| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| Boda02-24-07, 05:40 PM | If you could change ,in a permanent basis, anything in the current class system, what would it be? The classes special traits? The hit points? The access to feats or skill points? Place your sugestions. Personally, since i belive the current setting is very inbalanced in regard the non magical claasses, maybe a little boost in them, so that they may be more apelling in a long term pespective. |
| MarkusTay6302-24-07, 06:13 PM | I've been playing with the concept of a 'Universal Class'. I have seen this done successfully in other games, mostly Sci-fi, and have been trying to work it into the D&D system. Basically, at each level you get 40 points to spend on abilities, attributes, skills, and Talents (Combat, Magical, Stealth), with different point costs for various things. I was working it out, so as to balance it against existing clases, but then decided to can the whole thing. Although I like the idea of a generic system to hand-craft a character, there would be way too much opportunity for power-gaming. Giving players control over how often they get feats and ability boosts could lead to disaster, even if balanced against what they would lose in return. People can always combine multi-classing and PrCs easily enough if they want a truly 'different' character. So, after all that, I feel the classes work well the way they are presented, and the only thing I would like to see is more 'alternate levels' for different builds for the various existing classes. They did this with the Ranger from 3.0 to 3.5, and the Monk I believe. Also, some of the accessory books have come up with alternate levels. I would love to see this done for each race, so that a Dwarf Paladin is slightly different from a human one, or a Elven Mage different from a gnome, or a halfling ranger different from a half-orc one, etc... This way you would be able to focus your class more precisely on your particular character concept. |
| Stigger02-24-07, 06:21 PM | Think I'd probably give wizards a Int+4 skill point modifier at the least... seems very silly that a remarkably academic class is so gimped on skill points for all those knowledge skills they get. I'd probably up the bonus feat gain on them as well... and probably give bonus feat gains to sorcerers as well. And I'm definitely in favor of increasing the number of spells/day progression as well, 4 seems a little weak to me... maybe increasing it to match the sorcerers 6 and upping the sorcerer to 8 or so. Actually, thinking of it, I'd do the same with all the caster classes, not just sorcerer and wizard. Personally, I find spellcasters greatly gimped in favor of some artificial sense of balance, so that we can be fair to those poor non-caster types. Why should a guy with a sword be on the same level as that fellow who can toss fireballs out of his eyes and lightning out of his arse? |
| MarkusTay6302-24-07, 06:53 PM | I have had BOTH Wizards and Sorcerors since way before 3e. The way I worked it, Wizards know more spells, but Sorcerors could cast the few spells they know more often. I use a spell point system, so Sorcerors just get more points. I never liked the 'spell matrix' system from D&D, and its the one thing they refuse to change. My players do not have to memorize spells, they can cast any in their repertoire, which is keeping closer to the magic users presented in mythology and novels. Even D&D novels throw the whole "I used it so I forgot it" spell system right out the window; shows you what the authors think of it. |
| Boda02-24-07, 07:10 PM | I didnt say at the same level, that yes, would be a nonsense, but a little more powerful in their little corner, considering the limitations of the hit point sistem. Per example: why dont barbarians start with self sufficient feat and other physical related abilities? It would hardly make them at spellcaster level, but maybe make them a little more appeling. After all, FR isnt a only magic setting. That would be a Mage: the ascension thing. |
