| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
As the title says. Bonus points if you expand on how you'd change it/them. It can be a class, a rule, a concept, anything, or multiples of things (such as multiple classes or rules or concepts).
I'll start off with mine (and they are, for the most part, in no particular order).
2. "Feat Taxes/Staple Feats": Less obvious, but for those who know what feat taxes are, or know of the feats that everyone takes, this is fairly straight-forward. The easiest fix here is that you either remove options entirely (which won't make feats simply be a numbers boost), and accomodate any relevant changes it would cause, or you make them common options for everyone to utilize, as long as they would otherwise meet the pre-requisites for it back when it was a feat. Weapon Focus/Specialization, several other Fighter-only feats, Combat Expertise, Power Attack, Point-Blank Shot, Improved Initiative; all are prime examples of feats that can be removed or adjusted to be standard combat options, freeing up feat slots for more cool and interesting abilities.
3. The Big 6: This locks almost all players into specific item choices, because the game requires that these attributes are factored into the player's abilities in some manner, otherwise they will not be powerful enough to deal with the dangers that face them. While I'm all for setting bars, I think this can be better done with things like requiring certain abilities or options available to the PCs, and not "Oh, you don't have enough AC for this enemy. Whoops. Rocks fall, everyone dies?" The Automatic Bonus Progression does a lot to shore this up, but when it's merely an optional rule (even if a popular one), and when there are certain aspects of it that leave a lot to be desired, it's fairly easy to chalk this up as a "thing to change."
4. Weapons and Armor: If you haven't noticed, most everyone has identical armor and weapon choices. Full Plate, Mithril Breastplate, Greatsword, Scimitar...this sort of thing not only gets old fast, but really cuts back on the whole "characters are unique" concept that Pathfinder/D&D really tries to create. While I understand that certain classes specialize in certain weapons, either flavor-reasons, mechanical reasons, or whatever, I think it would be better if these armor or weapon choices had more impacts on the player's decision-making. In other words, there is no "best" weapon, but a weapon that does something that the player values the "most" for their character. One example that I can give is, if using the Javelin in place of, say, a Composite Bow, you could utilize Power Attack when throwing it, despite it being a ranged weapon (and therefore normally requiring Deadly Aim). The Composite Bow does offer more range, but if you want that extra damage (without sacrificing feats), the Javelin will help you out more. This needs a lot of work, but I think this is something that would greatly benefit a system such as this one, so that you aren't running into people with almost identical builds all the time.
5. VMC: For those who don't know this abbreviation, it stands for Variant Multi-Classing. (I see it asked almost all the time on these forums, so now you know what it stands for.) In a lot of cases, VMC is severely under par, or requires absolute system and character mastery in order to make use of it. In the latter case, it's awesome. In the former case, it's a waste of space and time. Even if it is an optional rule, it's awesome, and means you can multi-class without really multi-classing; but, in a lot of cases, it needs buffs, or revisions, because it otherwise results in broken or useless aspects. And when you're giving up half of your character feats for them...
Alright, I've listed my "Top 5" (and boy, it was hard to determine what should be up there), as well as potential means to change it (if I knew of any). What are other peoples' thoughts on things that they would like to change about the rules?
**EDIT** I applied a band-aid to any potential Wall of Text syndrome that may occur from the OP. I hope it's good enough...
I completely agree with Darksol's points (except VMC, which I haven't even read so I can't comment) but I also think skills need an overhaul. Skill checks are often either trivial or impossible and not a lot of middle ground.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
1) Get rid of the notion that all day abilities are worth more than 5 per day abilities. Thus the fighter's line of "no at will mean go all day" finally gets the debunk it needs. giving stamina for free always to the fighter is an option of a way to bandage this. (tangent, I think it might be cool to give fighter's 5/4 bab. gives them a unique fighting buff and complements their class feature of bonus feats.)
2) clear up how rules interact/ write rules in a more technical manner. Like if we had a some key words and could use those places and know what they mean would be nice. Fixing mounted combat.
3) drop cha or make it mandatory. Having it touch something that all classes are required to deal with. Heck something like a scaling discount on gear based off of CHA or something. Because as it is now, being un-required for most classes, anything that runs off CHA is a Tax or meant for a CHA class. Cause right now the next useless is INT, being skill points. CHA just means being bad at a few skills, which means nothing since you don't have skill points for every skill anyways.
