D&D General What Is D&D Generally Bad At That You Wish It Was Better At?

[pemerton]

I don't recall older editions giving us any real metric for Intelligence

Moldvay Basic has a chart, that mostly addresses linguistic ability.

 

[James Gasik]

Moldvay Basic has a chart, that mostly addresses linguistic ability.

Similar to the "languages known" for AD&D Intelligence? That is something I forgot about, as well as bonus proficiencies and skill points in later editions.

Or do you mean more like how eloquent your character is?

 

[pemerton]

Similar to the "languages known" for AD&D Intelligence? That is something I forgot about, as well as bonus proficiencies and skill points in later editions.

Or do you mean more like how eloquent your character is?

Here's the table (from p B7):

INT 3: Has trouble with speaking, cannot read or write

INT 4-5: Cannot read or write Common

INT 6-8: Can write simple Common words

INT 9-12: Reads and writes native languages (usually 2 - Humans know two native languages: the Common and Alignment languages . . . Demi-humans know a number of native languages, as indicated in the class descriptions(

INT 13-15: Reads and writes native languages, +1 added language

INT 16-17: Reads and writes native languages, +2 added languages

INT 18: Reads and writes native languages, +3 added languages​

 

[James Gasik]

Here's the table (from p B7):

INT 3: Has trouble with speaking, cannot read or write​

​

INT 4-5: Cannot read or write Common​

​

INT 6-8: Can write simple Common words​

​

INT 9-12: Reads and writes native languages (usually 2 - Humans know two native languages: the Common and Alignment languages . . . Demi-humans know a number of native languages, as indicated in the class descriptions(​

​

INT 13-15: Reads and writes native languages, +1 added language​

​

INT 16-17: Reads and writes native languages, +2 added languages​

​

INT 18: Reads and writes native languages, +3 added languages​

Well hey, I learned something new (to me, it's old news to some, lol). Ok, so there is one penalty for low Intelligence beyond mechanics, then, if you play that version of the game.

I'm amused that by 3e, an 18 Int Barbarian would be completely illiterate, by comparison (at least by default).

 

[mellored]

Rolling twice per attack. Attack and damage should be 1 roll.
(Possibly d20+weapon+Str - AC)

Ability Scores and modifiers. Should just be 1 number
(could go either way, but not both).

 

[Quickleaf]

@Reynard It's a good question. Apologies if someone already mentioned (I only scanned the first 6 pages of replies), but thrilling chase scenes...

Thrilling chase scenes is something I've never seen D&D handle well.

 

[Reynard]

@Reynard It's a good question. Apologies if someone already mentioned (I only scanned the first 6 pages of replies), but thrilling chase scenes...

Thrilling chase scenes is something I've never seen D&D handle well.

I think chase scenes are just hard in TTRPGs. Even games that do it "well" really only do it "okay" (I'm thinking of Savage Worlds here). It is such an immediate and audiovisual thing that I think primarily verbal media have a hard time doing it. I can't think of a novel, for example, that has pulled it off.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

@Reynard It's a good question. Apologies if someone already mentioned (I only scanned the first 6 pages of replies), but thrilling chase scenes...

Thrilling chase scenes is something I've never seen D&D handle well.

Really? That surprises me. Skill Challenges are wonderful for precisely that purpose, especially because a chase scene is extremely amenable to the few tweaks that make SCs even better: degrees of success*, dynamically evolving game-state, and one player reasonably "setting up" another player for a bigger impact.

*By which I mean, not just "partial" success etc., but rather true degrees thereof, all the way from abject failure to stunning success.

 

[payn]

Really? That surprises me. Skill Challenges are wonderful for precisely that purpose, especially because a chase scene is extremely amenable to the few tweaks that make SCs even better: degrees of success*, dynamically evolving game-state, and one player reasonably "setting up" another player for a bigger impact.

*By which I mean, not just "partial" success etc., but rather true degrees thereof, all the way from abject failure to stunning success.

I think SCs would be more interesting if executed as degrees of success. My short experience with them is often just run as "roll and get 3 or you fail" so its more like group binary.

On chase scenes, I think you need targeted defense rolls as well. PC gets a leg up or creates an obstacle for the target, how do they react? A lot of times chase are set up where its entirely on the PCs which I think takes some of the tension out.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I think SCs would be more interesting if executed as degrees of success. My short experience with them is often just run as "roll and get 3 or you fail" so its more like group binary.

Sure. The rules don't really discuss how to make any use of the relative numbers of successes vs failures to enhance the overall experience, but every DM I've ever had who has run them has done so. While I would understand folks feeling lost or direction less for trying to achieve this, if you find the "group binary" inadequate or dull...why wouldn't you do this? It's not like it's against the rules in any way.

On chase scenes, I think you need targeted defense rolls as well. PC gets a leg up or creates an obstacle for the target, how do they react? A lot of times chase are set up where its entirely on the PCs which I think takes some of the tension out.

Sure. That's the dynamic situation part I mentioned. Each roll, success or failure, changes the state of play. Some SCs aren't super amenable to that (for example, if the group is collectively doing research or gathering intel, it doesn't make much sense that every single roll results in a major change to the state of play), but chase scenes are one type where it's both extremely fitting and especially valuable to do so. If the quarry gets far away, the hunters get desperate, and if the hunters are snapping at their heels, the quarry gets desperate. Each "moment" (for lack of a better term) in the scene is in a different place with different context, meaning what is valuable vs negligible vs harmful is constantly changing.

Maybe the party Barbarian had the strength and speed to leap across rooftop after rooftop, so her success forces the quarry to dive down to street level in the hopes of disappearing into the crowd. But then the Bard's cunning and skill with leveraging the masses erases that advantage, so now the quarry, desperate and running out of options, starts vandalizing shopkeepers' stalls so that the PCs get caught in the resulting disaster. The Wizard tries to help with Arcana, essentially to reverse the damage, but it's too much too fast for them to fix all of it at speed, and the quarry slips further ahead, out of direct line of sight. Then the Sorcerer tries to persuade folks to tell her where the quarry went, but the crowd is just too upset and briefly blames the party for the issue, putting the quarry almost out of reach now. In the height of this tension, the Paladin, knowing that his god is hoping to make inroads with the population of this city, begs for a sign, a route to take, and is given one that cuts the quarry off at the pass, miraculously clear of people or obstacles.

The quarry has made it to the very gate of their hideout, but the party has caught them: two failures before four successes, an imperfect victory but a victory nonetheless. Had the Paladin failed, it would be there and three, and I'd probably rule that as the quarry has gone to ground, but the party knows for sure where that is and even some of its defenses. They failed to truly stop their opposition, but it was an extremely narrow loss, a cloud with a bright silver lining.

This way, every success does in fact matter. They aren't fungible. Further, even a failed SC isn't the worst thing, if the successes earned them enough benefits that they can still call it progress. It's sort of a mixture of "fail forward" and "focus on the fiction". Having seen this in action with at least three different DMs, it's a big part of why I love 4e so much (and why I find Dungeon World so comfortable to DM even though it is nowhere near crunchy enough for my preferences.)