Worst...Idea...Ever
- Thread starter JiffyPopTart
- Start date
VirgilCaine
First Post
Henry said:
Let's look at this sentence: Half-undead--half of something that isn't alive (and is by definition already in between living and dead), and Dragon magazine. Yep, I saw that coming.
werk
First Post
Shade said:
Thank you. Daemons went from my favorite bad guy to useless dorks.
Sand in my craw:
Level caps from 2e. (you should only be limited by your experiences)
AoO. (meta tactic exploit heaven)
Spiked Chain (why is it so special?)
Can only run in a strait line (it's simpler this way, but when has that ever stopped them)
And I honestly don't like the way grapple, trip, overrun, bullrush, etc work. Just make them a special attack with a save instead of this massive opposed complex cascading retributive thing.
Jdvn1
Hanging in there. Better than the alternative.
Sorry, Complete Divine gets that award for me. Complete Warrior is a solid second (worst), though.Psion said:
I really like the other two books.
You mean was, right? They were really cool... and the update kind of messed up my 3.0 Psion, too.Tetsubo said:
Gez
First Post
FreeTheSlaves said:
I'll echo that and add the "one spell list per spellcasting class philosophy". It's a real pain to have arcane spells that can be cast by a bard, a wu jen and a warmage, but not by a wizard, and spells that are level 6, 8, or 9 depending on who cast it. Should be limited to one spell list by magic type (arcana, nature, religion, psionics, no more), and spells being always of the same level.
Particle_Man
Explorer
Henry said:
Kinda reminds me of Blade. Is that what they were going for?
KB9JMQ
First Post
1. Turning Rules - Can't I roll a d20 add something to beat something ? Get rid of the charts and d6s already.
2. Spell Levels - Why can't a 3rd-Level Spellcaster cast third level spells ?
It would be less confusing if it was spellcaster level = spell level you can cast.
Yes it would take a revamping of the spells but I hate explaining to new players "Yeah you are 3rd level but you cannot cast fireball even though it is third level. You need to be 5th level" Which is always followed by "Why Not?"
2. Spell Levels - Why can't a 3rd-Level Spellcaster cast third level spells ?
It would be less confusing if it was spellcaster level = spell level you can cast.
Yes it would take a revamping of the spells but I hate explaining to new players "Yeah you are 3rd level but you cannot cast fireball even though it is third level. You need to be 5th level" Which is always followed by "Why Not?"
Odhanan
Adventurer
For me, that would be the idea that absolute game balance exists. It's more of an idea than a particular game element (actually, this goes farther than this, since D&D exploits this idea of balance to the extreme while using a loose hierarchy of usefulness of feats and abilities compared to the Magic TCG, which is a paradox). It's a general criticism towards D&D and the d20 system.
A balance principle for game rules is good and necessary.
Trying to make everything absolutely positively balanced is nocive for the game on the long run, because sooner or later you'll betray your credo or all the options will look like "more of the same" for any given player.
A balance principle for game rules is good and necessary.
Trying to make everything absolutely positively balanced is nocive for the game on the long run, because sooner or later you'll betray your credo or all the options will look like "more of the same" for any given player.
FreeTheSlaves
Adventurer
Could you give this story please? It sounds interesting.diaglo said:
