David Noonan on D&D Complexity

[Mark CMG]

Isn't #of attacks just formula (. . .)?

Yes, it is, as are saving throws, experience progression, and a number of other things.

 

[tylerthehobo]

With the 3e setup though, if powerful dragons don't have access to powerful magics, they are going to get quickly destroyed in the magical arms race that D&D can turn into...

"magical arms race". Good one. I like that and will use it in tomorrow's game with the munchkins in my group. I will sanction them accordingly.

 

[Endur]

I thought it was funny that they thought "Dispel Magic" caused problems. Dispel Magic has been part of the game since D&D began.

The problem is all of the buff spells WOTC added in 3.X, not Dispel Magic.

 

[DeadlyUematsu]

Yeah. Dispel Magic and Mord's Disjunction were pretty harmless - it's the buffs, if they are up, that makes thier use distatseful.

 

[I'm A Banana]

#1: Turn dragons into elemental-based Warlocks. Red dragons have firey invocations. White dragons have cold invocations. Blah blah blah. If it works for PC's, it can work for dragons, too.

#2: I'm going to punch Driddle in the eye if he mentions his crackpot card theory again.

 

[Hussar]

Something to remember when looking at this, and I believe this has been brought up already, is that this is the absolute high end on the complexity scale. This is the biggest of the big fighting the baddest of the bad. It doesn't get any worse than this as far as complexity goes.

99% of gaming will never be this complex.

Changing BAB -> It's not so easy as "BAB equal to your CL" because you need to check if Fighter of that level don't has additional attacks, so you need -> take PHB from the shelf -> find the page with Ftr BAB -> check it and add to yours Cleric sheet.

Bumping Str by 6 -> It's not so easy as add +3 to hit and +3 to damage, because you need to check what kind of bonus it is. It's enhancement, so it stack with righteous might but don't stack with bull’s strength. You need to read decriptions of all these spells when you casts any one of them.

Addind hp -> It's not so easy, too, because there is a question "Are these hp stack with these added by Aid spell?"

Ok, first, if subtraction by 5 requires a trip the the PHB, well, perhaps a calculator at the table could help. As far as reading spells before their cast, well, I would have to say, what's your point? The DM shouldn't be doing that, the player should be. And, when I ask, he better have the answer instantly.

I expect players to actually RTFM before they play. If players cannot remember details like that, then spell cards are the way to go. Buy some index cards and have the characters copy out their spells (at least the mechanical bits) onto them.

I really get the feeling that complexity at the table is the result of DM's who want to run every single detail. I don't bother. I trust my players to be able to run their characters within the bounds of the rules. I run the monsters and they run their characters.

 

[blargney the second]

I really dig the idea of dragons with invocations. Ch-ching!

 

[Justin Bacon]

I'm curious if everyone hates grapple, (and I think we all do), why doesnt WOTC, redo the grapple rules. Likewise with the flying rules, if the rules are too complex, simplify them. Do we need poor, average, good, and perfect fly ratings? I'm playing D&D not Aerotech.

I find that the grapple rules -- like most of the combat chapter in the PHB -- simply suffer from poor lay-out and presentation. They're no more difficult than a bull rush in practice. (Attacks of Opportunity are another ruleset that gets presented in such a muddled and confusing fashion that people come away thinking they're a lot more complicated than they actually are.)

That being said, if I were in charge of the universe, I would streamline several combat rules so that they operated on a common mechanic: Grapples, bull rushes, overruns, and trips. I'd get rid of weird little exceptions that serve little or no purpose (like the unprecedented rule which causes the grapple to fail if the opponent's AoO causes damage; or the rule that you can't grapple a creature two sizes larger than yourself -- hey, if you can overcome that size penalty I say more power to you; or the bizarro 25% hit chance while bull rushing). The result would look something like this:

--UNARMED COMBAT--

UNARMED STRIKES: Making an unarmed strike provokes an AoO. If it is successful, an unarmed strike deals subdual damage according to the attacker's size (see table). You can deal lethal damage with an unarmed strike by accepting a -4 penalty to your attack roll. Unarmed strikes are considered light weapons. A natural weapon is not an unarmed strike, but creatures with natural weapons can choose to make an unarmed strike if they wish to.[1]

GRAPPLING:

Grapple check: 1d20 + Strength modifier + special size modifier (see table)[2]

1. Move into the opponent's square. (This provokes movement-based AoOs normally.)
2. Make a melee touch attack. (This provokes an AoO normally.)
3. Make an opposed grapple check to bull rush, overrun, trip, or wrestle your opponent.

