What if we chose our abilities per ext. rest, not per level?

[fil kearney]

There are a number of power we could take, but we only get to make that choice per level right now...

what if instead it were as if all classes were a 3.5 cleric... the full menu of abilities (at will, /enc, /day, utility) of character level or below were there to choose from after each extended rest?  clerics, fighters, wizards, warlords, warlocks... all could just "prepare a new list" of at will, /enc, /day, and utility (more like a 3.5 martial adept, but whatever)

Would it really make a big difference in how the party performs?  Most folks will probably gravitate to a "default set" of abilities anyway, but keep a finger in the book in case something was coming down the pipe that would be useful if "x"...

whatcha think?  borken?  useful?

[Dan2]

In a scenario like that, most classes undoubtedly become more powerful, significantly so if they have an idea of what's coming up.
Wizards would be weaker in comparison...

But, I don't think that the power boost would be too terribly large.  (Not as much as normal compared to gestalt in 3.5)

I think it'd be a viable alternative to normal play (especially in a low/no magic campaign).

[X-Codes]

Multiclassing would go nuts, and the Wizard's Spellbook would become a moot point.  Furthermore, there are going to be more splatbooks with more powers for classes.

On top of all that, it's going to make Extended Rests take 6 real-life hours as everyone pours over the splatbooks looking at the powers and wondering if they want to change.

[fil kearney]

Aw, c'mon X!  it could put the "sing" back into multiclassing!

Plus, there are less abilities per class overall... it doesn't take THAT long to pick out cleric spells for the day in 3.5, right? 
And how much of a difference would it make on your build from day to day anyway?


well, with exponential splat growth, it can get pretty sick in a few years, but for now, it's pretty limitted, no?
I'm inclined towards "sure, why not... but big whoop"  simply because your build is your build.. it's not gonna change that much (presplat explosion).

Anyone got some good examples where this would greatly alter how they will play their character, or if it would really add to the time between breaks?

[Dan2]

... it doesn't take THAT long to pick out cleric spells for the day in 3.5, right? 

You, sir, have had the immense privilege of playing with people who knew what they were doing.

I've DMed more than one game where the wizard and/or cleric players were unable to contribute to the game for about 30 real-time minutes after they rested because they were trying to figure out what spells to prepare for the day.

Also, X-Codes makes good points.

[Lektor]

Perhaps placing some sorta cap on it would limit the time it takes, for people to go over their list. say 2 abilities per rest or something like that. But i dont see it as much of an issue with current books.

[fil kearney]

You, sir, have had the immense privilege of playing with people who knew what they were doing.

Touche.

Really, that is an issue of team management.  a good general rule in spell swapping is to have a number of "bundled" packages to pre-assign between games. 
dungeon lurk spell suite
mass battle spell suite
BBEG spell suite
outdoor travel spell suite
etc.
with a few spells slots to swap about amongst a sideboard of alternate spells. 

Quite frankly, if the player is not experienced in 3.x, or good at organization, they should play a sorceror or favored soul instead of wiz or cleric. 

but your point is valid.. this would make EVERY class wiz/clr... and that could be a disaster.  *sigh*

So let's assume we actually know what we are doing... same question: would this really make a big difference, and what builds would benefit the most/how?

[Dan2]

Well, multiclassing would be a must, all of the strength-based classes would recieve a boost (as strength based powers are the most common).

Utility powers would be traded around like candy, and the multiclassing paragon path would probably be one of the strongest.

as far as actual power of the party goes, there'd be a minor to moderate increase.  They'd still be capped at the correct number of powers...

The increase in power depends on the players' creativity and ability to determine what they'll most likely be confronting in the near future.

[fil kearney]

would the increased flexibility be enough to make multiclassing as written a now viable option, or is it still too much for too little?

[Dan2]

Each further step into multiclassing (under this ruleset) increases the variety available to a character and their versatility.  If you were to take the multiclassing paragon path, the versatility would skyrocket.

Like I said earlier, I'm pretty sure that the power of such a build wouldn't be all that much greater, but the sheer versatility of the builds would be enough to make me urge caution in allowing it.

Versatility and creativity mean interesting solutions to problems.

[X-Codes]

I'd say that if you made this rule, Paragon Multiclassing would be something akin to 3.5 Gestalt characters mixing in with non-gestalt characters, but with the non-gestalt characters being 3 levels or so higher.  With a really clever combination a Gestalt character could probably match the power of the others, but the vast majority of combinations really just won't cut it.