|
|
Post by ripx187 on Jan 22, 2021 15:06:37 GMT -5
There are rules found that are so stupid and wonky that they are ignored. One of these is the Firing a missile into a melee rule which is in the 2nd edition of AD&D. It states that when you fire into a melee, you have no idea what your target really is. Each character in the melee is assigned a number by size, and the DM uses a secret roll to determine the actual target, which chances are high that it is the back of a fellow PC.
Now, I have used this rule on occasion, because I have ran into cases where it is appropriate, but for the most part, it is ignored because it just irritates everyone. We even developed a NWP (or feat) called sharp shooter which allowed the player to pick their target.
|
|
|
|
Post by mao on Jan 23, 2021 8:02:57 GMT -5
There was a series of stories in the old Space Gamer mag from Steve Jackson Games. It was called Murphy's Rules. My fav is from Raid on Iran, that stated you can't shoot all the way across a city street with an M-16 or AK-47.
|
|
|
|
Post by El Borak on Jan 24, 2021 16:13:15 GMT -5
I have always ignored the rules in D&D for rest. Anyone who has ever earned a living, even for a little while, with a strong back, knows that you set a pace that you can keep to and you don't take breaks. You maybe stop for 5 minutes now and then for a swig of water and then you get right back at it.
|
|
|
|
Post by River Man on Jan 29, 2021 20:57:32 GMT -5
Keep posting, this is interesting stuff. Always like to see how people played bitd.
|
|
|
|
Post by Harry Wolf on Jan 29, 2021 21:19:02 GMT -5
There are rules found that are so stupid and wonky that they are ignored. One of these is the Firing a missile into a melee rule which is in the 2nd edition of AD&D. It states that when you fire into a melee, you have no idea what your target really is. Each character in the melee is assigned a number by size, and the DM uses a secret roll to determine the actual target, which chances are high that it is the back of a fellow PC. Now, I have used this rule on occasion, because I have ran into cases where it is appropriate, but for the most part, it is ignored because it just irritates everyone. We even developed a NWP (or feat) called sharp shooter which allowed the player to pick their target. I don't allow firing into melee, if people insist, then I tell them 70% chance of hitting a friend (which we roll first)and if it is a friend you have a +3 to hit from behind on your attack roll (which is rolled second), if you hit, your friend takes double damage. |
|
|
|
Post by Jakob Grimm on Jan 30, 2021 0:16:41 GMT -5
Some D&D versions have skills and a whole slew of game slowing and character limiting rules, none of which I use. IMO the worst rule was spell components. Good concept, but if enforced it is a nightmarish headache for both DM and players. Better to handwave it than to try to keep track of and just when life is on the line, they don't have the right component(s).
|
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on Jan 30, 2021 19:20:46 GMT -5
Some D&D versions have skills and a whole slew of game slowing and character limiting rules, none of which I use. IMO the worst rule was spell components. Good concept, but if enforced it is a nightmarish headache for both DM and players. Better to handwave it than to try to keep track of and just when life is on the line, they don't have the right component(s). I ignored this one for a long time too. Today I use it just to charge a maintenance fee. Sometimes you've got to read the spell description because the component itself might place limitations on the spell and it is there on purpose. A spell that requires a gemstone worth at least 500gp allows lower leveled casters to cast a more powerful spell than normal, but at a cost. I actually love games that center around collecting spell components for epic spells. It can add to the game if you let it, or you can just ignore common components and always just assume that they have them. |
|
|
|
Post by Paladin on Jan 30, 2021 21:58:41 GMT -5
We allowed wizards to use swords. Clerics could have edged weapons. Fighters can use magic scrolls if they're versed in the language and technique. Or even learn a spell from a friendly wizard.
No racial level limits or class limits. And it was never boring. People played what they wanted and all were satisfied.
Never had thieves and sometimes nixed clerics, too. Just used healing herbs and potions. And tweaked the natural healing rules a bit.
