Discussing problems with D&D/d20 rules...

[Psion]

(Erstwhile's post)

ROFLMAO! Now THAT'S Real Ultimate Power. (TM)

 

[Ristamar]

My reasons: there are no rules for designing a prestige class, or how to design good feat progression.

The funny thing is, if there were actual hard, concrete rules to designing feats and prestige classes, half of the d20 publishers wouldn't know what to print, and their designers wouldn't have jobs. Why? Because feats and prestige classes comprise a large bulk of the d20 market, but with a hard set of rules, any moron could put them together with minimal effort. On top of that, I'd imagine the resulting feats and prestige classes (created with these 'rules') would be pretty damn boring.

As it stands, there are guidelines to creating prestige classes in the DMG. Good guidelines. There were also articles on creating feats and prestige classes in Dragon magazine (and yeah, maybe they should've been printed in the DMG, but that's not the issue at hand).

These guidelines are more than adequate, helping the creator eyeball and adjust key issues to maintain balance. Go beyond that, and all you do is start stifling creativity.



Oh... and here's another 'thumbs up' to Erstwhile's post for delivering TEH FUNNEY. That was totally money, man.

 

[Tiefling]

You have some very good points, Celebrim, which I had overlooked. You're right that saying "Either you always hit the bullseye with a dart or not" would be unrealistic, and I think that goes into another nuance which I hadn't gone into: some skills will be more random than others. I suspect that Str and Con skills (including climbing) would be more constant, while Dex and Cha skills (including tossing darts) would be more variable.

Look at it this way, either you can climb the unknotted rope or you almost always fail. If you have +5 climb, you can take 10 and never fall off the rope under normal circumstances. If you have +4 climb, you can climb the rope 50% of the time, and half the time you fail to climb it, you fall off. If you have +0 climb, you can hang onto the rope and never fall off (until you fatigue) but you can only climb it 25% of the time, and most the time that you don't manage to climb it you fall off. Isn't this exactly what you are asking for?

Not really. I don't think it makes sense to have someone who can climb it 50% of the time. It seems to me that if there aren't any distractions, you'd either be able to do it or not. The "Take 10" rule is a step in the right direction, but with minimal distractions I don't think your chances would be affected much, while a lot of distractions would make it pretty much impossible.

On the fighter/commoner combat thing: you're right that I neglected the difference in HP and armor between them. In retrospect, the fighter would be much more likely to win the fight. But what I'm trying to get at is that even if Person A isn't any tougher or better armored than Person B, if Person A has even minimal arms training while Person B does not, Person A is much better off than Person B.

A good illustration is the sport of fencing. My brother has had some training in fencing. Not all that much, just enough that I would classify his skill with a foil as equal to a 1st-level Fighter. I, on the other hand, have no such training, but he's taught me the basics of how you handle the foil, so I'm proficient. I've sparred with him before, though, and even though the rules of fencing make inherent toughness immaterial, not to mention that armor has no effect, he can still beat the crap out of me every time.

The rules of fencing state that if you touch the opponent on the target area three times, you win. If I was to model this in D&D, the opponents would be making touch attacks against each other (thus armor has no effect). Furthermore, since you must merely touch your opponent to win, high HP has no effect.

Now enter the fighter and the commoner. Assuming they are equally proficient with their weapons, and the fighter has weapon focus in it, the fighter's BAB is +2 while the commoner's is +0. Each must make a touch attack against AC 10 and hit three times to win. The fighter only has a slight advantage (he'll hit 6/10 times, compared to the commoner's 5/10), so the commoner would win a significant percentage of the time - that's pretty random. Yet my brother manages to beat the crap out of me every single time - not very random at all.

That's why I think there's too much randomness. Sorry if the example is unclear, I'm pretty tired right now.

 

[Erstwhile]

Heh, thanks, folks...I'll be here all week.

