[NABAIS] Commonly shared gripes about D&D
- Thread starter Frosty
- Start date
kengar
First Post
I love 3e, I much prefer it to GURPS.
but...
AC = not hitting v. DR (I know this was mentioned before, but I agree)
Hit Points & Injury: I think a distinction beetween actual injury and the "roll with the punches" type of HP should have been made in the rules. (I know, an old gripe, but still valid).
but...
AC = not hitting v. DR (I know this was mentioned before, but I agree)
Hit Points & Injury: I think a distinction beetween actual injury and the "roll with the punches" type of HP should have been made in the rules. (I know, an old gripe, but still valid).
Flexor the Mighty!
18/100 Strength!
My gripes are few. I prefer the AC, HP, & Magic systems as they are.
1. Accelerated rate of advancement vs older editions. This game seems to be geared towards getting your PC's to high level quick. This leads to my next gripe.
2. The system "breaks down" around 20th level. This forces me to either buy another 40 dollar hardback book to keep playing the PC's or jury rig some house rules for it.
3. The art in the PHB.
4. The tight integration of every mechanic makes it hard to house rule or modify. The combat should have had an option for a simpler, less tactical sytstem.
1. Accelerated rate of advancement vs older editions. This game seems to be geared towards getting your PC's to high level quick. This leads to my next gripe.
2. The system "breaks down" around 20th level. This forces me to either buy another 40 dollar hardback book to keep playing the PC's or jury rig some house rules for it.
3. The art in the PHB.
4. The tight integration of every mechanic makes it hard to house rule or modify. The combat should have had an option for a simpler, less tactical sytstem.
Weeble said:
No-one said anything about liking the person doing the intimidating, or getting happy feelings about them. All that was said is that intimidation is a way of getting people to do what you want. Which it is - read the book!
Most people who make this criticism think intimidation is just the ability to scare people. It absolutely, demonstrably, is not. It is the ability to use fear to get people to do what you want. Merely scaring someone is a terrible way to accomplish this - people who are simply frightened often do the oppposite of what they think the person doing the frightening wants. Using intimidation as the book describes it requires a sense of how people react to stimuli and genuine force of personality, both essential parts of Charisma.
What on earth did you think this had to do with liking the person, or getting "happy feelings" about them?
Playability of Ability Score Damage !?
While I enjoy 3E a lot, I fear no game designer considered the consequences of ability score damage (especially temporary!), which comes from e.g. poison or psionics.
This temporary ability score damage isn't easily managed. Just look at the CharSheet and consider the places where Ability Bonuses are calculated into the effective bonuses - there are a lot! And then you get into some psionic combat or get poisoned and you suddenly have to recalculate your effective skill bonus, AC, Saves, hit points and anything else which depends on an ability bonus !?
While it might have been an obvious choice at the first look, temporarily losing ability scores turns out to be unplayable, I fear (while it may be a good rule for a computer-based game!)
Losing ability scores sometimes is a nice effect - if the amount doesn't change all the time (like an effect of a curse, which is in effect and that's it; or even a spell that boosts one of your scores). But think of the effects of psionic combat ... 5 different attack modes, each damaging a different ability score ... and the amount of damage is likely to change every round ... ts.
And about psionics in general: With the introduction of 3E the game system was streamlined and simplified a lot (it isn't called "d20" just for fun - remember
?) ... but why wasn't it possible to just add a Mental AC, Mental Hit Points and a Base Psionic Attack Bonus? It would have been much simpler ...
When 3E was designed, the designers decided to only keep the "holy cows" as guaranteed unchanged, but who told them that the 5 psionic attack and defense modes were holy cows? They even got rid of the "Sciences and Devotions" of 2E and introduced 9 power levels just like with the spells, so why keep those old attack/defense modes?
While I enjoy 3E a lot, I fear no game designer considered the consequences of ability score damage (especially temporary!), which comes from e.g. poison or psionics.
This temporary ability score damage isn't easily managed. Just look at the CharSheet and consider the places where Ability Bonuses are calculated into the effective bonuses - there are a lot! And then you get into some psionic combat or get poisoned and you suddenly have to recalculate your effective skill bonus, AC, Saves, hit points and anything else which depends on an ability bonus !?
While it might have been an obvious choice at the first look, temporarily losing ability scores turns out to be unplayable, I fear (while it may be a good rule for a computer-based game!)
