To Hell With 4th Edition, Lets Make Our Own Damn Rule Books...

[darkzucchini]

If you are like me, than you are sorely disappointed by this latest edition of Dungeons and Dragons to come from the WotC. While 4th edition had great potential and looked to fix many of the problems left by 3.5, the recently unveiled product seems to have betrayed much of the feel of D&D that we have cherished for so long as well as done away with many of the changes that made 3.0 and 3.5 such a well received update. Thus, I would like to gather those who feel that this newest edition has failed to improve this wonderful game in order to compile a list of the problems with both 3.5 and 4th edition and brainstorm together in order to create a system that successfully merges the good aspects of 3.5 with the good aspects 4th edition, and which homebrews what neither system has adequately addressed.

I will quickly outline some of my main problems with both systems, though I am not too familiar with 4th edition as of yet so I am sure that there will be more to come.

3.5

Spell casters quickly outclass non-spell casters due to their versatility.

Most classes don't gain enough skill points per level.

Classes need more feat to aid versatility.

Confusing CR/EL system.

Spell casters run out of spell too quickly at early levels.

I'm sure that there are more that I have forgotten for the moment.

4th

Too much of a "superhero"/"wire-fu" feel to combat.

Generally wacky rule changes (such as size categories).

Generally wacky additions (like Minion monsters).

The balances of classes makes them all too similar to one another.

Spell casters just don't feel like spell casters any more.

Lack of versatility in spells.

Since this is the homebrewing forum, I had better add some homebrewing, so I will add the begins of a new spell system.

Instead of leveled spell slots or at will/per encounter/per day abilities I would use spell points, based on level and primary spell casting stat. The spell points per day would be less than other such systems, but spell points could be regained in ways other than a full nights sleep, such as resting for 5 minutes after combat or taking an action to regain ones powers during combat. Let us give a fifth level wizard 12 power points, before combat he casts Mage Armor and Blur on himself, costing a total of 3 points (which he cannot regain until the spells' durations have ended). During the first round of combat casts Haste on the fighter, costing another 3 points. He then fires off two fireballs in the next two rounds, using up the rest of his power points. On the next turn he spends a standard action doing nothing, regaining 2 power points, which he then uses to cast Melf's Acid Arrow on the next round.

Powerful versatility spells would not be removed as they are in 4th but given drawbacks that would reduce their utility. For example, Fly would require full concentration to maintain, thus you can only have one Fly spell up at a time and you cannot cast any other spells while flying. Teleportation would cause power exhaustion, the loss of all remaining power points after the spell is cast, thus you could not teleport into the room of the boss and blow him away with all your spells. Save or die spells might require the caster to risk damaging himself to cast, or possibly cost power points to maintain in the case of something like Hold Person.

Anyway, feel free to add what problems you see with both 3.5 and 4th edition and how you would fix them.

[Levyathyn]

I like it so far. I've been trying to forge a spell-point system for months now. One problem I've noticed, though, is that though mages can fly using that ability, what happens in aerial combat?

The only experience I have recently is making a stat/skill system relying almost entirely on percentile dice, using a base of around 200% for definitive max values.

For example, say you have 11% skill in lockpicking, and 14% dexterity, pretty low-level values. Well, you add them, to 25%, and try to roll under than number on d100%. If the task is easier or harder, there will be a negative or positive adjustment to the roll. For example, -50% for a moderate challenge.
Then, if you roll 75% or lower, you succeed. It's still in trial stage, as I've yet to work on it much, but I have a few more solid ideas.

Although, I like minions. You an have dozens of them. =)

[Pronounceable]

I'm a dedicated homebrewer. I kill rulesets and take their stuff.

3E was a goldmine. 4E is also good for me. The stuff that's worth looting from 4E:
4 attacks vs 4 defenses
minor abilities at will
recharge on X monster abilities
encounter abilities (provided you supply them with good fluff)
trimmed skill list
shifting (optional)

[black dragoon]

Hrm...I look at some of this and say that look at unearthed arcana for spell points. Beyond that I am very willing to hunt down pieces of stuff that look tasty and smash them together.

[Draz74]

I find it both comical, and ironically tragic, how many people have announced they are doing some kind of project like this -- including me -- and how little they seem to work together. It seems like there are maybe 100 people on these Forums working on their own "3.7 edition" to fix the problems in both editions, and none of them ever get done because there's only one person working on each of them.