| Stigger02-24-07, 08:55 PM | Even Mage: The Ascension doesn't exist in a vacuum though, with the Garou, Kindred, Fae, Fera, etc... with the kindred effectively dominating the world pretty heavily. Personally, my view of the matter is that each class is really fairly well balanced at what it's intended to do. Put a wizard and a fighter (of equal level of course) and long range, and more than likely that fighter is going to end up smoldering... put them at point blank range and that wizard is pretty much going to end up reeling in the first round and dead on the second, if he lasts that long. Each class is meant to fulfil a specific niche and set of tactical options... really, the most versatile classes out there are the pure fighter and the pure rogue, since they can be customized to suit almost any number of playing styles, including a decent (albeit not spectacular) jack of all trades for their given skillsets. Mages almost have to specialize in at least some respect, be it in a school, metamagic, item creation, etcetera. Sure you can make them generalists as well, but it's not nearly as versatile a generalization that the fighter and rogue can manage, at least in my experience. Though for spellcasting, what I would prefer was a system that went something like being able to cast (X times your Int/Cha/Wis modifier) in spells per day, so it would make those ability increases a bit more important for casters, with a feat or three that could modify the total. That would make a bit more sense to me than almost anything else. |
| RooktheFury02-24-07, 09:52 PM | I think that flavor wise, sorceror should be a template that could be added to any character. It makes more sense to me because it's something that one is born with. If a fighter suddenly begins to manifest sorcerous powers, then they shouldn't be forced to multiclass. I don't know. Jsut something I have been thinking on. |
| MarkusTay6302-24-07, 10:37 PM | Thats sort of how Psionics originally worked, and it was too unbalancing. |
| MerrikCale02-25-07, 09:15 AM | I think that flavor wise, sorceror should be a template that could be added to any character. It makes more sense to me because it's something that one is born with. If a fighter suddenly begins to manifest sorcerous powers, then they shouldn't be forced to multiclass. I don't know. Jsut something I have been thinking on. I suppose Favored Soul would be a template too. Markie is right though, thats how Psionics originally worked way back in 1e and it just was too unbalanced, although in today's age of level adjustments you might be able to make it work |
| Quijenoth02-25-07, 03:43 PM | If you could change ,in a permanent basis, anything in the current class system, what would it be? The classes special traits? The hit points? The access to feats or skill points? Place your sugestions. I would restructure the hit point system and make it more of a level playing field when it comes to damage, the idea that wizards quake in fear at a guy with a dagger while the fighter treats the same guy with total scorn like hes a god while lifting the DR for armor from D20 modern/Star wars (and natural armor) instead of increasing your AC. I've played with the idea of hit points being fixed per level, fighters getting slightly more but hit points stay low. every time you lose all your hit points you suffer a kind of fatigue, fighters who specialise in extra endurance gain extra levels of fatigue. single damage that goes over your fatigue however has a chance to mortally wound requiring a fort save (new kind of mass damage effect). the problem with this level playing field style is it makes people think why play a fighter when a spellcaster can do so much more damage. the answer to that is to limit high level spells. my main idea is magic is free, you still have X number of spells per day but going over your X number of spells costs you damage) low level spells just deal hit point damage, mid range spells causes your fatigue to drop, while high level spells have a chance to kill you (like mass damage) metamagic effects increase the number of spell slots used and increase the spell level for effects only (not the damage) so a fireball (low level spell) maximised (+3 levels) uses up four 3rd level spell slots and deals the damage of 4 low level spells say (spell level x 4) 12. if you didn't do it this way the fireball would become a 6th level spell and you would have to lose fatigue and risk losing conciousness, this makes metamagic feats pointless. Ill stop rambling now, the system is al ot more involved (with minor quirks and rules) than that which I have outlined above. The main attempt of the system is to level the playing field for all classes. |
| Boda02-26-07, 01:25 PM | Yep the hit point system is the really big flop et all. Shouldnt the hit point be related with your constitution and race? And then the classes would add a little? When you say the fighter vs wizard scenario, you refereing to a low level characters combat yes? At high level, it would very hard for a fighter to kill in range attacks a wizard in 1 or 2 rounds. Can anyone explain the trap sense that barbarians get? So rangers and rogues dont sense traps (despite the fact that their make alot of them), but barbarian does?! Isnt there a limitation that states that you can only get sorceror/psionic when the character is first created? |
