The problem with D&D

Xini said:
The troll comment is hardly unexpected as I'm posting a criticism of part of the reason this place exists but I was kind of hoping to find like minded individuals who may in fact be interested in a discussion into the finer points of these errors and possible temporary fixes or alternate solutions.
The problem is, you've beefs with it are so huge, that fixes won't do it. Especially, since you don't like the d20 resolution mechanic (which is there for decades, so your beef with it is not actually "old-school") - the very foundation and - IMHO - elegance of D&D and d20.

You're fixed would be so friggin' huge, that you would get a new system. It's like having a car and trying to "fix" it onto a microwave. Just buying the microwave would be easier, more productive, and less time-consuming.

But let's try to find some "simple fixes":

1) Power disparity & Break Points:
Try a different campaign style. Start at 3rd level, give much less XP, and say level 6/7/8 is maximum level. This'll keep your power disparity problems in check, and with less level variance and keeps the game more consistent. Perhaps you should play more mini-campaigns and one-shots, where the levels doesn't change that much. Other than that... +2 level is a doubling of power, inherent in the game design, you cannot remove that without a complete redesign.

2) Class System:
Then change it your way. Say, one can only learn skills with appropriate training, or one can only take classes in certain circumstances. Dare to make small changes, if the players want to play a certain character... and about the more powerful: Power creep in 3.5 is very moderate.

3) d20:
Okay, that's a big bummer. Probably, you should use bellcurve rolling with 3d6. Has a similar average, so it won't change much, but it makes fumbling, but also exceptional successes less likely.

4) Magic:
Re-write your spell lists and spells, nothing else can help. Or just scrap the magic. Or get "True Sorcery".
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Xini said:
… I'm posting a criticism of part of the reason this place exists but I was kind of hoping to find like minded individuals who may in fact be interested in a discussion into the finer points of these errors and possible temporary fixes or alternate solutions.

As for asking WotC for anything, I don't believe I did. I merely remarked that I found their present offerings lacking.

I don't expect this line of thinking to suit everyone but I resisted the urge to post a disclaimer at the beginning none the less.

Others have said it. I will to. Find another game. Seriously.

You have problems with levels and classes and magic.
Your ideas on Magic are close to what Ars Magica does.
Games without levels and classes include RuneQuest (Basic Roleplaying), and HârnMaster. But they use a percentage system so they still have the linear chance of success failure you dislike. Neither FATE nor FUDGE have that problem. But rolling 4dF gives a result from -4 to +4, a total of only 9 possible outcomes, with a roll of 0 being the most likely. FUDGE works and is designed to allow you to create your own rules.

I don’t play DnD for (some of) the reasons you give. But I know that a lot of people play, and enjoy the game and I’m not going to impose my view of a good system on them if they are happy with the system they’re using. The folk here have always been polite & reasonable with me, even though I’m a HârnWorld and HârnMaster fan, not a DnD player. There are often lots of interesting discussions here. But, if you take levels and character classes out of the game, then it won’t be DnD any longer. Have you considered Castles & Crusades, a friend of mine runs it for his kids. Very old school DnD.
 


There are solutions for a number of your problems. Some are in the core books. Others are in the form of products released under the d20 license

Xini said:
#1 Power disparity
Some possible solutions for making low level warriors a threat:
WP/VP (Unearthed Arcana)
Armor as DR (Unearthed Arcana)
Torn Asunder

#2 Class System
Right well your a wizard, you adventure for six months in the wilderness and come back with more knowledge of architecture??? .

Training rules (DMG)

Survival still remains cross class no matter what you do..
Yeah, but he can still learn it. He just will not be as good as somebody who spent much of their earlier life learning to survive in the wild.

Then again, isn't there a feat in one of the products that makes a crossclass skill into class skills?

.
Oh and wizards are just refused armour completely.
No they are not. They just are not trained in armor and need to acquire training via feats.



Basically the whole concept of classes is restrictive and seems more like a good excuse to release reams of books than out of any intrinsic value to the idea. Oh and this also leads to the temptation to make the classes in the next book slightly more powerful or attractive than the last to try to tempt more people to buy the book.
There are sections in the PHB and DMG on customizing characters. Unearthed Arcana also offers many class variants.