4) find more of a way for skills to scale exponentially. It doesn't have to go as fast as spells do, but it'd be nice to do more things.
5) have a fraction of your level/bab be added to (some based on class?) ability checks. I think it's lame that my fighter, over his 20 level, with no magic is only 10% more likely to bust a door down and no better at all the other attribute checks.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
1. I'd put the cleric and druid on the 1/2 BAB track. I'd put the monk and rogue on the full BAB track (basically, spellcasting progression and BAB should be strictly inverse. +1 and no/4-level casting d10/d12, +3/4 and 6 levels of casting d8, or +1/2 and 9 levels of casting d6).
2. I'd reduce all BAB tracks by +1/2. This narrows the 'power band' and makes CR less swingy. Adjust the average monster table to compensate. This makes building NPCs easier (because they don't need an optimized AC and a surplus of magical knickknacks to compete) and monsters make more sense (so they don't need a +17 natural armor out of nowhere to make the numbers work).
3. Make a similar change to DCs and saves, but that isn't so simple of a change.
4. Fix sorcerer bloodline/oracle mystery spell progression so that they get their bonus spell on the Wizard/Cleric progression. A fire-bloodline sorcerer should not be waiting until level 5 to cast scorching ray or level 7 to cast fireball. It is however, cool that a 5th level Fire sorcerer's only 3rd-level spell known is fireball.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1. Martial/Caster Disparity. The former needs to be better, the latter needs to be scaled down a bit.
2. Anything everybody interested in doing a thing should not be an option, it should be built into the class or the game mechanics. People who want to swing a weapon really hard shouldn't need to take Power Attack, people who want to fight cautiously and tactically shouldn't need to take Combat Reflexes.
3. There really doesn't need to be dozens of different swords, polearms, etc. because people are going to choose the mechanically best ones, and people who want a specific kind of thing because the look of it will be sad because it's not as good as the Fauchard or the Rapier or whatever. Base weapon damage, crit range, multiplier, etc. on weapon type, character class, and proficiency level. Just describe your sword or polearm to look like however you imaging it looking.
4. Make Charisma useful to everybody for things other than social skills and spellcasting; make more things defend on multiple attributes (e.g. Will saves now depend on both Wisdom and Charisma, and a penalty in either hurts your will save.)
5. Being able to move and make a full attack should be a relatively low cost option available to all characters (or all martial characters.)
1. Narrowing of/overhauling of feats. In 2nd Ed, a DM was forced to be creative when a character thought out of the box, assigning a bonus or penalty to an action not covered by proficiencies (skills - which were very minor), and swinging a weapon or casting a spell. Now (and as of 3rd edition), you can only do certain creative things if you have the right feat. PF has loosened that up and given some actions back to skills but there are still lots of places where creativity is extinguished if you don't have the right feat.
2. Remove CMD/CMB - It's slightly better than the system within 3.X but still bogs the game down horribly because the rules are so cumbersome.
3. Make tactical movement less advantageous in favor of more creative and action oriented GM/Player interactions during combat. Again the rules bog fights down to a crawl.
4. Archetypes, while very cool have leaked into the realm of prestige classes. Reevaluate the number of and types of archetypes, move some into prestige classes.
5. Pare down the classes by folding some into others as archetypes: Paladin & Anti-Paladin are Cavalier archetypes, Rogue is a Fighter archetype (It's strayed too far from 1st & 2nd Ed thief), Skald is a Bard archetype, Witch is a Wizard archetype, Oracle is a cleric archetype.
Sidenote: Bye Bye Ranger, hello Slayer.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
DO NOT TOUCH MA RANGER!!
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't understand why folks find CMB/CMD complicated. A combat maneuver is always 1d20+CMB vs CMD. The math is simple. CMB = melee attack bonus; CMD = melee attack bonus + touch AC.
Now, the combat maneuvers themselves? The bloated grapple rules? The fact that combat maneuver builds become impossible at higher levels when fighting big creatures is common? I totally see that.
1= The witch. While it is a fun class, has a nice spell list, and some interesting class feature it is a culturally insensitive thing. Many Wiccans still use the term witch to describe themselves. The way the witch class is build it is all the negative stereotypes are what make up the class. I mean the smell children things is a bit much. I suppose renaming the class would help though I am not sure what it should be.