| Draxo02-26-07, 01:43 PM | I would increase the skill points sorcerers get, along with giving them some acual.. class abilities... |
| jamorris0902-26-07, 04:09 PM | I think for the most part the hit point system is all right. First couple of levels for a wizard they have very few hit points because well they spend most of their time studying and not much using their physical bodies like farm work, guard duty etc that someone who might become a fighter has done. Think about it this way. Say you take two guys and spend ten hours training one with a sword, and the other you spend 10 hours teaching him as many spells as you can. The fighter is going to learn much more much more quickly. Now have them spend years doing their respective studies and the wizard will have many more tricks and will have learned to harness this otherworldly power. Whereas you can only learn so much with a sword. Some of the skills a wizard learns also can be used for close combat or at least getting out of it. stoneskin, demensional door, fly. I am playing a wizard right now, as long as we aren't in doors I begin the fight by flying as high as my most effective spells can go and the only people who can touch me are archers and other casters. So wizards are only weak because they don't know much yet, so I think the hp progression does a good job of showing this. As far as the barbarian trap sense goes. These guys grow up in extremely harsh environments with animals always waiting in the shadows, other barbarians jumping out from behind rocks and stuff like this (they are chaotic and aren't afraid to win no matter what, even though many books describe them as honorable fighters). Just think of it as years of always being on guard. As to why rangers and rogues don't get it, I agree rangers shouldn't... how many people bumbling through a forest bother to set traps. Rogues other the other hand do get it actually. For sorcerors and psions if you multiclass after a couple levels of something else it just means that you've had the powers the whole time you've just been unaware and they've been awakened somehow. Sorry about the long post, hope I helped and any correct me where they see fit. |
| The Ranger02-27-07, 01:38 AM | Drop the epic level stuff. Let PCs keep advancing as regular characters. I suppose epic spells would have to be rewritten a bit, but other than that I see few reasons why there needs to be convuluted rules for higher level PCs. After all, doesn't a fighter keep getting better at fighting, a thief better at thieving and a wizard better at magic? |
| Xa Roth02-27-07, 01:46 AM | Drop the epic level stuff. Let PCs keep advancing as regular characters. I suppose epic spells would have to be rewritten a bit, but other than that I see few reasons why there needs to be convuluted rules for higher level PCs. After all, doesn't a fighter keep getting better at fighting, a thief better at thieving and a wizard better at magic? I've only just enountered these rules recently (it took my playing group ages to convert to 3 let alone 3.5 - just too much $$ spent on 2nd ed. books) and I would have to agree with this. |
| MarkusTay6302-27-07, 08:09 AM | I would have to third that. If any player of mine ever gets up thst high I'll never use those rules. I would increase the skill points sorcerers get, along with giving them some acual.. class abilities...You know, this actually isn't a bad idea for Sorceror's AND Wizards. The theory is that mages get spells every level and that is why they don't get class abilities, but suppose we treated spells as SKILLS? Anyone could learn them then, but mages would be exceptionally good at them (meta-magic feats built into the class progressions). You probably would have to use some sort of spell point system for this to work, or do what I do and have it cost HP to cast spells (with HP representing Fatigue, rather then actual damage). |
| Lord Karsus02-27-07, 10:36 AM | -If I could change one thing, I would make "Feat Progressions", similar to Power Attack-Cleave-Great Cleave. Things like that. Some "combos" like that exist, but I would like to see more of them, with more "base feats". Oh, and the +2 on all feats like Stealthy and such, should be increased to be +4, to make it worthwhile. -I would also give Monks "Martial Arts" Feats, which would give them the ability to use special "Martial Arts Attacks". For example, the "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" style of combat would give the monk a plus to jumping, hiding, and would give him a High Jump Kick that would do a little extra damage. Something like that. -I would also use a sort of spell progression with arcane casters. To put it most simple, in order to use Delayed Blast Fireball, you must already know how to cast Fireball. To use Chain Lightning, you must first know Lightning. To know Teleport, you must know Blink, Dimension Door, and so on... |
