Results 31 to 60 of 314
-
2012-09-24, 09:21 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Location
- Switzerland
- Gender
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
It works for quite a few spells, really. Teleportation, Calling, Interplanar Travel, Divination, large-scale destructive magic (all that is beyond the scale of your typical combat).
And that's the good thing about RPGs:
"Okay, we wait for thirty minutes" takes all of five seconds to say, but makes all the difference in the game.Resident Vancian Apologist
-
2012-09-24, 09:51 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Gender
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
I'm not really in a position to join any projects at the moment, but I would bring up that the saves mechanic never made a lot of sense. With everything else the active agent gets to roll, and the passive has 10+modifiers. So I suggest swapping them; things that target a save roll a d20 and everyone has 10+modifiers for their save. Saves become more like AC, while savable effects become more like attacks.
Put another way, a DC 14 blinding effect would become a 1d20+4 blinding effect.
-
2012-09-24, 10:03 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
My Homebrew: found here.
When you Absolutely, Positively, Gotta Drop some Huge rocks, Accept NO Substitutes
PM Me if you would like a table from my homebrew reconstructed.
Drow avatar @ myself
-
2012-09-24, 10:22 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- Pittsburgh, PA
- Gender
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
4e did this. It sometimes made sense, and sometimes didn't. If a wizard throws a fireball at you? I can see making him roll for that. If a pile of rocks fall on your head, who's rolling the attack? Personally, I'd rather stick to saves; if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
toapat, how does replacing saves make SR irrelevant?Hill Giant Games
I make indie gaming books for you!Spoiler
STaRS: A non-narrativeist, generic rules-light system.
Grod's Guide to Greatness, 2e: A big book of player options for 5e.
Grod's Grimoire of the Grotesque: An even bigger book of variant and expanded rules for 5e.
Giants and Graveyards: My collected 3.5 class fixes and more.
-
2012-09-24, 10:35 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2009
- Location
- Surrounded by Books
- Gender
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
When I mentioned longer casting times, I didn't mean for ALL spells. Obviously combat spells still need to be Standard Actions for casters to not be awful in battle. But if casters can bring to bare the majority of their spells in a standard action, we quickly get into the problem of them having more combat-utility than any other class. IMO, casters that are not specifically "Warmages" should not be at home on the battlefield. That isn't to say they should be useless, just not capable of exerting their full might as a standard action.
And if we're going with a check-based system, we can give modifiers based on casting time. So the higher the level you are, the faster you can cast lower level spells. Or something like that.
Man, now I need to read back through Ars Magica and Mage: The Awakening. I remember both of those having neat casting systems. Not to replicate, but for inspiration.
-
2012-09-24, 10:43 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- Pittsburgh, PA
- Gender
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
It sounds like you've got some good ideas... want to work on that for a bit?
Hill Giant Games
I make indie gaming books for you!Spoiler
STaRS: A non-narrativeist, generic rules-light system.
Grod's Guide to Greatness, 2e: A big book of player options for 5e.
Grod's Grimoire of the Grotesque: An even bigger book of variant and expanded rules for 5e.
Giants and Graveyards: My collected 3.5 class fixes and more.
-
2012-09-24, 10:43 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Location
- Switzerland
- Gender
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
I would argue for full-round casting times for most battle spells. It makes wizards more static and spells easier to disrupt, both of which are good things.
Resident Vancian Apologist
-
2012-09-24, 10:56 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Location
- Switzerland
- Gender
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
He'res a document gathering most of the discussion so far: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...t_BCuGjHQ/edit
Resident Vancian Apologist
-
2012-09-24, 11:07 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
My Homebrew: found here.
When you Absolutely, Positively, Gotta Drop some Huge rocks, Accept NO Substitutes
PM Me if you would like a table from my homebrew reconstructed.