In retrospect, though, I s'pose it should really have been "HarnMaster is the REAL ULTIMATE GAME SYSTEM"...since we're talking about rules, and as has been noted before:

Harn = a fantasy game world suitable for use with any game system.

HarnMaster = a game system specifically tailored for use with Harn.

So, I felt the need to clarify 'cause, basically, I didn't feel like re-writing the damn thing.

And yes, Harn is totally sweet.

E.

 

[derverdammte]

some skills will be more random than others. I suspect that Str and Con skills (including climbing) would be more constant, while Dex and Cha skills (including tossing darts) would be more variable.

Back when 3e was being playtested, one of the surveys indicated that the designers were thinking about having skills that had variable degrees of randomness. "Very random" skills would use a d20 + skill mod, and "Less random" skills would use a d6 + mod. If you wanted to mess with the system that way, it probably wouldn't be hard, although I can see why the designers didn't pursue this line of thought very far.

 

[Desdichado]

Look at it this way, either you can climb the unknotted rope or you almost always fail. If you have +5 climb, you can take 10 and never fall off the rope under normal circumstances. If you have +4 climb, you can climb the rope 50% of the time, and half the time you fail to climb it, you fall off. If you have +0 climb, you can hang onto the rope and never fall off (until you fatigue) but you can only climb it 25% of the time, and most the time that you don't manage to climb it you fall off. Isn't this exactly what you are asking for?

That math doesn't make much sense. How does a +5 give you 100% success and +4 give you 50% success?

 

[Erstwhile]

That math doesn't make much sense. How does a +5 give you 100% success and +4 give you 50% success?

Because at +5, at DC 15, you can Take 10 - and thereby succeed automatically, hence, 100% success.

At +4, you can't "Take 10". You need to roll 11 or higher to succeed (unless you Take 20, of course, but let's not complicate matters!)...hence, 50% success rate.

E.

 

[Desdichado]

Your Mileage May Very

Vary!

 

[Furn_Darkside]

Vary!

*blush* Ugh

Thanks for correcting me.

FD

 

[Kaptain_Kantrip]

Heh, thanks, folks...I'll be here all week.

E.

LOL! Great post, very funny! I laughed my ass off... it's got to be around here somewhere!

Thanks for bringing up the point about Harn and HarnMaster being two totally separate things. It's easy to get that mixed up.

Harn (the setting) is rules independent. There is some d20 information available for it, both fan and official published adventure/sourcebooks. You can use Harn's setting with d20 or any other rules system you like. HarnMaster rules are not to everyone's taste, nor should they be. There are a lot of GURPS Harn websites, for example. Others prefer to game Harn with Chivalry & Sorcery, Pendragon, Shadowrun 3rd Edition (!), d20, or RoleMaster. Chances are good you can find free online resources if you want to run Harn with other rules besides HarnMaster. In fact, I encourage you to do so. I initially gamed Harn with (modified) d20/Call of Cthulhu rules, and it was great fun... We just felt something still wasn't quite right (to our taste) and tried HarnMaster, which worked much better for us. YMMV. I mean, there are more Harn products (rules independent) than HarnMaster ones, so you could get all the setting material and never need the HarnMaster rule books.

I'd really like to take a moment and say that I am SO impressed with the way this thread is going and the quality and quantity of the posts. We are having a rational, friendly debate on issues that need to be addressed (not by everyone, but by those who need it addressed--meaning if you're having fun with d20 as is, more power to ya!), regardless of Harn or HarnMaster's inclusion in the debate. In fact, Harn and HarnMaster aren't even being discussed in a lot of the posts; d20 is!

The thread is really about addressing and finding solutions to these problems. I found mine in Harn and HarnMaster and wanted to share that with you all. I hope everyone finds a solution to their issues as well, even if its by modifying the existing d20 rules to fit their needs or switching to some other system. Gaming is about fun, and different people have different ideas of what constitutes fun, so I think/hope we can all agree that some people have issues with D&D and/or d20 and that these issues should be addressed and positive, workable solutions found so that everyone is happy.