Things that Irk Me about DnD (Somewhat long, kinda ranty)

[Staffan]

I have a druid player (3.0 version) in my current game and, I must say, compared to the other PCs, she does *seem* underpowered. Maybe it's just the player, I'm not too sure.

Anyway, in the last adventure, there was a fair bit of combat, and she didn't do much at all except cast Produce Flame and Flaming Sphere. She is 7th level. Is there any other offensive spells/tactics she could use to "kick ass"?

You should just have gotten Flame Strike, which is a pretty good spell. Entangle is good at lower levels - trap your opponents with plants, and have the rest of the party pick them off from a distance. Heat/Chill metal is great for dealing with opposing fighters. Summon Swarm creates major problems for spellcasters (at least it did in 3.0 - I haven't tried it out with the new version that actually summons a Swarm-type monster). Call Lightning and Poison are both pretty nasty. You can summon nasty beasts to deal with your opponents (like brown bears, giant crocodiles, dire boars and dire wolverines), and you have an animal companion that's of a similar power level. In addition, you have a decent BAB, two good saves, pretty good hp, and decent skills. Your wild shape isn't much fun yet, but next level you can turn into Large animals, like brown bears (or polar bears in a few more levels) or dire wolves, which give you great melee capabilities too.

 

[teitan]

I know I didn't give the full picture, but I was trying to show how it was in history in a context related to D&D mages. No offense intended.

No offense taken, just clarification is all. =) It is hard to offend me!

Jason

 

[teitan]

Are you saying that there is something inherent about combat that makes casting spells then, rather than while in quiet meditation, gives one a better insight into one's capabilities?

If so, how do you rationalize this? To put that another way, what's your Fluff text?

Actually no, I am saying that it is application and use of those abilities that give you insight into how to better use them. As an example, I can sit and meditate all day long about drawing but I won't become a better artist until I use that ability with a pencil and paper. Also, in D&D the prayer is what gives you the abilities to use those spells, but using the spells is what grants you experience in executing the magic. If you don't use the magic the prayer gives you how can you get better at it? You have no understanding of how it work and what it feels like. WHen you cast the spell you feel it course through you and learn how to channel that energy through cleaner pathways, more efficiently, allowing you to channel more through those pathways. Meditation wouldn't give you that understanding.

Jason

 

[Voadam]

Now, don’t get me wrong. I love DnD. And I’m not just looking for another game, because I like more stuff about DnD that I dislike. In fact I like most of it, but these things I’m about to discuss make it annoying, having to deal with them to get to the things I do like.

I realize that to some people, some of these things are what makes DnD DnD. I just happen to disagree. To me, DnD is basic fantasy. Especially now since its grown so far beyond a combat-simulation system for 2 people to use in their basement.
I see it as a means of representing fantasy ideas, concepts, and archtypes. The broader the better.

I already know most of the alternatives…Monte Cook’s Arcana Unearthed (which I do love), the variants from Unearthed Arcana etc. And while those are interesting, many of them fall short.

What I am looking for is just to see other peoples thoughts and opnions on these, the things that irk me about DnD. I’m not looking for alternative games to play, or to simply be told these things shouldn’t be changed…I just want to see if anyway feels the same way about any of them, and why. And to see what people think about why some of these things are in place etc.

Anyway, here they are in rough order of severity


The Arcane/Divine divide: This is probably the biggest thing for me. To me, its something that does not really exist in most fantasy…there’s just magic, and different types of magic are based on things like culture, or particular form of practice (basically, what would be class in DnD terms). There’s rarely two huge monolithic forms of magic and all spellcasters fall into one or the other category.
And where does this whole thing come from of god-magic being linked to healing and defense? I guess from the fact that the Cleric class was based off the Knights Templar and whatnot and certainly the Judeo-Christian God would have a link to healing and whatnot…but in a polytheistic fantasy setting, what about the gods of darkness and death and decay?


Also springing from this is another issue: I personally feel that wizards/sorcerers should be the masters of magic, as a whole. Partially because of all the classes, magic is all that those to get. And partially, because in most fantasy (where generally magic is magic), mages are masters of magic and able to use it to just about any end.But since the magic system is split down the middle, this isn’t possible. And so we have Wizards and Sorcerers barred from things (they aren’t allowed to truly heal at all), and they are rather weak in several areas (defense for instance). In DnD rather than master mages, Wizards and Sorcerers are mainly magical artillery. And yes, I realize they can do other things, but that’s always the primary focus seemingly.

The Cleric class: I dislike the Cleric class for three reasons. 1) its mildly unbalanced in its current form. 2) to me the “Priest” archtype is a very uncommon one. The “White Mage”/defense-healing Mage is more common but 3) the Cleric class doesn’t embody either of these very well. The whole considerable combat ability and religious focus pretty much kills the White Mage aspect, and as for the Priest archtype…the Cleric is to locked in to one thing. Even with Domains, a Cleric is going to have a lot of extra baggage that isn’t going to fit very well with many deities. Just the spell list alone. Why would a god of slaugher grant healing spells? Why would a god of knowledge grant Righteous Might or Divine Power? For that matter why would a priest of a god of knowledge have average BAB, full armor proficiency and a D8 hd?

