What I Want to See in DND: Buncha Little Stuff
I want every class to have its own thing. If a paladin is just a mix between fighter and cleric, that’s multi-classing, not a separate class. It needs to do something neither fighter nor cleric can do. (Ditto any other”non-basic four” class; paladin’s just an example.)
I want things like mounts and familiars to be available from the get-go, and be meaningful choices. And I want funky options–like a paladin riding a ki-rin, or a wyvern, or a giant butterfly–to be feasible (perhaps with feats or special powers) if the DM wants to allow them.
I want weapon-and-shield to be a meaningful choice. There’s a reason it was so common historically. I don’t want it to be the “best” choice–no no-brainers–but right now, unless you’ve build your character heavily around the concept, it’s often inferior to heavy weapon or dual weapon.
I want different kinds of magic–arcane, divine, whatever–to feel different. Maybe one can do something the other can’t. Maybe one’s almost useless for offense, the other for support. I dunno. But I want there to be a marked and significant difference between what a wizard is doing vs. what a cleric is doing, and not just as relates to healing.
I want race to matter more than “+2 to this stat and darkvision.” It can be minor–probably should be minor–but to at least a small extent, I want a 9th-level elf fighter to be mechanically distinct from a 9th-level dwarf fighter, and not just by a few numerical differences.
If the game includes a prestige class-like concept, I want them to be truly focused, and never no-brainers. There should be solid reason to stick with fighter or wizard all the way through max level.
I want the basic math to make no assumptions about quantity of magic items. Balance a monster’s level/CR/whatever assuming a party with zero magic items (or at least combat-related ones). Then give guidelines for low-magic, average-magic, and high-magic campaigns, including rules for “If you’re playing X kind of campaign, increase the average level of the party’s opposition by Y.”
I want a return of the 2E guidelines for what equipment is available in different time periods/cultures.
I want there to be some classes that can be played as simply as “I roll to hit, what damage do I do?” without choosing powers or maneuvers. Not saying those classes can’t have such things as options, but there need to be some truly newbie-friendly options.
I want monsters to go the 1E/2E/4E route of being designed to purpose, rather than the 3E route of being built exactly like PCs.
I want the game to stop assuming X number of encounters in Y time period.
I want the drow to go back to being a mysterious, insular, vile, and non-PC-appropriate race, but I know that’s not gonna happen. 
And I’m sure I’m forgetting a bunch, but that’ll do for now.
Edit to Add: Yep, forgot one. I want warlocks to exist, I want them to have multiple “patron” possibilities, and I want said choices to have major impact on the character (and not just mechanical, either). If a warlock gets his power from a devil, that fact should come into play, and very differently than it would if he got his power from a lord of the fey.
I want a warrior-mage to be a viable, playable concept from 1st level.
-TG
I want every supportive player of D&D to read this post and generate some positive, constructive discussion around it.
Excellent thoughts and I echo them wholeheartedly. I got here from Trevor Kidd’s twitter feed – happy to know he saw it!
Mostly what I’m seeing is alot of “I want choices to matter, and be valid.” I find I can’t argue with that.
For Weapon and Shield being meaningful, what we need is things like Warblades, or even 4E, where your damage isn’t based so tightly on how many hands are on your weapon. I almost never see two-handed Warblades or Crusaders, because they still get sizable damage with only one hand on their sword… But then they get bonus damage if they go two-handed. The Warblade in the game I’m in now uses a “Duelists Cloak” as a shield, so hecan switch back and froth between two-handed or one-hand and shield at will depending on what he needs to do.
Ponycorns.
I’ve got to say, I pretty much agree with everything here. D&D was always designed as a class based game because it was supposed to be about fantasy archetypes. There needs to be a compelling reason (or two or three) to stay with a single class throughout your career, rather than shopping around.
As for weapon-and-shield being meaningful? Something like allowing a shield to actively parry attacks (opposed rolls?) would be an interesting option that makes you feel more engaged while choosing the defensive option instead of just getting to hide behind bigger numbers. A bigger weapon rolls a bigger die, but a shield never really let you DO anything better, it was always just passive.
Incidentally I’d also like a bit more realism in the equipment choices (what real person ever went around in plate armor with a big metal shield to boot? Maybe at the joust or to hide behind while sieging a castle, otherwise it’s just overkill. If you expect to fight a dragon, sure, get a shield like Beowulf did, but against like goblins? Bleh.) but I guess that’s probably too much to ask for in a fantasy game. Ah well.
I want daggers to be more than the annoying pinprick they’ve always been.
I’ve always had a problem with how convoluted the rules for weapons get, especially when something like the coat of the weapon is included as a way to “balance” it.
I LOVE the Talent Tree system for classes in SW Saga Edition and D20 Modern.
@TheHydraDM Yep, I think you’re asking too much with the armor thing. I agree completely, but I think most people just prefer not to worry about the math involved with changing equipment frequently.
Like Ari, I’d really like to see an option that makes Magic Items unique, mysterious, rare, and even a little dangerous again. 4e magic items didn’t even feel magic, they felt like shopping for your average technology of the time.
My favorite gaming system is actually the simplified, story based system by Tracy Hickman called XD20. I’d really like to see D&D have a sort of scalabilty to that kind of story telling simplicity without the DMG simply throwing us a paragraph that says, “Hey, just focus on story if you want to.”
These are all the things I have been saying for a long time now – Sword & board lacks appeal, currently, as it is mathematically inferior in most cases. I think opposed rolls would slow down the game, but perhaps shields counting for damage reduction and/or cover would be an okay approach?
As for magic, I agree whole-heartedly – the magic should FEEL different, depending on the source. Holy magic from the gods should feel like it is blessings or the wrath of the gods. Druidic magic should come across as feeling like the magic is alive, pulsing, morphic. Arcane magic is trickier, because there are so many classes which get it, each in their own way, but that should be reflected in their spell selection: sorcerers magic should feel soulful, emotional, like it comes from the character. Warlocks should have very different powers based on their selection of patron – a great fey lord might grant access to enigmatic, wild seeming, or illusion type magic, while a devil would grant beguiling, wrathful, or binding magic. Bards should feel special, as their music is the source of their magic – perhaps lesser powers should be limericks, medium ones should be ballads, and the most powerful derived from sweeping epics and great arias. Wizards should be, however, the most versatile. They should be the ones studying all the other types of magic and trying to replicate the results. They would not be inherently more powerful, just more varied. Make necromancy/shadow magic a viable option right out of the gate also. Some people like to play dark. Let them have the option. A swordmage type sword-and-spell type should also be a viable option right out of the gate. Also, the drow have become “just another option” and have utterly lost their mystery. It is a shame, because it makes that kind of character seem boring now, and the adventure hooks attached to those races are less attractive.
Best [partial] solution for the shield issue from the pre-3E days: give shields bigger bonuses. Or make it easy to get bigger bonuses with level, or proficiency, or something. Basically, a +1 to AC is very rarely worth the amount of extra damage and/or cool you get from two weapons, two-handed weapons, casting a spell with your off hand, having a friend hand to swing from a chandelier, etc. But +4? Maybe.
When we played AD&D2, the houserules made shields worth +1/+2/+3/+4 for buckler/small/large/wall shield, and you could improve those bonuses further. The only other versions of D&D where I’ve ever seen regular shield use are Arcana Unearthed and Iron Heroes–in each case because there is a class or set of feats dedicated to making shield use cool.