Losing ability scores sometimes is a nice effect - if the amount doesn't change all the time (like an effect of a curse, which is in effect and that's it; or even a spell that boosts one of your scores). But think of the effects of psionic combat ... 5 different attack modes, each damaging a different ability score ... and the amount of damage is likely to change every round ... ts.
And about psionics in general: With the introduction of 3E the game system was streamlined and simplified a lot (it isn't called "d20" just for fun - remember
?) ... but why wasn't it possible to just add a Mental AC, Mental Hit Points and a Base Psionic Attack Bonus? It would have been much simpler ...When 3E was designed, the designers decided to only keep the "holy cows" as guaranteed unchanged, but who told them that the 5 psionic attack and defense modes were holy cows? They even got rid of the "Sciences and Devotions" of 2E and introduced 9 power levels just like with the spells, so why keep those old attack/defense modes?
Last edited:
clockworkjoe
First Post
Poison: it's just too weak in general. The poisons in the DMG are mostly a joke. Only the most expensive have a chance of actually killing a player with average or above average stats and the lack of a 'save or die' poison is stupid. Poison is not worth using except in bucket loads if you want to actually kill someone.
KnowTheToe
First Post
There are so many good one already mentioned so I will say Reread Ilen's and Limper's. They hit my biggies right on the nose.
Lack of skill selection is horrible. INT should be the dump skill for the fighter classes, it does nothing. Great I have 4 skill points to put in jump or animal handling. Tooeey, I spit on narrow skill choices. Less classes, more choices in those classes.
I enjoy D&D and think we should start a thread on what it does damn well such as set up a consistant game formula you can play loosely or become a hard rules lawyer.
Lack of skill selection is horrible. INT should be the dump skill for the fighter classes, it does nothing. Great I have 4 skill points to put in jump or animal handling. Tooeey, I spit on narrow skill choices. Less classes, more choices in those classes.
I enjoy D&D and think we should start a thread on what it does damn well such as set up a consistant game formula you can play loosely or become a hard rules lawyer.
Achan hiArusa
Explorer
The Sorcerer
Yes, I like the new D&D with its consistent rules set, though I do admit I end up playing more d20 games than I do D&D
Here is an article I sent into scalemail (which they will probably never print):
Are the Sorcerer and the Wizard Balanced with each other?
It seems that every class got a power boost. Rogues are more skilled than 2nd edition thieves, and a 20th level rogue can do more than triple the damage with a dagger on a sneak attack that a 2nd edition 20th thief could do on a backstab (and that doesn?t include the new class features). A 3rd edition fighter doesn?t have to sacrifice all of his skills (or NWPs) to be a fantastically skilled fighter. Clerics get more spells per day and more granted powers, and the list goes on. However, the wizard?s gain in power is modest, because of the belief that he was far more powerful than the other classes. But by comparing him with the sorcerer his power looks even more modest, which I will prove by the following analysis:
Category Sorcerer Wizard Bonus Justification
Arcane Preparation no yes -1 Arcane Preparation Feat
Bonus Feats 0 5 -5 Bonus Feats
Bonus Languages none Draconic -1 -
No Spell Book yes no +8 Spell Mastery Feat
Simple Weapons all some +1 Simple Weapon Feat
Spells Known 43 60 -17 Extra Spell Feat
Spells per Day 60 40 +20 Extra Slot Feat
Spontaneous Casting yes no +43 Signature Spell Feat
Grand Total - - +48 -
Note: If the number in the bonus column is negative then the wizard has the advantage. If it is positive then the sorcerer has the advantage. Most of the Feats mentioned above and below can be found in the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting or Tome & Blood.
Arcane Preparation: This is based on the Arcane Preparation Feat.
Bonus Feats: This is just straight up the number of bonus feats the character gets.
Bonus Languages (PH pg. 54): I just made this cost one feat for argument sake.
No Spell Book: Sorcerers are walking virtual spell books, while a wizard have to lug one around and
read it as they go. This assumes a sorcerer would get six spells per use of Spell Mastery.
Spells Known: This is how many spells a 20th level character of both classes knows. This assumes a
wizard has a maximum intelligence for a core race (23) and is justified by the Extra Spell feat (one
spell per feat).
Spells per Day: This is the number of spells per day both classes can cast. The sorcerer can cast 20 more
spells per day than a wizard. Each one of these is counted as one feat based on the extra slot feat,
though that feat works a little differently (it is more flexible with lower level spells and cannot be
used with the character?s highest spell level).