Drow avatar @ myself
-
2012-09-24, 11:15 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2011
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
GitP Username: GunbladeKnight
Skype Username, if applicable: GunbladeKnight77
How much time can I contribute?: A few hours per day, more on Sunday
Skills and credentials: Tested my hand here and there, have a good grasp for more technical than fluff.
Preferred project: Advice and brainstorming with anyone.
Do you wish to be one of the organizers?: Not a very good leader myself, though I wouldn't mind helping the overall organizers.
That is the system we are working within (though I do like Shadowrun's system).
Six ability scores, 10-11 being the basic value, negative and positive modifiers, bell curve distribution between 3 and 18 for humans, etc.
Hit Dice.
Base Attack Bonus.
Saves.
Feats and Skills (not what they do, just how they are gained).
Action types: Free, Immediate, Swift, Move, Standard and Full round.
d20 system, but let's not constrain ourselves fully. PF, 4E, and even Next have some good points, too.
Races: I think races are too similar. They should provide more features, more features that are relevant over a longer timespan, more interesting, and more balanced.
Base Classes: Every class should have: unique features that others can not easily reproduce. Interesting features. A choice between different, but thematically related features. The closest I can think of in core is the Ranger. Out of core, ACFs. These should be incorporated from the start. Classes should be as balanced as possible while maintaining their mechanical diversity. Balance isn't the strength of third edition, and not what I actually want from it. I want diversity and creative unbalance.
Prestige classes: Go back to these being optional, specialized builds. Give base classes enough features to make them attractive on all levels. Make prestige classes give up something for what they gain (i.e. no full casting prestige classes. Look at the DMG: the archmage gives up spells per day.)
Skills: Mostly leave them as they are, but incorporate skill tricks and other new abilities right into them. One big thing that annoys me is knowledge skills, though: they shouldn't depend on monster HD, but every monster should have an "exoticness" value.
Feats: Feats should never just add numbers. They should add abilities. The difference between feats and class abilities is that feats are beneficial to several different builds, while class abilities are specialized.
Magic Items: I'm not sure what to do with these, and I'll leave that to someone else. I would prefer less pure +number items.
Combat: combat maneuvers could probably stand to be a bit simpler, but if we are honest, most are attack roll, then opposed ability check, which is to be expected. Anything else? Mobility should perhaps be easier and more emphasized.
Magic: A few things. First, I dislike outright immunities, especially gained by spells. Second, no spells that are better than entire classes or replicate class features (invisibility, super-buffs, knock, find traps, etc. Especially a problem for skill monkeys). Third, what I did: make all spells that have large effects or permanently change something into rituals which are performed out of combat and take time and resources. 4E was on to something here, even if they did it wrong. Fifth, make spells easier to interrupt and resist at higher levels.
Monsters: Not sure what needs to be done here, not my thing. Not that much, really?
Types and Subtypes: Do any of these have to change? I remember someone showing how (Undead) could be a subtype, with humanoid (undead) vampires and construct (undead) skeletons, though that's going into details. Maybe have some of the types lose the straight immunities as well. Stabbing a construct in the weakpoint is perhaps harder, but not impossible.
Monsters as races: Ah, the big one. So many people want it. So many people have tried it. I've never seen anything quite satisfying.
Environments, et al: A few small things that are silly oversights like drowning, but overall okay, I think?
Another idea: Classes grant X amount of simple weapon proficiencies, and you can trade in 2 simple for 1 martial or 3-4 simple for 1 exotic proficiency, while some classes have suggested lists or set lists that allow for the same rules (such as the monk weapons).
-
2012-09-24, 11:24 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
your idea of what Circumstance is seems to me to just be glorified DM Fiat Flanking. that is not good.
also, should be merged with dodge and Competence, keeping the dodge type's ability to stack.
Resistance/Protection are enhancements that give enhancement bonuses. my suggestion was to simplify them in terms of gear and combine them.
Swift* and Immediate actions should not be included if it can not be decided that they can be justified.
* if it can not be justified as being separate from an immediate action.My Homebrew: found here.
