|
4 months ago ::
Jan 21, 2013 - 3:08PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Apr 15, 2001
|
More or less purely subjective. Briefly describe your ideal version of D&DN. Feel free to include any absolute deal breakers..
Then in plan B describe what you will accept and by accept I mean what you will actually spend money on if you do not get your ideal version of D&D.
Plan A. My Ideal.
A simplified d20 game that is a hybrid of Star Wars Saga and parts of 3.5 and 4th ed. No dead levels feats and talents unlock powers and abilities for some classes, spellcasters are vancian with at wills.
The deal breakers.
A simpified incomplete system- not going to pay money to add modularity later, 4th ed reprint, 1st ed reprint- by reprint I mean a game very similar to those ediitons not 100% identical.
What I would accept.
A cleaned up second ed no feats or skills, d20 based higher is always better (saves, attacks, etc), no level limits and no racial restrictions.
Something new but it has to be better than SWSE, Pathfinder and 4th ed mechanically and it has to have some amount of complexity to it even if it is at 2nd ed levels as opposed to 3rd and 4th ed.
A fixed 3.5.
A 2nd and 4th ed hybrid of some sort (AEDU fighters in a d20 based 2nd ed world with priest spheres and vancian wizards)
Whatever they do though it has to feel like D&D so alignments, the great wheel, Vecna, Kas, Grazzt, Orcus, Demogorgon, Asmodeus, Mordenkainen spells etc are important to me. The game also has to be fun most importantly so I do not care to much about the mechanics as long as we don't have CoDzilla or 4th eds class/role structure.
As to modularity they can do anything they like I really do not care. No alignments, 4th ed PoL setting, AEDU class book, gunpowder, Ravenloft, laser beams, space ships, ninjas, androids, gonzo races, animie powers/classes knock yourselves out as I don't have to buy it if I don't like it.
Reducing a character to a list of dice rolls and modifiers is not role playing*
*pg 30, AD&D 2nd Ed DMG, 1989.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 21, 2013 - 5:04PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Jun 13, 2010
|
My ideal version of D&D would be a revision, and improvement of 4E such as:
- Making it more flexible in terms of grid use having rules for playing without it, in other words, a simplified method of combat along with a more tactical one.
- Balanced and interesting classes, all classes should have special stuff, be it AEDU or something else
- Economic system, elegant rules, the less subsystems and clunkiness the better.
- Make race a very important choice.
What I could not live with, and probably skip it over other systems
- It´s simply a mess of old rules glued together
- It look too much like 3E
- Classes are too unbalanced
- system is not economic, several subsystems are all over the place.
- the art is 2nd class and cartoony
Unfortunately, now DDN look a lot more like the second option.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 21, 2013 - 5:09PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Jun 13, 2010
|
As a second option, but still acceptable, would be something very close to my first option, but really my threshold is very small, As I already own a lot of 4E books and 2E. It would need to be very close to my expectations to make up my mind.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 21, 2013 - 5:14PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Oct 17, 2007
|
A 4ed that's more like Gamma World 7ed: simpler, but still mechanically sound and with variance.
"People want balance but can't accept this homogenization that occurs as a result of that balance being implemented. then they complain that the fighter is weaker than the wizard ad nauseam.: - Teitan
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 21, 2013 - 6:11PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Sep 19, 2006
|
My Plan B:
Continue with the status-quo and maintain my 4E campaigns while continually refining v3.5 and growing the mechanics for a stonger E6 system. With some heavy revisions, I can make 3E work well, even at higher levels so long as I retool some elements and completely re-do how Monsters and NPCs are created (ie. NOT with PC rules).
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 21, 2013 - 6:19PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
May 18, 2002
|
A:
Open kernel math with deep-level customability.
B:
Reverse-engineerable with minimal-to-moderate effort.
Dealbreaker:
Baked-in-flavor circlejerk.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 21, 2013 - 6:20PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Apr 15, 2001
|
My Plan B:
Continue with the status-quo and maintain my 4E campaigns while continually refining v3.5 and growing the mechanics for a stonger E6 system. With some heavy revisions, I can make 3E work well, even at higher levels so long as I retool some elements and completely re-do how Monsters and NPCs are created (ie. NOT with PC rules).
Do you have your houserules written up?
Reducing a character to a list of dice rolls and modifiers is not role playing*
*pg 30, AD&D 2nd Ed DMG, 1989.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 21, 2013 - 6:21PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Nov 17, 2003
|
My ideal system:
I generate my ability scores.
I pick my race.
I pick my class.
I choose one special ability per level from a menu of options.
The game does not have very much +1 from this +1 from that.
What I will accept:
Anything we can reasonably expect WotC to slap the D&D label on.
My dealbreaker:
The game goes 100% electronic content with no book support.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 21, 2013 - 6:30PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Nov 18, 2004
|
Plan A: A version that starts with 3rd edition as it's base, corrects it's mistakes, and improves/expands it's features.
Plan B: A version that starts with 1st or 2nd edition as it's base, corrects it's mistakes, and improves/expands it's features.
Dealbreakers:
Significant 4th edition influences (Powers systems, Healing Surges, Alignment system, Planar design, Over-reliance on minatures.).
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 21, 2013 - 6:32PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
May 18, 2002
|
Plan A: A version that starts with 3rd edition as it's base, corrects it's mistakes, and improves/expands it's features.
Plan B: A version that starts with 1st or 2nd edition as it's base, corrects it's mistakes, and improves/expands it's features.
So... either SWSE or 3E?
|
|
|
