Mechanical Pet Peeves

[golentan]

I was wondering if people hat pet peeves about their favorite system? Little details that just aggravate you, even though they're not gamebreaking. This isn't a thread about Drown to Heal or other RAW exploits, just things that bug you.

For example, one of my favorite RPGs remains Exalted. But, my personal pet peeve in that: When you're tapped out, no more juice in the tanks, brought down to mortal levels? That's usually when your Anima Banner is glowing brightest. Not when you're pushing yourself, but when you've been pushed to your limit and are on the verge of collapse.

In DnD 3.5, it always bugged me that the assumption is that murder is the best way to get XP. Any time I suggest study, practice, or training as a means of character advancement, nope. Murder. Want to research that high level spell, well get out of that library, stop all your experimentation, and go kill goblins until you get a flash of insight.

[NichG]

My pet peeve with D&D is that so much of a character's performance is centered in the char-gen phase, which requires very long-range planning of choices and sticking to that plan, rather than in the actual gameplay at the table and dynamically responding to situations and opportunities.

I guess my other favorite system is my own homebrew one right now, so its no fault but my own if I have pet peeves with it
Honestly though, I'd say my pet peeve there is that the empire-scale warfare rules are so boring compared to character-scale stuff that I actively avoid creating situations where I have to use them.

[Doorhandle]

My peeve with dungeon world is it's combat system: it just lacks the flexibility the rest of the system has, and it's jarring or even boring because of it. Also, no combat maneuvers/equivalent.

Initiative in D&D like-games itself has started to annoy me; I generally decide what I'm doing early on, and so the length of time between turns annoys me. I haven't found a home rule fix I like for it either; granted, my experience with countdown initiative/speed factor is limited, but I find them a bit arbitrary at times. Plus, the fight-woosh effect: Combat rules are basically an entirely different game in of themselves.

[pasko77]

d20 in stead of 3d6.
Hate the linear random.

[DigoDragon]

I love Shadowrun 4e, but the way hacking works bugs me all the time. You don't need stats to be a good hacker, it's all skill and a quality computer. So often I see players create these hackers with 1-2s in all stats and 5-6s in skills and then spend the rest of their build points on a perfect computer set up. It's funny to think what a hacker convention looks like in this game world.

[Anonymouswizard]

In pretty much any 'modern day' rpg, the fact that the combat rules assume firearms are available. In near-future games like Shadowrun I can handwave that more dangerous streets made civilians campaign for the legalisation of privately owned pistols, but otherwise normally half of the combat chapter is completely useless to me.

Oh, I also hate games with high numbers of hit points but no penalty until you're only a handful away from death.

[AxeAlex]

Scaling Hit Points.

If you are unarmored and get a sword through the chest, it should almost kill you, whatever your level.

Now i'm not against the fact that a high level character should dodge that sword easily, or even ignore the pain and continue to be functionnal with a sword through the chest, but he should be almost dead in all cases.

It's especially bad in D&D where most 1rst level characters are even MORE fragile than someone in real life, but get absurdly tough as their levels get higher.

[Segev]

Scaling Hit Points.

If you are unarmored and get a sword through the chest, it should almost kill you, whatever your level.

Now i'm not against the fact that a high level character should dodge that sword easily, or even ignore the pain and continue to be functionnal with a sword through the chest, but he should be almost dead in all cases.

It's especially bad in D&D where most 1rst level characters are even MORE fragile than someone in real life, but get absurdly tough as their levels get higher.

The "more fragile" bit is a bug, definitely, but I think it is more related to certain things doing far more damage than they should. Cats, honestly, should not be able to do hp damage to a human.

The reason behind higher-level people taking more hp damage to die, however, isn't about them being able to survive a sword through the chest. The majority of your hp represent your ability to turn fatal blows into near misses or glancing injuries. A combination of luck and stamina. It's that last hp, the difference between 1 and 0, that is your fatal (or at least crippling) blow. (At least, in D&D.)

[Anonymouswizard]

The "more fragile" bit is a bug, definitely, but I think it is more related to certain things doing far more damage than they should. Cats, honestly, should not be able to do hp damage to a human.