When you Absolutely, Positively, Gotta Drop some Huge rocks, Accept NO Substitutes
PM Me if you would like a table from my homebrew reconstructed.
Drow avatar @ myself
-
2012-09-24, 11:25 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2009
- Location
- Surrounded by Books
- Gender
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
-
2012-09-25, 12:30 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2005
- Gender
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Just a suggestion for this that I've been fond of for a while: As the core mechanic, whoever's turn it is gets to roll the dice, always. So if the rogue trips a trap and it goes off on him, he gets to make a defense roll. If the Fighter provokes an AoO, he gets to roll his defense. But if it's the other guy's turn and he attacks the PC, he gets to roll it.
I find it keeps things on track better in play, and makes a logical sense, providing a clear distinction for who rolls when.
Anyway, I'm not sure I want to get too involved with this, as I'm personally looking into making something that goes a bit farther away from 3.5 than most of these projects seem to. I'll probably post something about it in the general chat thread tomorrow.If my text is blue, I'm being sarcastic.But you already knew that, right?
-
2012-09-25, 12:35 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Location
- Switzerland
- Gender
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
It does, however, need a few additional mechanics, at least one for converting a bonus to a roll into a static defence (not that that is all that hard it's just 10+value).
I think that works, though.Resident Vancian Apologist
-
2012-09-25, 12:35 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2012
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
The trick is to not get stuck in the ''fast casting is only for combat spells''. Lots of spells should be able to be cast without taking minutes and hours. Like most divination detection type spells. A spellcaster walks into a room and can detect undead in one round, but it becomes more useless if they must wait 30 minutes. The same way a spellcaster should be able to make an illusion of a door in one round, and not take an hour.
The quicker casting times for high level is a good idea, but don't just make casting times level based. They should be like ''the normal spell takes an hour, but you can cast the fast version with a check'', then higher levels could do it more often/easier...but any spellcaster of any level could at least try.
Circumstance Bonus: I have always liked the idea of randomness. It's something that 3x can really use. How about instead of a static DC, the DM rolls a 1d10 with 1-5 a bonus and 6-10 a penalty.
-
2012-09-25, 12:46 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Location
- Switzerland
- Gender
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Oh, absolutely, no discussion on that. In fact, if I go searching around a bit, I once made a list of all the core spells that would work better as rituals, I should be able to find it again.
Resident Vancian Apologist
-
2012-09-25, 02:03 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2008
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
This is an interesting idea. How much are you planning on modifying the base system, though? Because there are a few parts of the core system that produce all kinds of wonkiness throughout the system.
Ability scores are one. The fact that you can achieve 40 in some stats is what creates wizards with hundreds of HP and meatshieldy monsters that take too long to clear out dealing damage. Capping the bonuses, or at least stopping them from stacking, would prevent the problem... but run into issues with monsters that require those 40-ability scores to function against PCs.
Iterative attacks are another. One real easy fix for iteratives is to make them all at full BAB. This means all would generally hit, and your average fighter would be chopping off 20% of a monsters HP with each full attack, even with a one-handed longsword. The problem, though, is that it has undesired impacts on anything from the to-hit-vs-AC ratio to sneak attacks.
Re: Bonuses, some can likely be eliminated. Circumstance is probably unnecessary, because multiple will end up stacking and they're basically Untyped bonuses under a different name. Dodge bonuses have the similar "stack with one another" clause as Untyped, and so I'm not sure why they're a seperate type.
I would recommend eliminating miss chance and just adding such effects into AC. This simplifies things, and prevents system abuse along the lines of Shock Trooper.SpoilerThank you to zimmerwald1915 for the Gustave avatar.
The full set is here.
Air Raccoon avatar provided by Ceika
from the Request an OotS Style Avatar thread
A big thanks to PrinceAquilaDei for the gryphon avatar!
original image
-
2012-09-25, 02:10 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Location
- Switzerland
- Gender
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Dodge are separate because you can lose them under certain circumstances, which don't apply to untyped bonuses.
