What D&Disms have you never liked?

[Garthanos]

I remembered another one. Funny that I forgot it, since it's my biggest peeve. I guess I just mentally won't let it be a D&Dism.

Two-weapon fighting rangers. I don't mind them having the style available to them -- in the same capacity as a rogue or fighter might. I absolutely do not understand how TWF has anything to do, inherently, with being a cunning wilderness warrior. It just fries me. In a way, I don't mind them dating, but I really think they should see other people.

Classes which are very tightly bound with flavor used to be a problem....back in AD&D I had to convince the DM it was OK to let my priest of Odin use a spear. No clerics cant use anything sharp????!!!!!!.

I think it is a mistake thinking a cunning wilderness warrior needs to take the "ranger" class. Any martial class could take nature skill
And now if you want twf to be central to your fighting style she dates the fighter and barbarian too as a tempest fighter or whirling barbarian... and even before these other classes started woeing her anyone can take a feat and get some mileage out of using two weapons.
If I want to emulate a certain character from the lord of the rings, I am not certain I would even use ranger I have seen a build of him using the bard. Basically he needs diplomacy, nature and healing for skills. But most of all he needs the right back story.

If I played that priest of Odin I mentioned he would be a Warlord with a Spear and Religion skill and a feat to have ritual magic.

 

[pawsplay]

I never liked the cleric class because it always seemed like a weird admixture of pre-Christian paganism, Catholicism, medieval martial traditions, and wizardly spell casting.

Of course, that's what I like about it. Don't forget the visual of wearing armor and holding a mace and looking about to smite something with righteousness.

 

[Rechan]

If you dont like any of those things then why do you play the games?

If this thread has shown anything, it's that we dislike certain parts of assumptiosn relating to D&D. D&D is more than the sum of its parts.

And really no one should be going "WELL STOP PLAYIGN D&D IF YOU HATE IT SO MUCH" in this thread. This thread is about complaining about D&D assumptions!

 

[Mikaze]

Class restrictions on races were something I always hated in pre-3.x D&D. For example, the notion that a god of good would turn his or her nose up at a non-human would-be-paladin. It just never worked for me at all, and certainly not for the types of settings I like to run and play in.

 

[Herobizkit]

Cleric fix: 3e Cloistered Cleric variant (Unearthed Arcana) becomes core Cleric.

Vancian magic fix: Use Psionics mechanic instead. You'll have to get creative with the augments, but hey. Or, make everyone a spontaneous caster.

Gobs of HP fix: Players start with their CON score in HP. Each increase in levels rewards PCs with their CON score ONLY (Min 1 HP gain).

@ Garthanos: did you ever show that guy how other priesthoods might have different weapon allowances, as shown in both the PHB and in the Cleric's Handbook? Oh, and Forgotten Realms, too. And Legends and Lore.

 

[Ariosto]

Class restrictions on races were something I always hated in pre-3.x D&D.

Let go of the cookies (elven bonuses), and maybe you can get your hand out of the cookie jar (elven penalties). If you're determined to cleave to a halfling identity, though, then I'm afraid it's not really a "game balance" issue anywhere near so much as simply a prejudice against Bilbo the Barbarian.

 

[GnomeWorks]

If you dont like any of those things then why do you play the games?

A few reasons.

For one, at this point, I can make the d20 system do whatever I need it to do. The d20 games I run would be pretty much unrecognizable to anyone familiar with the core.

For two, one of my groups pretty much insists on only playing d20, and doesn't stray too far from core.

Third, my own game system isn't done yet. Until then, d20 is the best alternative, primarily because we're familiar with it.

Like tables of calculated bonuses and penalties and matrices of calibrated dice-results for macramé and decoupage?

Your hyperbole irritates me.

 

[jaerdaph]

Gully Dwarves - essentially mentally challenged little people - what the HELL were they thinking?

I mean really. I'd play in an All-Flumph PC party before I'd touch that!

 

[Jeff Wilder]

I've never really cared for the almost utopian integration of races in default D&D. I understand why the choice was made, but it makes me cringe. Were all big boys and girls, and I think we can deal with some institutional dwarf-hatin', right?

It may be nostalgic BS, but it seems like it's gotten worse and worse through iterations of the game. Again, possibly just nostalgia, but the races seem to feel more and more like, "99 percent human, 1 percent <insert racial quirk here>."

 

[Garthanos]

Here is a D&Dism I have not been fond of... the ubiquitous language common tongue.
I also understand why its done... But I liked tolkeins languages and designed a dragon language back in high school (for fun before doing much roleplaying).... so I might be an odd man out but a little linguistic diversity and adversity once in a while can be fun.