Things that Irk Me about DnD (Somewhat long, kinda ranty)

[barsoomcore]

Remember that being a "fish out of water" can be just as entertaining. And druids have ALL sorts of possibilities in urban environments -- which are generally (especially in a fantasy environment) home to all sorts of creatures -- rats, roaches, alley cats, stray dogs, disgruntled tyrannosaurus rexes...

Well, on Barsoom, anyway.

 

[Count Arioch the 28t]

In my last campaign, we had a druid played from beginning (1st) through to the end (18th), and no one was much impressed by the class. Even with shape-shifting it didn’t stand up that well in combats, and the spell lists need a few more useful spells at higher level.

The 14th level druid in my game annihilated a Cr 14 monster by herself in two rounds. The Huge elemental she summoned before that annihilated the other monster in a few more.

Wildshape into a dire bear, then grapple. You win.

Even with the 3.5 DR, she managed to do so easily. (As in, her GMF didn't overcome DR like it would have if we were playing 3.0, the monster had DR/cold iron and magic)

They have great shapesifting abilities, which is enough. Plus, once they get flame strike, they are better at nuking than the wizards are.

 

[Piratecat]

Merlion has asked me to let folks know that he's not ignoring this thread. He's away from EN World for another few days, but will be back in this thread after that.

 

[mmadsen]

Dungeons and Dragons doesn't represent any particular genre of fantasy other than "Dungeons and Dragons".

Very true.

I'm convinced that one of the reasons it's formed the basis of the entire industry is precisely because it doesn't ape any of the fantasy conventions, but rather pulls together all sorts of disparate sources (I can just imagine Professor's Tolkein's reaction to being told he was writing pulp romances like Howard and Burroughs) and comes up with its own unique brew.

I agree -- but I think it could work even better with just a bit more flexibility, so that the Monk class could represent the particular martial artist (of the particular style) you had in mind, the Ranger could represent Aragorn, Faramir, Robin Hood, et al., the Cleric could represent a non-combatant priest, etc.

D&D magic doesn't particularly well model ANY fantasy magic I've ever encountered. Which is totally cool, because when I want to play D&D, I want to play D&D, not Middle-Earth or Hyboria or any of that jazz.

Didn't you replace the D&D magic system completely for your game?

 

[LostSoul]

Actually no, I am saying that it is application and use of those abilities that give you insight into how to better use them. ... WHen you cast the spell you feel it course through you and learn how to channel that energy through cleaner pathways, more efficiently, allowing you to channel more through those pathways. Meditation wouldn't give you that understanding.

Sorry. What I meant by "meditation" included casting spells, along with prayer and an attempt to gain insight on whatever source you draw those spells from.

Would you agree, then, that a 1st level Cleric serving in a town, casting Bless, Create Water, Bless Water, Remove Fear, Endure Elements, etc. each day while he studies his holy tomes at the local temple, would also gain experience? Would that be equal to what an adventuring Cleric gains? If not, why not?

 

[barsoomcore]

When I want to play D&D, I want to play D&D

Didn't you replace the D&D magic system completely for your game?

Yep. Didn't want to play D&D, you see.

Barsoom actually started out before 3.0 arrived, and I made up a complete system of my own. Which worked okay, but kind of sucked. So when 3.0 came down the pipe, I converted Barsoom over to that, keeping the wackiness that made it my baby.

Which is what I like best about D&D -- it's surprising capacity to be deformed and still work. You think it's going to be all rigid and hard to customize and then you smack it around a little and baboom.

 

[mmadsen]

The Arcane/Divine divide: This is probably the biggest thing for me. To me, its something that does not really exist in most fantasy…

Agreed.

There’s rarely two huge monolithic forms of magic and all spellcasters fall into one or the other category.

Actually, I think that's fairly common, but the usual divide is between magic that is both divine and good versus magic that is either "divine" (in the D&D sense) or "arcane" and evil -- the real distinction is between good and evil, white and black.

Typically, of course, the white magic is less powerful, requires self-sacrifice, etc., while the black magic is quite powerful and harms others (or is fueled by harming others).

And where does this whole thing come from of god-magic being linked to healing and defense?

In D&D, "divine" magic, of course, isn't necessarily good magic -- but much of the system is designed around god-magic as good-magic.

I guess from the fact that the Cleric class was based off the Knights Templar and whatnot and certainly the Judeo-Christian God would have a link to healing and whatnot…but in a polytheistic fantasy setting, what about the gods of darkness and death and decay?

D&D Clerics do not match the real-world Templars well at all. The Templars were a holy order of warrior monks, much more organized than a typical medieval army (more like a modern army), with diplomatic and banking ties throughout the middle east. The D&D Paladin isn't an awful fantasy-fit for Templars.

In DnD rather than master mages, Wizards and Sorcerers are mainly magical artillery.

D&D clearly does have wargame roots. Fireball = catapult. Lightning bolt = ballista.

The Cleric class: I dislike the Cleric class for three reasons. 1) its mildly unbalanced in its current form. 2) to me the “Priest” archtype is a very uncommon one. The “White Mage”/defense-healing Mage is more common but 3) the Cleric class doesn’t embody either of these very well.

Agreed.

Actually, the Bard's mechanics fit the priest concept much, much better than the Cleric class's mechanics -- just switch out the spell list (which you'll probably want to tailor anyway).

Magical Sterotyping: I kind of dislike the fact that all spellcasting classes have it spelled out exactly where their magic comes from. Wizards get their magic totally from study. Sorcerers totally from inborn power. Clerics pray to gods or causes. Obviously this is easily ignored, but I’d still like it if there weren’t as much pigeonholing.

I don't see the problem.

Magic Item Dependency: I’d like to at least have a variant were the power of your character and the whole CR system isn’t so strongly based around magic items, making it easy for magic items to be a little less common and a little more special.

I certainly don't mind that they set a baseline; it's just not where I'd put it.

 

[teitan]

Sorry. What I meant by "meditation" included casting spells, along with prayer and an attempt to gain insight on whatever source you draw those spells from.

Would you agree, then, that a 1st level Cleric serving in a town, casting Bless, Create Water, Bless Water, Remove Fear, Endure Elements, etc. each day while he studies his holy tomes at the local temple, would also gain experience? Would that be equal to what an adventuring Cleric gains? If not, why not?

Yes, but at a much slower rate than an adventuring cleric.

 

[LostSoul]

Yes, but at a much slower rate than an adventuring cleric.

Why? Again, is there something inherent about combat (which is pretty much what divides "adventuring" from just wandering) that makes Clerics learn at a faster rate? And if so, what is your Fluff text for it?

 

[ThoughtBubble]

Why? Again, is there something inherent about combat (which is pretty much what divides "adventuring" from just wandering) that makes Clerics learn at a faster rate? And if so, what is your Fluff text for it?

Well, there's the potential for variety, working under stressful circumstances. But I think most important is the fact that I always just assume that PC's get gobs more (50% minimum) than any NPC would get. Why? They're special.