I've seen a couple attempts to band together, such as Renegade Paladin's attempt a few months ago; but it seems they rarely agree on how to fix problems.

I'd love for someone to help out with my d20Gyz system rather than starting their own. I think, in small enough groups, people can agree on how to do things. If anyone remembers Golthur, he and I exchanged a lot of homebrew ideas over email, and he helped me out a LOT. Then he got busy and lost interest and disappeared.


Instead of leveled spell slots or at will/per encounter/per day abilities I would use spell points, based on level and primary spell casting stat. The spell points per day would be less than other such systems, but spell points could be regained in ways other than a full nights sleep, such as resting for 5 minutes after combat or taking an action to regain ones powers during combat. Let us give a fifth level wizard 12 power points, before combat he casts Mage Armor and Blur on himself, costing a total of 3 points (which he cannot regain until the spells' durations have ended). During the first round of combat casts Haste on the fighter, costing another 3 points. He then fires off two fireballs in the next two rounds, using up the rest of his power points. On the next turn he spends a standard action doing nothing, regaining 2 power points, which he then uses to cast Melf's Acid Arrow on the next round.

This is kind of similar to the d20 Gyz beginnings of a spellcasting system. Spell points, awarded on an (effectively) per-encounter basis. Let me ask you about one glaring omission, though: is there no long-term cost of casting spells? Can a mage keep blasting away at full power 100 times per day, as long as he has 5 minutes' rest between each one? That seems to have a lack of flavor to me. Mages in literature generally have some kind of limit, where they get tired if they throw their spells around at every possible opportunity.

Myself, I'm working on a fatigue system where they have to make a Will save when they rest after combat to recover Magic Points. If they fail the Will Save, they progress down some kind of condition track of fatigue (details still in process). This is kind of similar to the True20 spellcasting system. The effects of failing the first couple saves would be pretty minor. ("Oh look, you picked up the first level of Mental Fatigue. That means you have 2 less Magic Points than usual, and take a -2 penalty on your next Will Save to recover Magic Points.")

[black dragoon]

Yeah, I've seen about three now I like the spell point variant and I think 3.5 unearthed arcana had a pretty decent rule set for them that set limits for how much blasting a mage can do. I myself normally set upper limits where a caster begins to get fatigued and if they use them up they are considerd exhausted since I've always believed magic does involve a physical aspect

[insecure]

This looks interesting.

I like the idea of a fatigue system for mages, and i would like to add some more to it. Can you maybe post your work so far?

Regarding the spell points, i think we would need to tweak a lot of spells, or at least change their levels.
(Which of these 3rd level spells are being used the most: Fireball or shrink item?)

[JGPyre]

All-right, I'd love to help improve the game a little bit. I see things exactly the way you do, that 4e is a step backwards, but has some solid tools. I don't know if there will be sufficient interest to keep this thread (or a series of threads) up on the top of the boards... but homebrewing in some changes in D&D 3.5 will be cool.

@Draz:
I think that you're going to lose interest in having people help you with your campaign setting because so many of us on these forums already have our own dedicated world that we want to keep playing in. That said, agreeing on homebrew fixes is a great way to do things, and can span across campaign settings.

What I can do now:
I have been playing 3/3.5 as a DM since it came out, and I have a good idea on how the CR/EL system works and why it's important. I dislike the idea of a straight XP system because it has implications for an unbalancing economic structure at higher levels, and the CR/EL system has the benefit of catching up players with lower levels to the rest of the party.

That said, ECL totally ****s up monsters as characters, for example, a Bugbear with 3HD and a +2 ECL would have a 6 ECL with 4HD as a lvl 1 fighter. This is unbalancingly weak. I should have a solution for this.

I will post my 'fix' to the CR/EL and ECL systems within the next couple days on my campaign setting wiki: http://tearsofchaos.wikispaces.com/House+Rules

(PS: I created the name "Tears of Chaos" about 10 years ago now, long before I ever heard of the "Tears of Blood" setting that these boards developed... weird.)

