Things that have bugged you since 1E

[Voadam]

wizard (aka mages) and specialist wizards . . .

i just want specialists to be 'special'. not just 'generalists +1 spell/lvl'

The 2e complete wizard's handbook took a step in this direction giving high level specialists a specific ability.

In my 2e campaign I allowed specialists to use divine spells of their specialty school until I eventually decided wizards should be able to cast any spell that did not require the direct intervention of a divine power (and then they could if they made a pact).

 

[The_Gneech]

Well, Fantasy Hero's just been released. Maybe that cheers you up a little.
I know it cheers me up a lot.

I'd be perfectly happy to use the previous edition of FH if my players would. But therein lies the rub!

-The Gneech

 

[Vanye]

By the way, Valley Elves, which appeared in Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth and the 1e Monster Manual II, were as tall or taller than men, the only type of D&D elf to be so tall until Dark Sun's elves.

Not true. The Forgotten Realms elves have been human sized since the game worlds inception, and the Realms predates DS by several years (even as a game product).

 

[PowerWordDumb]

Hmmm, customizeable ''racial'' or ''environmental'' templates as explained herein in place of subraces sound like a very good idea; definitely something to think about.

Danke.

Thanks!

And many thanks to Tonguez who summarized my rambling far better than I ever could, exposing the nugget of thought which I was struggling to convey.

As to the specialist wizards issue, you guys are so right it hurts. I don't know whether the fix is preferential spell access a la Monte Cook, separate spell lists, or the addition of clerical domain ability-like coolness to the specialist wizard.

As it stands it's lame and flavorless though, and definitely could use an overhaul.

 

[Mythtify]

I think hit points are a good game mechanic. What bothers me about them is that anything in D&D performs just as well with maz hit points as they do with 1 hit point. There is no performance loss in combat unless you pass out.

I always but a damage modifier in my games based on perecentage of hit points lost. Usualy, every time you lose 20% of your hit points, you suffer a -1 to all attack, skill, ability, spell casting rolls.
The penalty increases as you lose more hit points.

 

[Larcen]

... Yeah, I'll fourth that "small elves suck" opinion....

This is a true story that happened to me waaay back in college, early 80's:

I was an experienced player and it was my first session with an inexperienced DM. The game was already in play, so I quickly drew up an elf PC and away we went.

The party was then ambushed in a forest by a bunch goblins, orcs, kobolds, don't remember which.

When the DM asked me what I was doing, my first reaction (being so low level) was "Whoa! Well, I am an elf so I quickly climb up the nearest tree to try to get a safe sniping spot with my bow."

DM: "Uh, you are going to get penalties for climbing that tree."

ME: "Why?"

DM: "Well, it's kind of a small, dense tree and since you are 7 feet tall, it's going to be difficult."

ME: "???... I am HOW tall?"

DM: "In my world, elves are 7 feet tall. I like Tolkien."

ME: "So like, in your world there are a bunch of 7 feet tall elves stalking around the woods and climbing trees?"

It must have been my tone and the stare of total confusion I gave the guy cause the next thing he said was:

DM: "Fine. Elves are 5 feet tall."

Moral of the story? If your elves are regal city-dwelling folk, make them tall if you like. If they are stealthy woodland creatures, please, keep them small.

 

[Arc]

Hmmm... something that's been bothering me?

A character is just as likely to be hit while carrying a sword as you are when unarmed. There doesn't seem to be a decent system for using weapon parrying as defense, and makes every character dependent on his suit of magic armor (or mithril chain).

 

[PaulGreystoke]

Hmmm... something that's been bothering me?

A character is just as likely to be hit while carrying a sword as you are when unarmed. There doesn't seem to be a decent system for using weapon parrying as defense, and makes every character dependent on his suit of magic armor (or mithril chain).

Well, 3E does give an advantage to the character with a weapon as opposed to the unarmed combatant - an attack with your fists normally incurs an AoO while an attack with a weapon normally does not. Without the Improved Unarmed Strike feat (or levels in Monk) an unarmed combatant in a fight with an armed combatant has to suffer twice as many attacks because of the AoOs. Another way of looking at this is that the armed combatant only suffers HALF as many attacks as the unarmed combatant. Thus being armed reduces your risk of being hit in combat by half. So the game system accomplishes what you desire, just in a highly abstract way, much as HP & AC work.

 

[LGodamus]

the Halbard not being considered a reach weapon

Why sack?....they arent in real life....they dont have any greater reach than say, a great sword....

 

[Valiantheart]

Lets see:
Vampires who have energy drain slams.

The alignment system. Why so absolute?

The very blah slot based magic system.

15 thousands elf types.

Lack of an class based AC bonus.