While in a grapple, you are flatfooted[3]. You gain soft cover from your opponent (which may cause others to hit them when they're trying to hit you).

Bull Rush: If you beat the defender's grapple check result, you push them back 5 feet. If you wish to move with the defender, you can push them back an additional 5 feet for each 5 points by which your check result is greater than the defender’s check result. You can’t, however, exceed your normal movement limit. If your check fails, you must immediately move 5 feet back the way you came. (Note: The defender provokes attacks of opportunity if he is moved. So do you, if you move with him.)

Overrun: You can make an overrun attempt to move through an enemy's space as part of a move action or charge. The defender can choose not to oppose your grapple check and allow you to pass through their space as if they were a friendly character.[4] If the defender chooses to oppose the attempt, the opposed grapple check is resolved as a trip (see below). If the defender is tripped, you may move through their space as if they were a friendly character.

Trip: If you beat the defender's grapple check result, they fall prone. If you fail, the defender may immediately make an opposed grapple check as a free action. If they succeed, you fall prone.

Wrestle: If you beat the defender's grapple check result, you deal damage as if you had made an unarmed strike and are now wrestling your opponent

WRESTLING:
[ It's gotten too late for me to finish this coherently. I'll try to come back and edit this post in the morning, but it's pretty straight-forward at this point: Conditions and actions while wrestling, which include the possibility of pinning. Conditions and actions while pinning. Conditions and actions while pinned. The key is that accomplishing anything while wrestling, pinning, or being pinned is an opposed grapple check. Anything. ]

NOTES

1. There would be no such thing as an "armed" unarmed strike. That is just damn confusing. There would be unarmed strikes and there would be natural weapons. Clear distinction. The Improved Unarmed Strike feat would basically give the character a natural weapon.

2. I might consider allowing the defender in a grapple check to substitude their Dexterity modifier in place of their Strength modifier in the grapple check (if its higher, obviously). But I'm really not sure that's essential, and I'd prefer to avoid the complexity. If such a rule were implemented, I would also include the following: "The defender gets a +4 bonus on his check if he has more than two legs or is otherwise more stable than a normal humanoid."

3. Flatfooted nicely encompasses the "lose Dex bonus" and "don't threaten squares" condition under an existing term which is easy to remember because it just makes sense.

4. This would need to be combined with a rule revision allowing you to charge through a space occupied by a friendly character. But, on the flip-side, this just makes sense: The existing Overrun rules allow an enemy to get out of my way and continue my charge, why wouldn't my friends be able to do the same thing?

What's that, you say? It doesn't make much sense to have separate Improved Bull Rush, Improved Trip, and Improved Overrun feats any more? Yeah, you're right. Those should all be lumped into a single Improved Grapple feat.

 

[helium3]

I'm curious if everyone hates grapple, (and I think we all do), why doesnt WOTC, redo the grapple rules.

I think the grapple rules are generally just fine and I don't understand why everyone fusses about them so much.

 

[Thomas Percy]

Isn't #of attacks just forumla, BAB/-5/-5/-5? So if you are CL7 you would get +7/+2, CL12 +12/+7/+2, CL20 +20/+15/+10/+5, etc? That doesn't seem very complicated at all, and I'm not sure why you would need a book.

What is complicated and what is not is a question of who are you. You are better then me in maths, more clever. I played 3d from the beginning and doesn't see these -5/-5/-5 until now.
Anyway, it's a mechaniscs beyond mechanics. To play a chess I need to know how to move 8 pawns, 2 knights, 2 bishops, 2 rooks, 1 queen and 1 king. But I don't need to know why the rook (a "castle") moves any number of vacant spaces vertically or horizontally.

I expect players to actually RTFM before they play. If players cannot remember details like that, then spell cards are the way to go. Buy some index cards and have the characters copy out their spells (at least the mechanical bits) onto them.

Index cards can be great, maybe I will try them.

Let's imagine a D&D with buff spells easy to run without looking at the books or these cards, with a few (1-5) buff spells which work extremly simple, eg. "Haste: you gain 1 additional attack", "Displcacement: 50% of hits miss you", the spell duration is until the end of encounter, and so one. I think it's fun, but I happily read about any flaws of such solution, except "there will be less spells, book, cards".