2= The magus's spell list needs a change. That list should include more touch spells. Due to the few touch spells on the list a player is kind of limited to the traditional shocking grasp or I think it is the frostbite spell. The magus's spell combat style is built around touch spells and they should have a better selection.
3= removal or combination of some of the traditional feat taxes to get to the feats we know everyone really wants. So few people like combat expertise but they need it for the better feats. Removing or combining those feats would let players get to do what they want quicker and get to be more creative. Which is the fun part!
4= XP! I do not like XP. It causes players to want more combat and encourages the need to keep killing things to get more of that precious XP. Without XP the players level when the story / GM is ready for it. It is really difficult to dole out XP for social situations and non combat situations.
5= Dex to damage. Just let it happen we know people want it. There are feat that appear an then are errata'ed. It either need to be the agile magical ability or just be a feat that applies to light weapons.
Extra one that is kind of a rant = I really do not like that Charisma is the dump stat. I hate it actually. But you need so many of the other stats and something has to fall bay the wayside and somehow that became the charisma stat. It is only your social abilities but hey you do not need to talk to people if you have a big sword or fireball. The only way I can think to do this is make the social skills more important or give charisma something extra.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1. make every class have abilities: I find it so boring that non spell-casting classes have so few abilities to work with, at best being able to just use what everybody else can as well as their main class feature (barbarians attack or rage than attack, cavaliers can challenge etc.). even 4 level spell-casters like paladins and rangers are sorely lacking in interesting out of combat options.
I would change it by adding some sort of general martial abilities system that all non spell-casting classes would get with 1/4 casters getting some of both which would be a bit radical but casters get dozens of pages just for them.
2.Superhuman skills: I agree with others that skills should be able to scale much more than it does now. It strains my belief a bit that the same person can take several siege engine shots to the chest yet have to be over level 10 to have a 50/50 chance to meet the world high-jump record.
I think that something like skill unlocks applying to all skills as soon as you get a given rank so for example if you have 8 ranks of acrobatics you get one foot of vertical jump for every two points instead of four. I would also require a minimum bab or slower growth if the character has caster levels so spell casters would have to rely on spells.
3.charisma should be more central:as many said charisma is the most easily dumpable stat in the game and while you want to easily neglect some stats its a bit much for one stat to be completely useless if you are from a specific build or class. If all supernatural abilities were based on charisma it would be more significant but it would still be safely ignored by fighters, cavaliers rogues and more.
4.cut the pointless stuff: many weapons can be described as "Like x but better/worse" so why keep them. Put in a "battleaxe can substitute for a warhammer".
5.make weapons matter: this is a counterpoint to my last point but if you want to keep this many weapons in you have to have a point for their existence. Have more things affected by damage type or if you put in special martial moves like I said before you can have certain ones require certain weapons like a move that ignores a certain amount of AC has to be with a blunt weapon or light weapons can be used for arterial strikes
1. Casting system: I prefer spheres of power as a baseline, though I don't agree with it completely as is. But I like the idea of casters taking trees of spells to either be generic or specialized as they see fit, and as part of their "character." I also like how it lets casters play like casters without wasting limited resources.
2. Feats: Everything numeric becomes scaling (there's precedent for this in power attack & skill focus, why not apply it to weapon focus, the two weapon fighting line, vital strike, etc). To justify its existence then, a feat must do one of two things. Either it provides a (scaling) numerical bonus (as above), or it provides some new functionality (eg Gory Finish, Dazzling Display, deadly stroke).
3. Simplification: I'd remove style feats as a whole, power attack & friends (combat expertise, fighting defensively)* and all classes other than those in the base, plus remove Druid, Paladin and Bard. With spheres, the concept of a bard is unnecessary (you can cast by music as a tradition). Druids as a concept can be created via the cleric (which also changes to a 3/4 caster but gains class features) taking alteration and nature magic spheres, and Paladins could be built similarly. Change the ranger to fill a more "supportive" role that the bard had as a niche so that the niche is still addressed.
4. Complexity (shut up): Change BAB to a sort of "combat proficiency" that adds to both attack roles & AC. Strip out some of the AC boosting abilities (magic items, spells, etc) so that the numbers don't become unmanageable, and ranged attacks / magic would need some tweaking to make functional in such a system. But with this, things like "cut from the air" could change from opposed attack roles to simply "you add your combat proficiency to AC against ranged attacks (normal: you don't)." This would, as a side effect, make CMD and AC closer together in most circumstance, but I think that's okay.
