Since backwards compatibility and ease of labor are design goals of this RPG, I thought that I would open this thread to ask people what SINGLE change to one class would do the most to promote parity and fun between the base classes.
Take as your starting point 3.5. The idea is to pitch simple ways to solve complex problems.
I'll start...
Druids: Eliminate summon nature's ally spells. Reduces the complexity of the druid class, speeds game play, brings power more in line with the other casters.
Sorcerers: Add Diplomacy and UMD to their skill list. Adds flexibility with a cost and permits the class' effective use as the Party Face.
My design idea: Change Trapfinding. Instead of making it the ability to use search/perception without restrictions, make everyone able to search for any kind of trap, but give rogues an automatic perception check (like elves get for secret doors).
Druids: Eliminate summon nature's ally spells. Reduces the complexity of the druid class, speeds game play, brings power more in line with the other casters.
I wasn't aware that those spells grant druids that much power, but I'd say that since nature's allies are unmodified critters, they're actually the least complex of any summon spells.
And I wouldn't say that they do that much for complexity, since the spell (and the spontaneous rule) i so easily ignored.
Sorcerers: Add Diplomacy and UMD to their skill list. Adds flexibility with a cost and permits the class' effective use as the Party Face.
UMD's already there. I guess Diplomacy's still out because sorcerers are supposed to more imposing than nice.
|
My design idea: Change Trapfinding. ...make everyone able to search for any kind of trap, but give rogues an automatic perception check (like elves get for secret doors).
I dislike the elvish "search for secret doors automatically" ability such that we don't use it in my game. Mechanically, it's fine. My complaint is tht it puts the oness back on the GM (me) to remember that I need to roll their search checks for them. I have enough to do already, so if they want to look for a secret door, they can tell me that's what the want to do and roll it themselves.
-Skeld
I wasn't aware that those spells grant druids that much power, but I'd say that since nature's allies are unmodified critters, they're actually the least complex of any summon spells.UMD's already there. I guess Diplomacy's still out because sorcerers are supposed to more imposing than nice.
I was going off 3.5's rule set, so you can put me down for agreeing with Paizo on that move.
As for the summoning, it's one of their three power bases, along with melee (with wild shape and tough animal companion) and their battlefield control spells. I thought that eliminating the summon nature's ally spells would be the easiest and least disruptive way to bring the druid back to the pack a bit. (The early SNA spells especially outshine the summon monster spells.)
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 4
|
OK, I'll add one.
Clerics should not receive every spell on the cleric spell list. Cleric spell lists should be modular and campaign-customizable. Like sorcerers, they should have the ability to swap out spells that are no longer useful as they advance.
2E's spheres, of course, were not balanced or internally-consistent. So from a game point of view that's a bad direction to go. But the one thing they had going for them was the ability to make clerics of different deities feel and play completely different.
-eric
Clerics should not receive every spell on the cleric spell list. Cleric spell lists should be modular and campaign-customizable.
That would be a big change, and one that would take away rather than give. It would play merry hell with backwards compatibility.
2E's spheres, of course, were not balanced or internally-consistent. So from a game point of view that's a bad direction to go. But the one thing they had going for them was the ability to make clerics of different deities feel and play completely different.
I fear that unless they want to abandon 3.5 for good, making clerics of different deities feel and play different remains the players' responsible. They have to ignore spells that wouldn't fit their concept or faith.
And I do think it's mainly a player problem. I'd say it's possible to play a cleric properly, with unique divine flavour and all that. You'll just have to give up spells you would normally be able to use.
I know this doesn't always work. In a game I played in, we had a wizard (of one of the most game-derailing and power-hungry players I ever played with). He decided that he wanted a level cleric so he wouldn't have to rely on others for healing, and he became a cleric of the Faerûnian Moon-Goddess Selune.
If you don't know her, she's more or less the absolute antithesis to the Night Goddess Shar, who has power over shadows and the shadow plane and all that.
And when he brought in a high priestess of Selune for his inauguration, how did he do it? He shadow-walked her there. Because he couldn't teleport (forbidden school) and normal travel wasn't cool enough.
In another thread, one person suggested that a simple fix for the paladin would be to make their spells be spontaneous and off the Charisma stat. That reduces their multiple ability score dependency.
Allow only one sneak attack per round from rogues and others with that mechanic. While I STRONGLY disagree with this solution, it is an example of a single change with far-reaching effects.
Allow only one sneak attack per round from rogues and others with that mechanic. While I STRONGLY disagree with this solution, it is an example of a single change with far-reaching effects.
----
I strongly disagree as well. Is it a small change with significant effects? Yes. So would be reducing the fighter to 3/4 BAB and giving it a d8 HD, or making it so you stopping gaining HPs after 1st level. Does it solve any problems? No. Is it a bad change? Yes. Why even bring it up?
It got a lot of play as an idea and had multiple adherents.