Suggestions for future versions of IA Options

[rbeverjr]

I'll be making several suggestions (or at least bringing ideas) to the appreciated, great IA game developers. Even if you don't like my idea, maybe it will spark one of your own. Critto can let me know when he's no longer interested in hearing these ideas from me.

My first idea has to do with weapon proficiencies. Simply put you get more proficiency slots as you spend more time with weapons. Dual classes would get slots according to whatever class they are currently.
Maximum weapon proficiency slots per weapon type:
1 for wizards and sorcerers;
2 for clerics, druids, thieves, ranger-cleric mc, thief-cleric mc, and bards;
3 for caster-melee types (rangers, paladins, multi-class caster-fighters);
5 for straight melee classes (all fighters and barbarians).
Wizards/sorcerers can’t have combat styles, but all others can. APR increases are not limited to warriors. Kits can’t increase the number of proficiency slots, except in very rare cases. For instance, rangers in more modern DnD versions can specialize in the use of 2 weapons or in archery. Consequently, it makes sense to me that a ranger specialized in archery can have 5 slots in bows.

This post has been edited by rbeverjr: Feb 22 2019, 12:20 AM

[rbeverjr]

DnD has given fans a lot of fun in several countries for many years. It has had many playtesters and players to help develop it over time. I suggest that sticking to its game mechanics as closely as possible may be a good thing. Now, things have changed over time and almost always for the better. One of the things they got rid of from DnD2 was the sequencer type spells. I use them only once per battle because the enemies use them too (in SCS). In IA, there is a limit to once a day for chain-contingency, which is fine. In DnD 3 they made it so that haste would allow you to cast another spell in the round, which they quickly figured out was a bad idea and stopped it in version 3.5. So, no system is infallible, but they can be refined and improved.

There has been a lot of confusion about the Freedom of Action spell. Here are some answers from the Main35FAQV06302008. What is key to note is that Freedom of Action does NOT prevent haste rather only impediment to movement.

Does freedom of movement work against mimics and other adhesives?
Yes. Freedom of movement will allow a creature to escape from any type of adhesive or creature that uses some type of adhesive attack, such as the mimic. This is of course unless the entry specifically states that freedom of movement will not allow the creature to escape.

Does the freedom of movement spell protect a character from being stunned? The argument is that “stun” is a condition that hinders movement.
Freedom of movement is one of those tricky spells that has a lot of open-ended wording that might lead to confusion. The spell becomes much more manageable if you just look at it as something that ignores any physical impediment to movement or actions. If you assign this restriction, then it makes sense that freedom of movement works against solid fog, slow, and web; each of these spells puts something in the way of the creature that stops them from moving/acting, or specifically targets the creature’s physical movement.
With this interpretation, spells and effects such as hold person that apply a mental impediment to taking any action would not be bypassed by freedom of movement. These are mental effects, and freedom of movement only helps you bypass physical effects (such as solid fog) or effects that specifically impede just your movement, not spells that stop you from taking any action, as hold person does.
In the same vein, freedom of movement would not work on someone who had been turned to stone by a medusa’s gaze or by a flesh to stone spell.
To answer the original question, being stunned is one of those mental effects and would normally deny a creature the ability to act at all. Since it’s not specifically focused on just impeding movement, and it is a mental, not physical impediment, freedom of movement would not help a stunned creature to act or move normally.
This interpretation of freedom of movement can make it easier to adjudicate the effects of the spell, but it is also more restrictive. As always, it will ultimately be up to the Dungeon Master to make the best call as he sees fit for his campaign and play session.

Now, my suggestions about maximum weapon proficiency slots differs slightly from DnD 2. The weapon proficiency slot system was dumped in later DnD versions where barbarians appeared. If it was kept, I would like to think that my refinements would have been considered, as they are logical. You can devote yourself to a weapon or spells or (with less effectiveness) both.