What changes or tweeks would you make to the next edition of Dungeons and Dragons?
I would like to play with perception and info based on statistics.
My change would be that you need 12 wisdom to know you have 12 wisdom.
how high should one’s wisdom be to know his/her stats? The way I see it a person with 8 or less wisdom and intelligence that you should have to roll for chance to read ones character sheet.
First, second, third, forth and future editions changes welcome.
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
7 Answers
Can’t help you.
Many of the guys I grew up with who were into Dungeons and Dragons have still never really grown up. I have fond memories of them but to this day they are in an intellectual dungeon somewhere, and much as I would like to, I can’t get them out.
Having said that, the more wisdom the better.
I’m still a 3.5 and d20 modern guy. I never got into 4.0, mostly because I didn’t want to buy a whole new set of books. I hear it sucks.
I love 3.5 at low level, but at high level it’s broken as the characters are too powerful. It ends up being more about the spells you pick rather than role playing.
That’s why I am more into d20 modern nowadays. It has very little magic, and is much more role play based. In fact, right now I’m writing up my next set of encounters in my d20 modern zombie campaign that I’m running this weekend.
The whole class/level thing is sooooo 1980’s, and it needs to be tossed. When 2nd edition had Players Option:Skills and Powers I felt that they took a huge step in the right direction… then backtracked by not making that the default for 3rd edition.
In fact, that is why I dropped D&D entirely and went with GURPS and Shadowrun; classless, skill-based systems that allow the player to do whatever they have the Character Points/Karma to do. You’re a mage that wants to swing a sword? You aren’t prohibited from doing so… but any points spent on sword skills means less points for magic. Why D&D doesn’t… well, I attribute that to poor game design.
I would also retcon 4th edition out of existence. It has so many things wrong that the only reason I would allow it to even be remembered is as an example of what not to do.
Better actors, better writers, better director.
Agree with @jerv about classes and levels. That’s another reason why I like d20 modern better in that the classes make more sense. But it still has levels.
I played a GURPS game once online but my local group plays 3.5 so that’s what I play.
I haven’t looked at D&D since it was AD&D2, and that was a long time ago. My main complaint with it back then was that it was far too complex. I don’t know whether later versions simplified things, but if they didn’t, that’s what I would change.
Keep it simple and focus on roleplay not rule-play.
Answer this question 
Composing members:
0
