JimLotFP wrote:* Constitution determines what die you use for rolling hit points, no matter what your class. Fighters roll twice and keep the highest, Magic-Users roll twice and keep the lowest, Dwarfs roll one die higher and roll three times and keep the highest, that sort of thing.
While the basic idea is nice I don't really like the idea of rolling multiple dice and choosing best or worst. It is just not... elegant. Also, this idea departs from the basic system in which the only thing you need to know about your character are stat modifiers and character class. Instead, you need to check also his Constitition die. If I'd go with this system I'd probably go with just four different dice: 1d4 (negative Constitution modifier), 1d6 (no Constitution modifier), and 1d8 (positive Constitution modifier). Magic-User would roll one die smaller, Fighter one die higher, and Dwarf two dice higher (so a Dwarf with positive Constitution modifier would roll 1d12).
Also, Magic-Users will have lower hit points than specialists even without specific penalties, as their level progress is slower. Eliminating Constitution modifiers plays in favour of weak characters as even they will get at least 1 HP per level.
Having multiple dice rolled and one choosed also makes it difficult to calculate the probabilities.
JimLotFP wrote:* Magic saving throws modified by Charisma. It's the force of personality, not intelligence, that powers this stuff!
I like this idea, though it leaves Intelligence rather useless. (At least in our games Charisma has become one of the most important stats, as you will need to hire retainers if you want to survive.)
JimLotFP wrote:* Shields should give bonuses to parrying. Also allow a single parry in a round without sacrificing your own attack. (as would a second weapon, but there'd be no bonus to the parry) Shields could also parry non-firearm missile fire. (Fighters get 2x the bonus to parrying that other classes do.)
So that you could always choose to gain AC bonus against one attack per round? But wouldn't that make one-on-one combat quite a bit longer? Also, this would greatly harm characters who are facing multiple enemies at once, which means that flashy heroic deeds would be much more uncommon. Personally I like the way in which you just choose your combat style for one round and that's it. Elegant and simple, but still gives some tactical depth.
JimLotFP wrote:* Encumbrance should affect initiative in some way. Different encumbrance levels using difference dice is one option but I fear might complicate things. "for every encumbrance dot roll an extra die for initiative, use the lowest of the bunch" might work?
I like the idea of having different dice. Having multiple penalty dice, not so much. ENC 0 -> 1d12; ENC 1 -> 1d10, ENC 2 -> 1d8, ENC 3 -> 1d6, ENC 4 -> 1d4, overencumbered -> 1d2. These could be printed in the character sheet along with other encumbrance notes. Simple, fast, and having plenty of dice of different size and shape is always a plus. 
JimLotFP wrote:* Not original, but all weapon damage is d8, with the "roll twice, take the lowest/highest" for certain kinds of weapons.
Well, I don't really like having multiple dice rolls. Rolling just one dice is much simpler. Even rolling several dice and totaling them is better than choosing the best or worst from several rolls. And having multiple different dice is always cool.
JimLotFP wrote:* Also thinking that by expanding the skill list a bit, we could give Fighters and Magic-Users some skill points to play with while also giving Specialists more points so it's still their thing without maxing the existing skills up faster. Very unsure about this one because it makes NPC statting more complicated and I want to avoid that.
I like the way in which every character class is specialized. That makes every character in the group important. And it is elegant, as are many things in LotFP. Giving skill points to Fighters and Magic-Users would leave Specialist more or less useless.
JimLotFP wrote:* Witch-Hunter: Because thinking of the accompanying illustrations the Fighter has to go to Alice because she's the murderous one. The Flame Princess was originally designated as a Specialist but that doesn't seem right since she was conceived as a Solomon Kane type character. So there's the Witch-Hunter, with the concept being a kinda fightey character whose main thing is being magic-resistant.
This sounds great! What would that mean, specifically? Good saving throws, at least, but what else? Some kind of counter-magic skills that improve that every level? Something like "Magic-User that tries to cast a spell on Witch-Hunter will take one d6 of damage per Witch-Hunter's level"?
JimLotFP wrote:* Conquistador, basically the explorer-type. ("Explorer" itself being dishwater-dull as a name - legacy naming is useful because everyone recognizes it and little explanation is needed, but if you're adding something, don't let it fade into the background... Buccaneer might work?). Basically a fightey outdoorsey type, or a non-magical Ranger type ("Ranger" as a name being really being the wrong tone for the game).
Sounds good.
JimLotFP wrote:CironeAE wrote:Have you thought about moving demi-humans to the appendix and then using the extra space in the core rules section for a few of these new classes?
Not only thought about but long ago decided: Demi-humans and Clerics will go in the appendix, firearms to the main portion of the book, and Cleric spells folded into the MU spell lists.
Would there be lawful Magic-Users? Or do you have to be chaotic in order to heal someone? Will there be (non-magical) first-aid if clerics are eliminated?
On the other hand, we have been playing LOTFP for more than two years, and no player character has yet saved enough money to buy a plate armour! 