Tossed out Vancian magic in favor of spell points. I'm sure there are loads more.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dartanian on Jan 31, 2021 15:11:22 GMT -5
Some D&D versions have skills and a whole slew of game slowing and character limiting rules, none of which I use. IMO the worst rule was spell components. Good concept, but if enforced it is a nightmarish headache for both DM and players. Better to handwave it than to try to keep track of and just when life is on the line, they don't have the right component(s). I ignored this one for a long time too. Today I use it just to charge a maintenance fee. Sometimes you've got to read the spell description because the component itself might place limitations on the spell and it is there on purpose. A spell that requires a gemstone worth at least 500gp allows lower leveled casters to cast a more powerful spell than normal, but at a cost. I actually love games that center around collecting spell components for epic spells. It can add to the game if you let it, or you can just ignore common components and always just assume that they have them. This is an interesting perspective ripx187, so you allow spell casters to cast higher level spells (with the purchase and use of a gemstone of 500 GP or more in value) than they would normally be allowed to cast? So for instance, with the investment they could learn and use a 2nd level spell a level sooner than otherwise possible? |
|
|
|
Post by Dartanian on Jan 31, 2021 15:13:20 GMT -5
We allowed wizards to use swords. Clerics could have edged weapons. Fighters can use magic scrolls if they're versed in the language and technique. Or even learn a spell from a friendly wizard. No racial level limits or class limits. And it was never boring. People played what they wanted and all were satisfied. Never had thieves and sometimes nixed clerics, too. Just used healing herbs and potions. And tweaked the natural healing rules a bit. Tossed out Vancian magic in favor of spell points. I'm sure there are loads more. I am in favor of letting wizards use swords and I will go for dumping racial level limits and class limits. |
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on Feb 1, 2021 12:59:15 GMT -5
I ignored this one for a long time too. Today I use it just to charge a maintenance fee. Sometimes you've got to read the spell description because the component itself might place limitations on the spell and it is there on purpose. A spell that requires a gemstone worth at least 500gp allows lower leveled casters to cast a more powerful spell than normal, but at a cost. I actually love games that center around collecting spell components for epic spells. It can add to the game if you let it, or you can just ignore common components and always just assume that they have them. This is an interesting perspective ripx187 , so you allow spell casters to cast higher level spells (with the purchase and use of a gemstone of 500 GP or more in value) than they would normally be allowed to cast? So for instance, with the investment they could learn and use a 2nd level spell a level sooner than otherwise possible? Reading the rules for the spells, you find this happening and they are common spells. I want to say that Identify, a 1st level spell, actually requires a sacrifice of money to keep people from abusing the spell. The spells that I am referring to are found in the player's handbooks and they are canon, if the expensive component is ignored than the wizard is too powerful. I suppose that the same thing could be applied to Firing into melee. If an archer can just pick his targets, then he is kind of stepping on the Wizards toes. Does it make the archer too powerful on a mechanical level? Perhaps. |
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on Feb 1, 2021 13:08:48 GMT -5
We allowed wizards to use swords. Clerics could have edged weapons. Fighters can use magic scrolls if they're versed in the language and technique. Or even learn a spell from a friendly wizard. No racial level limits or class limits. And it was never boring. People played what they wanted and all were satisfied. Never had thieves and sometimes nixed clerics, too. Just used healing herbs and potions. And tweaked the natural healing rules a bit. Tossed out Vancian magic in favor of spell points. I'm sure there are loads more. Originally we used spell points, but later we found out that we enjoyed the Vancian magic more. Racial limits are an interesting subject, I kind of think that it was done out of laziness. You start with bonus abilities as a demihuman, I just allow human characters to pick X amount of bonus abilities themselves and it is fine. |
|
|
|
Post by Maximum Forest Ranger on Feb 1, 2021 19:10:37 GMT -5
This is an interesting perspective ripx187 , so you allow spell casters to cast higher level spells (with the purchase and use of a gemstone of 500 GP or more in value) than they would normally be allowed to cast? So for instance, with the investment they could learn and use a 2nd level spell a level sooner than otherwise possible? Reading the rules for the spells, you find this happening and they are common spells. I want to say that Identify, a 1st level spell, actually requires a sacrifice of money to keep people from abusing the spell. The spells that I am referring to are found in the player's handbooks and they are canon, if the expensive component is ignored than the wizard is too powerful. I suppose that the same thing could be applied to Firing into melee. If an archer can just pick his targets, then he is kind of stepping on the Wizards toes. Does it make the archer too powerful on a mechanical level? Perhaps. I am really curious which spells you think are too powerful without an expensive component? Which spells do you think make a wizard too powerful and even if that were true, wouldn't the easy solution be to make it a higher level spell? Or even to tinker with the number of spells a wizard gets at each level? Firing into melee is just allowing players to do something that only an idiot would do in real life IMO, in other words there is no upside to allowing it. If I were in a fight, the last thing I would want is missile weapon fire coming in from any angle. |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Feb 2, 2021 6:52:56 GMT -5
We allowed wizards to use swords. Clerics could have edged weapons. Fighters can use magic scrolls if they're versed in the language and technique. Or even learn a spell from a friendly wizard. No racial level limits or class limits. And it was never boring. People played what they wanted and all were satisfied. Never had thieves and sometimes nixed clerics, too. Just used healing herbs and potions. And tweaked the natural healing rules a bit. Tossed out Vancian magic in favor of spell points. I'm sure there are loads more. Originally we used spell points, but later we found out that we enjoyed the Vancian magic more. Racial limits are an interesting subject, I kind of think that it was done out of laziness. You start with bonus abilities as a demihuman, I just allow human characters to pick X amount of bonus abilities themselves and it is fine. Love me Vancian!(I read the books before I played anything) |
|
|
|
Post by The Editor on Feb 6, 2021 2:34:55 GMT -5
I never tried to track encumbrance, I just eye-balled it and as long a the character was not carrying more than a horse and two mules (hyperbole) they were good.