5. Skills: Expand the unlock system. Expand the effect skills can have (make treat deadly wounds more effective or take less time). Emphasize the importance of ranks vs check DC (but let high DCs also mean something) so that actually having the skills means something. Let climb grant an actual climb speed for example (and then dc checks let you move at multiples of that speed).
*I've not played enough for this to be a "from experience" belief, but all these behaviors (other than total defense, which I would keep) are false choices. They seem to be always on because the character is built such that having them on will always be an advantage. At that point, power attack really isn't any different than weapon specialization in effect.
edit: (quick thing on Charisma: I like DeadmanWalking's take to allow a character to choose to apply either Charisma or Wisdom to will saves at creation)
Design Manager
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't understand why folks find CMB/CMD complicated. A combat maneuver is always 1d20+CMB vs CMD. The math is simple. CMB = melee attack bonus; CMD = melee attack bonus + touch AC.
Now, the combat maneuvers themselves? The bloated grapple rules? The fact that combat maneuver builds become impossible at higher levels when fighting big creatures is common? I totally see that.
I don't think the issue is so much that people think it's complicated, as that it doesn't work the way they want it to due to scaling. Having spent a lot of time buried in CMB/CMD as I was working on The Luchador, I actually don't even think CMB/CMD scaling or grapple rules are that bad- the biggest issue with grapple rules is that they tend to have very binary results with a lot of fail points along the way (something I addressed when working on The Luchador), and the biggest issue with CMB/CMD is larger creatures getting to double-dip their size and particularly small creatures being too steeply penalized. On that note-
1) Remove size modifiers from the CMB/CMD equation, and eliminate all "blunt instrument" feats that inflate CMB numbers in an attempt to make them more functional at higher levels. This means maneuvers will be more equitably able to deal with a monsters over the course of an entire game/AP, and you remove the component where having them capable of dealing with larger monstrous opponents means they auto-succeed against humanoid opponents. The basic idea of CMB/CMD is actually great, there's just some severe but manageable problems in the execution.
2) Remove vancian casting entirely / restructure spell casting so that it follows similar logic to feat trees. I've actually already done this in my games by replacing all vancian spellcasting with Spheres of Power, and it's been awesome thus far, a really great improvement to the flow and enjoyment of our games. Casters are now defined by what they can do, and if you want to throw fireballs, you first have to learn how to create fire, so there's a nice logical progression of capabilities.
3) Remove all "purely prereq" feats. If everyone I see taking a feat is taking it for the sole purpose of another feat they actually want, particularly if the feat they want has no direct mechanical reliance on the prereq feat other than requiring it as a prereq (looking at you Combat Expertise), I want it gone. Either make it scale better so it's a decent feat in its own right, or trashcan it.
4) Directly related to number 3 and tied to number 1, take cumbersome feat trees and condense them down into a smaller number of scaling feats. This would mean that some classes, like the Fighter, would get actual scaling class features without having to be rewritten and could explore more options within their niche, and you wouldn't need splatbooks full of band-aid fixes to operate decently at tables where the challenges assume a higher level of system mastery on the part of the players (like mine). You wouldn't need class features like the Brawler's Martial Flexibility just to have a character who can perform more than 1 or 2 combat maneuvers effectively.
5) Condense the number of core/base classes and even class features (like Nature Bond, Hunter's Bond, Divine Bond, and Mount) into a smaller number of more robust classes and options that are designed from conception to be highly customizable with archetypes. I think the vigilante was a great example of how classes can and should be designed, and I'd like to see what that would look like when implemented from the ground up. This would also make it easier to design feats and options that are applicable to a larger number of character concepts and make it simpler to avoid design issues where, for example, a spell designed for class A becomes available to newly designed class B but didn't take class B into account at the time it was written (like spiritual weapon which can be taken by a number of different classes but refers to Wisdom instead of casting modifier since it was only written with the cleric in mind).
Do away with standard BAB and AC and replace with just CMD and CMB
Get rid of AoOs.
Use Spell Points instead of classic Vancian casting.
Bring back save or die spells and poisons.
Get rid of most of the races. There are just too many.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1. Remove big six magic item requirement. Make magic items special again.
2.Make combat more dynamic. Iterative attacks, etc requiring the character not moving makes combat way too static
That's really it. but if I needed to find something else.
