HERESY THREAD: Sacred cows that you think D&D would be better without.

[David Johansen]

Well, as a product I'd make it look as much like red book basic as possible.  I don't think percentile theif skills are a sacred cow though.  No, I'd probably hand out more hit points at first level and give magic-users a couple more spells but that's it.  The  sacred cow I guess I'd throw under the bus is massive and dense rule books.

Now, if I was designing a game that wasn't Dungeons & Dragons the Armor Class / To Hit mechanism and ascending hit points would die a sudden and horrible death.  I can't stand it.  It makes it too hard to describe credible results and turns combat into a rather dull points grind.  Not fun or desirable at all from where I sit.

But I think for the game Dungeons & Dragons is and has been it's an essential part of the game and works well enough in that context.

[Phillip]

People thinking the game would be better if officially changed to fit their own notions.

Not that I'm against people having their own notions; the more the merrier, including in Officially Approved Product!

Dave and I disagree on how to handle any number of things, and both of our campaigns differ from the "rules" found in DandD. If the time ever comes when all aspects of fantasy are covered and the vast majority of its players agree on how the game should be played, DandD will have become staid and boring indeed. Sorry, but I don't believe that there is anything desirable in having various campaigns playing similarly to one another.

[vytzka]

People thinking the game would be better if officially changed to fit their own notions.

Not that I'm against people having their own notions; the more the merrier, including in Officially Approved Product!

Didn't Gary kinda go back and forth on the issue?

[daniel_ream]

Didn't Gary kinda go back and forth on the issue?

By the time AD&D was published he was pretty hard core about the fact that the game was the game, and you all had better not be getting your grubby little fingers all over it.

[thedungeondelver]

None of you people engaging in this want to play D&D.

I don't say that as a pejorative; it's just that you want the popular-kid D&D banner over your game of choice, but you don't want that game to be D&D.  Empty table at a 'con because you're playing ?  Call it D&D but when the players get there tell them you've eliminated the six stats, the alignment, vancian casting, levels and classes.  But hey! It's advertised as D&D*!  So...win!  Players at the table!

If I want a points-buy more granular system with no levels or classes...there's a half-dozen games out there I can try.

If I need a car I don't drive my lawn mower to the store.


...


*Also there will be no dungeons involved for they are childish and silly.

[artikid]

Saving Throws as different from ability checks and (for later editions) skill checks.
Descending AC.

[Haffrung]

Get rid of the 3-18 values once you generate the attribute modifiers. They serve not purpose.

Replace Wisdom with Perception. Wisdom has always been tough to define, and using Wisdom to detect ambushes and stuff is bizarre.

Get rid of turning. It's difficult and annoying to referee. Replace it with the divine channeling ability from Pathfinder.

Call hit points Vitality. That would clear up the notion that every time you suffer damage you're actually being struck.

Introduce a rudimentary wound system. In 3E, Pathfinder, 4E, and Next all have a dozen or more conditions that PCs can sustain. But 'wounded' can't be one of them because it's too fiddly to track? Nonsense.

Cap the game at level 10 or 12. Most of power disparities and system wonkiness people complain about only really become evident at high levels. Few people play above level 10 or so anyway, so just cap the core system there, and let high-level play run on its own sub-system.

[estar]

None of you people engaging in this want to play D&D.

I don't say that as a pejorative; it's just that you want the popular-kid D&D banner over your game of choice, but you don't want that game to be D&D.  

Yeah I pretty agree with this. When I wrote the Majestic Wilderlands supplement I stuck with additions that I felt with were D&Dish and made it clear that I did so because it was useful for implementing D&D for my campaign.

There were some things that didn't go in. For example Abilities originally were a pool of points that could be allocated when you level. Similar to how in AD&D 2e you could modify your thief skill percentages. But I didn't put it in because I was writing it for Swords & Wizardry/OD&D and that just not part of how the game worked.

I will say if something is more convenient and doesn't modify the sequence of play or the odds then I say make it part of a new printing. For  example is Ascending AC for OD&D. Or a single save with modifiers.

[Gronan of Simmerya]

None of you people engaging in this want to play D&D.

Exsqueeze me?

"NONE?"

You keep using that word.  I do not think it means what you think it means.

[Exploderwizard]

Get rid of the 3-18 values once you generate the attribute modifiers. They serve not purpose.

The core problem with modern D&D right here.

In the original game, the vast majority of PCs had a modifier of 0 to most things. If we applied this rule then everyone would pretty much be the same.

Differences in actual scores is a data point that helps when making rulings not to mention actual attribute checks.

[J Arcane]

Get rid of the 3-18 values once you generate the attribute modifiers. They serve not purpose.

No they aren't, the designers just forgot how to use them.

[trechriron]

Escalating Hit Points.

Vancian Magic.

Feats + Prestige Classes + Special snowflake races + character optimization = SUCK MY BALLS.

Those are really my biggest beefs with D&D. Pathfinder/3.x gets so complex at higher levels it becomes unplayable IMHO. I love all the monsters in D&D and I like the idea of "niche protection" where there's a team with specialists who support each other.

But look. There's lots of games out there.

If you like 2d10 and some basics of D&D without escalating hit points or Vancian magic, Novus is actually a very well done fantasy ruleset. We're really digging it. I'm working on some conversions for it so I can have my cake and eat it too. :-)

Then there's always GURPS. It's a well designed system and can tweak almost any flavor of fantasy you could imagine. I borrow from it heavily to tweak out my games.

I don't need to slaughter sacred cows. I can respect the sacred cows and appreciate them and choose a different way to worship.  :-)

[Gronan of Simmerya]

Feats + Prestige Classes + Special snowflake races + character optimization = SUCK MY BALLS.

Yeah.

I never played 3.0, but I did play Star Wars d20 which my 3.0 playing friends assured me was quite similar.

The fucking game is simply broken.  I'm convinced they never even playtested the son of a bitching thing.

Dave Arneson playtested Blackmoor for two years before showing it to Gary Gygax.  Gary playtested Greyhawk for a year and a half before OD&D was published.  Rules with five times the number of words don't get a fraction of the playtesting.

[Black Vulmea]

. . . [Y]ou want the popular-kid D&D banner over your game of choice, but you don't want that game to be D&D.

But here's the thing - and there's no getting around it - both TSR and Whizbros listened to these people, for decades.

[David Johansen]

None of you people engaging in this want to play D&D.

Well, I don't anyhow.  But I do want people to buy and play D&D.  I think the industry on the whole desperately needs a popular and accessible version of D&D on the market.  A better game and a better product might be conceived and implemented to replace it but do you know how hard it is to build a strong product identity to overthrow an established one.

I might not like it, but we need D&D and we need it to be strong and accessible to new players.