The problem with D&D

[Crothian]

I accept that point buy is more open to abuse but I think it's less likely to be abused unless you have some munchkin or power gamer at work

Point buy is actually more likely to be abused because it is easier with all those options to do so. Class systems are more restrictive and harder to abuse because of that. But munchkin or power gamer will abuse either so it is best to just not play with them and thus avoid the problem altogether.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

Okay so me and my friend have spent many hours going over this again and again with possible solutions and theories. So far we reckon that either we need to abandon D&D or completely rewrite it.

I've rewritten D&D into my own game, Fantasia. I won't bother with the details because I don't agree with all of your problems with D&D, but if I can do it then so can you. I don't have anything constructive to say, just the Nike phrase "Just Do It!"

 

[Arkhandus]

They've already demonstrated a willingness to embrace multiclassing, and to write a Star Wars game so bad it had to be immediately replaced. Also, they've permanently tainted halflings with kenderness.

TAINTED?!?!!?!

But-but-but-but-BUT----

Kender are awesome!!!!!

 

[Hussar]

Eh, wot? A 'metropolis' is only 25,000 adults per DMG, plenty of the cities in Greyhawk have that number or higher, in fact I think most of the national capitals do, and Greyhawk is about the most medieval-y, least urban, of the main campaign settings! In something more like the classical world/Nehwon/Young Kingdoms model common to swords & sorcery, of which my own campaign world is typical, you're looking at far more 'metropolises', with total populations up to around 1 million (Imperial Rome, Byzantium at its peak, Peking).

And remember you're rolling 4 times per class per metropolis! Per DMG RAW each 25,000+ city has four Wizard of level 12+1d4, 4 Fighters of level 12+1d8 (& 8 of half that), 4 Druids, etc etc etc. You will have a good few level 16+ NPCs in every one.

This is way too much even for Gygaxian Greyhawk IMO, never mind Wilderlands or Nehwon. For one thing it renders conventional armies useless - maybe the kingdom can muster 10,000 Warriors, but they're only good for peacekeeping, all the real fighting will be done by the dozens of level 10-20 superheroes. You get something more like 'Way of the Exploding Fist' than LoTR.

So, I change the demographics. No biggy.

Take a nation of ten million souls. Pretty big nation by the standards of the time. By RAW, that means there are 100 000 people living in Metro's. That's 4 of the smallest cities that can qualify. 11 classes, with 4 rolls each mean that there are 44 double digit level NPC's in those 4 cities. That makes double digit (note that some might only be 13th) NPC's at about 0.176% of the population in the most densely populated areas in the entire nation. About 2 in a thousand or so. Mobs would obliterate anything other than the wizards or clerics, making your "Way of the Exploding Fist" argument meaningless. Even the Wizzies and clerics have a serious problem as well.

Good grief, how many HLC's are floating around in LoTR? You've got an entire race of immortal beings (or close enough) in the elves that could wipe out vast areas if they chose to. You have Ents mobilizing entire forests to obliterate armies. LoTR is a lot of things, but, low powered? Come on.

 

[mmadsen]

LoTR is a lot of things, but, low powered? Come on.

One of the most powerful beings in all of Middle Earth, Gandalf, is something like a 5th-level Cleric by D&D rules. (Isn't that what the old Dragon article had him pegged at?)

 

[Black Omega]

One of the most powerful beings in all of Middle Earth, Gandalf, is something like a 5th-level Cleric by D&D rules. (Isn't that what the old Dragon article had him pegged at?)

I thought Gandalf was statted a little higher but my memory fails me on the exact stats. In any case, I always thought that was a little silly. He beat a Balrog one on one, after all. Middle Earth was simply not a flashy magic place and most people with magical power tended to hide it instead of flaunting it. This means it's harder to rank them.

 

[cwhs01]

But d20 and D&D inparticular is so close to perfect that all other games pale in comparison.

I think i'll have to disagree slightly on this one Well depends on your definition of perfection i guess.

I like d20 (dnd3.x and all its spinnoffs such as mutants and masterminds, d20 modern etc.), but have no illusions about it being close to perfect. Or why the heck do we see discussions about the flaws/merits/quirks/designchoices of the system so often

I really do believe that there is no one truly perfect gamesystem. Not even ODD (1970 something or whatever the oldtimers are always babling about).

Okay that last one was a cheap shot. Sorry. ODD is perfect...

 

[GrumpyOldMan]

But d20 and D&D inparticular is so close to perfect that all other games pale in comparison.

I think i'll have to disagree slightly on this one Well depends on your definition of perfection i guess.

I’ve been playing for almost 30 years. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A PERFECT RPG.

There may well be a game that is perfect for you, Arashi, there is possibly one that is perfect for Xini. It probably won’t be the same game.

For me, the perfect game for role-playing in Glorantha is RuneQuest, I prefer RQ3. (Apologies to any raving RQ2'ers and any HeroQuest fans).
The perfect spy game is James Bond 007.
The perfect game for HârnWorld is HârnMaster.
The perfect 'Knights of the Round Table' game is Pendragon.
I have yet to find a perfect Science Fiction Game, though for SF backgrounds, I’m very fond of 2300AD.
In my view playing Call of Cthulhu with any rules other than CoC is foolish.
There are dozens of reasons why I believe that DnD is much from perfection than any of the games I've listed above.
But these are simply my opinions.

 

[Jawar]

Err... no. The more options you give, the more likely someone will try to abuse them. Point-buy is a whore that lies down saying "abuse me! abuse me!"

I respectfully cannot agree with the above sentence.
Yesterday, I bought «Buying the Numbers».
And by no way you can get something like the Abjurant Champion PrC, Fist of Raziel or whatever 'little' goodies out there.
In fact, upon first reading, and by comparison, I could see where the official material is more unbalanced.

 

[Hussar]

I think previous editions of D&D could play a lot like the Iliad, if you removed the M-U class. But in the Iliad the mooks aren't *totally* irrelevant the way they are in high level D&D, eg sometimes the press of spear-carriers prevented a victorious hero from retrieving the cool loot (weapons & armour) off the body of a slain adversary. That won't happen in level 10+ D&D unless the mooks are themselves 8th level Fighters or similar.

Like I said though, I'm not attacking 3e per se, just the demographic prescriptions of the DMG RAW. You can produce something a lot like the Iliad as follows:

1. No arcane magic.

2. Achilles is Fighter-10 (or maybe 12 with Gtr Wpn Spec: Spear). Maybe Hercules is a 15th level Barbarian, but he never reaches Troy.

3. Odysseus is Rog-5/Ftr-4 - quite an effective build, since he gets Weapon Spec + Rogue abilities such as +3d6 sneak attack.

4. Achilles' Myrmidons are all Fighters level 2+.

5. The rest of the spear carriers are Warriors, mostly in the 1-3 range.

If it were 1e, you'd shift the levels of the heroes up a bit - check out their levels in 1e Legends & Lore. Of course Fighter progression above 13th (when you got 2 Atts/round) didn't mean much other than +3 hp/level.

See, I look at this and wonder why? Achilles is a killing machine. The greatest of warriors and all that. Whack him up to fighter 20 and you're good to go. Why set the curve at the low end? Take the biggest, baddest guy, he goes at the high end of the curve - 20th level and then spread out from there.

As far as no arcane magic, well, you could do it that way, if you were trying to exactly emulate the Illiad. However, D&D, as it has been said many, many times before, is not a good system for emulating fiction. It just doesn't work without badly mangling the rules.

The idea is to step back and say, "Hrm, I want the game to be similar to X, Y and Z." not "I want my game to be an exact simulation of X, Y, and Z".