In regards to a sort of 4e power system, I have given fighters a bit more flexibility by introducing the idea of fighting styles that I've seen elsewhere. To attain one of these fighters spend a certain number of XP and time (for training) and then are allowed to make a Knowledge (Combat) or some equivalent check to gain an at-will power. These styles can't be taken until at least 5th level, and have 4 tiers, with the highest tier becoming available around 14-16th level. Requirements for fighting styles are just like feat prerequisites, but the abilities are designed to be in addition to feats, making them enhance the power of combat classes somewhat. I'll post an example of a fighting style as well.

...I'll get drafts of these and see what you guys think... I'll probably start a new thread for each of them.

[DR.Fealing]

This sounds interesting. I like both 3.5 and 4e and also enjoy other games like Paranoia and Call of Cthluhu, so I'm always interested in a new system.

I don't really consider 4e a step back, but a step sideways. It had some great ideas, but also some things I don't like. The biggest problem for me was the emphasis on simplicity. I don't need no stinking simplicity! I take pride in having the sometimes arbitrary rule sets of 3.5 practically memorized. What they needed to work on was speed. A good example of this is the new carrying capacity rules. I have no idea how realistic it is, but now I can say "oh, he has a str of 16 so is light load is 160 lb." (light lode is now str score X10) Before it would have been "his str is 16, so give me five minuets to look up that stupid chart." This streamlines the game in a small but helpful way.

One very intriguing part of 4e is the power system. It works particularly well for monsters. If I want a monster with X ability, I can darn well make him have X ability and it takes little work to give him X ability. Many people have complained about the difference between players and monsters, but I encourage you to make the monster system work more like 4e than 3.5.

The downfall of the power system is that it was taken to an extreme. Like you said, the players can all do some really wacky stuff, so while the basic idea is sound and fun, the execution makes everybody seem like a different variant of the 3.5 wizard. Off the top of my head I have a few ideas for this:

Make a different combat system for melee, ranged and magic (and maybe a difference between arcane and divine). Something *like* the current power system would be used, but with a twist. For example, melee characters could collect advantage points agents an enemy, which would allow them to use different powers.
Classless! This is completely un-D&D, but could be interesting to experiment with.
Back to good ol' fighters role attack and wizards cast spells.


I second the suggestion of getting a group of people to work with on this. A forum free-for-all or one person working by themselves would be way to much work. Maybe you could finish the overarching concepts and mechanics part, than post it here for critiquing?

Just my two cents

[JGPyre]

So I had some free time at work today waiting for new cancer cells... so here's what I got for ECL calculations! The tables got a bit wonky on the repost, they look a bit better on the wiki, but they're simple enough to give the idea.

http://tearsofchaos.wikispaces.com/Effective+Character+Level

Effective Character Level
The Tears utilizes two variant house rules to patch the preexisting rules on calculating ECL for 'monsters as races.'

Racial Hit Dice
The idea of racial hit dice is trying to express this idea that individuals of your race are tougher and stronger than individuals of one of the standard races. Races with racial hit dice include Giants, Bugbears, Minotaurs, Trolls, and Illithids, as well as others.
Certainly characters of these races do possess more toughness, durability, and fighting prowess than the more mundane races. However, it becomes problematic from a balance standpoint to imagine the utility of a Giant cleric or minotaur psion with their enormous effective character level adjustments plus counting each racial hit die against them as a full level. Even for more martial classes, racial HD for almost all monsters are significantly worse than any class (PC or NPC class, exception being commoner) that the character is actually training in. To enhance the ability to make more powerful fighters, clerics, and psions for these monstrous classes, I utilize a system of level exchange in which allows characters with racial hit dice stand on a more even ground with those that have no racial hit dice.

Exchanging Racial HD
For monsters that can take class levels, we generally assume that, like any character without racial HD, their 'last' HD is one taken from a basic NPC class like warrior (see orc, elf, and whatever other entry in the MM3.5). Therefore, to give a character with two or more racial hit dice a character class (this may include a PrC if the character is eligible for the class), start off by removing 1 racial hit die, and all of the benefits associated with that HD, and replacing it with a level of the class of your choice. This is your first level in a character class, though you still have one or more racial HD. These Racial HD, you class level, and your Level Adjustment all count towards your ECL. Once you have gained a total of three class levels (attaining 3 non-racial hit dice), you may choose to convert a second racial HD into a core class level of your choosing, provided that you meet all the appropriate prerequisites for the class (alignment, etc). The character is unable to select a prestige class during this level exchange because it represents the training that he had before he started leveling up now getting to the point that it outshines his racial toughness. Every three class levels that are attained (not converted) after level three, the character may convert another HD to a core class level, until all racial HD are converted. A table showing this is pictured below.
One caution, because you may end up changing skills, saves, and base attack bonus with your new levels, you should be careful that any revisions made to the character do not render the character no longer able to meet the prerequisites of a prestige class in which they have levels.

