D&D General What are your Pedantic Complaints about D&D?

Celebrim · Jul 15, 2019

Charlaquin said:
The problem is, D&D 5e’s weapon system isn’t granular enough to cover all the variations on medieval and Renaissance swords as separate weapons.

Any system not pedantic enough to want to differentiate sword families as separate weapon classes is not pedantic enough for me. I mean, I shudder at the idea of treating a falchion the same as a backsword, or applying the name Falchion to a family of weapons that seems to want to include the Ōdachi.

Celebrim · Jul 15, 2019

Lanefan said:
So, back to topic: peeved that nobody, either in official D&D or a 3rd-party, has ever published anything like this even as a magazine article.

I'm pretty sure a third party during the 3e era did publish an entire supplement on who can breed with who and if they do, what happens.

Vael · Jul 15, 2019

I find the Creature types somewhat arbitrary, and as a person that enjoys playing a Druid or casting Polymorph, the difference between beast and monstrosity is quite frustrating (I'd also like some more higher CR beasts that aren't Dinosaurs). Why is Giant a type and not a Humanoid subtype?

Nevvur · Jul 15, 2019

jasper said:
That is because the ale is really Pabst Blue Ribbon beer which everyone agrees is just water.

If all ale in DnD is PBR, no wonder the dwarves are so surly.

Nevvur · Jul 15, 2019

Lanefan said:
This leads into a whole other field of study, should one be so inclined, and that's to go through the Monster Manual, find all the cross-breed races (e.g. Tabaxi is part human, part cat), and then from there figure out what can in theory breed with what and-or have what in its bloodlines. Can, for example, a half-orc breed with a half-elf and produce an offspring that is genetically 1/4 elf, 1/4 orc, and the rest human?

I did this a long time ago using 1e's MM, FF, and MMII; and the results were rather staggering: a chart on a big piece of paper with lines connecting inter-breedable races that ended up looking like a plate of spaghetti. And that's before throwing in things like shape-shifting deities (consider the myths of deities like Zeus and Loki impregnating humans), demons, devils, and the like.

Ever since then, every character rolled up in my games gets a roll during char-gen to determine if there's anything unexpected in its bloodline - are you, for example, a distant descedant of a deity...or a devil, or an orc, or a cat...

So, back to topic: peeved that nobody, either in official D&D or a 3rd-party, has ever published anything like this even as a magazine article.

Publish it here. Now.

edit: Please?

(after updating it to 5e, of course)

Charlaquin · Jul 15, 2019

Celebrim said:
Any system not pedantic enough to want to differentiate sword families as separate weapon classes is not pedantic enough for me. I mean, I shudder at the idea of treating a falchion the same as a backsword, or applying the name Falchion to a family of weapons that seems to want to include the Ōdachi.

In defense of lumping falchions in with backswords, the guy who literally wrote the book on falchion and messer typology does support the term “medieval backsword” as an umbrella term for such swords. As well, I definitely wouldn’t include Odachi in that category. I might go so far as to put the katana in the same category as the kriegsmesser, which in 5e’s weapon system would probably end up being the same as a longsword. But the Odachi is closer to 5e’s Greatsword than to its Scimitar.

Celebrim · Jul 15, 2019

Charlaquin said:
In defense of lumping falchions in with backswords, the guy who literally wrote the book on falchion and messer typology does support the term “medieval backsword” as an umbrella term for such swords.

He may be right in the sense that any single edged weapon is a backsword, but be as that may, when I picture in my head a falchion I picture something that is tip heavy much like a machete.

For a movie example, the 'Green Destiny' is very much a Chinese variation on the same sort of sword design as an arming sword, but Michelle Yu's character prefers a sword that is translated as 'machete' and it's clearly very much after the same pattern as a Falchion. So these weapons would, at least in my head, despite the cultural differences get put in to arming sword and falchion families.

By contrast, when I picture in my head a backsword I picture something that often has a basket hilt of some sort and which is very much not tip heavy and often highly tapered and obviously designed to balance cutting and thrusting. Generally speaking when I speak of a backsword, I'm speaking of a straight bladed single edged weapon, or else I would use a more specific term like sabre or scimitar or what not. So in my head I might think there is more similarity in employment and purpose and function between a Kilij and a Falchion, than I would between a Falchion and a Backsword.

CleverNickName · Jul 15, 2019

Far and above, my biggest problem that I have...and I say this as a cis-het American dude...is the breast fetish.

Armor with breasts. Reptiles with breasts. Gargoyles with breasts. FRIGGIN WARFORGED WITH BREASTS?! Seriously, this needs to stop. Please. I'm begging you.

Lanefan · Jul 15, 2019

Celebrim said:
I'm pretty sure a third party during the 3e era did publish an entire supplement on who can breed with who and if they do, what happens.

The Book of Erotic Fantasy very vaguely - and IMO very badly - waved at this, but that was it as far as I recall (though I'll freely admit that there was probably a lot of d20-era stuff that passed me by and-or never even made it to this market).

This was one of my many great disappointments with the BoEF, in fact; that it didn't go much more deeply into fantasy-race inter-breeding, genetics, pregnancy chances, and so forth. Massive opportunity missed.

Nevvur said:
Publish it here. Now.

edit: Please?

One day I might, if I can figure out how to scan a great big piece of paper on this little tiny 8x11 scanner I have.

(after updating it to 5e, of course)

Sorry, but that's not bloody likely; as it would more or less mean starting over from scratch and I remember all too well how long this took to do the first time - and back then there were only three MM's to consider.

GreenTengu · Jul 15, 2019

Three things that upset me

1) The monster manual makes hyenas much weaker than wolves when they are in fact much stronger.
2) The Beastmaster Ranger takes animal companion stats straight from the monster manual rather than generating stats and levels for it based on your level and uses them in such a way that you are just shooting your self in the foot for taking something that could be fun like a ferret or an owl or something.
3) The hobgoblin racial stats suck to being nearly useless, grant an intelligence bonus instead of something that makes sense for the race, don't grant any skill or tool proficiency, grant a bunch of weapon/armor proficiency that are utterly wiped out and grant nothing if you play anything other than a caster and have a racial ability that both violates the core game design principles by granting a flat bonus (worse, a flat bonus you get to use after knowing whether or not using it will grant a success) and is unusable if a character is ever by him/herself.

Anyway, thanks for ruining my favorite race, favorite class and potentially my #1 choice for animal companion designers!