3. It's weird that you're fighting at 100% all the way down to 1 HP. Staggering around at 0. and unconscious at -1. Something that gives us a wounded state for longer. But still very simple.
4.CMB/CMD: I don't mind the base system, I do mind it takes such investment to do it, and mind that since no-one invests in it, no one does anything interesting like try to bull rush someone into a pit for fear of the AOO. In my next game I am going to allow players to either invest in improved whatever, OR take the AOO OR take disadvantage on the CMB roll (roll twice, take lower). Sadly against high CR the chance will be nill without the investment in it.
5.Along the lines of number 2, In a balanced way allow movement before, after, and between swings. Let's get that combat dynamic!
I believe there are already optional rules for all of this. I'm going to use the automatic progression tables from Pathfinder Unchained, treat combat maneuvers like I said above, find a way to do #5 fairly, etc.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1) The concept of AoOs should be removed entirely, and replaced with a much MUCH simpler way to account for doing vulnerable things while being threatened. Full attack action needs to be gone.
(I've played home games with the above rules in place and it is SO....MUCH...BETTER, especially for non-power gamers)
2) Magical items with fun magical qualities, and not enhancement bonuses.
3) Add a way for some melee class abilities that resolve a little more like spell effects, rather than trying to make a CMB based action work. I'm not for homogenizing the classes, but for god's sake, let Sabin suplex the boss for once.
4) Magic points (or whatever) instead of the 1-9 levels and slots. How this hasn't been officially revolutionized by now is beyond me.
5) Go through the CRB, page by page, and just reword/rewrite everything that is worded in that "paizo/dnd" way that makes certain things so needlessly confusing. A good example would be "Use Magic Device". That could be reduced to 4 sentences and a small table.
Referring to number 2, I totally agree. I have the Magic Item Compendiums from 2e and I drag stuff out of them all the time just for the fun of it.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
These discussions pop up a lot.
It's your game, at your table. Change whatever you want. The Pathfinder Police won't come and take away your stuff.
Sit down with your players and make the changes that work for your group.
RPGs are collaborative story telling. So, collaborate on the rules as well.
No reason to wait for someone else to do it for you, because you may not like what they do. Only you and your players know what's best for your group. Do that.
Oh, believe me. When my next campaign begins a change is gonna come.
1. Get rid of * taxes -- I totally agree with you here. I'd lump 2 & 3 together and call them both taxes. These are *requirements* and not *options.* Why even have them exist?
2. Get rid of Human bonus feat -- This a requirement for too many (mostly martial) builds. If the extra feat is going to be this important, start everyone with 2 feats at level 1. I don't want to be forced into a Human race choice in order to be competent with a bow at 1st level. Otherwise, see #1 (get rid of feat taxes).
3. More meaningful and at-will abilities at lower levels -- As an alchemist, I grow wings but can only use them 1 minute per level. As a sorcerer, I can cast a weak ranged touch attack or make a meaningless melee debuff 7 times per day.
4. End cross-purpose options -- Why are there so many options that don't work for the class? Sorcerer Bloodlines that increase strength, archetypes that add reliance on another stat, the White Haired Witch... It just feels like there's a glut of useless options.
5. Standardize the ruleset -- New content doesn't work with old content. Rules use the same names to refer to different things (I'm looking at you, fighter groups). The current ruleset is, at best, made of one-off exceptions and is, at worst, completely nonsensical. Are [poison] spells poisons? Are weapons in the Natural Weapon group natural weapons? Are there general ammunition enchanting rules, or do the rules only apply to the enumerated ammunition? We need categories. A <specific> is a <group> and rules apply to <group> and if we use the term <group> somewhere, we mean <group> and nothing else. Icons would be handy.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I wouldn't necessarily call it complaining. Complaining, near as I can tell, usually involves someone expressing dissatisfaction or unhappiness.
While we do have some of that here, we're also explaining why we don't like it, and (in the explainer's eyes,) they are genuine concerns that apply to the points being brought up. In some cases, we're even proposing ideas to improve or replace certain rules sets to make the game better as a whole.
That's not complaining. That is critiquing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
#1 Fix the Fighter
- Make Bravery a bonus equal to the fighter's level
- Make Weapon Groups stackable and less frequent, because I fighter isn't going to haul 4-5 different weapons around.
- The archetypes should be layered ON TOP of the original class
- More skill points
#2 Fix the Monk
- Make unarmed strikes viable, because the number of times I've seen weapon-based builds makes it clear that punches aren't good enough.