Spontaneous Casting: Sorcerers do not have to prepare spells. Thus they have the equivalent of the
Signature Spell feat for each and every spell that they know.
And the winner is: the sorcerer by a staggering 48 feats.
How can we fix this 48 feat gap (no pun intended)? The wizard could be give 48 extra spells 1st to 20th level (giving an extra 2.4 spells per level for a total of 4 or 5 spells per level). However I believe that some class features that increase campaign color could be added from other games in the d20 system (namely Wheel of Time and Oriental Adventures).
Fixes Sorcerer Wizard Bonus Source
Block yes no -6 Wheel of Time
Madness yes no -6 Wheel of Time
Minimum Spells per Level no yes -10 1st Edition AD&D
Slow Aging no yes -18 Wheel of Time
Spell Secret no yes -8 Oriental Adventures
New Total - - 0 -
Block: The sorcerer has a block as a female wilder (no matter what the sex the D&D character is). The description of a block can be found on page 60 of Wheel of Time. The sorcerer would receive Composure as a class skill (page 86 of Wheel of Time) and would be eligible to buy the Eliminate Block feat at 3rd or higher level (see Wheel of Time page 92).
Madness: Madness is described in Wheel of Time pages 53 and 210. For an unlucky roller it would require six mental stability feats for the character to be totally sane. The mental stability feat can be found on page 94 of Wheel of Time.
Minimum Spells per Level: A wizard gets 1 + Int bonus spells at 2nd and higher levels. This will give the character the same number of minimum spells that his 1st edition counterpart had. I counted it as 10 feats to make a round number. If this seems too low, read the section on Sorcerers in Oriental Adventures
under Game Rule Information: (pages 30) about mixing Wu Jen spells and Wizard/Sorcerer spells. This probably applies to normal campaigns also (whereas a wizard would have to travel there, learn the language, and earn the trust of a foreign spellcaster).
Slow Aging: The wizard ages slowly as per Wheel of Time, page 54. This fits very well in with the Forgotten Realms with centuries old wizards wandering about. I treated each 50% reduction in age as a single feat (though a single 50% is still more powerful than a feat, but doesn?t really affect game play unless the character is hit by an aging attack). Careful, controlled use of arcane magic can extend the lifespan. This includes study and preparation of spells before casting them. Spontaneous casting is harmful. Bards avoid this because they are minor spell casters and don?t use enough power to seriously hurt themselves (the music they use to cast there spells may also play a factor), but they do enough to cancel the slow aging effect. Sorcerers however, channel too much energy, too carelessly thus madly driving themselves into an early grave.
Spell Secret: This ability is described in Oriental Adventures, page 31. The character would get these at the same level as a Wu Jen. I counted each spell secret as a full feat and added the four feats listed as two feats (since they are limited much like a ranger?s virtual feats).
These are simple fixes and balance the two classes with each other. In game play, it does not seem to make the wizard significantly more powerful than the other classes.
Yes, I like the new D&D with its consistent rules set, though I do admit I end up playing more d20 games than I do D&D
Here is an article I sent into scalemail (which they will probably never print):
Are the Sorcerer and the Wizard Balanced with each other?
It seems that every class got a power boost. Rogues are more skilled than 2nd edition thieves, and a 20th level rogue can do more than triple the damage with a dagger on a sneak attack that a 2nd edition 20th thief could do on a backstab (and that doesn?t include the new class features). A 3rd edition fighter doesn?t have to sacrifice all of his skills (or NWPs) to be a fantastically skilled fighter. Clerics get more spells per day and more granted powers, and the list goes on. However, the wizard?s gain in power is modest, because of the belief that he was far more powerful than the other classes. But by comparing him with the sorcerer his power looks even more modest, which I will prove by the following analysis:
Category Sorcerer Wizard Bonus Justification
Arcane Preparation no yes -1 Arcane Preparation Feat
Bonus Feats 0 5 -5 Bonus Feats
Bonus Languages none Draconic -1 -
No Spell Book yes no +8 Spell Mastery Feat
Simple Weapons all some +1 Simple Weapon Feat
Spells Known 43 60 -17 Extra Spell Feat
Spells per Day 60 40 +20 Extra Slot Feat
Spontaneous Casting yes no +43 Signature Spell Feat
Grand Total - - +48 -
Note: If the number in the bonus column is negative then the wizard has the advantage. If it is positive then the sorcerer has the advantage. Most of the Feats mentioned above and below can be found in the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting or Tome & Blood.