Resident Vancian Apologist
-
2012-09-25, 02:24 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
You have approximately a kajillion homebrew classes and races here, and more than enough material to whip up races, classes, whatever.
Pick one topic, fix it, move on. The multifaceted "FIXANG EVERYTHING" is how I fail my classes nowadays and it'll kill this project just as hard.
-
2012-09-25, 05:50 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2010
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
I don't think I can really contribute much, but I'll offer ideas for discussion.
Is Con bonus granting stupidly large sacks of HP okay with everyone? If it changes, what is an acceptable alternative?
I see everyone is mostly okay with skills as-is. What about the idea of skills trained equal to Class Number + INT?
Merge Ref save and AC, make all saves 10 + number similar to SWSE?
Modify conditions? Going straight from fully capable to Petrified in one shot is pretty awful. Maybe you could use progressive conditions similar to Fear, like Daze -> Paralyze -> Stun -> Petrify, for example.
Merge Craft, Profession, and Appraise into a single Trade skill?
A few more sane skill DCs (especially Open Lock).
More combat maneuvers available to everyone, aside from just Trip, Disarm, etc.
Remove dependency on magic items, but keep them prominent?
How can BAB be made to matter more than to-hit bonuses?
Unrelated to mechanics though, it might be a good idea for people serious about the project to link it in their signatures to gather continued interestLast edited by Dsurion; 2012-09-25 at 05:51 AM.
-
2012-09-25, 06:29 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Location
- Switzerland
- Gender
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Just as browse: however, fixing piece per piece never gets anywhere. Many of the larger problems are with the basic framework. Plus, one big fix has the advantage that we can balance things against each other.
Dsurion:
HP are okay, I think. I don't think I ever had a problem with it.
AC and reflex are very different, I don't think merging them works.
I am all for making more condition tracks, like fear, fatigue and nausea. I want one for Death, personally, which would solve a lot of problems with Save or Dies.
Anyway.
People, we are getting logged down with details. So far, I think I'm the only one who talked about broad design goals instead of small fixes they'd like to see. And we still don't have a system for actually agreeing on what we put in or not.
Therefore, we need to elect leaders now. People said two, I think that's not the worst ideas.
Three steps:
1. Out of those people who said they would do it (first page) someone is nominated.
2. People vote for or against. I'm thinking 24 or 48 hours should be enough time to vote.
The Volunteers are:
Welknair
Grod the Giant
Eldan
And... those seem to be all. If anyone else wants to volunteer, tell me.
The leaders duties should be:
Nominating project leaders for different parts of the series.
Deciding when new projects should be started.
Updating a Design document, similar to mine, and picking out of the discussion what goes in there, by deciding when a consensus seems to be reached.
The two leaders should likely meet on Skype to discuss these things with each other.Last edited by Eldan; 2012-09-25 at 06:35 AM.
Resident Vancian Apologist
-
2012-09-25, 06:45 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2011
- Location
- Place of Utter Chaos
- Gender
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
GitP Username: WaylanderX
Skype Username, if applicable: Waylanderm
How much time can I contribute?: An hour per day, maybe 2 if needed.
Skills and credentials: New magic systems are my speciality. Furthermore I can come up with a variaty of other things. I'll improvise ;P.
Preferred project: Magic Systems, Base classes & Races, General Brainstorming.
Do you wish to be one of the organizers?: I don't have that much experience yet with homebrewing, also I'm not quite adept at leading people. If you really need somebody to take charge though, I'm willing to organize in a pinch.
Yoyo peeps,
This seemed like a very fun project to me and I hope you'll let me, somebody who is not as experienced as some of you, join. If so, I'm looking forward working with you all ^^.
Greetz,
WayLast edited by WaylanderX; 2012-09-25 at 07:05 AM.
A swordmaster never backs off, I'll cut you to ribbons with my almighty sabre! CHAOS DANCE!!
Nyllana OotS Avatar by Lord FullBladder, Master of Goblins!