Exchanging Racial Hit Dice
Total Racial HD Converted // Minimum Class Level Necessary for Level Conversion
1 1
2 3
3 7
4 11
5 15
6 19

Example Advancement
Saundra, the Bugbear Monk, starts with 3 racial hit dice. When she takes her first level, representing starting down the Monk's path, she removes 1 HD of her racial HD and replaces it with a monk level. She is now Bugbear2/Mnk1. She attains two more levels, getting to Bug2/Mnk3, she may now convert a racial HD to another class, so she becomes Bug1/Mnk4. When she attains 3 more levels, becoming something like Bug1/Mnk5/PrC2, she now has 7 class levels and my convert her final HD, becoming a bugbear Mnk6/PrC2. Note that she cannot convert her bugbear level to a new level of her prestige class.


Level Adjustment
Some races are strictly more powerful in terms of gameplay than others. Half-dragons have great strength, Illithids have incredible mental prowess, and Lycanthropes can shapechange. To assist in balancing the Effective Character Level of these exceptional races, they are given a Level Adjustment (LA) which is added to their Class Level and Racial Hit Dice to determine their ECL. However, LA has a diminishing rate of return as you level up, as the difference between 12 and 15th level characters is somewhat greater than the difference between a human and a wererat of those levels. To represent this in game mechanics, characters with a LA that reach a certain Class Level are allowed to "buy off" one level's worth of LA using experience points. What this effectively does it turn a character that has, let's say, and ECL of 12 (9 class levels and 3 LA) into a character of ECL 11. Thus, within a party of adventurers, he is considered to be a lower ECL, and receives marginally more experience than the remainder of the party to help him level up to a position of equality with his power. Buying off an LA does not equate to gaining a free level, the only mechanical effect of buying off level adjustments is to enable the self-correcting nature of EL-based experience to slowly grant the lower-powered character more XP, catching him up gradually to his party mates.

Buying off Level Adjustment
Starting Level Adjustment // Number of Class Levels Necessary for Level Adjustment Reduction (Not Including Racial Hit Dice)
1 3
2 6,9
3 9, 15, 18
4 12
5 15
6 18

Each time a character's level adjustment is eligible to be reduced, the character may pay an XP cost to take advantage of the reduction. The character must pay an amount of XP equal to (his current ECL -1) × 1,000. This amount is immediately deducted from the character's XP total. The deduction should reduce the character's effective character level (ECL) by 1. (If this deduction would not reduce the character's ECL by 1, the character's XP total is set at the maximum of the level below his current ECL instead.) This XP cost can't be reversed in any way, and the payment must be voluntary on the part of the character. The payment must be made immediately upon becoming eligible to reduce the character's level adjustment.
For instance, a 2nd-level gnoll fighter (ECL 4) who later gains a third class level has a minimum of 10,000 XP (his ECL has just gone from 4 to 5). He is eligible to reduce his level adjustment from +1 to +0. He must pay 4,000 XP, since his ECL is now 5 (1 Hit Dice plus 3 class levels plus his +1 level adjustment). After he pays the XP, his level adjustment decreases by 1 to +0. He now has 6,000 XP. His ECL falls to 4 (1 Hit Dice plus 3 class levels). Even if the XP payment would not reduce him to 4th level—for instance, if his XP total after reaching 5th level were 14,000 or more—his XP total can't remain above the maximum for 5th level, which is 10,000. Effectively, the gnoll has "paid off" his level adjustment with an XP cost, and he is now a 5th-level character.
Similarly, a drow cleric who has just reached 6th level (ECL 8) is eligible to reduce her level adjustment from +2 to +1. She must pay 7,000 XP, and her ECL becomes 7 (6 class levels plus her +1 level adjustment). When she gains her 9th class level (ECL 10), she can reduce her level adjustment to +0 (and her ECL to 9) by paying another 9,000 XP.[2]

1 Taken from Unearthed Arcana open source variants
2 Taken as written from the d20srd (linked above) though I changed the ECL of the gnoll fighter to accommodate for his reduced HD in the system of monsters with PC classes described at the top of this section.

