Worse Rules that game designers have made?

[Pants]

Good point on the flying rules, they really suck now. I've never noticed them, because frankly, I've never really used them that much before. I've always handwaved them.

Which one of these questions are not already covered by the existing rules?

Where?

 

[lukelightning]

As for flying, I've been thinking of a house rule turning flying into 3 categories: good, average, poor.

To stay flying a poor flier must spend a standard action. For it, flying is just a way to get around.

An average flier must spend a move action to fly (moving a distance is part of this action), so it cannot make a full attack and fly.

A good flier spends a free action to fly.

Not a perfect system, but I think it's a start.

Which one of these questions are not already covered by the existing rules?

I'd rather not deal with trying to figure out how a gorgon can attack the guy behind it if people are on all sides. Does it get a free bull rush on everyone as it turns around?

 

[Raven Crowking]

Where?

If you think grapple is annoying then you probably don't want to have all sorts of weird rules on what happens when a 5x10 monster needs to turn when there are people adjacent to it. Does it push you away? Is there a strength check involved? Do you get an AoO? Are you effectively giving this creature a free bull rush check or does it need to take a standard action to move you away? Is it some arbitrary DM ruling?

Is the creature attempting to move through an area that contains another creature? If so, what happens?

Is the creature attempting to move through an area that is threatened by another creature? If so, what happens?

Is there any question in the above quoted "weird rules" that is not covered by the existing rules for moving through (or into) an area that contains another creature, and/or the existing rules for AoOs?

RC

 

[JVisgaitis]

Is there any real problem with the way this was handled in Arcana Evolved?

I don't really think so.

 

[GwydapLlew]

Having seen a bucking bronco up close and personal, I have never had a problem with the concept of a creature turning as many times as it wants in a 10' x 10' square.

Likewise, I've never had a problem with a creature arching its neck to breath a gout of flame, or lashing out with a tail at an odd angle, or just thrashing around until it can get a good shot off. The cries of 'free bull rushes' make no sense to me, as, per RAW, you don't need to knock someone back to rotate in the same square.

I am always amazed at the hue and cry over small rules that never seem to be a problem at my table.

The rules that I find clunky are grappling; not because the rules are bad, but because the rules are poorly presented. I'd like for things to have ungodly high resistances, not immunities. I prefer my orb spells to be affected by SR. The worst rules that game designers ever made? I'd have to say the chargen rules from TMNT And Other Strangeness.

 

[Fishbone]

That same Wizard in the low double digits "coming out of his pajamas" couldn't even begin to hope to mentally dominate an aberration of appropriate CR. Their will saves might as well be automatic.
The good save for a high level creature simply isn't an option, especially if it has SR. SR never made much sense to me, regardless of edition. Thats what the saving throw, resistances, and immunities are for.
SR and good saves are hell on casters for nearly 3/4 their career.

 

[painandgreed]

My pet peeves:

1) That building magic items costs XP. It's a poorly thought out kludge that doesn't do what it supposed to 9and I'm not even really sure what that is). It has no presidence in D&D and there is nothing else like it in the mechanics short of level drain, and it causes issues of SOD.

2) Detailed XP for combat (and disableing traps), but everything else is "ad hoc" with no guidelines for the DM. End result is that most campains only dish out XP for combat. If you ever overcome a challenge through RP, most DMs balk at givign out any XP for it because they have no reference as to how much to give.

 

[lukelightning]

Is the creature attempting to move through an area that contains another creature? If so, what happens?

Is the creature attempting to move through an area that is threatened by another creature? If so, what happens?

So now, instead of attacking, it has to spend its action bull rushing people out of the way? Or if it is a free action, you're giving it free attacks. And regardless, I think it would severly slow down play. A simple attempt to attack someone or move position turns into multiple bull rush attempts.

 

[Stalker0]

That same Wizard in the low double digits "coming out of his pajamas" couldn't even begin to hope to mentally dominate an aberration of appropriate CR. Their will saves might as well be automatic.
The good save for a high level creature simply isn't an option, especially if it has SR. SR never made much sense to me, regardless of edition. Thats what the saving throw, resistances, and immunities are for.
SR and good saves are hell on casters for nearly 3/4 their career.

If your fighting an aberration...don't use will saves!! Good saves are good for a reason, they should be damn hard for a caster to get through. If a caster has a good chance on a fighter's fort save, then what chance does a fighter have at all?

 

[lukelightning]

If your fighting an aberration...don't use will saves!! Good saves are good for a reason, they should be damn hard for a caster to get through. If a caster has a good chance on a fighter's fort save, then what chance does a fighter have at all?

The problem is that good saves soon become "perfect" saves, and you have to rely on a certain amount of metagame knowledge, particularly when it comes to classes (since no knowledge skill applies to classes...you can at least use a knowledge check to justify your knowledge of aberrations...but what knowledge skill do you use to know that clerics have good fort saves?)