airwalkrr said:
1. Multiclassing
AD&D was too strict. 3rd edition is too permissive. In AD&D you couldn't change professions unless you were human; that was a problem. In 3rd edition you can't help but change professions many times, including certain prestigious professions; this is also a problem.
Potential Solution: There needs to be a significant drawback to multiclassing while keeping it viable. Currently, the only drawback (XP penalty) is easily circumvented. Even when it isn't avoided, XP loss isn't fun.
You're looking at it in the eyes of a tweaking power gamer. WHen my players multiclass, it's for RP reasons and it's to be unique. No one in our games, in character or out of character, truly refer to themselves by their class/prestige class names. They make each individual unique. For example, one player of mine has a Paladin/Fighter/Cavalier but in-game he's known as a "Holy Cavalier of Helm". He also has a Samurai/Psychic Warrior/Elocator who's known as "Amutsugi of Clan Kaisetsu, a clan where it's warriors are gifted with abilities that they have molded into a unique martial arts style known as te Kaisetsu Style. Amutsugi's talents have been honed to specialize in martial maneuvers involving psychoportation."
If you look at it in that perspective, then multiclassing not only doesn't seem so bad but you'd hardly notice it. Unless someone were truly just trying to tweak and power game, in which case I can see the problem.
airwalkrr said:
2. Free Metamagic
Metamagic as an idea is great. But there is a reason the designers gave it an opportunity cost in the form of a higher level spell slot. Wizards were not meant to maximize fireballs at 5th level and clerics weren't meant to chain greater magic weapon at 7th level. The current trend of metamagic rods, sudden metamagic feats, and other "free" metamagic effects gives spellcasters too much power.
Potential Solution: I think this aspect just needs to be removed from the game. Metamagic is fine. "Free" metamagic is not.
Those magic items are not "free". They have a market price value and a character should not have items equal to the total he or she should have for that character level. If they go over it, then they're imbalanced for game play. It's in the DMG.
airwalkrr said:
3. Synergy
I'm not talking about synergy bonuses from skills. I am talking about unintended consequences of mixing and matching sourcebooks. For example, if a dread necromancer (Heroes of Horror) takes the Tomb-Tainted Soul feat (Libris Mortis), he gets unlimited healing. Taken separately, neither of these abilities is overpowered. Taken together, they have synergy that is far greater than the power of their individual components, likely an oversight because the books had different development teams.
Potential Solution: Allow each player access to one sourcebook ONLY outside of the three core rulebooks. This prevents most forms of synergy. Of course it reduces player options so it is not an ideal solution.
This I agree with, but then again, the DM should rule 0. It's that simple. If he makes it known that only core rules are allowed and he has to review non-core rules before admitting them into play, then so be it. If the problem springs up afterwards, again he should rule zero it. If the player doesn't understand, too bad.
airwalkrr said:
4. Two-Handed Weapons
Because of the double bonus from Power Attack, floaty shields, and more beneficial Strength modifier, two-handed weapon wielders have become the staple of melee combat. Forgive me, but this is trite. Two-weapon fighters and sword-and-board style have become comparatively worthless relics in the game.
Potential Solution: (and this is vague) The game needs to support multiple fighting styles by providing viable options for each that don't heavily overshadow the others. Player's Handbook 2 goes a long way towards rectifying this problem, but I don't know if it goes far enough.
I don't really see that many two-handed wielders. It's a good split between sword&shield, two-weapon, one-handed and two-handed fighting with my group. I have seen material that greatly benefit all of those.
airwalkrr said:
5. Balancing Per Encounter Instead of Per Day
This is a horrible idea because it propagates the notion that the world conforms itself to the power level of the player characters. Some encounters are meant to be tougher, and those encounters require greater resources. Others are meant to be more menial and require fewer resources. Properly gauging the difficulty of an encounter and balancing your resources is part of the strategy of D&D. Leave "per encounter" balancing in MMORPGs and keep D&D a strategic game, like it was meant to be. Or at least publish two versions.
Potential Solution: (another vague one) Characters should not be able to use their most powerful abilities without limit.
Well, no one has fun when the DM throws a great wyrm at them at level 2. In the end, you need to realize it's a game and as long as your players know that too, then it doesn't seem so unrealistic anymore. To make things more realistic, I agree with throwing in something too weak or too powerful now and then, but give them a fighting chance. Like allow them to lure the frost giant into a know fire trap or something if they're level 4 fighting it.
airwalkrr said:
6. Neverending Buffs
Yet another thing that removes an element of strategy from the game. Clerics are particularly fond of these. Spells like magic vestment, greater magic weapon, and heroes' feast are virtual must-haves for clerics because they last practically all day, especially with extend spell. "Forget situational spells. Just memorize the ones that keep you perpetually powered-up!" That's bland.
Potential Solution: Reduce durations of spells like this, or add costly material or XP costs to reduce their frequency of use.
I can agree with this, but it depends on the game's style. Not everyone likes the same style of gaming. Some like D&D to be more MMORPG like and others don't. I don't mind it either way.
airwalkrr said:
7. Combat Expertise and Power Attack
These kinds of feats make the game a bit too complicated because of the constant calculation required. A 10th-level fighter with Power Attack has 11 attack options representing the various penalties he can take. A 10th-level fighter with Power Attack AND Combat Expertise has 66 attack options! And he is expected to quickly decide which course of action is best?
Potential Solution: Simplify these kinds of feats with a flat penalty and flat bonus. The decision for the player then becomes merely to use it or not.
No, flat bonuses are horrible, trust me. They're like that in DDO: Stormreach and a lot of people hate it. My Barbarian hardly, if ever, uses Power Attack because of it.
And you were just recently talking about players need to do more strategizing, allowing Combat Expertise and Power Attack to be customizable IS strategy.
airwalkrr said:
8. Point Buy
As if we needed more excuses for players to focus on character creation as opposed to actually playing the game. The world isn't that fair. I don't know why we would expect our characters to be "equal" either (as if that ideal were even possible). Besides, it ruins the excitement of rolling up a really nice set of scores.
Potential Solution: Roll ability scores.
Depends on game style. Everyone has to make a character according to whatever method the DM uses.
airwalkrr said:
9. Rerolls
Various class abilities that allow rerolls greatly reduce the amount of chance in the game. You aren't likely to roll very many 1s during a game session, and if you have one or two reroll abilities (luck domain, luck blade, fatespinner, etc.) you don't need to worry about them. As long as your character is powerfully built, you will almost never need to worry about pesky automatic failures. Additionally, these abilities are greater still in the hands of NPCs, who only usually need them for one battle.
Potential Solution: Don't allow rerolls to change the result of automatic successes or failures.
Well, you're Luck Priest isn't really lucky if he can't manage to get himself out of a 1 on an attack, now is he? Doesn't really make sense.
airwalkrr said:
10. Magic Item Creation
It costs XP to make magic items. So my character unlearns things for succeeding at a task. How on earth does that make sense?
Potential Solution: Just drop the XP cost for magic item creation. It already costs your character a feat. Or make the creation of magic items difficult by requiring rare components that must be quested for.
Well, you don't unlearn anything, because you can't lose a level crafting magic items. I see and explain it as a representation of great energies that tax the mind, body and spirit of the individual crafting such potent items, whether minor or overwhelming in power. Someone else might explain it differently. Point is, XP cost is a great way to deter power gamers from crafting magic items to the point of uberness.
