D&D (2024) Rules that annoy you

[mellored]

That you can only hold one instance of inspiration.

If you get a second one, you can give it to someone else.

 

[fuindordm]

Thought of another bone of contention for me: Force Damage. Either shouldn't exist, spells and abilities that use it should do less damage with it or there should be more monsters resistant to it.

Yeah, it's gone from something very rare to simply "untyped magic damage". Maybe any creature with magic resistance should be resistant to force damage?

 

[overgeeked]

The new stealth rules. Anything that says you can stay hidden because you ducked behind a wall a few minutes ago despite moving into plain sight and standing directly in front of someone is utterly stupid.

 

[DrJawaPhD]

The new stealth rules. Anything that says you can stay hidden because you ducked behind a wall a few minutes ago despite moving into plain sight and standing directly in front of someone is utterly stupid.

The new rules state that "the DM decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding", so Rules As Written provide plenty of justification for the DM to adjudicate any gray areas as they see fit without being restricted by hard and fast rules

Not that the DM is ever restricted by the rules, but for Hiding the book seems to go out of its way to make it clear that DM interpretation will be involved

 

[Lanefan]

That’s just fluff that you can easily ignore without having to ban anything! I liked how the designers described levels 1 and 2 for the warlock as being a “try before you buy” type of thing.

It’s no more nonsensical than paladins who don’t swear an oath until 3rd level, druids who aren’t sworn into a circle until 3rd level, bards who don’t join a college until 3rd level, and so on.

My guess: all of these things are intended to allow cheese-weasels to take dips into those classes to get the benefits without having to take the drawback of being tied to a patron or an oath or a circle or whatever.

 

[Lanefan]

But level 4 is Hero and level 8 is Superhero!

That's just blatant self-promotion on the part of 4th and 8th-level types who've never done a heroic thing in their lives and instead got those levels through murder and pillage.

 

[Lanefan]

All through D&D there's been a very inconsistent and often-broken thread of more interesting solutions - for example, in 4E, the blood of a medusa can cure petrification in medusa victims. But inexplicably 5E drops that. That's in no way an improvement or more interesting design, it's just dropped for no reason, and we're forced to use ultra-generic and annoying-to-get Greater Restoration.

Similar thing occurs in BX/1e - in Keep on the Borderlands there's a potion you can find that de-stones medusa victims, and as far as I know that's the only instance in the game where that potion ever appears.

 

[pukunui]

My guess: all of these things are intended to allow cheese-weasels to take dips into those classes to get the benefits without having to take the drawback of being tied to a patron or an oath or a circle or whatever.

I think it was more about a) streamlining the classes so they all have their subclasses kick in at 3rd and b) pushing back the big subclass benefits so the dippers can’t get them with just one or two levels.

 

[Lanefan]

A level 1 character is still a main character of the heroic fantasy genre. They aren't over-the-top for their genre. And it's not like they can fight an ogre or do things like that at 1st level.

It sounds like you don't want that genre. There are other fantasy subgenres that are a lot more gritty, or need more build up. That's not what D&D is emulating, so I can understand how that annoys you.

That's not what D&D is emulating now.

Time was, it did that emulation just fine at lower levels before getting more over-the-top at mid-high levels. In other words, it could and did do both.

Somehow that changed, and I'm simply pushing back against that change.

 

[Lanefan]

I think it was more about a) streamlining the classes so they all have their subclasses kick in at 3rd and b) pushing back the big subclass benefits so the dippers can’t get them with just one or two levels.

a) above makes sense from a design perspective, though better would be to have those things kick in at level 1 and ban those classes from being part of a multiclass combo. b) however doesn't, in that the character can happily take two levels in those classes without becoming tied to anything within the class; and that tie-down is (at least in my eyes) the great big drawback that pays off all the other benefits you get.

I mean, say I'm a Rogue looking to dip into Warlock for whatever reason. If doing so meant I had to tie myself to a patron right away with all the inherent headaches that entails, I probably wouldn't do it; but as I can take two levels without that drawback why wouldn't I, so as to allow myself to spontaneously cast spells that maybe help my Rogue-ing.