A Realization (maybe an epiphany?) about D&D

[Klaus]

Ooops. Oh well, it wasn't like anything ever came out of the door anyways.


I allow a DC 20+Hide to spot the opponent; but they failed the spot, and were guessing...

Yair -> Check under the "Invisibility" header in the DMG glossary. There's a rule called "groping about":

Choose two adjacent squares. As a standard action, you waves your hands or weapon around these squares. Make a touch attack for each square (50% miss chance applies). If your touch attack hits, you deal no damage, but you pinpoint your target's location (at least until it moves again).

 

[Psion]

Well, I don't want to tempt edition wars (as bringing up C&C often does), but I will say this to those considering C&C: some people who actually played it reported in the d20 modern/other forum report that while they found some things they wanted rule-light wise, in some ways it replaced 3e complications with old school complications.

 

[MonsterMash]

Well, I don't want to tempt edition wars (as bringing up C&C often does), but I will say this to those considering C&C: some people who actually played it reported in the d20 modern/other forum report that while they found some things they wanted rule-light wise, in some ways it replaced 3e complications with old school complications.

I think (hope) that all of us accept that no ruleset is perfect (except maybe Diaglo with OD&D(1974) ) and does everything well - it's more a question of which tradeoffs do you want to accept.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

You know, I just came to a realization (maybe an epiphany?) about D&D.

Too many people whining.

 

[kenobi65]

Check under the "Invisibility" header in the DMG glossary. There's a rule called "groping about":

I believe that rule covered the vast majority of my high-school dating experiences.

 

[Crothian]

You know, I just came to a realization (maybe an epiphany?) about D&D.

Too many people whining.

Welcome to the internet, enjoy your stay!!

 

[Nebulous]

I do think that 3.5 has too many rules, but my solution was to just leave out rules i don't like. It has worked wonderfully for me to ignore weapon sizes, ignore several attacks of opportunity, ignore static level feats that never change, (i switch out stuff for players) and other quibbles. I really do like DnD although it's not perfect, certainly no game system is ideal but at least DnD has super support.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Welcome to the internet, enjoy your stay!!

How do they say ...

Ah yes. Quoted for truth.

 

[Steel_Wind]

Easily my favorite version of D&D so far. I have no issue with the rules or the number of them.

 

[Odhanan]

I prefer a system with a detailed and consistent ruleset, because it's easier to derive a "better" (however it's defined - more balanced, more interesting, more exciting) version of the rule once you start from a definite position.

Exactly alike. I prefer to have a complete ruleset, yet modulable enough for me to take out parts of it if I want to than a large, unfocussed ruleset that will require me to build subsystems for it to work like I want it to.

you can't do everything with [D&D]

Damn right you can't. It's not a generic system at all, if that's what you're talking about. If you're talking about some precise combat actions, I'd suggest you have a look at the Book of Iron Might from Malhavoc Press, and soon Mearls' Iron Lore. Lots of combat options, maneuver system etc there.