| Bluenose02-27-07, 11:14 AM | -If I could change one thing, I would make "Feat Progressions", similar to Power Attack-Cleave-Great Cleave. Things like that. Some "combos" like that exist, but I would like to see more of them, with more "base feats". Oh, and the +2 on all feats like Stealthy and such, should be increased to be +4, to make it worthwhile. What would you make Skill Focus(whatever), out of curiosity? +6? Personally I think it might be better to leave the bonus as it is, but any skill affected by it would be a class skill for the PC. -I would also give Monks "Martial Arts" Feats, which would give them the ability to use special "Martial Arts Attacks". For example, the "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" style of combat would give the monk a plus to jumping, hiding, and would give him a High Jump Kick that would do a little extra damage. Something like that. Tome of Battle: Book of Nine Swords is a bit like that. With the Martial Study/Martial Stance feats you can pick up some of these manoeuvres even without being in the class - a monk in my game has got some rather nice throws out of it. -I would also use a sort of spell progression with arcane casters. To put it most simple, in order to use Delayed Blast Fireball, you must already know how to cast Fireball. To use Chain Lightning, you must first know Lightning. To know Teleport, you must know Blink, Dimension Door, and so on... I had the idea once of making all spells affect single targets, but a wizard/sorceror could take feats enabling them to affect more. So you wouldn't have a Chain Lightning spell, but a Lighting spell affected by the Chain Spell feat. It would require re-writing most of the magic system, but every so often I dust off my notes and add a little to it. One day it might even be usable :) . |
| Soltares02-27-07, 11:53 AM | I'd take many of the Barbarian, Paladin, Monk and Monk class abilities and turn them into Feats. A Fighter could pick up the Rage feat chain, and the more Rage feats he took, the better his Rage abilities would get, just like a Shifter or Heritage Sorcerer taking additional feats of the appropriate type. A Fighter who took the Rage chain to it's conclusion, and the DR chain, and the Fast Movement feat, would be essentially a Barbarian. But he wouldn't have to take *all* of these. He could take only some of the Rage, and none of the DR, putting those 'Barbarian class features' into something else, depending on his area of focus. The more Class abilities become modular feats (either by turning them directly into Feats or Feat Chains, or making them swappable with Alternate Class features that aren't limited to some oddball race, or just UA-style Variant Classes), the more one can customize a class, and have an evangelical priest who doesn't channel positive or negative energy, but instead uses inspiring speeches and sermons to duplicate the effects of Bardic music or a 'Bard' that casts spells like a Wizard (less spells / day, not spontaneous, but has a spellbook) or a Monk that only uses weapons and has no unarmed focus at all or a thuggish Fighter that blows a few of his Feats to have a few dice of Sneak Attack, or a nimble Swashbuckler that blows some feats to have Skirmish dice like a Scout. This applies to Prestige Classes in particular. Just about every PrC class ability should be a feat, even if some of them belong at the end of high-prerequisite chains. And then Prestige Classes can be lured into a big metal crate with a sultry wink and a show of leg, locked in, and dropped in the sea, never to be seen again. Anything worth having from a PrC should be available as a feat or alternate class feature or whatever, and not require someone to have something like; Ranger 2 / Fighter 4 / Rogue 3 / Invisible Blade 5 / Master Thrower 3 on their sheet to get the various features they want for their dual-dagger-throwing death-machine. 