D&D 5E Mechanics you don't want to see, ever

[The Crimson Binome]

Well, you got inspiration though so a kind of lucky feat light. I like both, and with inspiration I gladly allow it to afflict rolls made by me the DM or some other player. It is a twist of fate style mechanic which complements the else strict rule set of 5e in a perfect way imho

I'm not convinced that Inspiration is actually a rule of the game. I mean, it has zero interaction with any other rules, and it only comes up when the DM explicitly decides that it comes up. If the DM doesn't actively go out of their way to apply it, then for all practical purposes, it doesn't exist.

It's a lot like the random item charts, in that way.

 

[Coroc]

I'm not convinced that Inspiration is actually a rule of the game. I mean, it has zero interaction with any other rules, and it only comes up when the DM explicitly decides that it comes up. If the DM doesn't actively go out of their way to apply it, then for all practical purposes, it doesn't exist.

It's a lot like the random item charts, in that way.

It is a formalized deus ex machine, something like a dungeon master giving out a boon in previous editions.
E.g. you roleplayed a scene very good but botched the roll for some action involved in it and for the sake of a cool sequence of events, the dm lets you repeat the roll and says it is just some miraculous effect.

The randomized item charts are a total PITA for all DMs who tend to master like me, a potential to give out some item which can push the whole game in an unwanted direction. I would never ever use them unless they are hand selected and sorted by me.

Example: party finds a foldable portal or cubical gate.

I am good with creating things on the fly if the limits are given by campaign etc- but having details of 12 different other planes at hands, just because I used the random tables and this treasure comes up and the party is like "oh nice, lets make a spontaneous trip to Nexus" - nope, that creativity of mine rather goes into the actual campaign and its design.

Same with party finds a flying carpet, decanter of endless water, simply most planar stuff, most teleport or other stuff which gives magical movement etc., this needs to be custom designed unless you want to destroy your campaign.

 

[Tallifer]

A headache-inducing skill system likes GURPS

 

[The Crimson Binome]

It is a formalized deus ex machine, something like a dungeon master giving out a boon in previous editions.

It's a framework to let the DM mess with you, if they're so inclined. The random item tables are a framework for the DM to add randomness, if they're so inclined. Both systems are entirely self-contained, and can safely be ignored by any DM who doesn't want them.

That's why I say Inspiration isn't really a rule, in practice. Practically speaking, it never comes up. For you, random item tables aren't really a rule, in practice.

 

[Lanefan]

That's... not actually how those classes work in play unless they're very badly designed indeed. Your chief error is in the phrase "all the time". Central to the mechanics of something like a factotum or a binder or an incarnate is that you don't have every ability all the time: you have to pick what you're going to be at any given time, and if you realize you need to be something else, you're out of luck until tomorrow.

Could be we're talking about slightly different things then.

I'm referring to the type of character that's intentionally built to be a bit (or a lot) of everything - or as many things as it can - all at once. Many strengths, no weaknesses.

In previous editions, every time I ever saw someone pushing for a more "gish"-like build it invariably meant that person was really after a powerful JoaT. "Gestalt" may be the current term for the same thing but I'm not sure, and no doubt someone will correct me if it isn't.

If it can fight (almost) as well as the Fighter, cast spells (almost) as well as the Wizard or Cleric, and sneak (almost) as well as the Thief or Rogue, then it's a JoaT - otherwise known as a one-character party.

 

[Lanefan]

It is a formalized deus ex machine, something like a dungeon master giving out a boon in previous editions.
E.g. you roleplayed a scene very good but botched the roll for some action involved in it and for the sake of a cool sequence of events, the dm lets you repeat the roll and says it is just some miraculous effect.

The randomized item charts are a total PITA for all DMs who tend to master like me, a potential to give out some item which can push the whole game in an unwanted direction. I would never ever use them unless they are hand selected and sorted by me.

Example: party finds a foldable portal or cubical gate.

I am good with creating things on the fly if the limits are given by campaign etc- but having details of 12 different other planes at hands, just because I used the random tables and this treasure comes up and the party is like "oh nice, lets make a spontaneous trip to Nexus" - nope, that creativity of mine rather goes into the actual campaign and its design.

