ColonelHardisson said:
Sure it does. It is that simple. Even if this was a gradual realization, why does that preclude simply finding another ruleset that is more to one's liking? I mean, what do you think people should do? There were substantive suggestions - a number of people suggested specific games to try. Why is that not addressing the sum of the post? Someone even suggested that Unearthed Arcana addresses many of the concerns in such a way that D&D doesn't have to be abandoned. Someone else mentioned the Rules forum as being the place where such things are addressed in detail. Why is that not addressing the sum of the post? Are people supposed to sit down and write a dissertation on it? As someone said above, it's beginning to seem as though you're simply being contrarian. That's not particularly interesting for a discussion.
Lots in that which is more than "Try a new system". I am not suggesting that one need to write their Masters Thesis, merely that "Maybe you should play another rpg.....D&D is what it is." is not a very constructive reply.
What D&D is has changed through editions, and it will undoubtably change again. Some changes are for the better, others not so much. Some stick, others not so much.
Is the OP wrong in suggesting that threads pertaining to many of the things he brings up appear here and elsewhere? I would say no. I've seen lots of them, and participated in or started a few.
Is the OP wrong about the XP system comments? I would say yes. I think CR/XP doesn't cut the mustard, but it's a heck of a lot better than willy-nilly to my view. OTOH, I'm subscribed to at least one thread about overhauling the XP system called "Calculating XP Drives Me Crazy" and the person who started that thread is a pretty hep cat.
No Hit Points? I decided that Wound Points/Vitality is a better system (or can be made into a better system, anyway). Again, mileage varies here, but it's hardly a new suggestion.
No Hit Dice? That's one of the OP's WTF moments for me. I can't imagine Conan being as easily killed as any old Aquilonian. That defies the genre that I'm trying to promote.
Problems with AC? Well, that's another thing
Unearthed Arcana addressed (who was it who mentioned fixes in this book earlier, anyway?). I use a rather elaborate AC/DR system myself, and its quite nifty. A summary used to exist on EnWorld about two months ago.....
Initiative. OP suggests Wisdom makes more sense than Dex. Dex is more than just flexibility, though...it is also speed. I don't buy into the OP's problem or fix, but I wouldn't leave a game because of it as a house rule.
Etc.
Some of his points show a lack of understanding of the rules system ("Why should I waste a feat and XP when I can just buy the item for the same price?", a natural 20 always hits so some of those 200 bears are bound to get lucky) and some of his points show a growing awareness of problems that have plagued rpgs since they first were spawned (unarmed combat and two-weapon fighting, armour and arcane spell casting).
The OP's historical knowledge is questionable (druids were a religious order; D&D druids have lots more to worry about than this!) but he is obviously looking for a gaming experience that works. Maybe he needs house rules. Maybe he needs a new game system. Maybe he just needs better fluff text so that he understands better why the "game is what it is".
Frenkly, he might just need to go back and look at 1st and 2nd Edition.....not for the rules, but for the logic as to why the rules are the way they are. Also, for some ideas as to how to use the system to make the type of game he wants.
Armour Class is a great example of this. It makes sense in the context of an abstract combat system, but how well do the current rules explain the abstract nature of that system? I personally would love to see some of the flavour text from 1st and 2nd ed in the new books.....As some of you will, no doubt recall.
The point is that there are a lot of answers other than "D&D is what it is" or "D&D is a very well-designed game, period."
Nor does it help to respond by claiming that the OP was simply complaining and offering no solutions, when the OP contains solutions (not necessarily good ones, mind) to several of the problems OP sees. "The DM should assign XP as he or she feels, not as the rules dictate" is, after all, a fairly firm position and a fix if you accept the OP's original problem vis a vis XP.
It's not much different than, say, saying "I detest calculating XP. It requires figuring out the actual CR of all my home-grown monsters and NPCs, it requires a spreadsheet for each character and encounter, it doesn't take into account the massive story content of my game, it doesn't factor in the fact that my game levels far slower than average, and it requires me to keep better bookkeeping than I currently do (especially when xp-draining spells and item creation gets used.) When I figure out XP, I usually throw a big honkin' story award on top, then even out the numbers so it at least
appears that I calculated it the official way."
Nor is it particularly helpful (or accurate) to claim that
You must all agree with me to some extent, because I consistantly see threads here for "simple combat" or "simple stats" etc. equates to a "broad generalization that other opinions are not valid".
The OP may not be
right, but neither is the OP entirely wrong.
Many of the issue the OP has have come up many, many times, and many of them are so common that they have official fixes in Unearthed Arcana.
As a final note, training can overcome circumstantial difficulties. In D&D, skills can overcome the limitations of armour, and you can do acrobatic in armour if you spend the skill points to do it. I am sure that anyone who can do cartwheels in plate mail can do better cartwheels far more easily when unarmoured.
RC