'Cause that's just silly! The choice of spontaneous or prepared casting should be balanced all by itself (and, IMO, pretty much is, with the spontaneous caster losing the benefit of the huge and versatile spell-list available to a prepared caster, combined with the reduced effectiveness of metamagic feats). As a result of this, even if some rebalancing is required to beef up the prepared caster, or reduce the effectiveness of the spontaneous caster, *both* versions should gain access to the same amount of class abilities as they progress in levels. For every metamagic / item creation / spell mastery feat option that a Wizard gets, the sorcerer should gain access to a bonus feat as well (metamagic / item creation / heritage). The channeling energy mechanic adapted from the old 'Turn Undead' of 2e has grown into a monster, when strapped onto a class that already has twice the hit points of a wizard, better weapons, full armor, full spellcasting progression, a pair of domains with free extra powers and limited spontaneous casting ability. But I *like* the idea of expanded channeling abilities and divine feats. I just think that it deserves it's own class. A base class devoted entirely to channeling a form of planar energy for various effects, such as healing, blasting the infidel, blessing / buffing allies, warding off evil forces, etc. would be a very neat class, and look a heck of a lot more like a Warlock than a Cleric, channeling energy into a limited pallet of effects, based on the 'Divine Feats' chosen as class levels accrue. The higher the class level, the more 'dice of effect' the channeled energies can produce, and the more uses / day are available. [While, mechanically, it might end up looking 'Warlock-y,' ironically it ends up looking more like the priests of myth and lore, channeling holy power to an array of effects, but not actually preparing or casting spells. The holy power is the same holy power in any event, but some priests might know the rituals of exorcism (having bought the feat) and thus be able to channel the holy power to exorcise evil / dispel magic / etc. whenever they want. Others would be skilled into turning it into a searing bolt of cleansing fire, to burn away the unclean beasts (with the appropriate feat), while the newest recruits to the faith might only be able to soothe the injured or enhance their own strength by channeling divine strength into themselves.] Similarly, Druids are somewhat strapped, being a shapechanging melee class and a full-casting class with a ferocious animal companion. Either one can be effective all by itself, and splitting these two feature-sets up and making an effective 'natural caster with pet' class and an effective 'turn into beastie and eat your face' class would be preferable to shoving two notably different roles into a single class. This sort of thing would also end the rule of the Natural Spell feat. Anytime a class is inconceivable without a particular feat, such as a Druid with Natural Spell, a Cleric with Divine Metamagic, or a Dread Necromancer with Tomb-Tainted Soul, then, IMO, there is a problem. Every class should be designed / balanced on the same metric. Having some of the classes in the party be 'blow your wad' classes like Wizards and Psions and Druids, who quickly blow through their spells, power points, wild shapes, etc. and the rest be 'all day' classes like Fighters, Warlocks and Rogues, is, IMO, not conducive to consistent group-play. Either; 1) The Wizards should have access to some 'free' stuff as well, even if the 'free' stuff is notably less effective than their big spells. A Wizard shouldn't have to worry about spending the rest of the day trying to contribute with his quarterstaff without getting killed... Reserve Feats are one step in the right direction here, but there should be a baseline arcane functionality even for the Wizard who blew his feats on Item Creation and Metamagics. 2) The Warriors should have something like Rage, that allows them also to have finite resources to 'burn,' that will also give them cause to want to stop and rest from time to time, instead of having half of the party constantly stopping to wait for those darn casters to get their beauty sleep. And I want a pony... |
| Lord Karsus02-27-07, 05:49 PM | What would you make Skill Focus(whatever), out of curiosity? +6? Personally I think it might be better to leave the bonus as it is, but any skill affected by it would be a class skill for the PC. -I don't know, but I've always seen those other feats (Stealthy, and the like) to be almost useless. You get very few Feats to begin with. If you are going to use one of those slots on something that increases your skills, it had better be a decent bonus. Adding a +2 to two skills just really isn't worth enough to be a feat, in my book. If it were upped to +4, then the feats would be a lot more appealing. |
