D&D: Worst (design thought experiment)

[Ashtagon]

More as a thought experiment than anything else, how would you go about implementing a rules set (pseudo retro-clone) that took on the worst aspects of every D&D edition?

Pre-emptive: no edition warring please. I love every edition I've knocked here. If a concept is only directly addressed in a single edition, it probably isn't appropriate here.

• Core mechanics: 1e style saving throws and THAC0.
• Races as classes from original and/or classic D&D
• XP tables that vary by class from pre-3e.
• Grapple rules from 3e (along with all the other 'combat manoeuvres', but grapple especially)
• 2e style weapon specialisation (read all about it in The Complete Fighter's Handbook)
• No feats
• Not sure which did the worst implementation for skills.
• Weapons have varying modifiers to hit based on 1e style weapon tables.
• Speaking of 1e, POLE ARMS!

[HunterOfJello]

- Fighter's only class feature is that they get TONS of "Fighter Feats".
- All "Fighter Feats" are terrible

-Truenaming
-All of the already weaker spellcasting classes must rely upon 2 stats to cast spells instead of 1.

-Candles of Invocation are common in the world.

-Every method of fighting except for THF takes 2 to 4 times the amount of investment as THF and has less than 1/4th the usefulness.

-Paladins lose all of their class abilities by committing a single evil act

-Classes are given features that define their entire ability to fight enemies. Many enemies are absolutely and unequivocally immune to those class features. (Sneak Attack)

-Everyone loves playing Half-Elves. Therefore, Half-Elves should be given the worst stats of any other major race.

[Togo]

xp strictly linked to wealth
all classes have functionally similar abilities with different fluff attached.
grappling suddenly allows you to gorge eyes, break limbs and score other injuries, while attacking someone with a weapon does not
All spells are combat spells
All out of combat challenges abstracted to a dice roll the DM believes would be appropriate to 'solve' the problem
Extra rules tacked on to make your character more powerful, for no reason
Random chance of being psychic for no cost

[SiuiS]

I disagree on some of your points. I think the differing XP values solve some of the perceived balance issue between melee and casters, and old-school weapon mastery was pretty slick. Especially considering current weapon mastery is... Kinda wasteful.

Also, old saving throws aren't that bad. Instead of you having a bonus to roll over a static DC, you instead lower the DC. It's mathematically pretty similar.

Togo hits a lot of salient points I can't argue however. Can I just agree with his list? I'll even add

- class mechanic which so confusingly contradicts basic rules that they seem unplayable (bards requiring half elves to be multi class fighter/thieves and then somehow dual class into Druid)
- implicit and unspoken Default Campaign Setting which informs all of the designer's decisions, which left unspoken creates odd rules for seemingly no reason
- unspoken expectation that games scone about politics and logistics at around 12th level, utterly falling apart due to power disparity afterwards.

[sonofzeal]

- All "Fighter Feats" are terrible

Improved Initiative, Power Attack, Improved Trip, Shield Ward, Martial Study, Mage Slayer, Pierce Magical Concealment, Pierce Magical Protection......

(Unless you're talking about a different edition of course, but the rest of your stuff is all 3.5)



On-topic...

- Skill challenges from 4e.
- Multiclassing from 2e.
- Stealth errata from 3.5e
- Legacy spells in 3e that were balanced in earlier editions by downsides that no longer exist.
- 3d6 in order from AD&D
- 18/?? strength scores

[eggs]

Tactical success must be predominantly determined by the user's time investment in an unrelated out-of-game "Character Building" task. Bonus points if the tools used in creating a single character in this task involves rutting through scores of thematically unrelated splatbooks, or if the task involves webs of prerequisites that demand deliberate forethought.

Also, weapon/armor interaction charts!

EDIT:
And the default ruling on "can my character try X?" is "No, unless you have a Feat, Class, Nonweapon Proficiency AND Power that permit it."

[Tvtyrant]

Having to have "feats" to craft things that you need "skill checks" to be able to craft. Yay paying for the same thing twice!

Spells that make you good at other people's class roles.

Every class has the same exact base mechanics.

No skills for classes with BaB.

[Ianuagonde]

Also, weapon/armor interaction charts!

Ah, those were the days. More goodies from 2E to add:
-rolling high is sometimes good and sometimes bad.
-initiative is modified by the speed of your weapon or spell, and changes whenever you use a different weapon or spell.
-reading/writing is a skill, and learning it requires the same amount of resources it takes to learn riding.
-speaking of skills, the old skills need to be restored to glory, to trick newbies into making bad decisions when building a character. In particular, the skills Astrology, Charioteering, Cobbling, Fire-building, Gaming, Herbalism, and Tightrope Walking are essential for the best of the worst.
-darkvision and low-light vision are too easy. Instead you get infravision, the ability to see heat emanations. This is much cooler, and makes the DM work that much harder. Now, he needs to differentiate the heat auras of a fighting wolf, a sleeping wolf, a gelatinous cube, and a white dragon.
-magic items are very rare. Making a magic items is close to impossible, and any recipe can only be used once. Said recipe can only be obtained through extensive research and communing with other planes. This rarity includes healing potions.
-your movement is the amount of 10-yard increments you can walk in a round when nothing is happening, and as 10-feet increments during combat. Descriptions such as 'movement 30 feet' makes for lazy players.
-memorizing a single spell takes 10 minutes x the level of the spell. That will nerf those spellcasters!

