D&D General Let's list/complain about things we don't like

[R_J_K75]

Seems like some people just want go list and/or complain about things in D&D they don't like.

Oh good, I thought this was going to be a thread about listing "EVERYTHING" we don't like. We'd be here a very long time.

In all seriousness, I ran my first D&D 5E2024 game this past Monday and the page flipping and cross referencing reminded me why I stopped playing 2014.

 

[Jack Daniel]

▯

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don't disagree, but every time someone mentions that I get flashbacks to how badly Paizo bungled the PF1 shifter class. It was quite a time to be on their messageboards...

Never been a Pathfinder fan.

 

[Remathilis]

D&D is good at being D&D.

It's terrible for a lot of things. Along with d20.

The Golden Era of d20 Systems showed me the benefits and limitations of D&D mechanics. Star Wars never quite worked right, WoD d20 was just weird, CoC d20 was fun but a very different game. And don't get me started on Doctors and Daleks! If the goal is to play D&D but as a Jedi or a vampire or a Timelord, it's fine, but it's not the best way to emulate the specific feel of those properties.

 

[el-remmen]

I'm still not over Drow as pcs. Also their seeming ubiquity. Drow should be scary monsters known only in legends and spoken of only in whispers. Personally, I only use them about once or twice per edition, and I treat them like 1e did before G3- nobody knows about them except for a few elven sages, they are far removed from humanity/elfkind, they are thoroughly corrupt demon-worshipers (NOT just Lolth fanatics), etc.

If you want to play a dark skinned elf, you can be... an elf with dark skin. No problemo. I have no problem with that. But Drow are (in my game) the negative version of the quintessential elf: bright (morally), shining exemplars of freedom, the best of the fey adjacent races. Drow are depraved, dark, preternaturally awful, inhuman in the worst way, with the worst traits of the fey- capricious, arbitrary, a profound lack of concern for human(oid) morality and a love of cruelty.

In my previous homebrew setting “drow” was not a sub race of elf, it was the name for an elf (or elven community) who dedicated themselves to the spider goddess and turned evil. Thus a drow could look like any elf, they just had a template that gave them the powers associated with drow (and when they fell short of her expectations they became driders) and their cult had been driven underground a millennia or five ago.

 

[MGibster]

The Golden Era of d20 Systems showed me the benefits and limitations of D&D mechanics. Star Wars never quite worked right, WoD d20 was just weird, CoC d20 was fun but a very different game.

"This is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons even death may die." --mgibster defending Call of Cthulu d20. I was completely surprised when I played CoC d20 and found out what a great adaptation of the original game it really was. Don't get me wrong, you're right, it's a different game, but unlike most d20 adaptations, Monte Cook and John Tynes' love of the original really shines. It was a great game to introduce both players and Keepers to Cthulhu.

But, yeah, I gotta agree with you in the aggregate. Most of the d20 adaptations lacked. I'm looking at you, Wheel of Time.

 

[GobHag]

The original blog post that started it is closer to mediocre than a train wreck, when judged as a blog post. The bigger problem is the way discussing it snowballed in internet forums about RPG theory. Allegorically, imagine if there was a sizeable group of people that regularly referenced and discussed Sam Raimi's Spider-Man 3 in forums about the art and history of cinema. As if it were the next Shawshank Redemption or Pulp Fiction.

I've never really understood how the essay was popularized; maybe someone else can give some more insight.

Because it put into words something I've always felt was true--the Neotrad part especially, can't judge the LARP stuff--and helps explain my own preferences and history. While I wasn't big into Forum RP I was very close to places in those things back in the day and the connection between them is really obvious to me and I was frustrated no one found such commnality.

 

[Edgar Ironpelt]

I'll put down two in particular:

1. Massively powerful spells "balanced" by harsh limits on the number a character can cast. (And by the "quadratic wizards" syndrome: Wizards are gawd-like at high level, "balanced" by their being worthless loads at low level.) This is perhaps the earliest thing I didn't like about (A)D&D: "D&D does not have wizards. It has artillery pieces disguised as wizards."

2. Using inflationary hit points and then deploying various and sundry mechanics to overwhelm or bypass those high hit point totals possessed by high-level characters & high hit-dice monsters: Save or suck, critical hits, death from "massive" damage, ability score damage... This is not "the best of both worlds" but rather the worst of both worlds. This also goes back a long way for me - not as long as my first complaint, but still a very old one for me.

(I'll note that I'm not against inflationary hit points themselves. They have some valuable and desirable properties. What bothers me is the reaction "Inflationary hit point have valuable properties that certain players and GMs desire! We must nerf them! For the sake of avoiding bad MunchkinFun! Or for Reasons(other)!" Out of, I guess, some sort of buyer's remorse.)

 

[cranberry]

My list.
The official elimination of the half-elf and half-orc as separate and distinct species.
Magic-like abilities have mostly replaced magic items.
Mechanics/abilities heavily weighed in favor of the PCs
BBEG's need minions, lair actions and legendary resistance in order to provide a challenge for the PC's.
Loss of real threats, such as level drain, aging (ghosts 1E), high magic resistance of some monsters, etc.
The minimal risk of perma-death.
Some illustrations seem to be trending toward "softer" imagery.
The economic system no longer works after a while. "Let's see, I have 10M gp, and a meal at the tavern cost 1 cp."
The illusion of choice.
The game trying to be everything to everyone. Options are great, but at some point it becomes ridiculous.
Less emphasis on combat, and more on roll playing.
Rangers still haven't been fixed.
Gods being optional for clerics and paladins.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The consolidation of different races into the same mechanical presentation. No, damn it, goliaths are not half-giants, dragonborn are not draconians, etc. They're different!

I have an opposite issue, excessive amounts of similar species with similar and overlapping niches.