#3 The whole d20 thing
Basically the d20 idea is not a good one from a statistics point of view and neither is it any good for representing what a person can reliably do as compared to what they could potentially do (ok that's like a reiteration of the statistics point). D&D has a flat probability curve. You are as likely to roll a 20 as a 1. That alone doesn't sound too bad but when you consider that 10 is basically a reliable result to reflect normal responses but rolling a 9 means failure then it's getting too twitchy and isn't a reliable result at all. There are ways around this but whilst still using the D20 system it tends to lead to more capability than you wanted and more cost than you can afford..
If you want more reliability Take 10 or Take 20. It won't help you in combat or for saving things, but it is there.

There is also the 3d6 variant from Unearthed Arcana

#4 Break points
Right well let's assume that your playing the game and your happy with the rules structure. At first level everything is deadly. Stubbing your toe can force you to return to a safe haven and rest up for 3 weeks whilst you regain your confidence. Now through your career your progressing (usually at an alarming rate or one so dull as to be torturous) and you hit some "break" points. The first is around level 6 and the others are usually about level 12 and leel 16, roughly in line with when a full BAB character gains an additional attack. At these points it seems your abilities suddenly shift up a gear and you become more than a mere level above your previous point. This is quite odd but it's all to do with how the level system works out and the way all those charts sum together.
Quite often what was a challenge the day before is now a walk over and you feel much more powerful. This would represent real life only in terms of psychology but here it's made real. Of course in about 2 levels your back to your normal state of pride ready for the next break but that's an aside.
The biggest problem with breaking points,imo, is spellcasting. Some solutions:
1) No spellcaster can take two consecutive levels in the same spellcasting class.
2) Find an alternative d20 magic system
3) slower advancement (DMG). Okay this delays the problem, but depending on how much you slow advancement and at what points will determine how long you delay the problem.

#5 Magic
Okay so fantasy needs magic like Star Trek needs to be able to beam people or create food from nothing but the present philosophy regarding magic is terrible. Any time something happens which is not explained by what we regard as reality, it's labelled as magic. Strangely however it seems that magic is actually about a dozen different elements working in concert. No regard is paid to making any kind of sense with magic, it is just left completely open as some kind of weird thing which just does what it wants and yet conforms to the petty rules laid out in the books. Why oh why is there such restricted and tightly defined spells with almost no allowance for customisation and yet virtually anything can and will be explained away with a singular mention of the word magic. Personally I'd like to see some kind of overall general capabilities of magic which are guidelines for what magic can and cannot do whilst simultaneously relaxing the borders on spells so that a fireball (for instance) is not it's own spell but rather something you can do with a certain level of skill in a fire based spell. It'd be quite simple to break down most spells into various categories so that skills could be used and then each casters personal choice on where they place their skill points would be reflected in their capability with their spell selection.

Get the Elements of Magic books from EN Publishing.

As you can see just from that we pretty much shot the system to pieces. Why not change systems? Well we have a group of dedicated D&D players (read can't be arsed to learn a new set of rules) and the system is simple and keeps moving. If only it did not grind so much when people stopped just walking up and trying to trade blows in a static fashion..

There are solutions without requiring going to a new system. You just need to take advantage of the d20 products out there. Of course, you'll need to get your players to learn the new material.

We have looked into some alternatives but it seems that all of them are trying to differentiate themselves too much from D&D and end up being acquired tastes (something our players aren't liable to do willingly).

I do hope that any version 4 that the mages of muhlah come up with is an improvement but I fear that they believe so strongly in the d20 religion and the infallibility of the original D&D concepts that we are liable to be left with a simple rehash of what exists now, including all the flaws.

Yes we could just look for new players but we like the current lot (changing the system from ground up would be preferable to changing friends).

Oh and yes if your thinking that I'm a little old school then that's true. I do hanker after the days of musty black and white rule books with long words in them and a recommended age past ten. I don't see that as bad though as I increasingly am finding role-playing games getting "dumbed down" to attract larger portions of the populace. Thank he who always rolls 20 that Hero still exists as a paragon of complexity and I shall always be forever grateful for the unwieldy system of GURPS and all it's multitude of expansions. These systems show what's possible when you really want detail. D&D should not be consigned to the oversimplified section of role-play games. It should be the middle ground, the nexus and it's just so not.

I never found GURPS to be unwieldy. MY only problem with GURPS was with magic (a similar complaint that I had with Hero System).
 
Last edited:

Ok it seems I've been a little miss leading in my opening litany.

I am present a player in two games of D&D and have been with this group for a few years now. I have no desire to ditch them nor any immediate need to graffiti the PHB. This is just what me and a friend (who is the DM of one of the games) stay up until like 2am discussing. I figured it may be a good topic on a forum of role-players.