Peace!

[JGPyre]

In regards to the Encounter Level and Challenge Rating System

For my ECL system to work, the EL/CR system needs to be in place in roughly the same way that it currently exists... my justification:

http://tearsofchaos.wikispaces.com/Encounter+Levels

or


Encounter Levels
Sometimes you need to give experience to a party of PCs after an encounter that is not easily calculated on the experience point tables in the DMG. Here are the ways I handle things. These are the House Rules I use to manage experience awards.

Combat Encounters
Whenever I have a problem, I use the SRD's tool for Encounter Calculation: http://www.penpaperpixel.org/tools/d20encountercalculator.htm
The combat encounters also include situations where a character is able to avoid what was intended by the DM to be a combat encounter. Although I usually scale down the EL of encounters resolved this way by 1 or 2 (because the encounter was "easy" for the party), the PCs still deserve substantial rewards.

Non-Combat Encounters
This includes traps, social conflicts, and other dangers that require skill to overcome. I award points based on an ad hoc system. Because of the way experience points are structured in D&D 3.5, giving experience for these encounters in increments of 100 (starting at minor victories, and moving up towards 1,000 for bigger challenges) has been wonderfully effective. I don't think that the EL system and the experience table map very well onto non-combat encounters.

Story Awards
Taking a cue from one of my favourite things about D&D games adapted for the computer, I award significant experiences upon the completion of an adventure or quest. This experience is awarded on an ad hoc basis, though I usually ballpark the number at somewhere between 1 and 4 (depending on the importance of the quest and the manner in which it is completed) encounters of that party's level, divided as normal between the party members.

[JGPyre]

In Regard to Spell Points

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/spellPoints.htm

I looked over the Spell Point system in Unearthed Arcana. It seems like you get too many points. I have a couple of comments, but don't have the will to produce new tables today.

- For prepared spells, they shouldn't prepare a set number of spells that they can use as many times as they want. Instead make them prepare all their spell levels ahead of time like normal.

For example, a wizard with 8 spell points could prepare two bull's strength (2 each), a Mage armor and 3 magic missiles (4 total) or 8 Magic Missiles. This encourages a bit more care in choosing spells for the day.

- Have level-scaling spells require augmented spell points. Like with Psions, make casting a lightning bolt that does 7d6 take 4 spell points, thus, the higher level powers will remain slightly superior in the face of just taking infinite fireball and lightning bolt preparations.

- Reduce total spell points provided in these tables, it just seems like a whole lot. It also seems like ability score matters too much.

- For divine casters, let them cast domain spells for -1 SP. I just think that it's cool that way. Then with a "max SP" you can spend determined by your caster level (5 for 9th level cleric, for example) it makes it easier to metamagic your domain spells, and cast more of them. This could replace the +1 domain spell that clerics get rather effectively.


That's all I got for now... sorry for the triple post, but they really all were on different topics.

[Nonanonymous]

I feel like 4th Edition more or less got the right idea for martial classes, but they seem too similar to the casters the way they're set up right now. While a point based magic system is one way to go, the Paragon Project (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=71041) is probably my favorite substitute magic system, and is unfortunately slow-moving lately. Perhaps you could try asking Lord Gareth and the rest of that crew to join us over here?

[Draz74]

@Draz:
I think that you're going to lose interest in having people help you with your campaign setting because so many of us on these forums already have our own dedicated world that we want to keep playing in.
Not if it's the kind of help Golthur gave me. Even when we disagreed about how the game should work (sometimes due to different ideas of "what world we're playing in"), he would be willing to help me develop my idea and I'd help develop his. Even when we weren't planning on adopting some rules from each other.

Or, you know, someone could offer lots of ideas, but when I make a decision, always say, "Of course in the end you are right, Master." That would work too. :smallbiggrin:


This looks interesting.

I like the idea of a fatigue system for mages, and i would like to add some more to it. Can you maybe post your work so far?