- Make use of its speed enhancement, because right now, it's not very well implement. You can't take a charge and use that extra speed for some extra damage.
- Make it less strength focused, because DEX, CON and WIS are already troublesome enough to manage.
#3 Merge feats
- Any Improved/Greater/Superior/Great and whatnot should just on added in the primary feat. TWF, for instance, should become ITWF at level 6th and then it changes to GTWF at 11th. I'm so sorry, but if you take a feat, why WOULDN'T you take the rest?
- It would allow for less management and late-level tricks
#4 Remove prestige classes entirely
- Archetypes have proven that it's possible to mix and match different class features together.
- PrCs have sometimes ridiculous requirements, and some are JUST for lore reasons, not mechanical reasons. The Shadowdancer, for instance, requires ranks in Perform (Dance), but oddly enough, the skill itself isn't used AT ALL for the shadowdancer's abilities.
- PrCs mostly cause problems due to multiclassing and just awkward combinations.
#5 Remove daily limits on low-level abilities
- Granted Powers, Bloodline Powers and School Powers deal negligible damages/have negligible enhancements, but they have a daily limit.
- The Kineticist's Kinetic Blast puts all of these to SHAME. It's scalable, it's free and it's at-will.
- Arcane spellcasters that rely mostly on spells dearly need an at-will ability on par with a fighter's main weapon, if they run out of spells. Even an archer has a suitable backup weapon if he runs out fo arrows, so spellcasters should have at-will abilities, since their weapons aren't the main go-to ability for them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
These discussions pop up a lot.
It's your game, at your table. Change whatever you want. The Pathfinder Police won't come and take away your stuff.Sit down with your players and make the changes that work for your group.
RPGs are collaborative story telling. So, collaborate on the rules as well.
No reason to wait for someone else to do it for you, because you may not like what they do. Only you and your players know what's best for your group. Do that.Yes, but:
1) People like to complain. It (allegedly) makes them feel better.
2) It can serve as a gateway for sharing and comparing houserules.
3) Products benefit from customer feedback. This is a form of feedback.
I agree on all your points.
I didn't mean to limit or end the discussion. I have made a lot of changes to the core rules, using some excellent advice and suggestions that I have found on these boards.All I wanted to do was encourage people to not wait for official rules or a "Pathfinder 2.0", but rather, make the changes now, to eliminate frustration and make the game more enjoyable for your specific group.
So long as you're having fun, you're doing it right.
So long as you're having fun, you're doing it right.
Amen and Amen.
|
Not really in any particular order:
1.) Make 4+Int the minimum Skill Points per level, with the exception of Wizards and Int based Casters. (0+Int or 2+Int).
2.) It would require rewriting the system, but a fairly simple (otherwise) way to fix both the Martial/Caster disparity (if you believe it exists) and also help remove a great deal of magic destroying encounters would be to increase the minim effect spells have while decreasing the maximum effect. This would (in theory) help to keep some casters from focusing on maxing their casting stat, as they would get less of an overall benefit from doing so, and also allow for more of a Critical Hit sort of effect with magic, (it's uncommon, and not dependable, but when it happens, it's awesome).
3.) Make either every class MAD, or every Class SAD.
4.) Significantly reduce the amount of "use this Stat instead of that Stat" or "add stat to _____" abilities. Divine Grace would be an exception, as would Monk's AC Bonus, but among of the few. Things like Smite Evil, where it's a temporary sort of ability you use, would generally be okay.
5.) A bit torn on a few possibilities for the last one, so I think I'll go with either boosting Medium Armor or altering it so that it fits mechanically as more of a middle ground, reducing your speed by only -5ft for instance, but allowing you to Run as if it where Light Armor.
-
Remove the rule about any class requiring a Patron Deity. Why stifle creativity and fun?
-
90% of the things that PF moved away from 3.5, change back. Wholesale.
-
Grant a lot more Classes Bonus Feats (especially in the form of options that must be chosen between one or the other like Ranger's Fighting Styles).
-
Add a lot more "Multiclassing" Feats (and other options) that help to encourage a wider variety of builds.
-
I personally don't have a big issue with the "Christmas Tree Effect", but if anyone really wanted to fix it, all that really needs to be done is to create a few thousand other options that are actually meaningful PLUS interesting that actually look at each and every single class, and keep in mind that all of these items need to be at least largely relevant for about 5+ levels.
