I'll actually take a shot at this since I think you might be looking for some rationale or input. Yeah we can all always play a different game, but D&D dominates the market share and support material. Like operating systems, I'd love to have something other than MS product (and I know there are tons of options) but none integrate as cost effectively with the business software and applications I need.
So on a quasi point by point basis.
In the sense that combats under D&D take longer in later editions than earlier editions, that seems to be a common experience. The complexity comes from options and degree of simulation attempted. The basic mechanic, hit by level, defense by AC is pretty simple. Of course many feats etc. are advantageuos only if you use a battle grid approach and this can add time.
If you want a simpler version of level based, then earlier editions of D&D are most likely for you. Forums exist for this.
I don't get this. The players are not limited if they have the same view of D&D as you. Only if they don't share your view are they then limited, so to them D&D is fine. Are you suggesting that the options in D&D should not be on the market?
Regardless I like a very simple "death spiral" approach. One or two steps max, such as fresh, wounded, dead, and use such. The drawback, not much for PCs actually, but for the DM can be a major bookkeeping headache. Hence I'd suggest adding only one level of wounding to add a bit of realism, e.g, if you are fighting two people and you stab one, it is better to then shift to the unwounded guy as the wounded one is less of a threat. You can add this to D&D readily by house rule, just slap on a - modifier to hit once you take a certain % of your HP. I suggest 50% of HP as it is easy to figure.
In my view HP, Class Levels and AC are intermingled. Hit Points correspond not just to physical damage, but skill in defense as well. Class Levels impact hit points but also determine offensive skill. Armor Class conflates both the chance to be hit with the chance to be damaged; thus viewing a hit not as a mere touching but as a touching that causes damage. Very useful and elegent mechanics for miniatures combat as they can readily reflect the outcomes of minitures battles with swords and bows. Problematic for those situations where a mere touch is enough to harm.
It sounds like you want a system where in melee skill determines how hard you are to hit and armor reduces damage.
Not knowing the Two Weapon rules I can't comment.
No for in-game explainations there are many one can craft besides the rules said so. For example, non-nobel metals and especially iron alloys interfere with spell casting (the summoning and using of the magic but not adding defense). One reason mages may not have large metal weapons on them.
IIRC the combat round is long in the sense it represents multiple blows and is not a blow-by-blow representation. If you've ever done any fighting with fists or swords, e.g, fencing, SCA, etc. blows and swings take only seconds or less. Attacks thus represent more than just a single swing, so if you you try to close in on me, I probably can get off an extra good attack attempt on you.
The two hundred bears need to be making a "touch" knockdown attack. Of course how all two hundred could attack I don't know since maybe 6 at a time could surround a character.
In the end if all these things bother you, keep an eye out on the house rules section. In my short time here (with a few more posts than the crash induced reset would suggest) all these topics and house rules to address them have arisen.
So on a quasi point by point basis.
Hey what can I say, to each their own. What is balance to one is a restriction to another.Kashell said:
In the sense that combats under D&D take longer in later editions than earlier editions, that seems to be a common experience. The complexity comes from options and degree of simulation attempted. The basic mechanic, hit by level, defense by AC is pretty simple. Of course many feats etc. are advantageuos only if you use a battle grid approach and this can add time.
Not a bad observation, but not sure if you want a more skill based or more class based system. A more skill based system, yeah I'd have to agree, other games may be a better option and convert D&D materials into those terms. If you are looking for conversion information that might be a more constructive topic to post on.
If you want a simpler version of level based, then earlier editions of D&D are most likely for you. Forums exist for this.
I don't get this. The players are not limited if they have the same view of D&D as you. Only if they don't share your view are they then limited, so to them D&D is fine. Are you suggesting that the options in D&D should not be on the market?
Advancement mechanics are always tricky. Why can't a DM assign xp as they see fit? There is nothing to limit this. But isn't this the height or arbitrary? If you advocate this then you should have no problem with the rules. Just view the rules as helpful guidelines in the arbitrary DM award.
A very valid point. When soldiers stop fighting is a DM decision. Just like characters who might retreat if they take too much damage (not from a death sprial effect) but from the fear that the next good hit might kill them; NPCs and animals would normally do the same. If every creature you face fights to the death, then that's a DM "fault" not the game.
