Pet Peeves....

[Psion]

In looking at d20 this way, it seems that a lot of special options/abilities are rules-by-exception. To almost every base rule in d20, there seems to be some sort of exception. You get only one AoO, except if you have Feat xx, or Feat yy, or PrC zz.

Isn't this really objecting to all feat-like advantages? All character abilities that are not well parsed into skills?

Because really the rule is not "You get only one AoO, except if you have Feat xx, or Feat yy, or PrC zz." The rule is as a baseline, you can only make on AoO per round. The feats and prcs are additional capabilities, not part of the baseline rules. And if you object to quantifying capabilities on a character basis, we can only agree to disagree.

 

[Narfellus]

On a positive slant, with everyone here posting a lot of the same complaints, it looks like we have ways to fix them. Between Grim Tales (which IS a good book i undervalued at first), Unearthed Arcana and some logical thinking, we can cater the game we like. The problem is, and i think a lot of people agree, we end up paying good money for a lot of rules we don't necessarily like, just to get a few that we do like.

 

[Turjan]

On a positive slant, with everyone here posting a lot of the same complaints, it looks like we have ways to fix them. Between Grim Tales (which IS a good book i undervalued at first), Unearthed Arcana and some logical thinking, we can cater the game we like. The problem is, and i think a lot of people agree, we end up paying good money for a lot of rules we don't necessarily like, just to get a few that we do like.

That's true, to some extent. However, our individual pet peeves differ slightly, and this makes the design of a new rulesset that addresses these points in a consistent way a commercial gamble. That's why I don't think this will happen, and we will have to stick with toolboxes like Grim Tales.

I'm still waiting for someone accidentally publishing a tailor-made OGL game for me .

 

[der_kluge]

As someone said, it is the trinkets that are bothersome: +1 weapon, +1 shield, +1 armor, +1 clock, +1 ring, +1 amulet, etc.

God, tell me about it. I don't know what I'd do without my +1 clock.

 

[der_kluge]

Isn't this really objecting to all feat-like advantages? All character abilities that are not well parsed into skills?

Because really the rule is not "You get only one AoO, except if you have Feat xx, or Feat yy, or PrC zz." The rule is as a baseline, you can only make on AoO per round. The feats and prcs are additional capabilities, not part of the baseline rules. And if you object to quantifying capabilities on a character basis, we can only agree to disagree.

That's one way of looking at it, but you have to agree that there are several feats that exist to alter the normal scenario. In fact, some feats have a "normal:" paragraph to indicate how they affect the baseline.

blind-fight - reroll miss chances for concealment, and whatever advantages the concealed attacker had, are negated. Requiring the DM to keep track of the BAB for blind-fighting PCs versus other PCs.

dodge - already mentioned. DM has to keep track of which monster the PC(s) are currently dodging. Can also create confusion: "I rolled a 19, the creature just barely hits you." "No, I'm dodging that one, he needs a 20 to hit me." "I thought you were dodging this one, no I said I was dodging that one, I changed this round."

improved *just about anything* alters the ways AoOs work, and change the way the base rule work. So, the DM could try to bull rush a PC, and the PC could stop and go, "oh, but I have improved bull rush". So, unless the DM keeps track of which PCs have which feat, it could get a little hairy.


Another peeve I have about feats is that not all are created equal. No way something like Improved Initiative is worth as much as say, Quickdraw or combat reflexes. I've seen PCs go entire campaigns, and *never* use combat reflexes. Improved Initiative is used multiple times in a typical game.


While I'm at it, some of the feats just make little sense in all situations. I could create a halfling with improved bull rush, and improved overrun. The mind boggles.

 

[fredramsey]

Simple - it's not the DM's job to make sure players are using all their abilities. You don't tell them what spell to cast or what enemy to attack, do you? No. Nor should a DM be in charge of any of the character's abilities.

My players know this, and pay attention to the game so they know when to use the abilities they took. I only worry about monsters and NPCs.

That's one way of looking at it, but you have to agree that there are several feats that exist to alter the normal scenario. In fact, some feats have a "normal:" paragraph to indicate how they affect the baseline.

blind-fight - reroll miss chances for concealment, and whatever advantages the concealed attacker had, are negated. Requiring the DM to keep track of the BAB for blind-fighting PCs versus other PCs.

dodge - already mentioned. DM has to keep track of which monster the PC(s) are currently dodging. Can also create confusion: "I rolled a 19, the creature just barely hits you." "No, I'm dodging that one, he needs a 20 to hit me." "I thought you were dodging this one, no I said I was dodging that one, I changed this round."

improved *just about anything* alters the ways AoOs work, and change the way the base rule work. So, the DM could try to bull rush a PC, and the PC could stop and go, "oh, but I have improved bull rush". So, unless the DM keeps track of which PCs have which feat, it could get a little hairy.


Another peeve I have about feats is that not all are created equal. No way something like Improved Initiative is worth as much as say, Quickdraw or combat reflexes. I've seen PCs go entire campaigns, and *never* use combat reflexes. Improved Initiative is used multiple times in a typical game.


While I'm at it, some of the feats just make little sense in all situations. I could create a halfling with improved bull rush, and improved overrun. The mind boggles.

 

[Desdichado]

I'm still waiting for someone accidentally publishing a tailor-made OGL game for me .

That one made my laugh. So true for me too.

 

[Narfellus]

God, tell me about it. I don't know what I'd do without my +1 clock.

Oh, that is so true. The game SO forces you to have super-powered everything to be effective in combat (or telling the time). In my Midnight campaign I really scaled back the magic output. But Midnight is so different that default Dnd, gold pieces don't even exist and mages are killed on sight, so any magic is crafted secretly or found in lost ruins. God, that game system fixed so many problems i had with DnD, i don't really want to play in another. For awhile anyway.