I'm not one for hampering the brainstorming process, but this has to be said.
Since we have all played tabletop games, we pretty much have a good grasp of the community. In general the community is full of clever, imaginative people chalked full of good ideas. Lying amongst this field of bright ideas are landmines of tragic thought.
My fellow gaming companion and I were remenicing of old campaigns and the people we played with, and came to the realization of what a system would look like given some of the bizarre house-rules or hangups they had with the game. After doing this, I felt it important to point out that there will certainly be some bad suggestions posted for new rules and thought it fitting to point some of them out. Here are some bad suggestions.
SR 3 monsters:
"This is a high-magic world, so everything has grown slightly immune to magic...even animals."
Really?
"Yea but only a little. Animals have an SR 3."
....
The concept of SR 3 monsters gives me a feeling similar to drinking a slurpee too fast. Wow. That's annoying on a new level...squirrels with 5% chance of ignoring my burning hands spell. Barring a newfound facination with magic-resistant rodents, let's leave this one lying on the side of the road.
Fat Iconics:
"Did you see all the people in the players handbook? They're all skinny. WTF is up with that?"
Wha...What?
"What, just because I'm fat doesn't mean I can't be heroic?"
Well... the dwarf is a bit chubby...
"Don't patronize me. Fat people obviously aren't encouraged to play the game."
Whoa.
"I bet there are fat monsters."
Now I was chubby growing up...hell I'm still a bit. I'm an athlete and if I stop training for a few months I put on 25lbs...just the way I am. We all have hangups over something. There might be a fine line between "hangup" and "rubber-chicken swinging insanity", but the line is clearly there. Let's try not to step over it, shall we?
Arbitrary combat modifiers:
"Have you ever tried to fight with a bad case of hayfever?...Seriously it's harder than it sounds."
I'm not adding seasonal hayfever modifiers into my game.
"What, we travel all over the world and nobody is allergic to anything at any season? That's highly unlikely dude.
Damn, the game is broken I guess. Too late now, let's move on.
"I have a table written up, here take a...
NO...just roll already please.
Somehow, someway, somebody will always find it pertinent to add some kind of bizarre combat modifier to the game that doesn't currently exist for the purpose of enhanced realism. Let me clarify by saying NO. NO. Oh, and NO. House ruling in something for injuries when you are dropped to 10% HP... ok I can see that, but it should be a house-rule I say. Combat modifiers when you have to pee really bad?...Just roll the dice...please lord, roll the dice for them, or hit me with a bolt of lightning and end my suffering.
Skill or feat obsession:
"Dude, why can't there be a feat for uchi-mata?"
That falls under grappling.
"Look I like the grappling stuff you houseruled, but no uchi-mata? Why the hell not?'
It's a gelatinous cube, dude. Even if there was an "uchi-mata" feat it's not happening.
"All this stuff is clearly non-gi based...why do you hate Judo?"
What? I don't hate Judo...*sigh* Just roll please.
"Yes you do. It's obvious."
I think I'm blacking out...
Given some of my own houserules and obsessions I can understand this a bit, but that line is crossed when I no longer know my own obscure obsession doesn't belong in a core handbook. Regardless of how much you are fascinated with the process behind crafting baseballs in a medieval fantasy setting, or your insistence that "breeding gerbils" is a whole different level of complexity than most forms of animal husbandry deserving it's own mechanics, please consider if the finer points of gerbil breeding have in any way taken hold in popular culture enough to assume that anybody is interested besides you. That or warn me before I read the thread, so I don't feel compelled to beat myself to death with the oversized stapler on the corner of my desk after reading it.
Good gaming.
Generally, any suggestion that the core rules should have detailed rules (i.e. a chapter's worth of) about something obscure.
