Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="vturlough" data-source="post: 228341" data-attributes="member: 3268">Okay,I like DND.  Love DND.  Been playing it for a long time.  Therefore, here is my rant on d20 and DND.Bad things:ClassesImportance of itemsGame BalanceWargamingSkills"Upping the Numbers"ACkind've a rantHit pointsCRsGood thingsSimplicityGets casual gamersFor me, I will be brief, as many of these are connected.In redesigning DND, since they created a new system anyway, they should have gotten rid of the wargaming roots of DND.  The whole progression of characters and monsters is based in wargaming and should be done away with.  Why?  IMO (as all of this is), the wargaming roots is what keeps the focus away from the individual.  Classes - Classes are fine but I don't like a system where classes can't be replicated through special abilities.  For example, no one else, not even the fighter with his many feats, can be as good of an unarmed fighter as a monk.  Why not?  Why do I still *HAVE* to be a monk to get better unarmed damage?  Sure, the odd feat here and there might up me a die or two, but nothing to compare to the monk.  This doesn't even talk about his special abilities."Game Balance" - Things work differently.  That's just the way it is.  While I don't want to have a race that has +6 to all attributes, having choices that give bonuses without penalties would be nice.  In 2E, with the increased level limits, there was sometimes little reason to be human, except for role playing.  I still had more than 66% human characters in the group because that's what the guys wanted to role play.  That was their character.  In general, though, "game balance" can't happen because at some point, the classes will be good in their area and no one else can touch them.  Would anyone consider having a wizard fight a fighter?  Yes, part of a wizard's abilities are spells and ignoring them isn't fair to the wizard.  The point is, that given the circumstances, the fighter has the advantage.Items - WHY IS THE EMPHASIS ON ITEMS?  Why isn't it on the character?  Why is it that, as shown by money for characters of higher than 2nd level, a character MUST have a certain gold amount of items after 1st level?  What does that say about the system?  Why can't we have a system that allows me to have a character who inheirited his father's magical sword and not have it ruin "balance".  Skills - I personally don't like black and white, hit or miss skills.  There is too much subjectivity in them.  I mean, if a character has a +25 in something and rolls a 34 but needed a 35, they still notice nothing?  (or whatever?)  That is higher than probably a 10th level character can get and yet they still didn't notice something?!?? "upping the numbers" - I was worried about it with Deities and Demigods and it seems to be continuing with Epic Level stuff.  The numbers just go up.  Want to challenge your 21st level characters?  Make the DC be 50!  Want to have more powerful items?  Up the total bonus from 10 to 25!  Want to have creatures to challenge them?  Give them ACs of 100 and +125 to hit!  GIVE ME A BREAK!  I take a very simple approach when assigning a DC.  Can ANY class/race do this?  Do you need to be experienced to do it?  If the answer is yes and then no, the DC should be easy.  Not higher!  I know it is corny but I have yet to find myself facing things in life that I can't handle.  Having said that, what happens when suddenly something that was a DC of 15 becomes a 40?!??  AC - Armor was created to reduce damage, not make it harder to hit.  Yes, you can nit pick this and say an actual hit is when it does damage.  What?  So, the big guy with the hammer who hit the guy in full plate didn't roll high enough to wound him?  That dent in the breastplate doesn't mean anything?  Minor rantsCRs - A very good start but still too subjective.  Too many situational bonuses.  For example, 3 orcs with daggers is a CR of 1.  But, arguably, the same 3 orcs with bows might be a 1.5.  The same three orcs with bows at 150' might be a 2.  And, give the last ones some cover and they might be a 3.  (Also, see previous rant on items.)  Again, a good start and probably the best it can be, given the rest of the system.HPs - THEY MEAN NOTHING!  THEY HAVE NO MEANING!  We could rename them Squishy Points and it would be the same thing.  What this does is take away from desciptors in battle, or anytime HPs are lost, because what does losing 10 HPs mean?  What about 20?  Why do I keep coming back?Many reasons.  First of all, this game is simple.  By keeping it simple, I get to emphasize the STORY and CHARACTERS, not what they are carrying.  This is a very good thing.  Second, the simplicity has allowed casual gamers (such as my wife) who might not otherwise play to play.  That attracts more players, which is a good thing in my opinion.I am not going to stop playing DND.  I do like it.  There are some days when I just have to scream at what it is instead of what it could have been.  Okay, *deep breath* I am done now.  Thanks for reading!  turlough, who still thinks that Alternity is the BEST game ever written.  Period.</blockquote>

Verification