Arcane Preparation: This is based on the Arcane Preparation Feat.
Bonus Feats: This is just straight up the number of bonus feats the character gets.
Bonus Languages (PH pg. 54): I just made this cost one feat for argument sake.
No Spell Book: Sorcerers are walking virtual spell books, while a wizard have to lug one around and
read it as they go. This assumes a sorcerer would get six spells per use of Spell Mastery.
Spells Known: This is how many spells a 20th level character of both classes knows. This assumes a
wizard has a maximum intelligence for a core race (23) and is justified by the Extra Spell feat (one
spell per feat).
Spells per Day: This is the number of spells per day both classes can cast. The sorcerer can cast 20 more
spells per day than a wizard. Each one of these is counted as one feat based on the extra slot feat,
though that feat works a little differently (it is more flexible with lower level spells and cannot be
used with the character?s highest spell level).
Spontaneous Casting: Sorcerers do not have to prepare spells. Thus they have the equivalent of the
Signature Spell feat for each and every spell that they know.
And the winner is: the sorcerer by a staggering 48 feats.
How can we fix this 48 feat gap (no pun intended)? The wizard could be give 48 extra spells 1st to 20th level (giving an extra 2.4 spells per level for a total of 4 or 5 spells per level). However I believe that some class features that increase campaign color could be added from other games in the d20 system (namely Wheel of Time and Oriental Adventures).
Fixes Sorcerer Wizard Bonus Source
Block yes no -6 Wheel of Time
Madness yes no -6 Wheel of Time
Minimum Spells per Level no yes -10 1st Edition AD&D
Slow Aging no yes -18 Wheel of Time
Spell Secret no yes -8 Oriental Adventures
New Total - - 0 -
Block: The sorcerer has a block as a female wilder (no matter what the sex the D&D character is). The description of a block can be found on page 60 of Wheel of Time. The sorcerer would receive Composure as a class skill (page 86 of Wheel of Time) and would be eligible to buy the Eliminate Block feat at 3rd or higher level (see Wheel of Time page 92).
Madness: Madness is described in Wheel of Time pages 53 and 210. For an unlucky roller it would require six mental stability feats for the character to be totally sane. The mental stability feat can be found on page 94 of Wheel of Time.
Minimum Spells per Level: A wizard gets 1 + Int bonus spells at 2nd and higher levels. This will give the character the same number of minimum spells that his 1st edition counterpart had. I counted it as 10 feats to make a round number. If this seems too low, read the section on Sorcerers in Oriental Adventures
under Game Rule Information: (pages 30) about mixing Wu Jen spells and Wizard/Sorcerer spells. This probably applies to normal campaigns also (whereas a wizard would have to travel there, learn the language, and earn the trust of a foreign spellcaster).
Slow Aging: The wizard ages slowly as per Wheel of Time, page 54. This fits very well in with the Forgotten Realms with centuries old wizards wandering about. I treated each 50% reduction in age as a single feat (though a single 50% is still more powerful than a feat, but doesn?t really affect game play unless the character is hit by an aging attack). Careful, controlled use of arcane magic can extend the lifespan. This includes study and preparation of spells before casting them. Spontaneous casting is harmful. Bards avoid this because they are minor spell casters and don?t use enough power to seriously hurt themselves (the music they use to cast there spells may also play a factor), but they do enough to cancel the slow aging effect. Sorcerers however, channel too much energy, too carelessly thus madly driving themselves into an early grave.
Spell Secret: This ability is described in Oriental Adventures, page 31. The character would get these at the same level as a Wu Jen. I counted each spell secret as a full feat and added the four feats listed as two feats (since they are limited much like a ranger?s virtual feats).
These are simple fixes and balance the two classes with each other. In game play, it does not seem to make the wizard significantly more powerful than the other classes.
Tsunami said:
jeffh, this is what in the world I was talking about. I wasn't the one who stated this in the first place, so please, unless you know what you are quoting, don't. Charisma is simply used in the context of what society portrays it as. A Half-orc with a low charisma would quite effectively Intimidate another of his breed, or any other race for that matter, and I don't think that being inharently less charismatic should affect this. Intimidation is, once again, not pursuasion. It is imposing one's will (as in Willpower-as in Wisdom) on another to get the desired response. Read my initial post before you make foolish comments. I was mentioning that some skills like Intimidate might be better defined if some specialization were allowed, i.e. using a different ability than the one listed. The DMG makes reference to this, but it is not in the PHB.
Similar Threads