Just because they find it doesn't mean they should automatically know how to use it (RAW be damned!); and if the only way they can learn about it is trial by error then you've got the potential for several (mis)adventures when they find themselves somewhere they really shouldn't be and have to find a way out.

I've had several Amulets of the Planes come up - and the PCs still only use them in dire emergencies as they still, after much divination etc., only know of about 10 destinations (out of 50!) and that some of those are decidedly risky.

(side note: reminding self to go into the mechanics-that-need-to-come-back thread and add in "magic item field testing")

Same with party finds a flying carpet, decanter of endless water, simply most planar stuff, most teleport or other stuff which gives magical movement etc., this needs to be custom designed unless you want to destroy your campaign.

I just assume these sort of things are going to appear at some point in any case, and don't fret it too much.

It's only a worry if you-as-DM have pre-decided how you want the PCs to travel or to approach an adventure.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I'll add that I don't ever want to see AEDU. short/long rests are about the limit of what I can find reasonably believable for recouping abilities. AEDU is just too metagamey for me. Well, specifically the "E" part, because it can be so fluid as to what is and isn't an encounter in actual game play. If monsters react as they would in a dungeon realistically, something that could be 4 separate encounters could be rolled into one, depending on what is going on. Maybe they get a minute to plan before the next one hits, or maybe it's 5 minutes, or maybe there are 10 minutes but other activities don't really allow a rest. I've never been a fan of 5MWD anyway. In my preference, if you have abilities that can't be done over and over regardless of how fatigued you are, then you need a significant rest period to recover those. Preferably, I'd rather have just two: at will, and between long rests. But I can kinda sorta see one hour short rests as well, but that pushes my limit.

 

[Gradine]

Which is too bad, as you'd likely miss out on some entertaining intrigue-style gaming. Done right, a party of counter-plotting PCs can end up making D&D play very much like Diplomacy.

The fact that you say this as a good thing tells me that we aren't going to see eye to eye much on what constitutes a fun play experience.

 

[Gradine]

As for the actual OP:

• Basically every cumbersome rule from AD&D that fell by the wayside by 3.X. Race/class limits, Thief percentile abilities, percentile Strength, etc.
• Also, racial stat penalties. Bonuses help support specific niches that are most often associated with the race. Penalties discourage alternative options.
• Save or Die.
• Rituals being the only out-of-combat magic
• Monsters that are built like PCs

Edit: Forgot a few:

• Level drain
• AEDU or any mechanic in which all classes play nearly the same way

 

[TheCosmicKid]

Could be we're talking about slightly different things then.

I'm referring to the type of character that's intentionally built to be a bit (or a lot) of everything - or as many things as it can - all at once. Many strengths, no weaknesses.

In previous editions, every time I ever saw someone pushing for a more "gish"-like build it invariably meant that person was really after a powerful JoaT. "Gestalt" may be the current term for the same thing but I'm not sure, and no doubt someone will correct me if it isn't.

If it can fight (almost) as well as the Fighter, cast spells (almost) as well as the Wizard or Cleric, and sneak (almost) as well as the Thief or Rogue, then it's a JoaT - otherwise known as a one-character party.

So, bards, basically.

Bards are solid characters in 5E, but I've yet to encounter a problem with one rendering the rest of the party obsolete. The primary reason for this is the action economy: even if a bard has the option to do anything, they can still only do one thing per turn. (This is also why the traditional multiclass gish build has usually been underwhelming in its performance across editions.) The flexibility they gain does not compensate for the premium they pay in effectiveness. If, say, a character can swing a sword 80% as well as a fighter and throw a fireball 80% as well as a wizard, then on paper it might look like zomg they've got 160% power, but nope, their output on any given round is still just 80% -- the party would be better off with a real fighter or a real wizard.

The exception to this pattern is when the features synergize. Usually this has meant self-buffing to become a monster (I'm looking at you 3E cleric). 5E, however, is reasonably carefully designed so that most combat buffs can be cast on other party members, and further incentivizes this with the concentration rules, so you're probably better off with a wizard-fighter team where the wizard buffs the fighter than with two gishes where each buffs themselves.