Regarding the spell points, i think we would need to tweak a lot of spells, or at least change their levels.
(Which of these 3rd level spells are being used the most: Fireball or shrink item?)

I'm not going to derail this thread by posting tons and tons of my ideas, but if people have questions about specific areas of the rules, I'll be happy to say if I've come up with any foundation ideas that I'm building on. In addition, insecure, if you're interested in learning a lot more -- or just in helping me work out the magic system -- send me your email in a PM and I'll start bouncing ideas off of you.

Unfortunately, the magic system, along with the skill system, is the area of d20Gyz that I've had the hardest time making real progress on. So while I have ideas beyond what I already described, they're definitely half-baked.

As far as the Fireball vs. Shrink Item thing goes, though, I actually think this is one area of 4e I'm going to adopt: the combat magic/Rituals division. Not wholesale, of course; no reason to have rules that all Rituals have a casting time of at least 10 minutes and expensive material components. But yeah ... I think I will be making Shrink Item (to use your example) into a Ritual to differentiate it from Fireball.

[insecure]

It would be nice if you could email your work, just for fun, but i can't really help you, and don't expect me to answer each email, as i'm far too lazy.:smalltongue:
So, only send emails if you bother.

You can find my email adress by clicking on my name, and then "send email".

[robotrobot2]

The one thing I really hate about 4e is fact that basically every class gets spells. It did what Star Wars did and made everybody an identical WOW character. All the characters have to be kind and good or get killed by the rules system. The only difference between characters is what powers they choose. It hurts the roleplaying more than it helps. Also, why do the characters spontaneously disappear upon becoming 30th lvl. I wouldn't want to spend a long time developing a character just to have him go "poof" and disappear (for all intents and purposes.)

[wakazashi.juice]

Spell points like ............. psionics!

I think that is a great idea because in my opinion psionics has a much better spell/day type thing.

I think that high level wizards are too powerful. you should tone down some of the high level spells that are too good, like disintergrate, or power word kill.

Spellbooks are also a very complicated system, which has always bothered me.

This hasen't been mentioned as a flaw, but I think that Rouges should have some way to kill people that they can get directly behined and spend a full round action to slit their throat. Maybe as a special ability at high levels.


Also, why do the characters spontaneously disappear upon becoming 30th lvl. I wouldn't want to spend a long time developing a character just to have him go "poof" and disappear (for all intents and purposes.)

They probably go an play golf. :smallsmile:

[Dark-Penance]

This hasen't been mentioned as a flaw, but I think that Rouges should have some way to kill people that they can get directly behined and spend a full round action to slit their throat. Maybe as a special ability at high levels.

Rogues have sneak attack damage... This applies when the enemy is denied his or her dexterity to armor class (if the rogue is sneaking up on them, this is often the case). That's pretty much exactly what you just described.

[Jayngfet]

Love this idea,mind if I throw in my 2cp?

what about hit dice? The idea of a natrully tough race getting little HP per level seems off to me, what about messing with racial HD and such?

Spell points are fantastic, but if you ask me regen should be slower.

[KKL]

Too much of a "superhero"/"wire-fu" feel to combat.
You're playing D&D. Unless you spent most of your time in 3.5e playing as a low level campaign dying to whatever happens to breathe on you the wrong way, you should know full well that by level 5 or maybe even 4 your characters are basically superhuman in their own right. And what the hell is wire-fu?


Generally wacky additions (like Minion monsters).
How are minions wacky in any way? They're an extremely good addition to 4e and along with everything else, makes DMing up encounters a lot easier than they were.


The balances of classes makes them all too similar to one another.
Classes function far differently than each other. If you attempted to pull what fighters do as a wizard or a rogue, you'd end up becoming a stain on the floor. Hell, wizards can play differently than each other, and they're the same class.


Spell casters just don't feel like spell casters any more.
Maybe I'm just extremely bitter, but having wizards not be all powerful ass raping bulldozers of death and destruction as long as they had spels and had a good head on their shoulders and just plain broken is a nice breath of fresh air.

[Zeta Kai]

...Pro-4E rant...

That's nice. Did you have anything to contribute to actual topic? If not, then your time would probably be better spent proselytizing over on the Gaming board, where a thread on the merits/problems of 4th Edition is created every few seconds. :smallamused:

[darkzucchini]

Well, I haven't spoken up in awhile so there is a fair amount of ideas to respond to, I will see if I can get to them all.

