Really good things in theory, but in practice...

[catsclaw227]

This is an interesting thread.

I feel like 3.5 broke the DR issue with the many different materials and the generic "magic" material needed to bypass. I believe that cool materials can still exist, and even DR based upon plusses as well, but it needs to be done differently.

Maybe a system that reduces DR based upon plusses (like noted above 5/plus) and material types (silver bypasses 2DR or whatever)

I don't mind the CR system that much, taking it as a general measurement instead and dealing with inconsistencies in-game.

 

[Hussar]

5. Sorcerors. Nice in theory; in practice, given either good luck or good management in spell acquisition, just an overpowered wizard variant.

Y'know, I think this is the first time I've ever seen anyone who thought that sorcs were MORE powerful than straight up wizards. Takes all kinds I suppose.

 

[Remathilis]

Counterspells.

IN THEORY: You can disrupt a baddies evil magical spell and save your party from firey doom.

IN PRACTICE: You never waste a readied action on the off-chance an evil mage is gonna use a spell you also happen to have also learned/prepped. And if you did, isn't better to RETURN FIRE rather than simply hand-wave away a spell most PCS will save vs. anyway?

 

[Herzog]

Counterspelling is only interesting when you :
have
-improved counterspelling
-reactive counterspelling
-heighten spell
and are a sorcerer or simmillar class.

That said, spending that much feats to fix something that is useless by the RAW might not be worth it.

The alternative to counterspelling is, of course, just readying an action with a bow. Most of the time (at least, for lower level casters) more effective than counterspelling.

Oh, and I recently found another big dumper: Since 'light' is now 0 lvl and 'darkness' lvl 2, you can't use light to counterspell darkness anymore! (except when you have heighten spell, of course)

Herzog

 

[Herzog]

To your left you'll find the lovely classless/featless system Hero, now currently in it's 5th edition, revised and expanded.

To your right, you'll see the equally impressive GURPS, now in a full color hardback duo set in it's 4th edition, also revised and expanded and class free since 1st edition.

Actually, that's exactly my problem.

They only improved on their system half-way. Now, it's neither a 'simple' system where you pick your class and go, nor a 'complete' system where you can build exactly what you want.

I have played GURPS, and I like it, although I have a tendency to create crippled characters. I have not played Hero, but I think I will take a look at the system to see if it something I would like.

Herzog

 

[Fishbone]

As a very big fan of HERO FRED(5th revised edition), I must say that it is a great system, and I like it better than Mutants and Masterminds though GURPS does do the really low stuff, like 100-150 point FBI agents and the like a bit better. Your mileage may very.

 

[Li Shenron]

For D&D 3.X, what one rule or concept do you think fits this statment best?

"<This thing> is really good in theory, but in practice it doesn't work that well."

HOUSE RULES


...or actually Level Adjustment

 

[SWBaxter]

For me, the stuff that sounded good but hasn't turned out so great is:

Grappling - reads well, but it's a separate subsystem with its own rules, in play it tends to disrupt the flow of the session when players who aren't familiar with the rules get grappled.

Turn Undead - another separate subsystem that disrupts the flow. As others have mentioned, it's also kinda goofy at high levels, and it screws up encounter balance when comparing groups that have a cleric vs. those that don't.

Multiclassing - loved it on paper, but the careful planning required to ensure high-level viability for many combos (primarily spellcaster/non-spellcaster) has turned me off.

Prestige Classes - some are suites of abilities you can't get from regular classes and feats, some are truly prestigious representing membership in some secret organization, some just cover up other rules hiccups (such as multiclassing with spellcasters)... basically, there's no clear concept of what they're supposed to be.

Cascading bonuses and penalties - Loved this when I first picked up 3.0, but over time I've come to really hate the way something like ability buffs or damage cascades through the character sheet, potentially affecting combat bonuses, skills, saves, feats, etc. Just too much bookkeeping, particularly at high levels.

That's about it, there's other stuff that grates on me, but these are the ones that looked really good when I first read 'em and turned out to be not so good.

 

[erc1971]

I really dislike the 3.5 DR system, but for the opposite reasons most of you dislike it.

On paper, it looks awesome, but that is not the case.

Back in the days of +x needed to hit, or the DR 40 in 3.0 - things were different. If all the fighters went up and thier swords bounced off the monster harmlessly - you know it was time to run, and come back later when you were well equipped.

Now adays - monsters with DR are used all the time when players do not have the neccessary weapons to bypass it. All this has done is to ensure anyone planning on melee has a Conan like strength stat and a massive two-handed weapon.

This became a huge sticking point in our last game. I had a swashbuckler who wielded 2 rapiers. Constant constructs and undead with DR, tons of demons with DR 15 (we are playing SCAP). I went 3 gaming sessions and contributed less than 10 points of damage combined in all 3 sessions, and got so frustrated I ended up telling the DM I am remaking my character with rule -1.

---------------------------------

I agree with you all on the XP rewards. Our group consists of a bunch of rules lawyers, we study them, and restudy them. None of us have been able to figure out how they are supposed to work - we just give out the XP for the monster based on the party/character level and move on.

----------------------------------

Special Attacks: There are a ton of them...grappling, sunder, trip, bull rush, turning undead, etc., etc. All have different formulas, and are used rarely enough, that everytime they are used, the game stops for everyone to flip open thier books and read up on them again.

 

[Dross]

Challange Ratings.

In theory, they are a very useful way to balance encounters and traps for various levels of players, as well as a level-dependant XP mechanic.

In practice, they might work well with a 4-PC party with just the right amount of magical resources that the book assumes them to have, but have a different party size, or change the level of magic in your campaign, and this will start falling apart...

In my experience, this is true (mostly the >4PC in party part). However, if you don't work with higher CR foes to meet the party CR rating (using a mixture of more foes and adding a level or two to each foe etc) then you can say party CR = normal CR + 2 or some such. I do admit that htis takes some work though.