Core concept or rule that just bugs you beyond your ability to put up with it?

[MerakSpielman]

So are you suggesting that magic should be kept out of the hands of the PC's?

He seems to be suggesting that keeping magic out of the hands of the PCs is the only real way of keeping it 100% mysterious. It's a rational argument, and I agree.

 

[Rel]

He seems to be suggesting that keeping magic out of the hands of the PCs is the only real way of keeping it 100% mysterious. It's a rational argument, and I agree.

Well I suppose that I agree that it's the only real way of keeping magic unknown and unknowable. It just doesn't sound like much fun to me.

 

[woodelf]

I'm curious about this, because it's never been my experience - how do attacks of opportunity slow the game down? What would you recommend as an alternative which preserves the benefits of reach and defensive position?

Closing/fending and retreating/pressing rules. Great system that incorporated this for AD&D1, and which i adapted to AD&D2--it accomplished everything AoOs do, and then some, and with less complexity and less intrusiveness.

 

[reanjr]

You ad hoc everything? Come on. You're not playing D&D then - you're playing cowboys and indians.

I meant when related to magical item creation. I also ad hoc XP and treasure. The rest is OK to use tables and rules, etc...

 

[reanjr]

Well, you'd probably have to tone down the number of different weapons, actions, etc. But that would suit me fine. I'd have 1 "two-handed melee wepaon" with the same stats, and the player can then decide whether it's a greatsword, a greataxe, a greatclub, a falchion, ...

ETA: Do you still have that system? As a doc file or something? I'd really like to take a look at it.

Yes, I do, e-mail me reanjr wwnet net (fill in the blanks) and I'll send it to you. I'm currently at work, but an e-mail will remind to do it once I get home.

 

[reanjr]

Sometimes I miss segmented movement. It eliminated the archer getting charged instantly problem. (Archer and barbarian meet at 60 feet distance. Barbarian win init. He closes the 60 feet and slams the archer with his ax. Even if the archer has his bow out, by losing init he cannot load and fire it before the barbarian runs 60 feet. Not logical. In our old system, the archer had to roll 6 less than the Barbarian on the init roll for it to happen (and they were only d10 init rolls plus Dex bonus). Wow, I guess I do have at least one pet peeve. Unrealistic movement.)

I'm not sure if that is really a complaint on the movement system. Seems more like a complaint on the initiative and action system.

 

[reanjr]

There are two solutions to that quandry: (1) make it easier to create magic items, or (2) make magical treasure less common. Actually, there is a third option: (3) explain why difficult-to-create magic items are so common in local ruins.

#3 is easy for most magical items. They're permanent. You're just finding stuff from 700 years ago. For a real-world example, take cars. They're hard to make. They're very expensive. They're absolutely everywhere. Imagine if they lasted forever.

 

[reanjr]

Agree totally.

I don't understand why people think that the acquisition of magic lewt is out of control in 3e when I clearly remember the truckloads of magic items our characters collected in the old days. Flipping through 3rd edition modules and Dungeon articles, it seems to me that it's nowhere near as ludicrous.

The problem 3e has that the old editions didn't is that the players are in control of every magic item they get. They synergistically put together absurd combinations of items that just wouldn't have happened in older editions without the DM's support. Magic items have been commoditized. They're a shopping list.

 

[KnowTheToe]

Which breaks the game if you don't use a long series of house rules.

- speaking about eliminating low level magic items

In almost every game I played, the PCs have been 30-32 pt buy or rolld 4d6 reroll 1's. In each case the PCs are significantly more powerful than the 25 pt buy characters the game was balanced with. So if you are using heroic stats, it is like having permanat low level magic items.

 

[reanjr]

The thing is, people say they want magic items to be rare and special. They say they want their players to be impressed and to treasure their rare, valuable +1 Longsword. But the problem is, no matter how rare you make them, it's still just a +1 Longsword. +1 just isn't that much. A fighter who rolled better than you could have a +1 to hit and damage just from his higher strength, and that's at first level! A +1 weapon is crap. It's practically worthless. No matter how rare it is. Great, I have a 5% greater chance to hit an enemy. Like I'll ever really even notice.

If you want magic to be rare and powerful, the way to do it isn't by making low-powered items rare and difficult to find. It's by eliminating the low-powered items altogether. If ALL the magic weapons in the world are +5, than all the magic weapons in the world will be rare, insanely powerful, and priceless. Adventurers would be lucky to ever find one.

That's what I do, except that I tend to create magical items with special abilities rather than just +5. A semi-intelligent +3 sword that keeps you alive (sustenence) so that it can subtly sway you with its suggestion ability to bring it back to its owner and uses negatively charged energy (+1d6 damage) to power other effects is probably not much more or lesss expensive (if you use the tables) than a +5, but it is a lot neater and can be placed into the hands of a much lower leveled character without problems, since the sword controls itself.

Thr problem with letting players create magic items is that they don't do this sort of thing. They're more like " yeah, +25% chance to hiznit!! My character'll be da bomb now, yo! Hook me up magic-man! Here's the cash."