-
Fix (Upgrade the hell out of) Channel Energy. Just fix Clerics, really. Might be easier.
1) Replace the Action System with a better version of the Unchained Revised Action economy (I already do this in my house rules). Most caster/martial problems are fixed in my system because of how I do counterspells, movement, and actions.
2) Consolidate classes that cover similar niches, and replace their abilities with packages that 'create your classes' on pre-designed chassis like what already exist, but with less bloat and more system.
Example: The ranger and paladin would be the same class, with their features being parallel to each other based on whether you go druid or cleric with your design choice.
Fighters and Brawlers would be the same class
Rogues and Slayers would be the same class
Let spontaneous/prepared be a stylized choice on the player, and have the casting classes function the same way so there are less full casters and choose your flavor based on what you want.
3) Consolidate feat chains into single feats: pretty obvious, have feats scale like power attack does, so chains like TWF become a single investment and make it much more attractive to use.
4) Consolidate spell lists to 3 or four lists that all classes cast from, something like Arcane, Divine, Psychic, and Nature would be ideal, and classes who cast lower levels of spells would be capped at how high they get in spellcasting, rather than requiring a while list
5) Consolidate skills, in a better way than Unchained does. Some of the skills they have in that system are perfect, Athletics being swim/climb combined for instance. And make Alertness/Perception less important for all characters, instead have a mechanic similar to concentration when it comes to Alertness in combat/surprise rounds that isn't tied to the skill which is used mostly out of combat for scouting/searching. Also, what even is survival? Why can;t I use Alertness/Perception to follow tracks? Why doesn't Knowledge (nature) cover knowing what kind of tree provides what kind of wood/shelter?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1. Do something about the fact that player AC is basically flat while BAB climbs without bound. "Does a 45 hit?" shouldn't be a rhetorical question, or even a thing. I guess this is really just a subset of C/MD.
2. Dump Vancian. It never made any sense and yet it persists.
3. Prestige classes are cool but so many are outright infeasible due to pre-reqs. The ones requiring multi-classing are the worst offenders.
4. Find a way to expand the game without making it worse than ordering at Starbucks. You should be able to describe your character in less than six adjectives, or without having to come up for air.
5. Find a way to expand the game without having to carry a small library with you. It's not just source books, either: rules are spread across AP's and modules, too.
1. Rewrite some of the prereq feats. Combat Expertise becomes Gain +2 to all combat maneuver checks and +2 to CMD, you do not provoke an attack of opportunity while performing a combat maneuver. Dodge and mobility become baked into the same feat with a passive +1 to ac and additional +4 vs Attacks of Opportunity from moving. Add a feat that grants pounce to the end of the whirlwind attack chain.
2. Change magic stat boosting items so that they never become a permanent stat bonus, no using them to qualify for feats.
3. Bake the skill unlocks into basic skills. Give that aspect of the game some attention and martials will have more narrative power.
4. Return clerics to the 2nd edition style of domains, where your domains determined what spells your god was willing/able to grant you rather than simply having full access to everything. Minor access being like 3rd level max, major access being all 9 levels.
5. Borrow from 4th ed d+d the idea of highest of 2 stats applying to things like initiative and saving throws. IE: initiative highest of dex or wisdom, fort highest of strength or con, reflex highest of int or dex, will highest of wis or cha. This will provide some boost to SAD classes but i think it will provide a larger boost to the MAD classes who will have a better chance of not having to tank a save completely to make the majority of their class function.
1: Remove true strike restrictions. It's nearly useless to wizards, except when enchanting a bow for rangers. Rangers and Paladins need it and it fits them.
2: Make mirror images appear in any available square again. The current version can be renamed column of vomit illusion.
3: Most of the versions of removing the Big 6 are good, but you have to remove the plus restriction to weapons and armor. A vorpal battleaxe might have no extra plus to hit and damage.
4: C/MD, I keep forgetting what it is. It was better when the character sheet had 5 slots for attack modes. It just drags melee down to the level of grappling.
5: Don't toss out vancian in favor of spheres of power or non vancian. Add other things as options. Rituals and incantations can be attempted by non wizards, but should have other limits. Some like the chance of backfire, others do not.