"We need detailed rules for firearms. Humidity modifiers for gunpowder reliability checks. Detailed hit zones, because guns really are that dangerous. They should be touch attacks except against all armour except leather. Detailed damage charts for shotguns, depending on distance. It should be 3 rounds to reload - once to get the powder out, once to get it in, once to get the bullet in. There should be feats to make each stage quicker. We need strength checks to deal with recoil. Oh, and to have examples of modern weapons, Ultramodern Firearms d20 should be included entirely."
And those are the more reasonable suggestions ;-).
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16
|
I had a GM once years ago who required that Magic-Users (this was in the days of 1st ed) keep detailed lists of all their spell components and mark them off as required.
Seriously, material spell components (unless the item is exceptional) should be removed from the game.
The current pouch rule basically did that...but still allowed for the evil DM tactic of depriving the spell caster of the pouch to limit spell casting at any given moment.
You want to freak out the party wizard have a rogue lift his component pouch sometime before combat.
I had a GM once years ago who required that Magic-Users (this was in the days of 1st ed) keep detailed lists of all their spell components and mark them off as required.
Seriously, material spell components (unless the item is exceptional) should be removed from the game.
Hm. I don't recall you being at my table :-)
In my current campaign, I require that all casters take Eschew Material Components at low level, and Ignore Material Components at epic level. Otherwise I *will* keep track of components.
And if you think components are unimportant, there's a reason force jaws (Spell Compendium) requires a piece of dinosaur bone. And go ahead, start ignoring the components for favorable sacrifice (Spell Compendium), that'll be wonderful.
On the other hand, requiring components lets you do things like use the vile components rules from Book of Vile Darkness or the improved component rules (Complete Mage? Can't remember off the top of my head).
So yeah, I like components at low level. Once you're high enough, it's a moot point anyways. Nothing like a true resurrection without the 25,000 gp cost.
I use to require players to track components under 2e. However, I also let players recover materials for enemy spellcasters and allowed for minor magical items that counted as reusable componnets (they were great low level magic items).
Under the current 3.5 rules I allow for power components, so players still need to track some materials.
Another bad suggestion:
Rules for a separate Comeliness score and a table translating that score into the size of certain body parts.
IMHO, any rule that does not 1) Add to the "fun" factor of the game, and 2) Not dramatically increase the amount of die rolling or otherwise slow the game down, is (or could be) a bad rule.
If a rule improves realism, but reduces fun (allergies) and increases die rolling/time referencing something, then that rule is not necessary for D&D and should not be used.
You could also vastly complicate the combat system to account for just about everything that can possibly happen in the real world, but I have a strong feeling that it wouldn't be as much fun nor would you have combat moving as quickly as it does now.
I had a GM once years ago who required that Magic-Users (this was in the days of 1st ed) keep detailed lists of all their spell components and mark them off as required.
Seriously, material spell components (unless the item is exceptional) should be removed from the game.
Do you require that archers keep track of their arrows? Do you require that fighters actually "have" a greataxe in their backpacks before they can use it? Yes? But why?
Wizards can already bend reality, why should they get to do it for free (seriously, I think some wizards got together and paid for a Limited Wish on you)? I agree, spells should use the (more flavourful) spell components... a dinosaur bone? Sweet! Now I can use that Force Jaws spell my mentor taught me! It makes adventuring more than just a rote dungeon-hack with a random adventure generator on the other end.
"So the wizard needs 8 pieces of Troll Hide and 8 Troll skulls and 8 pieces of Warrior Leather? What am I playing here?" If your PCs know that they will also need these pieces in order to cast the same spells later, it won't be so 4th-wall-breaking.
Another bad suggestion:
Rules for a separate Comeliness score and a table translating that score into the size of certain body parts.
You mean... the nose? I could see that.
in defense of spell component tracking...it sure was a fun bludgeon to use when the players were doing *too* well ;)
We houseruled yearsd ago that it was common sense for spellcasters to be passively collecting odds and ends for use in their spells. The component was assumed to be present if it had a value of less than 1GP per level of the caster. This worked out pretty well, while preventing the abuse one would see if all components were just removed....then came a feat that did basically trhe same thing...argh!