Magical Sterotyping: I kind of dislike the fact that all spellcasting classes have it spelled out exactly where their magic comes from. Wizards get their magic totally from study. Sorcerers totally from inborn power. Clerics pray to gods or causes. Obviously this is easily ignored, but I’d still like it if there weren’t as much pigeonholing.

Magic Item Dependency: I’d like to at least have a variant were the power of your character and the whole CR system isn’t so strongly based around magic items, making it easy for magic items to be a little less common and a little more special.

Well, there are other things, but this post is plenty long enough as is so I’m just gonna go with this for now

The answer is to use a d20 game that is compatible with D&D but uses different magic. You can keep the non-spell classes such as fighter, rogue, barbarian, and monk.

You already mentioned Arcana Unearthed.

Here are three other types

Sovereign stone campaign setting, one source of magic, five elemental specializations.

Wheel of time d20 one source of magic. Also uses defensive bonuses which reduce item dependancy at higher levels.

Elements of Magic pdf.

I'm not sure how well using Conan, Star wars, or Call of Cthulhu would work for a fantasy setting/magic system as I don't have those.

 

[BASHMAN]

Druids don't suck!

Druids. Druids are underpowered, and gnerally even with their shapeshifting they arn't worth playing. They need something give them a bit of boost and need a few more decent spells to make them viable.

A 1st level druid can be a combat machine, if you do it right! Take ambidexterity or TWF (i cannot remember which feat they fused the 2 from 3.0 into for 3.5). Cast shilelegh on your quarterstaff and use it as a double weapon! That means you used paired +1 weapons that do d10 damage, with only a -2 to hit with each. If you take weapon focus staff, the net penalty becomes +0 (-2+1 for magic, +1 for skill). You would be dual wielding better than the ranger or fighter with a first level spell!

At higher levels, druids get nastier. Take the feat that allows you to cast while in wild shape! Turn into a rat/bat/bird, and sit in a tree or hole in the ground. Cast call lighting on enemies. Direct the strike each round, from your undiscovered position of saftey. Repeat. Flaming sphere also works good for this.

 

[barsoomcore]

Dungeons and Dragons doesn't represent any particular genre of fantasy other than "Dungeons and Dragons". I'm convinced that one of the reasons it's formed the basis of the entire industry is precisely because it doesn't ape any of the fantasy conventions, but rather pulls together all sorts of disparate sources (I can just imagine Professor's Tolkein's reaction to being told he was writing pulp romances like Howard and Burroughs) and comes up with its own unique brew.

Which is where we get clerics and paladins and monks and whatnot from. D&D magic doesn't particularly well model ANY fantasy magic I've ever encountered. Which is totally cool, because when I want to play D&D, I want to play D&D, not Middle-Earth or Hyboria or any of that jazz.

Tell me it's still Dungeons and Dragons without magic missile, clerics, beholders, wands of fireball, scrolls and good old trolls you need to burn up. Tell me this game doesn't thrive on cure serious wounds, call lightning, roll for initiative, search for traps, break down the door, 10' wide corridors, tavern brawls, red dragons, brass dragons, black puddings and rust monsters.

Dungeons and Dragons is its own genre. Its own setting. It's not Greyhawk and it's not Forgotten Realms. It's Dungeons and Dragons, dude. Don't want to play it, that's cool. But love it for what it is. Warts and all.

Thanks, Gary. Dunno what I would have done without you.

 

[dead]

Hmmm...but if you are intolerant of the intolerant, then you yourself are intolerant, and should expect people to be intolerant of you...

One of the many paradoxes of political correctness, I guess.

It's a paradox, but a necessary one. Otherwise the 3rd Reich would be ruling the world.

Book-burners the world over would be coming for you D&D tomes as you "tolerantly" let them throw them on the bonfire.

 

[barsoomcore]

Folks, this conversation needs to get back on topic if it's going to survive. Discussions of politics, religion and belief are against the rules.

 

[Sir Elton]

It's a paradox, but a necessary one. Otherwise the 3rd Reich would be ruling the world.

Book-burners the world over would be coming for you D&D tomes as you "tolerantly" let them throw them on the bonfire.

Ah well. If you want to be treated like a prince, you have to basically treat others like they are princes or princesses as well.

On Topic:
My gripes have to do with the ranger. I still need to retool it a bit. That, and I don't need miniatures. This preponderance on miniatures cramps my style; which I try to emulate a Hong Kong flick. I mean, why do people use them anyways? I don't like how they are used.

 

[dead]

Folks, this conversation needs to get back on topic if it's going to survive. Discussions of politics, religion and belief are against the rules.

I apologise.

Back on topic.

In my current party of players, I have a paladin, rogue/cleric/wizard, wizard/fighter, and druid. Now the first three PCs are no trouble to deal with -- all my generic adventures work for them -- but, I find, that I have to give *extra* attention to the druid PC. I have to throw in adventures that feature foresty environments and fey folk to keep them happy.

What sort of good resources are out there for druidy/foresty/feyish things?