Levyathyn: While your skill system seems like it would work out fine (similar to the system used in the Fallout series) it is very similar to 3.x system, which I personally feel is a fine system itself. My approach to changing a game is if it doesn't need fixing don't fix it, and I don't feel that the skill system really needed much fixing.

As for the fly spell, the point of making it based on concentration would be to limit it to being a utility/escape ability, rather than a buff that makes you immune to land based melee opponents.

cnsvnc: I personally have no problems with 4 attacks against 4 saves or sticking with the old 3.x system, they are basically the same. The 4e method does simplify the attack process, for better or for worse.


Depending on what the minor abilities are, I don't have a problem with infinite uses, such as having cantrips cost 0 power points and fighter type classes being able to use minor special attacks as a full-round action. I just don't want mages to feel like Magic Missile machine guns.

Encounter abilities I am not such a fan of since they are often more difficult to justify (why can I only ever pull this move off once this fight even though its been going on for ten minutes while I was able to use it on each of those minute long encounters). I prefer abilities that a character can use an infinite amount of times as long as the right requirements are met (i.e. flanking a foe, charging a foe, attacking a prone foe). I don't mind the monster regen except that it further separate NPCs from PCs by giving them different mechanics (which I feel is a bad thing) and it moves away from the d20 idea of using the d20 for pretty much everything other than damage.

As for skills, I personally don't feel that the need to be trimmed down, I feel that some need to be grouped together as is done in the Iron Heroes system and that 2 skill point characters need to have their skill points upped to 4 per level.

Draz74: I would love to check out you system and possibly contribute to it, PM me a link if you so desire.

As for an over all fatigue system for spell casters, I have been throwing some ideas around. Possibly giving them a parallel to Hit Points called Mental Fortitude or something similar (Mages would get d10+Wis, Clerics/Druids/Bards d8+Wis, Rangers/Paladins d6+Wis, everyone else d4+Wis). Maybe saves would have to be made to reduce Mental Fatigue (damage to Mental Fortitude) with a spell caster not being able to cast spells until they have rested for eight hours after running out of Mental Fortitude. This is just the beginning of an idea and I encourage anyone to contribute to its development.

JGPyre: Yep, it totally was the ELC system that I was thinking of that is totally screwed up.

I have also thought of introducing fighting styles into my campaign, sort of ToB without all the Asian style fluff. For example, I think I would give fighters the choice between 3 stances that they could be in Defensive, Offensive, or Balance each with a number of moves that could be performed under a certain stance, Defensive would of course focus on tanking while Offense on damage dealing, with Defensive abilities unusable under Offensive stance and Offensive abilities unusable under Defensive stance, while balance stance could use the abilities from both stances. The versatility of Balance stance would than be offset by a number of Offensive and Defensive sub-stances that give certain bonuses to dealing damage or taking hit respectively. Stances could be changed as a move equivalent action, or as part of a move action much like drawing a weapon. While this does feel a bit like some of the warrior abilities in MMOs (WoW to be precise) I feel that it has a good enough basis in martial fighting styles from across the world.


Sorry to those of you that I haven't replied to yet, hopefully I will get a chance to get back on later today.

[Draz74]

Levyathyn: While your skill system seems like it would work out fine (similar to the system used in the Fallout series) it isn't very similar to 3.x system, which I personally feel is a fine system itself. My approach to changing a game is if it doesn't need fixing don't fix it, and I don't feel that the skill system really needed much fixing.
Fixed that for you. Unless maybe what you meant was "it is very similar to the 2e Thief skill system."


Encounter abilities I am not such a fan of since they are often more difficult to justify (why can I only ever pull this move off once this fight even though its been going on for ten minutes while I was able to use it on each of those minute long encounters). I prefer abilities that a character can use an infinite amount of times as long as the right requirements are met (i.e. flanking a foe, charging a foe, attacking a prone foe).
My idea is to adopt and embrace the Psionic Focus system from the XPH. Psionic Focus becomes a more generic "Mind Focus," and other abilities are limited in a similar way.
I have the following in mind for my system:


Battle Focus - mainly used for powering special attacks or counters similar to Tome of Battle maneuvers. Different feats would give you various ways to regain your Battle Focus, although honestly, I'm having trouble thinking of balanced ways to regain this Focus, and I'd welcome ideas.
Faith Focus - used for turning undead, Paladin Smites, domain powers, and powering feats like the Devotion feats from CChamp.
Luck Focus - used to power luck abilities (e.g. rerolls) like CScoundrel feats.