Regardless I like a very simple "death spiral" approach. One or two steps max, such as fresh, wounded, dead, and use such. The drawback, not much for PCs actually, but for the DM can be a major bookkeeping headache. Hence I'd suggest adding only one level of wounding to add a bit of realism, e.g, if you are fighting two people and you stab one, it is better to then shift to the unwounded guy as the wounded one is less of a threat. You can add this to D&D readily by house rule, just slap on a - modifier to hit once you take a certain % of your HP. I suggest 50% of HP as it is easy to figure.
Games rely on abstractions for playability, this is one here that is actually part of and key to the the overall abstractions D&D chose. IMHO this arises from the abstractions that came out of miniatures combat back in the 1970s. It has been perpetuated ever since.
In my view HP, Class Levels and AC are intermingled. Hit Points correspond not just to physical damage, but skill in defense as well. Class Levels impact hit points but also determine offensive skill. Armor Class conflates both the chance to be hit with the chance to be damaged; thus viewing a hit not as a mere touching but as a touching that causes damage. Very useful and elegent mechanics for miniatures combat as they can readily reflect the outcomes of minitures battles with swords and bows. Problematic for those situations where a mere touch is enough to harm.
It sounds like you want a system where in melee skill determines how hard you are to hit and armor reduces damage.
See above. It's more, I'm wearing a ton of armor so you can't hurt me. That's the inherent assumption in D&D hence Touch AC etc.
Makes perfect sense if you've ever boxed or done martial arts. Skill is key (in that you know what to look for in how someone telegraphs a punch). But all things being equal the faster guy hits first.
Consequence of how AC is treated reducing the vlaue of Dex. on "hitting" in melee.
Drop them, convert them to gold, no big deal. Again, who's to say the setting is european dark ages. Who's to say that in the fantasy world platinum does not occur as a more pure metal instead of a hard to smelt ore?
You are thinking of renaissance fighting manuals I believe. I'd be loathe to say that certain factions of humans in history (e.g., berserkers, vikings, etc.) or humans in general wouldn't blatantly attack.
You need to be specific. You seem to not know the historical origin of Druids. If you did you would realize there was a huge religous component to Druidism. A better criticism is they might be too much "nature boys." I don't think there is evidence that Druids were environmentalist at all in the present sense. But since the Romans wiped them out who's to say.
Again, not sure if you want a skill system or not. If not, then earlier editions of D&D may be your ticket. I'd take issue with skill checks inherently slowing play. It depends on when and how you use them. If you are going to pepper them trough combat, they certainly will add to flow disruption. If there is one or two per room, how long does it take you to roll a die and read a number?
Depends on the level of detail you'd like. Sounds like you want less here. Then combine them as you suggest. Not a hard thing to do.
Maybe you can't buy that custom item you want? Maybe WoTC is being nice and giving the DM a system for making magical items instead of them just being listed.
Not knowing the Two Weapon rules I can't comment.
Really. No matter how well they fit, the armor still weighs a fair amount and is not flexible in every direction. I'll admit I've never acutally worn a suit of full plate, but have worn chain shirts and while not massively cimbersome they do limit range of motion much more than a t-shirt.
An observation going back at least into the 70s. Easy to fix, boost the AC bonus, etc.
This boils down to the old argument can/should mages be able to cast in armor. What answer do you want? Drop it if you don't like it but game balance is a prime reason to keep it. Given the power of magic other classes need something to call their own.
No for in-game explainations there are many one can craft besides the rules said so. For example, non-nobel metals and especially iron alloys interfere with spell casting (the summoning and using of the magic but not adding defense). One reason mages may not have large metal weapons on them.
IIRC the combat round is long in the sense it represents multiple blows and is not a blow-by-blow representation. If you've ever done any fighting with fists or swords, e.g, fencing, SCA, etc. blows and swings take only seconds or less. Attacks thus represent more than just a single swing, so if you you try to close in on me, I probably can get off an extra good attack attempt on you.
The two hundred bears need to be making a "touch" knockdown attack. Of course how all two hundred could attack I don't know since maybe 6 at a time could surround a character.
In the end if all these things bother you, keep an eye out on the house rules section. In my short time here (with a few more posts than the crash induced reset would suggest) all these topics and house rules to address them have arisen.