5B: Mental inventory. Add int. bonus, wis. bonus, cha. bonus to level to get the number of things memorable. This controls how many things or places are studied carefully. It also controls how many rituals or incantations a character knows. You could have random first level bonus slots, 1D4 for dwarves, 1D6 for humans, and 1D8 for elves. Vancian casters have half as many mental slots because they have spell slots in their head already.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
1) Make the game easier to run Unify and simplify more rules to be more universally applicable remove ability scores they don't do anything, you only use the modifiers 90% of the time. Make encumberance easier to deal with, limit buffs, simplify math. Removed experience, don't make WBL a second progression, make NPC making easier.
2) Make the game simpler to learn I love CMB/CMD, literally any time a player wants to do something "off book" CMB is the go to, but AoOs punish you for creative play. Simplify magic, I like spell slots but tracking buffs/debuffs needs to be simpler.
3) Make roleplaying and mechanics interact You never have to roleplay in Pathfinder. You might be affected by morale bonuses/penalties but a raging barbarian can still think and plan like a genius wizard. Knowledge checks mean the person rolling knowledge asks the GM to speak in exposition after which the playe says: "I repeat that to the party." Instead they could add facts to the campaign that are retroactively true. There is no status condition for angry, hungry, exhausted, frustrated, happy, or in love.
4) Alter power expectation If a demon lord is CR 20, then a God could Ben CR 25, if most campaigns finish around 15-17 then you can hit that upper echelon of power. A 1st level character should be able to express their concept, a level 15 character should be a refined version.
5) Make power wider not deeper Fighters should be adaptable, not specialised, wizards should be able to do a wide array of things, but not all at once.
#1 Fix the Fighter
- Make Bravery a bonus equal to the fighter's level
- Make Weapon Groups stackable and less frequent, because I fighter isn't going to haul 4-5 different weapons around.
- The archetypes should be layered ON TOP of the original class
- More skill points
Wait as in Bravery +20 vrs fear saves at level 20? why not just flat out give immunity to fear at that point?
Wait as in Bravery +20 vrs fear saves at level 20? why not just flat out give immunity to fear at that point?#1 Fix the Fighter
- Make Bravery a bonus equal to the fighter's level
- Make Weapon Groups stackable and less frequent, because I fighter isn't going to haul 4-5 different weapons around.
- The archetypes should be layered ON TOP of the original class
- More skill points
Their Will save is the lowest of all 3, Wisdom isn't much required for a Fighter and at this point, you don't want to be affected by fear effects...
Their Will save is the lowest of all 3, Wisdom isn't much required for a Fighter and at this point, you don't want to be affected by fear effects...Wait as in Bravery +20 vrs fear saves at level 20? why not just flat out give immunity to fear at that point?#1 Fix the Fighter
- Make Bravery a bonus equal to the fighter's level
- Make Weapon Groups stackable and less frequent, because I fighter isn't going to haul 4-5 different weapons around.
- The archetypes should be layered ON TOP of the original class
- More skill points
Just making sure we were on the same page that +20 was what you wanted.
Just making sure we were on the same page that +20 was what you wanted.Their Will save is the lowest of all 3, Wisdom isn't much required for a Fighter and at this point, you don't want to be affected by fear effects...Wait as in Bravery +20 vrs fear saves at level 20? why not just flat out give immunity to fear at that point?#1 Fix the Fighter
- Make Bravery a bonus equal to the fighter's level
- Make Weapon Groups stackable and less frequent, because I fighter isn't going to haul 4-5 different weapons around.
- The archetypes should be layered ON TOP of the original class
- More skill points
That is the case, because... either give a good will save to the Fighter of just buff a specific bonus to a reasonable level.
It won't save you against mind-control, but that great wyrm won't bother you this much with its presence.
Or, you know, just make them immune to fear (frightened, panicked etc.) past a certain point.
|
|
Or, you know, just make them immune to fear (frightened, panicked etc.) past a certain point.
Maybe have a scaling ability that makes you immune to the starter conditions = Starting is one step less severe, so effectively immune to Shaken, while Frightened becomes Shaken > Two steps less severe, so effectively immune to Frightened, etc
All of these can work; I'm just suggesting that Bravery shouldn't be a weak bonus against fear effects, especially when your Will Save's a joke :P
Hey, Bravery has five upgrades, so... Horrified, Terrified, Panicked, Frightened and Scared, or make it 3 upgrades to make it Panicked, Frightened and Shaken, if the alternate fear horror rules aren't used.