What do you think D&D is missing?

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Gnome genocide.

 

[Enforcer]

Things I think D&D needs:
-Some sort of wound penalty system (like the new Star Wars) where taking damage actually affects you before you die.

-Parity between non-spellcasters and spellcasters. This would probably mean taking Fighters, Rogues, and the like and kicking their power up a few notches.

-More unified mechanics. Turn Undead needs to be just as easy to do as rolling to hit with a longsword, same with Grappling. Many skills can be bunched together as well, having the side-benefit of low skill point characters being able to do more things.

You know, if they took all the really great stuff from the new Star Wars game and just ported it over, that'd be just fine with me.

 

[jdrakeh]

A streamlined system for designing NPCs. Like that found in Iron Heroes. Or True20. Or Advanced Quick20. Or Simple20. Or anything other than full-blown PC stats for people as unimportant as bar maids. NPC classes alone don't cut it.

[Edit: Heh. I see that I already mentioned this further up the thread. Totally forgot about that. This is how much D&D needs streamlined NPC creation rules.]

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

My first choice is sounds mechanics for larger scale battles.

I might agree but the orientation of D&D IS small-scale. Where larger scale of combat is accomodated it is ONLY for times where the few individual PC's take on large numbers of opponents. Large numbers vs. large numbers inherently causes the system to crack and fall apart. It just is NOT what the system is designed to accomodate.

And that is as it should be. If there are large-scale battles to be fought then D&D is simply not the ruleset to use in any way because it moves events decidedly away from the actions of those PC's - which is what the game is about. PC participation WITHIN larger combats can and should still be handled with the nromal D&D rules. When the scope of the combat to be modeled exceeds the participation of the PC's then you are within the realm of DM fiat. And IMO that is also as it should be.

Because everything about D&D is intended to be scaled to the few PC individuals and what THEY can accomplish, when the scope of the system is expanded to encompass MANY such individuals on both sides of a LARGE combat the system quickly and understandably breaks down. To fix that D&D would have to be wholly redesigned to FIRST model the large scale combats as desired and THEN scaled down to accomodate actions by individual PC's or NPC's as opposed to massed units. To do THAT must involve a dramatic change in the flavor of D&D away from heroic fantasy to something closer to real-world. I wouldn't necessarily have a problem with that, but many others would.

Most importantly it will never, EVER be a matter of "just adding on some rules that are otherwise missing".

 

[Fifth Element]

Hmmm...... Needs more ninjae.

And robots. Don't forget the robots.

 

[CryHavoc]

An economy that works?

 

[Greg K]

Things I think D&D needs:

-Parity between non-spellcasters and spellcasters. This would probably mean taking Fighters, Rogues, and the like and kicking their power up a few notches.

I'd prefer that they take the spellcasters down a few notches.

 

[Zulgyan]

I second streamlinening and simplification of the DMs Work.

I second no spells for almost every class.

Less familiars and poke-mounts.

Dominions

Followers

 

[Lanefan]

(dazed, confused, fatigued, exhausted, nauseated, drowsy, cranky...)

Hey! It's the Seven Dwarves, updated for the 21st Century!

Lanefan

 

[Storyteller01]

A sense of adventure?


I seems that, unless a DM goes seriously out of their way to amp up a challenge, the default is to let the players win.