What rules don't work?

[S'mon]

Yes, but a level X character also counts as CR X. That is what he/she is complaining about.

Yup - that's what doesn't work. A single NPC of level = party level is not a good challenge, almost always. If you give NPCs CR equal to around 4/5 their Class Level rounded up (ie level 4 = CR 4, level 5 also = 4), I think it works out. Alter to fit - eg a Wiz-5 is a bigger threat than a Sorc-5 due to his 3rd level spells.

 

[Yair]

Well, reading this thread the number of things that don't work has multiplioed Some good points here...

For me, the main problems are:
- Hit Points. They are mostly evasion/fatigue/luck in my game, but it still doesn't quite work. Player: "I hit him... *roll, calculate*... for 12 damage"
Player: "He evades your petite blow with a smirk"
Player: "OK, I guess I DIDN'T hit him after all..."

- No Reactivity. Two combatants just keep stnading at their postiions, trading blows (and even the ones that miss don't harm the soroundings or armor or anything). The rouge saves from the fireball, but is still standing at the bare center of the room. And so on.

- Too Many Rules. There are just too many rules to remember them. And often the rules don't make sense in the particular circumstances. I want a simpler game, with more room for DM fudging.

Now for some more concrete comments...

On this count, I like the GURPS method. You have one second. Act. OK, you drew a weapon. Next guy. OK, you cast a spell. Next. OK, you moved up to your foe. Next....

I very much liked the "Counting Initiative" model. Everyone declares what he does at count zero, and the DM says how long it would take them (in, say, seconds). The DM then proceeds to count the seconds out loud - when the count gets to a character's action, he gets to do it, then says what he does next and so on. If a character decides to change plans, he must say so when he does and the DM sets the time it would take for the new action. In this way, all the players tend to listen all the time as they may decide to change plans, and doing so earlier means they will finish it earlier.
This sounds more complicated than it is. In rules, it would be something like:
- Every player must state what his character does - from "just standing and looking around" to "charging through the mob to get to the BBEG while fighting defensively". Roll 1d10+dex modifier+circumstance modifier (set by the DM) and add it to the current Count; when the Count reaches this amount, your action is resolved.
- You can restate your actions at any Count.
- The DM Counts, starting from zero. You can stop him to declare an action at any time. If you miss your Count, you may act later - the DM shouldn't remember your Count for you.
- When between actions, your character is where and doing whatever the DM decides; other character may intercept it or interfere with its actions.

Something like that.

 

[Dinkeldog]

I am not sure what he is was talking about. There were no politics there. I said that while army, marines, navy, etc. All talk trash about each other all the time we still know we are on the same said in the end.

Gremlin, if you're ever confused about a moderator action, just contact the moderator involved. It is inappropriate to publicly air grievance with the moderators. Do it in private and all will be revealed.

And no, that's not all you said.

 

[glass]

Why does an armor-clad character get the benefit of heightened AC by having his skin under the armor toughened by Barkskin - while he doesn't get any AC benefit by instead wearing a tough artificial skin (leather armor) under his armor? Armor & Natural Armor should be the same bonus & hence shouldn't stack.

I never thought about this before, but now you mention it, it does make sense.

3E made a great stride forward with the stacking rules. But there are simply too many bonus categories. Trimming category bloat woud make for a better game.

This, I definitely agree with.


glass.

 

[glass]

I may be the only person here who likes attacks of opportunity.

'No, there is another'

EDIT: I mean me, not Leia.


glass.

 

[Psion]

'No, there is another'

More than one.

I used the DM screen for like a month before I figured out the simple thumb rule that underlies AoO (which they pretty much spelled out in the simplified explanation in 3.5.) It's been smooth sailing since then. All the hand wringing about AoO strikes me as much ado about nothing.

 

[Particle_Man]

Oh yeah, giant creature swings club, hits little man, man doesn't even have to make a strength check to see if he's knocked back.

I think there is a feat for that in the 3.5 MM.

 

[freebfrost]

Do you use that for every damage?

Don't spells (like empowered Fireball) just kill everyone then, because noone can make the MD save?

Bye
Thanee

Yes.

It's the world of Conan! Gotta be tough, right?



The rules allow for a set number of Fate points, that can be used to save your character from death, i.e. "Being Left For Dead," and abandoned by the enemy on the battlefield. You are basically at -9 and have an hour for someone to aid you.

Also, the spells from Conan are very, um, Conanish. That means they are more sinister in nature and not so flashy as a Fireball. There aren't many "roll Dxx" for damage type evocations in Conan.

 

[Kid Socrates]

The concept of class skills. Why can't my cleric of the god of thieves take pick pockets and hide in shadows?

I couldn't agree more. The more I think about class skills, the more it irks me. In 3.0 sense, what if my fighter grew up with a deaf family? Couldn't he have Read Lips? Why is a sorceror worse at seeing things? What if my rogue grew up with a wizard and learned everything he leanred about magic, to the point where he can recognize a spell being cast just by seeing it, just as well as another caster?

I didn't always feel this way, but the more I get into my game and the more I try and make it perfect for my players, the more I want to change.

Options, not restrictions.

 

[Kid Socrates]

You would probably like the HP system from either the white wolf games or the revised grim and gritty. Both have penalties for getting hurt before you die that include penalties to skill checks and attack rolls. My next campaign i am gonna try the revised grim and gritty rules in whole instead of just peacemeal like i am now.

Just sticking my head in here about the White Wolf system -- while I do like that things get harder when you get hurt, those negatives KILL in White Wolf. It didn't really make combat more intense for me, it felt like if I got even nicked, things would escalate into a dead character in one round. Granted, this is with my WW knowledge being before the recent revamp, but being reduced to one die on a Dex + Dodge versus a healthy guy's five successes, and one die to try and soak that damage, it's very hard to stay alive if you get hit once. In running White Wolf, I found myself very often lying about the damage successes my villains had because the players took two hard hits and were scrambling to get away with a -5 dice pool penalty.

Now, if they've changed this and cleaned it up in the recent books, feel free to completely ignore me.