[Togo]

Paladins gaining/losing powers because they didn't extend enough control over the actions of other PCs.

Highly setting specific rules, like alignment languages.

Cavaliers

Read languages as a thief skill (because only they get skills)

[Ashtagon]

Barbarians should be banned from using magic items, and should be rewarded for destroying items that other PCs could have used.

[ThiagoMartell]

I actually think XP tables differing by class are an excellent idea. The tables themselves were not very organized, but the idea is sound. Wizards are supposed to be more powerful than Fighters, after all.

In fact, what I'd add is "all classes work exactly in the same way" from 4e. And "no simulationism at all" from 4e as well. "no multiclassing" or "3e multiclass penalties", I'm sincerely not sure which is worse.

On a sidenote, you really dig the unfun stuff, Ashtagon

[deuxhero]

-Everyone loves playing Half-Elves. Therefore, Half-Elves should be given the worst stats of any other major race.

When was this? Isn't Half-Orc MUCH worse in 3.x?

[sonofzeal]

When was this? Isn't Half-Orc MUCH worse in 3.x?

Half-Orcs still have a reason to play them - Cha is a common dumpstat, leaving you with a Str-vs-Int tradeoff that's worth it for some. The problem is that they don't have anything else of value, which is exactly where Half-Elves are. Both are overshadowed by their parent races, but Half-Orc "win" in that they're merely less advantageous than their parents, while Half-Elf is simply not advantageous at all.

[strider24seven]

More as a thought experiment than anything else, how would you go about implementing a rules set (pseudo retro-clone) that took on the worst aspects of every D&D edition?

Pre-emptive: no edition warring please. I love every edition I've knocked here. If a concept is only directly addressed in a single edition, it probably isn't appropriate here.

• Core mechanics: 1e style saving throws and THAC0.
• Races as classes from original and/or classic D&D
• XP tables that vary by class from pre-3e.
• Grapple rules from 3e (along with all the other 'combat manoeuvres', but grapple especially)
• 2e style weapon specialisation (read all about it in The Complete Fighter's Handbook)
• No feats
• Not sure which did the worst implementation for skills.
• Weapons have varying modifiers to hit based on 1e style weapon tables.
• Speaking of 1e, POLE ARMS!

If I really wanted to torture myself:
I would play 4th ed or PF.

[robertbevan]

-initiative is modified by the speed of your weapon or spell, and changes whenever you use a different weapon or spell.

i thought that was a really cool feature, actually. i was sad to see it go in 3ed.

it added a little more depth to your decision when choosing what sort of weapon you wanted to fight with, and sometimes when deciding which enemy in a group you want to attack first.

i'd like to see a system with a well thought out balance of weapon speed, critical threat range, and critical hit multiplier.

little details like that even contribute to fleshing out some of my characters' personalities when i'm creating them.

[strider24seven]

Could a mod lock this thread please. It looks like a forum members decided this thread was an acceptable place to begin edition warring.

I was not intending on edition warring.
If you want me to rephrase, I shall:

•Core mechanics: 4th ed Core mechanics, specifically variable defense mechanics and with all classes receiving mostly identical "per-encounter", "per-day", etc abilities
•XP table "changes" from PF
•CMB from PF
•3.0 Haste

[Cyan Wisp]

1E (Still love you, 1E, but...)
- morale, loyalty, grapple rules. Ugh.
- thief skills. It's a wonder that any low level thief could make a dishonest living!
- initiative: especially casting time vs. weapon speed factor - when even winning initiative does not guarantee that you can cast your spell unclobbered.
- Psionics for the elite
- Comeliness!
- Some very low level limits. Sorry half-orcs, 4th level cleric is all you can aspire to. The gods don't like you. Probably because your comeliness is, well, wanting, and you stink of unlawful union.
- disease, parasitic infestation, system shock, called shots, assassination, psionic attacks and defenses, aging effects, permanent death. Die, PC, Die!

2E
- "fighting monks." I liked 1e monks.

(I actually liked the 2e "roll low" initiative with weapon speeds and casting times too - first thing we ported into our 1e games)

Can't think of anything else at the moment.

[robertbevan]

Could a mod lock this thread please. It looks like a forum members decided this thread was an acceptable place to begin edition warring.

oh come on now... this thread has been pretty civil for the topic you started.

what are some of the crappiest point of each d&d edition? oh... and no edition wars please.

that's like getting on a fox news forum and saying

what race of people do you think smell the worst? oh... and let's be mature about this. try not to say anything racist.

[Andorax]

Crit charts for various types of injuries you can suffer from bludgeoning, slashing, crushing, piercing, fire, frost, acid. Roll for attacks and for spells.


Determine the XP award for a HD 13******* creature.

[Ashtagon]

oh come on now... this thread has been pretty civil for the topic you started.

what are some of the crappiest point of each d&d edition? oh... and no edition wars please.

that's like getting on a fox news forum and saying

what race of people do you think smell the worst? oh... and let's be mature about this. try not to say anything racist.

There is actually a benign reason for this thread. People do like to make new rules systems, which often build on what came before. By canvassing peoples opinions of what was really bad, we have a better idea of what should be especially avoided.

There is a world of difference between

"Edition X sucks"

and

"The way feature X was implemented in edition Y sucks"

[Ianuagonde]

i thought that was a really cool feature, actually. i was sad to see it go in 3ed.

It is cool, and I would like to use it. The lumbering fighter,drawing his greataxe vs the rogue who has already thrown a dagger, and is now readying a second. I like it. This is how combat should be.

What I don't like is the hassle that comes with using a different weapon in the same combat (for example, starting with a ranged weapon and switching to melee) or casters using more than one spell in a fight. This happens a lot. It means that on round one, your initiative is 6, on the second round it's 12 and on the third round it's 10. And every other player is also using a different number every round. And so are your enemies. I've DMed this, and it was not pretty. I spent more time figuring out whose turn it was than I did with the combat itself.

To be honest, I don't really have a good fix for this. If you only use the first modifier, PCs will walk around with the fastest weapon they've got even if they don't intend to use it in combat. I wasn't happy to see this go with 3E, but I understand it, and perhaps it's for the best.

1E (Still love you, 1E, but...)
- Some very low level limits. Sorry half-orcs, 4th level cleric is all you can aspire to. The gods don't like you. Probably because your comeliness is, well, wanting, and you stink of unlawful union.

I forgot about those limits! Those were pretty awful indeed. Only humans can become Paladins, because the gods like humans best. Halflings cannot be Rangers. Elves may not be Druids. It felt really random.

I would also like to add to the list:
-requirements to be a specific class start at level 1. This makes them feel more like prestige classes, and that can't be bad, right? So if you want to be a Paladin, you better roll well for your ability scores. Because if you are anything less than strong (Str 12), wise (Wis 13) and very pretty (Cha 17!) you do not deserve to be a Pally, and the gods won't let you be one.

[killem2]

The wrestling rules in 2nd ed. Oh jesus those were insane when people wanted to use the, lol.

[Flickerdart]

Spellcasting powered by all six attributes;
You must expend spell slots to save vs spells that target you;
Every time you do this, look up a chart and see if it helped or actually lowered your save;
Monsters don't need to spend slots to save against your spells or to cast spells at you;
Non-casters are not affected by spells and instead run a slight chance of being stunned for one or two rounds if they save (with a massive bonus);

Oh, 3e psionics...

[Arbane]

1st ed's "Pummelling, Grappling, and Overbearing" rules.

It's not actually from any edition, but it's as common as dirt: Official fumble rules.

[Novawurmson]

Spells that are more effective against you if you don't have the correct number of skill points.

Classes without unique class features.

Core Rule Book leaves out iconic classes.

[Cyan Wisp]

... "3e multiclass penalties"...

Seconded. What a straitjacket.

I don't know how many times I've thought: "hey, I'd love my character to dabble a little in sorcery/thievery/etc. only to be discouraged by the penalties.

Maybe it's to stop the "pick up a level of..." mentality and promote commitment; but commitment to even levelling of classes is not always a good idea for a character. Sometimes, as a concept, you just want to dabble.

From what I understand, PF has addressed this by enabling your choice of favoured class and giving bonuses for levelling in that class.

[Craft (Cheese)]

It's not actually from any edition, but it's as common as dirt: Official fumble rules.

They're actually doing this in 5E, if recent articles are to be believed. Woe betide us all.

So here's a horrible idea: A "skill die" you roll at every level, for every skill, to see how much that skill goes up. Rogues and Wizards get a d12 skill die while Fighters get a d4.

[Randomguy]

The Skill Challenge rules from 4E.

[nedz]

Being taller gives you a bonus to hit, and being shorter gives you a penalty to hit.

Being shorter gives you a bonus to hit, and being taller gives you a penalty to hit.

(From two different versions of the rule sets, obviously)

[Khosan]

They're actually doing this in 5E, if recent articles are to be believed. Woe betide us all.

So here's a horrible idea: A "skill die" you roll at every level, for every skill, to see how much that skill goes up. Rogues and Wizards get a d12 skill die while Fighters get a d4.

Start it out with a giant negative modifier though, like say...d12-9, d4-3. Minimum 0 (unless you roll a 1, in which case you lose a rank).

It's realistic! You don't get better at a bunch of things at a similar rate as you age and, for the most part, you don't learn anything. Sometimes, you even get worse at things.