D&D (2024) Rules that annoy you

[Vaalingrade]

What if your herbs and bandages are packed away when you first reach the dying person? Wouldn't it take you more than 6 seconds to get them out? What if the person is wearing armor and you can't access the wound without taking the armor off? What if the person has been poisoned rather than stabbed or burnt?

I very much feel like your answer is as oversimplified as the game mechanic is. I remain unconvinced.

But does wasting all that time and possibly letting all the problems that comes from character death due to wasting that time actually make the game more fun?

 

[mamba]

The problem with caster dominance, IMO, isn't that the casters have too much power. It's that there are things that only casters can accomplish, which I feel has only accelerated the trend towards making more and more "magical" character options available.

I prefer to tackle it from both ends, elevate the non-magical abilities and bring the casters down a notch

 

[mamba]

And for the price of flavor fail that causes a powerful archmage to suddenly forget basic utility spells and caster players SITTING ON THER ASSES NOT DOING ANYTHING IN COMBAT because they had to put all these utility spells into their spell slots.

what they put where is up to them, if the Archmage no longer is doing everything with the others tacked on as glorified sherpas, that is a plus in my book, not a fail.

The question was what annoys me, not what can I get consensus for, so not sure why I now have to find consensus

 

[Lanefan]

Being perfectly honest...exactly the kinds of rules changes you proposed in the OP, and many of the other proposed changes in this thread. They sound like absolutely the antithesis of a fun, entertaining evening; they turn even the smallest acts into the worst sort of bean-counting.

Well, one aspect of the game is and always has been resource management; and I think it does the whole thing a disservice to ignore this aspect completely even while handwaving a few of the more tedious bits.

I want to have a relatively fun time being a heroic adventurer who fights evil princesses and rescues beautiful dragons, who does the right things for the right reasons, who shows mercy because it is both morally upstanding and actually worth doing.

Or, far more fun, doing the wrong thing for the right reasons or the right thing for the wrong reasons....

Your "knock someone unconscious, it lasts for up to 24 seconds" rule, for example, has just made taking prisoners alive against their will essentially impossible. It has made it so every session where I advocate for a nonlethal approach to dealing with combatants, I am actively being a detriment to everyone in the group, including myself.

Agreed; and that tangentially points to somethng that has been a hole in the D&D rules since 1974: there's no game mechanic for someone dying slowly or clinging to life for several days.

Such ill-considered efforts, pursued out of an aesthetic or meta-aesthetic desire for the rules to look and feel nice rather than for the rules to perform well as a fantasy roleplaying game experience, are the bane of far too many games today.

That's what annoys me about rules nine times out of ten. When they prize on-the-page prettiness or geometry or so-called "realism" (even though "realism" and reality often do not intersect...) ahead of being well-structured, effective rules that achieve the designer's intent for the gameplay experience.

I very much agree about the problem of rules designed for geometric prettiness (or geometric convenience!) but don't agree about the realism piece, as I feel that's what the rules should first and foremost be there to emulate: the in-game reality.

 

[Lanefan]

I would quibble with that. Just because someone wakes up after a few rounds of combat doesn't mean they'll jump right back into the fight!

Remember these rules apply to PCs as well; and if it's a PC, yes it will jump right back in even though it shouldn't be able to.

 

[Lanefan]

Yeah you just need 6 seconds to do all of that.

I honestly can't tell if you're joking or serious with these claims; because at face value they're bordering on - well, I'll just say impossible.

6 seconds to: remove armour to get at a wound, when removing that armour would normally take a few minutes; and assess the wound and-or determine whether the victim is still alive; and dig out an herb or potion from your backpack or wherever you've stashed it; and apply said herb or potion that would normally be a full-round action (i.e. take 6 seconds) in itself?

Shenanigans all round, I say to that.

 

[Lanefan]

And for the price of flavor fail that causes a powerful archmage to suddenly forget basic utility spells and caster players SITTING ON THER ASSES NOT DOING ANYTHING IN COMBAT because they had to put all these utility spells into their spell slots. And price of arguments about who takes what utility spells, and frustration of players really excited to try new spell but never being able to prepare it because utility and other necessary spells need to take priority...it kinda exposes vacian casting as a bad rpg system.

Not quite. It exposes vancian casting as a system in which the player, in-character, has to make choices that aren't always the best choices. It also exposes vancian casting as a system with hard-coded limits as to what casters can do in a day.

Both of these are features, not bugs, when it comes to reining casters in.

 

[Lanefan]

But does wasting all that time and possibly letting all the problems that comes from character death due to wasting that time actually make the game more fun?

Yes.

Next question?

 

[pukunui]

But does wasting all that time and possibly letting all the problems that comes from character death due to wasting that time actually make the game more fun?

At this point, it’s gone beyond the game rule for me. I want to know how it is possible to do these miraculous things in real life!

 

[Not a Decepticon]

what they put where is up to them, if the Archmage no longer is doing everything with the others tacked on as glorified sherpas, that is a plus in my book, not a fail.

The question was what annoys me, not what can I get consensus for, so not sure why I now have to find consensus

Not quite. It exposes vancian casting as a system in which the player, in-character, has to make choices that aren't always the best choices. It also exposes vancian casting as a system with hard-coded limits as to what casters can do in a day.

Both of these are features, not bugs, when it comes to reining casters in.

Except it doesn't and never have solved the issue of casters being owerpowered. It in no way solves the fact casters can do much more than martials. hell, it enforces it because if you force caster to prepare all the utility spells, they probably are going to outshine rogue AND fighter at the same time. You want to sacrifice all quality of life updates like rituals and cantrips for the sake of adding targetted boredroom, bookeeping and busywork. Game balance will not be solved by making the game annoying to play.