| MarkusTay6302-27-07, 08:45 PM | Just to toss a few things around – LK - Instead of feat progressions, how about Feats that ‘improve with use’. It would take some bookkeeping on the DMs/players part. But its workable. Lets say you got +2 for stealthy every 3 levels. You take it at lev 6, so at level 9 it goes up to +4, and at level 12 it goes up to +6. Or, alternately, you could have them get the boost every 2 levels (+1 lev for each level already obtained). Now at 6th level you take it, and get +2 (your at Stealthy 1), then the next time you get a bonus at 9, same as before (your at Stealthy 2). Then, it goes up four levels before you see another bonus, so at 13 you get the +6 (Stealthy 3). I wouldn’t allow it to go higher, but theoretically you could gain +8 at level 18. With the second version, the progression slows down, to simulate real-world learning curves. As Bluenose has already stated, you could use the TOB rules, which are far superior to the basic rules. All martial feats should be tactical feats IMHO, because some of them are just to encounter-specific to be of much use. Spell progression is a great concept, and FAR more realistic. There was an article in Dragon for adding spell progressions to 2e. I think the Path magic book covers this as well, but I’m not sure because I don’t own it. I used to use the spell system in Iron Crown’s Spell Law, but it got too cumbersome doing the conversions (players didn’t own the product), but they had a very well-thought out system of magical ability progression. Bluenose – agree with everything you say, I really like the idea of taking a single spell and changing it up with feats, that sounds AWESOME! I may have to ‘borrow’ that for the Kara-Tur thread if it eventually turns into a Netbook. :D Soltares – Another person who thinks like me. :cheer: I also feel they have convoluted the game way too much with too many rules. The original four basic classes could have been changed-up simply by added feats. Give feats at EVERY level, and take away class abilities for MAXIMUM customizability. The four basic classes would have their own set of ‘class feats’ and they would be able to choose the path they want. This is pretty much how it worked in 1e, with subclasses, but with feats we do away with the need for sub-classes. Whats with all the optional classes, PrCs, AND feats? They all pretty much do the same thing and add way too many game mechanics. Four classes + feats could simulate EVERYTHING all three of those do right now. Adding rage to a fighter gives you a barbarian. Adding ‘nature skills' to a priest gives you a druid and adding them to a fighter gives you a Ranger, we don’t NEED separate classes. We could have joining an organization as a prerequisite for obtaining certain feats, which would eliminate PrCs all together. Just more unnecessary redundancy within the current rules set. Everything you say Soltares is on the money; I am SO saving your post for future reference. Than you. I would SO LOVE to work on 4e; simplify everything and get rid of the need for so many books. Of course, that will NEVER happen, Because the company makes money selling us those books, so keeping the rules muddled is in their best interest. :( Just think... if they simplified all of those sub-systems and combined them, they could spend more time on giving us what we REALLY want - regional material. |
| boggler6502-27-07, 10:53 PM | My biggest problem with the current dnd system is all the crap source material that gets released. I mean come on, they just released a source called complete mage, like 4 months before that they put out complete arcane... it's practically the same sourcebook, but they just added a bunch of powergaming crap. The fact that half of the prestige classes in all of these sources have only 5 or 3 or 6 or some other random number of levels. That kind of thing is useless, a prestige class like archmage is ok with 5 levels, but a PRC with only 3 levels... what is the damn point? I don't DM on a weekly basis, and so in between each game someone invariably gets a new sourcebook and they want to use it.... and it has a bunch of ridiculous unneccessary crap that seems designed to make my life difficult. That and dead levels... how hard would it have been to come up with two extra special abilities for a druid?... damn WotC grrrr... |
| MarkusTay6302-28-07, 05:05 AM | Boggler - Check out This Site (http://www.wakinglands.com/htm_files/the_main_page.htm). the guy does freelance for Wizards, and has done some articles concerning dead levels, so his stuff is semi-official. I use most of his alternates, its a great all-around site. |
| boggler6502-28-07, 08:23 AM | Thanks Markus, that one went straight into my favorites =) |
| BrianCritchley02-28-07, 04:36 PM | I'd allow each class to have a bonus class skill chosen by the player at 1st level, to reflect background |
| Boda03-09-07, 10:17 PM | Why is Blackguard a prestige class and paladin a class? Both being prestige classes makes more sense. |
| MerrikCale03-09-07, 11:08 PM | Why is Blackguard a prestige class and paladin a class? Both being prestige classes makes more sense. or perhaps both being classes |