
Particle_Man 05-20-07, 01:00 AM	Hmmm...The Sorceror would be out. Warmage and Beguiler would replace it as "theme" casters, and Warlock would be added in as a "very simple to use" caster. I think Paladin, Barbarian, Fighter and Ranger could go, and be replaced by Martial Adept classes. On the other hand, that would require learning a whole new mechanic. And that would be the trouble. If we are talking about "core" I assume you mean "concepts a beginning gamer can pick up" so entirely new systems of magic would be a bad idea (much as I like psionics, tome of battle, etc.). The Warlock gets in because its simplicity makes up for adding in invocations. Some of the advice in DMG II and Dungeonscape could shift into DMG I. I think the Mob template could go into the MM. Maybe prune the number of intelligent biped races in the MM - how many do we *need* for a core game? Oh, Turn Undead would need to be made more simple. As would fatigue/exhaustion rules and anything else that uses attribute penalties. There are too many cascading effects from suddenly and temporarily losing (or for that matter, gaining) attribute points for efficient play.
Optimized_Commoner 05-20-07, 01:58 AM	A lot of it has already been done for you. Core Rulebooks, Expanded Psionics Handbook (should have been Core Rulebook IV), Spell Compendium, and the Magic Item Compendium. Where do you think I got the idea from? They're going to be a huge resource for me in this project. Hmmm...The Sorceror would be out. Warmage and Beguiler would replace it as "theme" casters, and Warlock would be added in as a "very simple to use" caster. Yes, I think the warlock is a better sorcerer than the sorcerer. A simple character with endless energy and a few 'powers' as opposed to casting spells. The warmage though seems un-necessary, I'd consider spell-thief a more interesting option to have in there. I think Paladin, Barbarian, Fighter and Ranger could go, and be replaced by Martial Adept classes. While I like the idea of making TOB core material, I'm uneasy about ditching all the martial classes. Really, how much space does the fighter take up in the book? Even a TOB class might want to dip into fighter for the feat-filled goodness. And that would be the trouble. If we are talking about "core" I assume you mean "concepts a beginning gamer can pick up" so entirely new systems of magic would be a bad idea (much as I like psionics, tome of battle, etc.). No, this is something I'd be making for my own benefit (not like I could distribute it anyway, that'd be a copyright violation) just to re-streamline my games. So it'd be for experienced users who have already used all these systems seperately. Just trying to replace the 50 odd books I own (exaggerating but only slightly) with 3 or 4 that feature the best bits. Some of the advice in DMG II and Dungeonscape could shift into DMG I. I think the Mob template could go into the MM. Maybe prune the number of intelligent biped races in the MM - how many do we *need* for a core game? Agreed. Oh, Turn Undead would need to be made more simple. I think I'd replace it with the damage dealing varient from complete divine. I completely agree. The entire wealth=power system has to be rethought. Definately one of the worst parts of the edition. Yeah, I'm inclined to agree. Problem is it's a step up from the previous editions which had no attempt to control or even measure the power gained from magic items. So I'm not sure where to go with that. Anyone know any good replacement systems? Green Ronin's Shaman, Witch and Psychic are pure gold. Definately keepers. Ahh, I don't have much OGL material unfortunately. The Leadership feat. Not a good idea. I'd drop it, along with the druid's animal companion. Which makes me think of the alternate druid shapechange from PHB 2. That's a definate keeper. Yeah, the PHB 2 has some great replacement things in it. Things that cost XP. This as a cost mechanic is terrible, particularly since XP has a built in "catch up" factor. Should be dumped along with wealth=power to form an entirely abstract measure of character power. Again, a good idea but hard to do. If a wizard's schick is that he can have all sorts of different spells, he needs a more significant pinch in some other areas, like fewer spells per day. We wizard already has that. He pays gold per spell he wants (I know it's a wealth=power system but a lot of 3.5 is). The cleric is the problem. Of course you could potentially replace them with a favoured soul. Tactical feats are a great idea. These are a keeper. In fact, they are so much a keeper, you should make more by combining bunches of other, individually less desirable feats and making them into new tactical feats. Absolutely The monster creation rules are one of the highlights of the system. These are a total keeper. However, effects that are dependent upon a creature's HD are problematic. These often need to be dumped, particularly ones that grant a benefit limited by a number of hit dice. We know who I'm speaking of! A-friggin-men.
Ongorth 05-20-07, 10:26 AM	Yeah, I'm inclined to agree. Problem is it's a step up from the previous editions which had no attempt to control or even measure the power gained from magic items. So I'm not sure where to go with that. Anyone know any good replacement systems? Well, I didn't suggest anything that I don't already do. Here are two ways to go about it without totally overhauling the system. 1) Keep the system exactly as is as a metagame constraint to player power. The player can have all the money they want, but they can only have items/abilities/effects worth up to the amount listed in the book. The player can cast wall of iron/fabricate until there heart's content, but if buying a new Amulet of Health +6 would put them over their limit, they just simply can't get it for some reason. They can buy lots of tacos, though. Things that cost XP count as (c x 5) towards this limit. 2) Make an alternate measure of power. For simplicity call them power points. Each character gets a certain number of power points each level (about 70% of the gold they would have gotten) that they can invest in powers (which have effects just like magic items). This reflects the awesomeness of the character. Disposible items are handled with "schicks" (thanks Feng Shui!) where the character buys the ability to always have the item handy a certain number of times per day by taking the appropriate item creation feat. Things that have costly material components or cost XP are drained for the character's power points. There are more complications in this system that I won't go into detail, including: 1) Handling dispel magic 2) Using traditional magical items 3) Antimagic fields 4) What percent of the traditional wealth you give to account for the increased power of customization, no item slots and any magic "relics" you give the party. 5) Trading in or upgrading your characters powers However, it gives the player total customization, which is nice since nothing else about the character is random and gear is a large bulk of your character's power. This is the system I'm currently using and its pretty good.
Optimized_Commoner 05-20-07, 10:40 AM	Thanks for the suggestions Ongorth, I thought about it a bit earlier today and I've come up with a potential solution. I'd like to get your opinion on it if possible. I wrote down the basic idea in the unearthed arcana forum, here's a link Removing XP cost/Material Components (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=850088) What do you think?
Ongorth 05-20-07, 11:04 AM	OC: That's a pretty simple way to handle costly/xp components if you don't want to resort to complete abstraction. I think the idea of a generic magic powering item is a pretty good idea, plus it leaves the door open for "power components" in spellcasting as was suggested in Unearthed Arcana and Mongoose's Component's and Foci. The conversion cost is easy enough as the equation is already built into the system (1 Xp = 5 gold) so the pricing of items should be easy with some math to account for the reusability. Personally, I don't mind both killing item creation feats and resorting to total abstraction, though. However, if I were to join a new group, I might suggest such a thing as a compromise.
Optimized_Commoner 05-20-07, 11:55 AM	Personally, I don't mind both killing item creation feats and resorting to total abstraction, though. Nor do I, however if I start going too far from D&D then I might as well write my own system (which I've done in the past). I like D&D and when I house rule I like to keep it to a minimum so that I can keep using all the resources that already exist. However, if I were to join a new group, I might suggest such a thing as a compromise. That's one of the reasons I like this idea. It still interfaces with all the systems in D&D which makes it a great compromise.