What's not fun?

[psionotic]

We have true death = negative (your level) HP, minimum 10. So a 15th level char dies at -15, and a 20th dies at -20. Not really elegant, but it allows higher level chars to go down a bit further before bleeding out.

I'm certainly in favor of a 4e death mechanic in which it is more difficult for PCs to die, but death is more final. The current "easy to death, easy to rise" cheapens death, life, and is none too wise.

 

[marune]

I'm certainly in favor of a 4e death mechanic in which it is more difficult for PCs to die, but death is more final. The current "easy to death, easy to rise" cheapens death, life, and is none too wise.

I'd love it that way.

 

[Nifft]

So I see an ever increasing number of posts identifying parts of DnD that just aren't fun that people want removed when 4E comes out next year. So lets get it all on the table and see just what isn't fun and needs to go.

This excellent question...

Damage
Gnomes
Failing skill checks
Missing attack rolls
Failing saving throws

... has somehow been cheapened. Whatever. I'd like you to stop spraying the bitter herbs, but the discussion seems to be ignoring it, so I'll do the same (excepting this).

- - -

Resource management is really tough at high levels. Magic Items are a pain to track, to destroy (as a DM), to split up when loot time rolls around. Spells become too numerous. Buffs and de-buffs become too numerous. Spellcasting opponents are PAINFUL to create and run.

Exponential XP went away. I'd like it if exponential loot went away, too.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Glyfair]

The problem, of course, is that any list you come up with is going to be misleading. The fact that something isn't fun for the particular person who brought it up isn't even remotely the same thing as saying that it's not fun to a majority of players, and thus should be reconsidered.

The other thing is that sometimes short-term "non-fun" enhances long-term fun. There is a lot of trade off there that varies even more from person to person.

For me, the following things have major "non-fun" elements.

Save or die. It has too small of a sweet spot when used by PCs. On "mooks" they feel wasted. On the BBEG they are almost always anti-climatic. It's only in the in-between "lieutenant" area where they feel right, but aren't used there very often.

When used against PCs there is no real threat value that is fun. Either the effect fails and does little or nothing, or it succeeds and you have to deal with character death and all that entails.

Death. This varies. In a plot heavy game (which isn't the same as a railroad game), it can kill subplots that are developing and playing out. There are other ways of having negative consequences for failure besides death. However, it is tried and true and what everyone is used to. In most D&D games it is expected.

Running out of resources (spells etc). When doing so relegates you to the spectator role for significant amounts of time, this is very unfun (see "AD&D 1st level magic-user").

 

[Digital M@]

Skills - are so numerous and specific in nature that they are nearly worthless, except for a few and since only one or two classes have the ability to purchase them they have little to no value. For Move silently/hide for instance I would love to see a base DC modified by someones listen instead of a mine vs yours b/c a fighter would never hear anything short of an elephant heard stampeding past. There are so many specific knowledge skills that they become worthless for both the PC and DM.

There are so many facets of the game that could be more fun. Magic Items make the man is crap. I would rather magic items be a bit more rare and the PCs aility be able to carry them through more.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

I think we can all agree that Gnomes can be fun if punted correctly.

Say...into the Dragon as a distraction for the rest of the party to book it.

 

[zoroaster100]

Waiting 45 minutes or more at the beginning of a game session while the players figure out their buff spells and the effects of which buff stacks with what - not fun.

Waiting 15 minutes while a player calculates his attack roll, his AC or his saving throw bonus - not fun.

Spending half an hour or more recalculating everyone's attack bonus, AC, and saves without magic items when in an antimagic zone - not fun.

Checking a dozen different buffs on someone to see which ones are dispelled by a dispel magic - not fun.

Checking a dozen magic items to see which ones are destroyed after being struck by Mordenkainen's disjunction - not fun.

Playing a character who can't seem to ever affect the opponents the party faces - not fun.

Having to carefully calculate treasure division after a session because wealth/magic items are essential for character effectiveness - not fun.


Having all mental control abilities nerfed by the first level spell Protection from Evil - not fun for a DM.


Absolute defenses against whole classes of abilities (such as death ward, freedom of movement, mind blank, true seeing, energy immunity or energy resistance 30, etc.) - not fun

If 4e fixes these things, D&D will definitely be more fun.

 

[Falling Icicle]

Gnomes

As someone who has actually played a gnome, I emphatically disagree. Especially with your premise that in order for the game to be fun in 4e, they must be removed. If you don't like gnomes, don't play them. But don't insist on taking away the fun of those people who do enjoy playing them.

 

[LostSoul]

Honestly, the only non-fun thing that's in the 3e ruleset for me is the consequences of failure on a die roll. Sometimes, it's very important, and failure is cool - a SR check, an attack roll, a Tumble check, you know the type. But when you make some check, and fail, and failure is boring and doesn't do anything to drive the plot along - I don't like that.

Example: Ran a con game for Burning Empires today. Player made a Circles check - wanted to get in touch with an NPC he knew who would feed him information that he could use to attack the bad guys. He fails. Instead of just saying, "Yeah, this guy don't know jack", I decided to drive the plot: the NPC thinks, "I can get ahead by betraying this upstart PC to the bigwigs." The NPC does so, and the game moves in a direction that I didn't expect before that die roll was made.

Now that's a totally different style of game, but you could use the same principle for D&D. Fail to make that (opposed - that's important) Survival check to track the bad guys? Guess what - the get the jump on you.

 

[Li Shenron]

Save or die
Energy drain
Death
Damage
Running out of resources (spells etc)
Failing skill checks
Missing attack rolls
Failing saving throws

I think that if someone is not having fun with these negative circumstances of the game, they should play another game entirely...

One thing is to remove 1-2 of these kind of penalties. Another thing is to remove ALL of them... In that case it would be better to consider playing a storyteller game instead of trying to fit the traditional D&D which a lot of people like as it is, that is: a game where avoiding the dangers IS the main reason for playing.