|
|
|
|
Post by youngbuck on Feb 21, 2021 1:43:32 GMT -5
I find this very enlightening.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jakob Grimm on Feb 23, 2021 4:14:03 GMT -5
Along with talking about what we don't like there are a lot of good ideas for tweaking those things and making them more functional.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Feb 23, 2021 12:08:02 GMT -5
We allowed wizards to use swords. Clerics could have edged weapons. Fighters can use magic scrolls if they're versed in the language and technique. Or even learn a spell from a friendly wizard. No racial level limits or class limits. And it was never boring. People played what they wanted and all were satisfied. Never had thieves and sometimes nixed clerics, too. Just used healing herbs and potions. And tweaked the natural healing rules a bit. Tossed out Vancian magic in favor of spell points. I'm sure there are loads more. Nothing wrong with a wizard having a sword. How did you run your magic with spell points? Did you have your own system or did you borrow one? |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Feb 23, 2021 12:09:13 GMT -5
Along with talking about what we don't like there are a lot of good ideas for tweaking those things and making them more functional. 's take on magic is making me rethink so things, I like his ideas, they make for a fun game. |
|
|
|
Post by Paladin on Feb 28, 2021 11:27:22 GMT -5
We allowed wizards to use swords. Clerics could have edged weapons. Fighters can use magic scrolls if they're versed in the language and technique. Or even learn a spell from a friendly wizard. No racial level limits or class limits. And it was never boring. People played what they wanted and all were satisfied. Never had thieves and sometimes nixed clerics, too. Just used healing herbs and potions. And tweaked the natural healing rules a bit. Tossed out Vancian magic in favor of spell points. I'm sure there are loads more. Nothing wrong with a wizard having a sword. How did you run your magic with spell points? Did you have your own system or did you borrow one? I just noticed this. Pardon me...I don't keep up as well as I should. But we tended to use the wizard's intelligence score to determine the number of points per day. Or sometimes constitution, the theory being that magic taxes the body and you will be limited in the amount of spells you can cast before exhaustion sets in. If I remember correctly, we borrowed liberally from Tunnels and Trolls and the Arduin grimoire, along with a healthy dose of house ruling. |
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Feb 28, 2021 16:19:04 GMT -5
Nothing wrong with a wizard having a sword. How did you run your magic with spell points? Did you have your own system or did you borrow one? I just noticed this. Pardon me...I don't keep up as well as I should. But we tended to use the wizard's intelligence score to determine the number of points per day. Or sometimes constitution, the theory being that magic taxes the body and you will be limited in the amount of spells you can cast before exhaustion sets in. If I remember correctly, we borrowed liberally from Tunnels and Trolls and the Arduin grimoire, along with a healthy dose of house ruling. Hmm, I am assuming then that Tunnels & Trolls uses spell points. I don't have a copy of that. What version of T&T did you use Paladin? Using a combination of INT, CON and adjusting for Level would be the way I would probably go, if I were to use spell points. I would also make some adjustments in the results of certain spells, based on CHA, DEX, WIS, or STR. For instance the chance of success of charm spells would be better the higher the CHA. |
|
|
|
Post by Paladin on Feb 28, 2021 16:23:11 GMT -5
Adjusting effects based on ability scores sounds like a fun option.
I only have the original T&T. Never have played it, but I've robbed from it plenty of times.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Feb 28, 2021 18:51:29 GMT -5
Nothing wrong with a wizard having a sword. How did you run your magic with spell points? Did you have your own system or did you borrow one? I just noticed this. Pardon me...I don't keep up as well as I should. But we tended to use the wizard's intelligence score to determine the number of points per day. Or sometimes constitution, the theory being that magic taxes the body and you will be limited in the amount of spells you can cast before exhaustion sets in. If I remember correctly, we borrowed liberally from Tunnels and Trolls and the Arduin grimoire, along with a healthy dose of house ruling. Do you remember any of what you got from T&T and from the Arduin Grimoire? Even roughly? Also how well did it work? Was it fun and would you recommend it or did you move away from it after awhile? |
|
|
|
Post by Dartanian on Mar 31, 2021 12:00:02 GMT -5
This is an interesting perspective ripx187 , so you allow spell casters to cast higher level spells (with the purchase and use of a gemstone of 500 GP or more in value) than they would normally be allowed to cast? So for instance, with the investment they could learn and use a 2nd level spell a level sooner than otherwise possible? Reading the rules for the spells, you find this happening and they are common spells. I want to say that Identify, a 1st level spell, actually requires a sacrifice of money to keep people from abusing the spell. The spells that I am referring to are found in the player's handbooks and they are canon, if the expensive component is ignored than the wizard is too powerful. I suppose that the same thing could be applied to Firing into melee. If an archer can just pick his targets, then he is kind of stepping on the Wizards toes. Does it make the archer too powerful on a mechanical level? Perhaps.  I guess I will differ with you on people abusing the Identify spell. IMO the expensive component is too restrictive and I make it easier to use Identify. ripx187 what other spells do you think make a wizard too powerful if you do not use spell components? |
|
|
|
Post by Morton on Apr 24, 2021 23:16:15 GMT -5
I never used the encounter tables, I always just throw in whatever feels right at the moment. Could be an angry red dragon or some cute little pixies.
|
|
I guess I will differ with you on people abusing the Identify spell. IMO the expensive component is too restrictive and I make it easier to use Identify. 