Worse Rules that game designers have made?

[Pants]

How about getting rid of deflection bonuses? Why do we need more than armor, dex, shield, and maybe dodge?

Deflection actually serves a purpose though, if you wanted to pair down the bonus types, you could easily choose a bunch of other ones (profane/circumstance/insight/etc)

 

[Fedifensor]

How about getting rid of deflection bonuses? Why do we need more than armor, dex, shield, and maybe dodge?

I'm amazed that no one has mention the strangeness of having armor and "natural armor". It gets even wackier when you realize that a brilliant energy weapon ignores armor...but not natural armor (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicWeapons.htm#brilliantEnergy).

 

[Razz]

I'm amazed that no one has mention the strangeness of having armor and "natural armor". It gets even wackier when you realize that a brilliant energy weapon ignores armor...but not natural armor (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicWeapons.htm#brilliantEnergy).

I'm amazed you find that hard to comprehend. It makes total sense.

If your hide is as thick as a whale's and then you put full plate on, of course it'll be that much harder to damage you. Not only do you have to penetrate the armor but also the hide beneath.

How does it NOT make sense?

 

[Razz]

Deflection actually serves a purpose though, if you wanted to pair down the bonus types, you could easily choose a bunch of other ones (profane/circumstance/insight/etc)

It not only serves a purpose, but it makes sense in a fantasy world. Having magic or a magic item that wards/warps/distorts attacks away from you wouldn't fit into any other bonus category but its own--- Deflection.

 

[XO]

Omg !

The more I read this, the more I am tempted to throw all 3e/3.5 books in a box and dedicate my time to AD&D instead...

Paladins need empowering to be rebalanced: it has to do with the number of key abilities required for the class to work... Str, AND Wis, AND Cha, AND preferably Con and Dex makes for a tough balancing act. The old 1e "spellcasting as a Cleric two levels lower" was good.

Most semi spellcaster's casting levels make them particularly good at shining shoes: they're good at utility spells, but they become useless fro offensive purposes.

The fact that the golf club effect was not mentioned means people like it? Adamant-iron-silver-magic-good-axiomatic-cardboard-papercut-fruitiness? "DR 15 still applies 'cause your weap didn't have bubble-gum"

Facing is good. Flying maneuvers w/o facing sucks. I like to know that the dragon can sit on me, but not breathe nastiness at me... And no, facing does not necessarily call for minis.

Useless lower level spells when climbing in level... That's a bad rule.

The Touch AC is fine... We house ruled it that way in 1e, 2e, 3e vindicated us, and usually, a save will apply (except a very few exceptions) once the magical attack touches.

Bards need a boost... Sure they can make decent buffers, but they are at a disadvantage in most adventuring environments.

Multiclassing works, but should be limited to perhaps three classes, including the final PrC.

Gestalt is best.

Bad epic system.

Bad D&D power curve.

Bad absence of alternate life experience mechanics allowing NPCs to progress as alchemists or wizards while playing in the lab or the library.

So many things to fix...

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

Just a quick question: do the majority of people think that rules that are largely flavour based ... should be dumped?
...
I realise I'm probably in the minority...

You never can really tell what the majority think. Good polls take exceptional skill to craft and extreme views tend to be over represented in threads.

I'm fine enough with the rules as they are. The idea of house ruling and tinkering away just strikes me as a terrible bore - and much worse than enduring the occasional annoying mosquito.

That said, now that I've remembered, we've always played that cutting your way out of a creature that has swallowed you whole requires that you kill it. Once the creature is < -9 can we justify describing such an obviously lethal injury.

I guess we do use ingrained (and almost subconcious) house rules...

 

[Aus_Snow]

Amen! I still shudder at the weapon size rules.

Why?

No really, I honestly have no idea what you (or TB) mean.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Why?

No really, I honestly have no idea what you (or TB) mean.

I actually feel the same way. The notion that a human longsword = halfling short sword never sat well with me. They're just not the same weapon. Proportions are different, handles are different, blades are different. I much prefer the 3.5 method.

 

[RangerWickett]

It not only serves a purpose, but it makes sense in a fantasy world. Having magic or a magic item that wards/warps/distorts attacks away from you wouldn't fit into any other bonus category but its own--- Deflection.

Well sure, if you want a lot of bonuses. But if you want to simplify the rules, you don't need to make a distinction between defense that is metal, defense that is meat, and defense that is a distortion in the fabric of reality.

Consider this. If people were limited to only having 3 active magic items at any time, such that having more caused the newer ones to stop functioning, you could let everything stack, and it wouldn't be broken. I know it's not at all what D&D 3e is, but we shouldn't be opposed to considering such types of change.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Class skills are bloody stupid. I'm hopeful that Fourth Edition will do something to eliminate this nonsensical holdover from earlier editions' overly-strong niche protection philosophies.