Small but annoying things D&D never got right

[elrobey]

A person with no artistic ability whatsoever -- even a person who can't see -- can create a flawless visual illusion.

Learning a language is binary (you either know it or you don't) and almost trivially easy.

 

[Wormwood]

The fact that every edition of D&D turns punching, kicking or tackling someone a pain in the ass.

Bards.

Clerics, to a degree.

 

[wgreen]

Wayne, armor makes you 'harder to hurt,' not 'harder to hit.' Or rather, it makes your flesh harder to hit, since that's what matters. It's still easy to hit your armor, but high AC means the stuff that can bleed is protected.

Exactly. IME people who have trouble with this concept also complain that it's Strength that modifies attack rolls, rather than Dexterity. Once you get the "to-hit" vs. "to-hurt" distinction, it makes a lot more sense.

Here's a strongly related peeve: touch attacks are made with Str, not Dex. Whassupwithdat???

-Will

 

[Zander]

I hate that you can't climb on the backs of monsters.

Oooh! That's a good one. I hadn't thought of that but now that you mention it, why can't you climb on a monster's back and stab away?

 

[Zander]

The fact that every edition of D&D turns punching, kicking or tackling someone a pain in the ass.

I'll second that. They're fixing the grappling rules in 4E so maybe they'll simplify the punching and kicking rules too, bring them into line with rules for weapons.

 

[DreamChaser]

Exactly. IME people who have trouble with this concept also complain that it's Strength that modifies attack rolls, rather than Dexterity. Once you get the "to-hit" vs. "to-hurt" distinction, it makes a lot more sense.

Here's a strongly related peeve: touch attacks are made with Str, not Dex. Whassupwithdat???

-Will

Maybe 4e will make it a TO HURT role. Or bring back THAC0 only it will be To Hurt AC 0 lol.

Actually, I totally agree. In any edition "to hit" is actually "to hurt"

DC

 

[Zander]

I second you on Animate Object, one of the very first things I noticed I didn't like in 3.0.

Glad you agree! Actually, we're not alone. Almost all gamers I've ever mentioned this to have agreed once I've brought it to their attention - one of those "yeah, why is that?" moments.

 

[olshanski]

There is something I don't like about diseases.

In D&D, you slowly get worse and worse until you get better or die.

I would imagine that for things like the plague, smallpox, etcetera, you get sick very fast (24-48 hours) and possibly die, but then you have a longer recovery period.

There also isn't a mechanic for chronic illnesses... things that keep you moderately hindered until you are cured. Just like you have blindness or deafness that sticks around until you are cured, I could imagine a use for diseases like consumption or hemophilia that stick with you but don't necessarily kill you outright, and cause some problems until you are magically cured.

-----
One of my main gripes is and always has been falling damage, but we already have multiple threads dedicated to it.
------

The rules for getting lost in 3.5 are really screwy.

-------
The rules for cold damage are a little screwy. If you are well protected, you can survive for long periods of time in very cold weather. If you are on a march and wearing decent clothes, you can be comfortable at -20 degrees. If you were to stop marching and just sit still, you might be dead in 10 hours. If you managed to get soaking wet and then stand in a temperature of -20 degrees, you might be dead in 10 minutes.

 

[Zander]

Here's a strongly related peeve: touch attacks are made with Str, not Dex. Whassupwithdat???

I think it should be whichever is better for the attacker. I do European 15th c. martial arts. One of our regular warm-up exercises is simply to lightly slap your opponent, a touch attack in D&D terms. People who are stronger can bat their way through a weaker opponent's defence. But quicker, i.e. more dextrous, people can circumvent a slower opponent's defence. I actually change my fighting style depending on whether I think I have the strength or dexterity advantage.

 

[Sadrik]

I think it should be whichever is better for the attacker. I do European 15th c. martial arts. One of our regular warm-up exercises is simply to lightly slap your opponent, a touch attack in D&D terms. People who are stronger can bat their way through a weaker opponent's defence. But quicker, i.e. more dextrous, people can circumvent a slower opponent's defence. I actually change my fighting style depending on whether I think I have the strength or dexterity advantage.

Which would be kind of cool to have two fighting styles in the game. One based on DEX and the other based on STR.