My Extended Homebrew Sig!SpoilerNothing to see here
Currently writing a fantasy novel: The Dawn of Life!People willing to provide feedback are appreciated
-
2012-09-25, 06:56 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Location
- Switzerland
- Gender
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
M Eve does not seem to be a valid username. Spaces aren't allowed, and M_Eve didn't yield any results.
Resident Vancian Apologist
-
2012-09-25, 07:05 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2011
- Location
- Place of Utter Chaos
- Gender
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Changed, should work now.
WaylandermA swordmaster never backs off, I'll cut you to ribbons with my almighty sabre! CHAOS DANCE!!
Nyllana OotS Avatar by Lord FullBladder, Master of Goblins!
My Extended Homebrew Sig!SpoilerNothing to see here
Currently writing a fantasy novel: The Dawn of Life!People willing to provide feedback are appreciated
-
2012-09-25, 08:07 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2012
- Location
- Aldain
- Gender
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Knowing how busy Welk is with other projects as well, I'll vote for the other two, though if Eldan's more unreliable, we might want to see if there's someone else? What do you think Eldan?
Scientific Name: Wombous apocolypticus | Diet: Apocolypse Pie | Cuddly: Yes
World Building Projects:
Magic: The Stuff of Sentience | Fate: The Fabric of Physics | Luck: The Basis of Biology
Order of the Stick Projects:
Annotation of the Comic | Magic Compendium of the Comic | Transcription of the Comic
Dad-a-chum? Dum-a-chum? Ded-a-chek? Did-a-chick?
Extended Signature | My DeviantArt | Majora's Mask Point Race
(you can't take the sky from me)
-
2012-09-25, 08:09 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Location
- Switzerland
- Gender
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Perhaps unreliable is the wrong word? I don't know.
I tend to be impatient. If something loses steam, I know that I become likely to get frustrated and drop projects after shouting at people a few times.
Though so far, I seem to be organizing anyway, so I would continue doing that. But I'd rather like a second co-leader to shout at me when I begin to lose motivation.Resident Vancian Apologist
-
2012-09-25, 08:26 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2012
- Location
- Aldain
- Gender
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Sorry, didn't mean to sound...critical. I was more just repeating what you said in your post: "Do you wish to be one of the organizers?: I can. But I'm not the most reliable person."
That being said, you seem to be handling a lot of it, organizing this, you own the thread, and have a good vision/sense of where we should be going, so I'm more to say that you are naturally one of the leaders. I was just concerned by your words, so as long as whoever you work with works well in partnership with you, I'd say we'd be fine.Scientific Name: Wombous apocolypticus | Diet: Apocolypse Pie | Cuddly: Yes
World Building Projects:
Magic: The Stuff of Sentience | Fate: The Fabric of Physics | Luck: The Basis of Biology
Order of the Stick Projects:
Annotation of the Comic | Magic Compendium of the Comic | Transcription of the Comic
Dad-a-chum? Dum-a-chum? Ded-a-chek? Did-a-chick?
Extended Signature | My DeviantArt | Majora's Mask Point Race
(you can't take the sky from me)
-
2012-09-25, 09:58 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2008
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Sorry, but after thinking it over a bit, I think I'd be best off skipping this project. My ideas for a "fixed D&D 3rd edition" would really be more like a fixed universal D&D, pulling material from several different editions for the best options. And the biggest problem with doing that is that it may make base 3.5e incompatable with the end result - running against one of the design goals.
SpoilerThank you to zimmerwald1915 for the Gustave avatar.
The full set is here.
Air Raccoon avatar provided by Ceika
from the Request an OotS Style Avatar thread
A big thanks to PrinceAquilaDei for the gryphon avatar!
original image
-
2012-09-25, 10:13 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- Pittsburgh, PA
- Gender
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
On the subject of casting times:
I think my wizard fix makes my opinion on the matter fairly clear. I like rituals as a way of expanding spells known lists, but I also like having so many spells available for clever players to use in combat.
