What rules don't work?

[Zoatebix]

The biggest one that comes to mind is the iterative attack rule. I would rather prefer that all attack rolls had the same modifier. Iterative attacks at high levels require you to specifically remember which dice roll goes with which attack modifier, which sort of forces the DM to stop and process every attack individually while waiting for the player to do the math. I work around this one too, but I don't like it. Let's just say, this is one thing I dig about spycraft.

Ooh, ooh! What does Spycraft do?

 

[Henry]

The other thing about big creatures is that the easiest way to kill them is to jump into their mouths with a +1 wounding dagger, since they all have much lower ACs on the inside. Cutting your way out is a sinch, especially compared to cutting your way in. I'm imagining there's a group of halfling assassins out there who specialize in "Into the Mouth" combat techniques.

Oh, my God! What a group of halflings with brass ones those would be!

The Victual Brigade!

 

[gizmo33]

What do you mean a leather poncho over platemail? Those are the same thing, an armor bonus.

Not if you're made out of platemail. Then the platemail is your "natural armor" bonus.

 

[gizmo33]

I'm imagining there's a group of halfling assassins out there who specialize in "Into the Mouth" combat techniques.

This is the funniest thing I can recall reading in a long time. When I stop laughing I want to make this my sig.

 

[monboesen]

I intensely dislike that HD are linked with size. I would rather have a system that gave massive bonuses to HP, Fortitude saves, Str, Natural armor, Damage reduction and so on.

I also detest the polymorph/shapechange rules.

And let me join the crowd that finds grappling bothersome and very boring if you use Big monsters and grappling as the character have no way of winning the grappling checks.

 

[sniffles]

The more I play, the more frustrated I am with Attacks of Opportunity. I just can't bring myself to believe that anyone will stop paying attention to an opponent who's right in front of her in order to take a whack at a guy who's running past her. In fact, I think a person in melee should have a penalty to even notice someone else moving through her threatened space.

I also dislike all the different categories of actions - it's just too complicated. I have to keep a note card to remind me what I can do in a round. I'd much prefer a system that said simply, "You can do two things in a round, and they can be any two of these: move, attack, defend, cast a spell", etc.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

The more I play, the more frustrated I am with Attacks of Opportunity. I just can't bring myself to believe that anyone will stop paying attention to an opponent who's right in front of her in order to take a whack at a guy who's running past her.

Do you also have a problem with flanking opponents not automatically hitting their targets?

I also dislike all the different categories of actions - it's just too complicated. I have to keep a note card to remind me what I can do in a round. I'd much prefer a system that said simply, "You can do two things in a round, and they can be any two of these: move, attack, defend, cast a spell", etc.

You've got that now.

You can do:

A) 1 Move action and 1 Standard action or B) 1 Full Round action
--and--
1 swift action
--and--
As many free actions as your DM lets you get away with

If you don't move, you can also take a 5' step.

It's not really all that complicated.

 

[focallength]

In the old days of D&D they actually described hit points as fatigue/luck etc... the first set of hit points you roll is your actual hitpoints, i.e. the point you start breaking bones and taking major hits. It works well if you think of hit points as luck/fatigue points. And a higher constitution gives you more "wind" or the ability to roll with a hit or shrug it off as nothing. Ever seen a dude get kicked in the nuts and just get pissed off? lots of hit points jackie chan gets hit all the time but he just gets winded or lucky. Its when hes down to 4-12 hit points that he gets broken bones, as evidence in the gag reels.

The one main thing that ticks me off is will saves for warriors, why would a highly conditioned fighter whos spent years honing his mind and body have the will of a gnat. I make a joke thats fairly true that a 1st level wizard can cast charm person on just about any fighter and make him his...female dog. "hey mr. tenth level fighter do me a favor and give me all your stuff and then see if you are any good at cliff diving, no, trust me! its perfectly safe, after all Im your trusted friend I would try to hurt you.

 

[John Morrow]

The more I play, the more frustrated I am with Attacks of Opportunity. I just can't bring myself to believe that anyone will stop paying attention to an opponent who's right in front of her in order to take a whack at a guy who's running past her. In fact, I think a person in melee should have a penalty to even notice someone else moving through her threatened space.

It's designed to allow the simulation of battle lines. Some older melee combat games and role-playing games used to do the same thing by requiring you to stop as soon as you came close enough to a hostile combatant in melee and perform a disengage maneuver to get out of melee combat with them. Without one of these or the other, it's just too easy for a character that can move 12 squares in a turn and slip through a small one square gap behind enemy lines to flank them.

As for stopping paying attention to the opponent in front of you or having trouble noticing someone moving past you, remember that D&D 3.5 abstracts out facing (which way a character is primarily looking) and instead assumes that characters are spending their 6 second round moving around and looking around and covering themselves through 360 degrees. It's only when they have someone on both sides of them that they have trouble being in two places at once. Is this realistic? Not entirely. But no RPG combat system is and giving a character facing requires shorter combat rounds and shorter movement or it has it's own big problems.

So the quick and dirty answer is that Attacks of Opportunity are an abstraction but many of the alternatives are more complicated and playing without them has it's own realism problems.

I also dislike all the different categories of actions - it's just too complicated. I have to keep a note card to remind me what I can do in a round. I'd much prefer a system that said simply, "You can do two things in a round, and they can be any two of these: move, attack, defend, cast a spell", etc.

That also creates other problems. Do you really want a Wizard casting two Chain Lightnings in one six-second round before anyone else can respond? If a fighter has 3 attacks in a round, what does a single attack mean? Do they get all three attacks? Then what does a double-attack mean? Can they cast a spell like True Strike and then whack someone with their weapon in one round? What does it mean to attack and defend or defend and attack?

 

[Jeff Wilder]

I've solved this problem with a very simple house rule:

• Up to your Constitution score in hp are your "pain points". If your hp decrease to this or below, you're wounded.
• Any point above are your "luck/dodge/fatigue points". As long as you're in that total, you're not wounded.

That's all. No rules are actually modified here.

So under your house rule, if you've only taken "luck/dodge/fatigue" damage from that wyvern, do you have to make a Fortitude save against its poison?