What are your beefs with the d20 system?

[Theron]

Dependence on miniatures

The inordinanantly higher amount of prep time required just dealing with nuts and bolts stuff when planning an adventure. Before 3e, GM assist type software was a nice time saver. Now I find it pretty much a necessity with so much info to record even for a simple kobold encounter.

The sheer volume of magic a high level character is assumed to have on hand. Entirely a matter of taste, but not my cup of tea.

For D&D, I would have preferred a level dependent Defense score and separate Health and Wounds like you see in d20 Star Wars. It's always irked me that for most characters, the only way to keep from getting hit is to pile on more better armor. (Yeah, I know HPs are an abstraction that represents many factors besides ability to absorb physical punishment, but there are other and better ways to implement the damage mechanic than just marking off hit points until the character kicks it. IMHO, YMMV, ONVISONH...)

 

[Grayhawk]

Prestige Classes.

I don't have a big beef with those - I just choose to not not include them, as I don't feel they're at all necessary.

Comming from 1e & 2e I think that 3x allows for an incredible degree of customization by means of it's feats and multiclassing rules.

In pursuing a certain roleplaying concept through the classes and feats you chose, you may end up with a character who's weaker than a single classed character with an optimum feat selection, but so what?

Some choices should be better than others, and if you've created the character thats fun for you to play - even at the expense of some power - I'd say that you've made the right choice.

Judging from discussions on this and other boards, it doesn't seem like Prestige Classes can claim to offer a perfectly balanced alternative either. As far as I can gather, their inclusion makes it unlikely that many characters will stay with the core classes for very long. And as they say about feats: 'If everybody wants it, it's propably too good.'

In the rare instances where you really can't build the character you want using the core classes, I'd rather use the 'Modifying Character Classes' part from the DMG.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

...a lot of the 'problems with d20' I'm seeing would be better labelled as 'problems with D&D'.

 

[fusangite]

The greatness of Mutants and Masterminds really demonstrates the degree to which problems with D20 are really problems with D&D. The big problems are the experience/advancement system and alignment. Also, there are some portability problems -- the fixity of the planes of existence makes it harder to adapt D20 to non-D&D feel worlds.

 

[fusangite]

And let me second that comment about miniatures; while my current campaign is well-suited to miniature use, I would like the option of not using them.

 

[Wombat]

Like any system, I can find faults here. Not enough to destroy the game for me, and mainly as a metagame problem, but they are still there.

I dislike the dependence on miniatures that is being forced to a greater extent on us. I don't like to work with minis, due to my break with miniature wargaming back in the 1970s. Some people ask me, "But how do you handle AoOs?" To my eye, they are part of the problem, forcing a more graphic, miniature-centric view of the game.

I dislike the alignment system, but find it ultimately ignorable.

I dislike Armor Class as written. Armour doesn't make you harder to hit; it makes you harder to be damaged. Know this from experience...

I dislike the Vancian magic system. It worked well in Vance's books, as it was part of the feel for those particular stories, but it doesn't map most common myths, legends, and even fantasy novels well. The fact that there is no ceremonial magic system built into the base game is something I find sad.

I dislike the terribly silly monsters that populate so much of D&D. OTOH, these, too, are easily ignorable. There are no phantom fungi, displacer beasts, mind flayers, and the like in my games and, for my gamers, this makes for a happier world.

I used to have real gripes with the character classes and levels, but 3rd ed made a huge difference that way; I would wish for better multiclassing rules as multiclassed characters take much more than a slight hit on their power level, but that is minor in comparison.

I loath the proliferation of PrCs. I only run a few in any given campaign, but they are continually created. Personally, I prefer PrCs that are prestigious rather than generic. For the most part you can map most PrCs by going multiclass or taking specific Feats. If there is no need for a specific class, why introduce it?

At the moment I have reached the saturation point on supplements. I have no desire to pick up any more, any more than I have a desire to switch to 3.5. I am comfortable with my game as is. I hope everyone can find a level they are as comfortable with.

 

[MEG Hal]

I think my biggest beef with d20 (as opposed to DnD) is the initiative system.

I do not like how the current system RESOLVES the actions based almost exclusively on WHO is doing the action (the character's initiative) and for the most part ignores the WHAT is being done.

The easiest examples come from having two guys stand across a room from each other. One has a loaded pistol in hand and one has a sheathed knife. Their actions for the round are "shoot the other guy" and "rush across the room and stab him."

D20 uses ACTOR-based resolution. WHO matters more than WHAT. If the gun toter gets a higher initiative, then he gets to take his action first. If the knife wielder does, he goes first. The actions, what they are doing, are irrelevent. With a little better roll, the knife guy will rush across the room, drawing his knife along the way and stab the gun toter before he ever gets to think about shooting.

FYI-side note here, they teach us that a knife wielder within 20ft of us may be able to stab us before we can pull/use our gun...so in this case this may be more realistic then we care to want to believe.

Ok, end real life info for gaming

 

[Nifft]

Not in the least bit. I didn't like a flurry of weapon proficiencies in AD&D 1e&2e any more than I liked a flurry of 1/2 and 1 point skills in GURPS.

Okay, I don't know GURPS, so I'll just repeat: I'd like a system that did for skills what 3rd Edition D&D did for combat proficiencies.

-- N, not naturally snarky

 

[swrushing]

FYI-side note here, they teach us that a knife wielder within 20ft of us may be able to stab us before we can pull/use our gun...so in this case this may be more realistic then we care to want to believe.

Ok, end real life info for gaming

Note that i would have no quibble with it if "pull/use outr gun" were the example.

What D20teaches is that if the gun is in hand, ready for use, and neither character has surprise, then it still might be likely for the knifer to run over and stab before you even get a shot off. It depends on WHO.

Acxtually, to be clear, what D20 teaches is it doesn't matter whether you draw your gun before entering the room or leave it in your holster. When the non-surprise situation unfolds, it will matter not one iota whether you drew your gun ahead of time. IF WHO-GUN wins initiative, he can draw the gun and shoot before the WHO-KNIFE can close. If he drew the gun outside, and he wins initiative, WHO-GUn can shoot the knifer before he can close. If WHO-GUN wins initiative, he can draw his gun, taker a 5' move to possible cover and "ready" to shoot the gknifer "when he closes".

If WHO-GUN loses init, then regardless of whether the gun is in hand or not, the knifer will rush actoss and stab him, possibly as much as 60', before he can do anything about it.

All in all, it makes taking time to draw the gun ahead of time rather pointless. The ACTION is not a significant element, just the ACTOR and how well he rolled init.

In the half-action resolution and the immediate-normal-delayed methods i described, whether you already had gun in hand or had to draw it would make a very significant difference. if you had it drawn already, your shot would go off before he got to you. if you left it in holster, then init would be the determining element.

I prefer that.

Some may not.

 

[Corinth]

As with some others, my biggest beef is that too many people conflate D&D with d20- they forget that D&D is just one specific form of d20.