As for skills, I personally don't feel that the need to be trimmed down, I feel that some need to be grouped together as is done in the Iron Heroes system and that 2 skill point characters need to have their skill points upped to 4 per level.
Hmmmm ... maybe that's a system I should put more thought into copying, myself.


Draz74: I would love to check out you system and possibly contribute to it, PM me a link if you so desire.
Problem is, it's not in a complete enough form to all be on a website yet or anything. So I don't know what link I'd send you. But at some point I'll get around to PMing you (and insecure) some stuff.


As for an over all fatigue system for spell casters, I have been throwing some ideas around. Possibly giving them a parallel to Hit Points called Mental Fortitude or something similar (Mages would get d10+Wis, Clerics/Druids/Bards d8+Wis, Rangers/Paladins d6+Wis, everyone else d4+Wis). Maybe saves would have to be made to reduce Mental Fatigue (damage to Mental Fortitude) with a spell caster not being able to cast spells until they have rested for eight hours after running out of Mental Fortitude. This is just the beginning of an idea and I encourage anyone to contribute to its development.
I'm using a Vitality/Wound Points system instead of normal HP, and I've been considering simulating fatigue (spellcaster or otherwise) by just taking lots of nonlethal (i.e. VP-only) damage.


I have also thought of introducing fighting styles into my campaign, sort of ToB without all the Asian style fluff. For example, I think I would give fighters the choice between 3 stances that they could be in Defensive, Offensive, or Balance each with a number of moves that could be performed under a certain stance, Defensive would of course focus on tanking while Offense on damage dealing, with Defensive abilities unusable under Offensive stance and Offensive abilities unusable under Defensive stance, while balance stance could use the abilities from both stances. The versatility of Balance stance would than be offset by a number of Offensive and Defensive sub-stances that give certain bonuses to dealing damage or taking hit respectively. Stances could be changed as a move equivalent action, or as part of a move action much like drawing a weapon. While this does feel a bit like some of the warrior abilities in MMOs (WoW to be precise) I feel that it has a good enough basis in martial fighting styles from across the world.
The details of this (like the three basic stances) don't excite me much (yet), but I agree that stances were a good addition to the warrior's repertoire. Changing them as a move action or as part of a move, rather than a swift action, is also an interesting idea that I'll consider.

[EvilElitest]

if you want to reform 3E, be aware it is like reform in a nation. You think you can simply remake some stuff, then you find that the problems take a lot of consideration. I'd suggest making a team of reformist to discuss what is wrong and right about the system and how the change should go
from
EE

[KKL]

That's nice. Did you have anything to contribute to actual topic? If not, then your time would probably be better spent proselytizing over on the Gaming board, where a thread on the merits/problems of 4th Edition is created every few seconds. :smallamused:
It's not a rant, it's picking apart things I personally find silly. Also, off-topic happens, I've seen it around here and nobody raises a fuss about it. This is more or less vaguely on topic, but near the sidelines.

[JGPyre]

Fighting Styles, Stances, and Making Combat-Oriented Classes More Interesting

So I spent a little time working on the Fighter Class in general after I made a PrC to submit in DMan's competition yesterday. I found a link to a really well thought out Fighter Fix from the WotC boards.

http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=728493

I liked some things, but the Warrior Focus abilities seemed clunky and the Stances seemed like they should be something that all martial classes could get, just that fighters should be the best at them. Thus, I was inspired to trim down the original to:

http://tearsofchaos.wikispaces.com/Fighter (James' Fighter)
Replete with
http://tearsofchaos.wikispaces.com/Fighting+Styles (Fighting Styles and Stances!)

Something I'm tripping over right now and could use a suggestion for... I can't for the life of me seem to be able to think of two different names for the "Combat Styles" that give fighters multiple feats simultaneously and the "Fighting Styles" that provide the stances. "Fighting Styles" stays, I just want an alternate name for Combat Styles.

Secondly: any feedback on my ECL system?