The Sacred Cow Slaughterhouse: Ideas you think D&D's better without

[sabrinathecat]

Ditch "Dark Sun" and "Psionics".
No Drow as PCs.

Start having the people who write the modules read the rules. Especially where portals are concerned. 4E rules clearly state that most portals only link two locations on the same plane, and that portals to other planes are rare. And yet almost every mod has the players bouncing between planes like they're on celestial pogo-sticks.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

... like they're on celestial pogo-sticks.

Oooh ... great idea for a new magic item!

 

[Storminator]

Plane Shift? Planescape? I tend to agree with the latter, and also with changing alignment from its AD&D/3E version (I prefer the Basic/4e version, both for story reasons and also because I think it works better at the table).

My initials?

PS

 

[Herschel]

"Fire & Forget" spellcasting.

 

[Storminator]

Plane Shift? Planescape? I tend to agree with the latter, and also with changing alignment from its AD&D/3E version (I prefer the Basic/4e version, both for story reasons and also because I think it works better at the table).

On a less irreverent note, while I don't like Planescape and despise the Great Wheel, I see no need to excise either of them. I've been ignoring them for 30+ years, I can keep on.

PS

 

[SkidAce]

None. Sacred cows are sacred.

An individual setting can change whatever it wants. An individual group can change whatever it wants - and the rules can certainly be structured to help them.

But the game as a whole? It is what it is.

Ding ding ding...Winnah!

Thanks for typing this for me.

 

[N'raac]

What popular game mechanics, tropes, and ideas do you believe are unnecessary or otherwise outdated?

Thinking as a businessperson, why would I eliminate popular aspects of the game?

I'd say the Law/Chaos axis of alignment. We can keep Good and Evil, the other part is just too prone to folly.

OD&D had Law/Chaos only. I recall an article on adding the good/evil axis noting that the two were conflated with Good/Evil in the rules and in play, and cited Dr. Who as a clrarly Chaotic, but Good, character and Daleks as equally clearly Lawful, yet also Evil.

Also, the "one cleric, one deity" of pseudo-monotheism. Lots of polytheists draw inspiration from many gods of the pantheon. This should be a more common option.

The non-deity option is pretty clear in 3e. I think it's GM's deciding it will not be allowed in their games that create this issue.

The least favorite parts that I have always wanted to strip out are hit points and classes.

But if you take these out the game really doesn't feel like D&D anymore.

I say leave the herd alone and let D&D be D&D. When I want to play a game with different mechanics there are plenty of other games out there.

Very true. I also post on the Hero boards, and it is amazing how many posters want to emulate D&D with the Hero rules. My usual response is "WHY??" There is no way you will get a better system for playing D&D (whatever edition you are working to emulate) than D&D. Use the system for its own strengths, not to created a watered-down version of another system.

 

[BlueBlackRed]

That classes must be equal in power at all levels.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

I'd be willing to kill off hit points for a different damage mechanic. But other than that, I like D&D as it is. I'm willing to use other systems to get other mechanics.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Very true. I also post on the Hero boards, and it is amazing how many posters want to emulate D&D with the Hero rules. My usual response is "WHY??"

I don't post on the HERO boards, but I have run D&D in HERO; I answer thusly: FLEXIBILITY. Bbecause with HERO, I can- and have- let individual players run PCs using (a translated version of) their favorite edition's incarnation of a class, race, spell etc. side by side with other players doing exactly the same thing...even if nobody is in agreement. So I can have a 4Ed Warlock in the same party as a 3.5Ed Psion, a 2Ed Priest & Barbarian, and a 1Ed M-U, Druid and Ranger, and not have much in the way of issues.