On the subject of bonus types:
I support the merging of various divine bonus types, various magic types, and on circumstance modifiers. DM fiat is a vital element to making a system like this work without adding in page after page of rarely-reference circumstantial rules... exactly what we're trying to cut down on.
I'd like to see very low-level play be a bit more survivable, but that's probably just me. Hit points seem fine, though I wouldn't be entirely unopposed to changing from hit die to flat numbers.
I see everyone is mostly okay with skills as-is. What about the idea of skills trained equal to Class Number + INT?
Merge Ref save and AC, make all saves 10 + number similar to SWSE?
Modify conditions? Going straight from fully capable to Petrified in one shot is pretty awful. Maybe you could use progressive conditions similar to Fear, like Daze -> Paralyze -> Stun -> Petrify, for example.
More combat maneuvers available to everyone, aside from just Trip, Disarm, etc.
Remove dependency on magic items, but keep them prominent?
How can BAB be made to matter more than to-hit bonuses?
Unrelated to mechanics though, it might be a good idea for people serious about the project to link it in their signatures to gather continued interest
Last edited by Grod_The_Giant; 2012-09-26 at 10:32 AM.
Hill Giant Games
I make indie gaming books for you!Spoiler
STaRS: A non-narrativeist, generic rules-light system.
Grod's Guide to Greatness, 2e: A big book of player options for 5e.
Grod's Grimoire of the Grotesque: An even bigger book of variant and expanded rules for 5e.
Giants and Graveyards: My collected 3.5 class fixes and more.
-
2012-09-25, 10:16 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Location
- Switzerland
- Gender
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Yeah. At the current stage, I just relish having something to do with my free time. So, I can invest a lot into this for the foreseeable future.
LIke your wizard fix, Grod. Some of the same ideas as mine, but overall simpler. I think I like it.
A few other points:
I love third edition D&D. It is my favourite system, and I have tried many (Shadowrun, Vampire, Mutants and Masterminds, FATE, Gamma World, Dark Heresy and perhaps half a dozen less well known ones). I think fundamentally, it works and we honestly don't need that many changes. The framework is sound, there are just some things on top of it that are broken. I say we fix what needs fixing, simplify a thing or two that we don't really need to, but think is helpful and make the one or other improvement. That's all.
Skill points should stay in, as far as I'm concerned. I like having a character with fewer points in more skills, especially at high level. And starting a character with one rank in profession: undertaker, or craft: weaponsmith is a nice way of adding some background.
I honestly don't care much either way on rolled saves and static DCs vs. static defences and rolled attack spells. The result is mostly the same.
Condition tracks are a good thing, and I think they would solve many problems, mostly with save or dies. We have a fear track, an exhaustion track and a nausea track. My suggestion is adding another stun track and make them all have four steps, from "mildly annoying penalty (sickened, fatigued)" to "out of the fight" (paralyzed, panicked). Do we need any more tracks?
Combat maneuvers: Spontaneously, I'm thinking of adding a limited power attack and some kind of standstill maneuver that stops enemies from moving past you.
Magic items: start by dropping the "+4 to [stat]" items. Or at least, reduce them to a handful. Include a few other ways of increasing stats. Which reminds me of another point, see below.
Base attack: iteratives should matter more. Having all attacks at full BAB is perhaps a bit good, but how about changing 15/10/5 into 15/10/10, i.e. having all iteratives at the second best value?
Races: I've been thinking of this. Someone suggested bloodlines. My idea was this: in normal 3.5 you gain a stat point every four levels. How about dropping that and replacing it with a racial bonus, or a selection of several racial boni? Steal from the racial paragons a bit. "At level 4, an elf gains +2 to wisdom or dexterity, their low-light vision doubles in range and their bonus to listen checks increases to +4". Just a bit less boring than that.Last edited by Eldan; 2012-09-25 at 10:30 AM.
Resident Vancian Apologist