I'm not really looking for a game which is trying to be realistic in harsh terms like flashpoint on the PC when compared to battlefield 2142 but I would object if I fired a rifle at someone in battlefield 2 and then they danced a little, declared they were of a totally new class which I'd never heard of but were apparently existing for thousands of years and are completely immune to bullets (sorry but sarcasm is just sooo addictive). All I'm looking for is D&D to try to limit themselves to things like left always being opposite to right and not suddenly inverted so it's parallel!

I have had a look into GURPS (thanks to those suggesting alternate routes, I guess at some point I'd need to just plant my feet and scream till I'm sick or until the group agrees to try something new or beat me unconscious). Is there any good way of summarising all those sidebars? The reason I ask is because that element of the layout I think would be the most confusing to ex D&D players.

I'll check out this GURPS Lite though I don't hold out much hope of shifting the players.

Oh and in anticipation of the point about "if they're happy with it then who are you to screw with it" but it's usually based around one of those points that mass arguments break out and the whole system just supports bad practices. The best example is the Cleric with a pearl of power and divine metamagic ( persistent ), the BAB of a fighter 4 levels higher than them all day for one spell and less feats than the fighter spent trying to achieve the same. Therefore I am trying to find something to offer to them, kind of like showing them something so bright and shiny that all arguments would be forgotten (okay so I'm an idealist as well as a bit of a perfectionist).

I'm not familiar with this HARN though so I'll go check that out.

Shadowrun has interesting rules conventions but it's just as easy to break (personally I don't like to engage in such persuits but this DM who I talk to shucks game systems like he's shelling peas). I do like the idea of the game but for me the whole doom and gloom is a downer. It's why I don't play Warhammer.

Mind you though I think I stopped at 3rd ed. I think I've only got about half a dozen books for 4th so maybe it's an improvement in total?

Oh, for a little guidance, my favourite game was 1st ed Conspiracy X. I now have 2nd ed but I've no chance of dragging people to anything but fantasy games. Well some but not all and that causes friction.
 


Xini said:
Shadowrun has interesting rules conventions but it's just as easy to break...snip
The only rule system that can't be broken is the one the players agree not to.

Also, check out Mutants and Masterminds 2E. While it's nominally (in the sense that it would work equally for other genres) a superhero game, its also the best example I've seen of a classless d20 derived-system. Plus, it's not as much of the stretch for D&D players as the Hero system or GURPS.

Being classless (and intended to model supers), it would take a little up-front design work to create a framework suitable for a typical high fantasy campaign, but nothing too difficult.
 

Xini said:
I'm not familiar with this HARN though so I'll go check that out.

Low magic, tries to be 'real' medieval. It works for me. You might want to check www.warflail.com and look for the Hârnmaster Combat vs D20 combat comparison. Most folk are interested in how combat systems work. This gives a direct comparison between the two.
 

Fifth Element said:
If you're wondering why you've been called a troll, notice that you just referred to these perceived flaws as "errors". D&D was designed the way it was designed. These are not errors, they are design decisions.
LOL! I'm not used to people being so errr... sensitive (if you'll forgive the term).

As for errors vs design decisions, I think that's just a question of perspective. Well aside from the example character for Abjurant Champion. That was a complete pooch screw.
 

Xini said:
I figured it may be a good topic on a forum of role-players.
Nice intention, but sadly already done to death ;)
Xini said:
...declared they were of a totally new class which I'd never heard of but were apparently existing for thousands of years and are completely immune to bullets (sorry but sarcasm is just sooo addictive).
Hmm... then you're problem is not with D&D, but rather with a DM who doesn't limit stuff. In fact, if you're using the video game-comparison... expansion packs do give new options!
You just don't have to play with them.
Xini said:
The best example is the Cleric with a pearl of power and divine metamagic ( persistent ), the BAB of a fighter 4 levels higher than them all day for one spell and less feats than the fighter spent trying to achieve the same.
See, that's what I mean with limiting. If stuff annoys you too much, don't use it.
Xini said:
Shadowrun has interesting rules conventions but it's just as easy to break (personally I don't like to engage in such persuits but this DM who I talk to shucks game systems like he's shelling peas).
Well, for one thing that's the beauty of classes - they tie some stuff together, ensuring balance much better than point-buying. Second: Every system is breakable - that's rather a problem with the players if they try hard to break it. Third: Well, that's right - flavour is really a matter of tast.. I like Shadowrun (3rd, never touched 4th), but I think the flavour is goofy.
 

Remove ads

Top