What D&Disms have you never liked?

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

Were all big boys and girls, and I think we can deal with some institutional dwarf-hatin', right?

We also don't have to flee from those ideas as if the ideals of childhood were something an adult should be ashamed and afraid of.

 

[Garthanos]

Vancian magic fix: Use Psionics mechanic instead. You'll have to get creative with the augments, but hey. Or, make everyone a spontaneous caster.

Another Vancian Fix was give mages cleric like hit points and have mages spells cost hit points to cast (unless you made a skill check) mix that with another Vancian Fix that I considered way back was using components but then you control spell access with an economy of rarity and cost for the components, how difficult and how much time to gather, and maintaining there freshness etc. It has a classic alchemical feel to it... but it becomes regulated by economic factors ... that is a pretty complex and subtle tool.

That said ... something no more extreme than attacking with a projectile like darts could have components purchasable from and apothecary for a price similar to the darts. These might have been components required to paint runes on your staff which gradually faded... as used.

A light spell could had components like 2 x the price of a chunk of torches... stuff like that.

I rather found myself putting a lot of effort in to trying to fix the game... realized it was too far from what I wanted in the first place. Never did play 2e... or 3e.

4e did this with rituals... but economy is so ahem badly defined revolving heavily around the purchaseable aspect of magic items... I am not sure it works as nicely as I envisioned.

@ Garthanos: did you ever show that guy how other priesthoods might have different weapon allowances, as shown in both the PHB and in the Cleric's Handbook? Oh, and Forgotten Realms, too. And Legends and Lore.

Imagination Donation might have helped even more ... I think he did get L&L later we had the first three dont recall seeing the idea of alternative weapon options in the players handbook (The DM in question might have required it to be incredibly explicit) but that was in 1979 ... and I moved on to playing different games shortly there after. AD&D2 came out with specialty priests... but really the 4e Warlord with religion and ritual training actually feels better than anything I seen previously

Gobs of HP fix: Players start with their CON score in HP. Each increase in levels rewards PCs with their CON score ONLY (Min 1 HP gain).

A proper fix for me ended up not occurring until recently.

I came to realize the abstraction was a tool I could use to help characterize the heroes.
Visualize hit points based on their nature and there capabilities. Lucky Heros, Skilled Heros, Tough Guy Heros and Magical Ones using there gifts to minimize the impact of attacks.. but it looks different for each. A bloodied tough guy might have bunches of little wounds that only worry him... until he gets his heart in to it... or a skilled hero looks winded and maybe has his first minor flesh wound as a sign he is starting to slip and the mage might be sweating profusely and distracted (his faery servants all complaining and jibber jabbering -> the theme for his magic is that he manifests feylings) My halfling Rogue/Warlord is freaking out questioning if any of this is necessary with his eyes darting about making sure he knows where the exit is. .. his defenses are frequently him lucking out.

Some of this makes it in to actual play by using the UA trick of players making all the rolls and letting them describe how they defend themselves (or even if a fluke results in crappy performance by the bad guy... my daughter likes it when the bad guy stumbles in some funny way for instance maybe barely missing) and so how the hit point loss manifests is individual. Not all players like doing the describing themselves (my daughter) but for those who do its one more can of awesome.

And even though I am using it in 4e... its a pretty transportable concept.

 

[Celtavian]

re

Armor Class.

I like a combination of damage reduction and dodge/parry/block type systems. Wish D&D would move to such a system.

 

[Aus_Snow]

I like a combination of damage reduction and dodge/parry/block type systems. Wish D&D would move to such a system.

Query: Dagger meets plate; what happens?

Not implying it can't work. Just curious as to your preferred approach.

 

[The Shaman]

"Tinker" gnomes.

Feh.

 

[Garthanos]

Query: Dagger meets plate; what happens?

Not implying it can't work. Just curious as to your preferred approach.

Games with damage absorbtion I have seen use broader crit ranges to emulate things good at getting between the cracks in armor.

Knights carried daggers they were very good at getting past plate in real life (betwix the gaps) but actually not so good till the guy inside slowed down.(beating them senseless with a mace worked nicely to accomplish that )

 

[Kinneus]

My big one is weirdly specific, but... drow. Drow have:
1. Uncomfortable racial overtones (the evil, cursed race with dark skin).
2. What feels like a pandemic of fanservice with its dominatrix-inspired culture.
3. Drizzt clone syndrome, where every PC tries to do the tragically misunderstood thing.
4. Poor motivations. Drow are evil because they're evil. They hate elves (and eladrin) because they hate elves and eladrin. Many players choose to play drow and take their racial traits to mean "be a dick," and spent the rest of the game insulting their teammates IC and generally being obnoxious. I'd ask them to stop, but heck, they're just roleplaying their whiny, angsty race, I guess.
Basically, it's everything I dislike about fantasy with its racism, adolescent sex fantasies, and persecution fantasies all in one angsty little package.

Otherwise, I'll have to echo Vancian magic, for reasons other have listed. Mostly, it just always struck me as weirdly specific. I also wasn't a fan of the whole vulnerable at first level thing, but after playing 4e for a while, I can sort of see the appeal. I like that we have a nice variety in the editions now... if I want to feel like a youngster against the odds, I'll play 1st edition. If I just want to get straight to the big hero stuff, I'll play 4e.

 

[Starbuck_II]

Healing is Cleric only power: only the Cleric is good at healing. 3.5 wwent to so far as to have the Healer (class) worse at healing that a Cleric. Yes, the Healer is not as good at Healing as the Cleric.

Druid, Bard, etc are the same way.

They buffed the Cleric because they didn't want Cleric to be a band-aid, bu then required it by making only it best at healing. Why not just allow every class that can heal good at it!

Why does Druid need stunted healing growth?

Why was Healer prepared casting even Cure spells?

 

[Mercule]

"Tinker" gnomes.

These are a Dragonlance-ism, along with kender (aka klepto-insane halflings). I'm fine with them there. It any other context, they are out of place.

There is a well known, and unspoken, table rule at my games. If your gnome ever messes with technology in a flamboyant way, he will develop a very bad case of being dead. For the most part, players get itchy even thinking about gnomes using trap setting skills.

That should make my position fairly clear. Gnome are short, hippie Dr. Doolittles.

 

[jaerdaph]

Secretly, I do like Gnome Tinkerers and their Giant Space Hamsters, but I would never admit to that publicly.

That should make my position fairly clear. Gnome are short, hippie Dr. Doolittles.

On a related note, I was forced to watch this (forgettable) Disney musical movie from the 60s this weekend:

The Gnome-Mobile (1967)

Ouch. Just Ouch.