Unless nomming on the mini. Otherwise, yeah, pixie fighters should not be able to threaten the realm by flying a mile up and dropping pebbles.

Although that gives me an idea for a adventure.

The reason behind higher-level people taking more hp damage to die, however, isn't about them being able to survive a sword through the chest. The majority of your hp represent your ability to turn fatal blows into near misses or glancing injuries. A combination of luck and stamina. It's that last hp, the difference between 1 and 0, that is your fatal (or at least crippling) blow. (At least, in D&D.)

This is why I think HP should be replaced with a vitality/wounds mechanic (either wound points or 'conditions'). Once your Vitality reaches 0 you've become exhausted from dodging and bruises, and so take a small penalty and any damage now goes to your (very small) wounds pool. Although I really advocated easily increased active defences, so that a character who wants to be a dodge monkey feels different to one playing a hunk of meat.

[AxeAlex]

The "more fragile" bit is a bug, definitely, but I think it is more related to certain things doing far more damage than they should. Cats, honestly, should not be able to do hp damage to a human.

The reason behind higher-level people taking more hp damage to die, however, isn't about them being able to survive a sword through the chest. The majority of your hp represent your ability to turn fatal blows into near misses or glancing injuries. A combination of luck and stamina. It's that last hp, the difference between 1 and 0, that is your fatal (or at least crippling) blow. (At least, in D&D.)

That can't apply when swimming through lava, being in a cloud of acid, being struck by lightning, of getting axed when paralyzed, asleep, etc.

Even then, "turn fatal blows into near misses or glancing injuries" imply martial competence, cunning and even dexterity and agility, which is NOT a given in all characters. I find that hit points become insanely complicated to manage if you try to explain them other than being able to survive a sword through the chest.

The easiest way to make scaling hit points works is to accept them as his, absurd durability. A sword can't even go through the chest of a high level fighter because he has steel-like skin or a shield of tangible willpower...

Myself, I prefer something more down to earth, something a little lower on the fantasy scale, that's why I hate that, but that's just ME.

And if YOU enjoy coming up with interpretation and explanations (Well even paralyzed, you have enough will power to overcome the spell for a moment and jump out of the dragon's stone-melting breath to save your life, but then the paralysis comes back!), then you are awesome!

[Segev]

Note that "luck" is part of the equation.

Also, most games have a mechanic for getting around your massive hp if you're helpless (D&D calls it "coup de grace," and doubles and redoubles the damage done before making you save vs. death; if you STILL survive, then yeah, it's insane durability...which you patently have at that point).

I'm fine with silly durability, honestly, in the right sort of game and setting.

Lava rules, again, are more to blame for being able to swim in it for any length of time, than are any rules about hp. It should be far more damaging, but lava in fiction is little like lava in real life. For one thing, convection apparently doesn't exist!

[AxeAlex]

Note that "luck" is part of the equation.

Also, most games have a mechanic for getting around your massive hp if you're helpless (D&D calls it "coup de grace," and doubles and redoubles the damage done before making you save vs. death; if you STILL survive, then yeah, it's insane durability...which you patently have at that point).

I'm fine with silly durability, honestly, in the right sort of game and setting.

Lava rules, again, are more to blame for being able to swim in it for any length of time, than are any rules about hp. It should be far more damaging, but lava in fiction is little like lava in real life. For one thing, convection apparently doesn't exist!

I get you, but IMO putting "luck" in the hit points is a bit silly. Why would a fighter be luckier than a wizard?

And of course, lava rules, cats damage, coup de grace, and some more rules could be handled better I guess. But the way I see you can change all the "faulty" rules, or just get rid of Scaling Hit Points and all the other rules are not so bad anymore.

I for myself use damage reduction for armors and shields, and a fixed number of Hit Points modified by your Constitution.

Finally, Im pretty sure you already know that, but: I'm not really trying to convince you that scaling hit points are evil (There is no wrong way to enjoy RPGs), just explaining why I hate em!

[Earthwalker]

Shadowrun any edition of the game.

Having a difference system of advancment before and after character creation.

It just annoys me so much that you are always better off trying to get a skill up to max at the start and begin with only 4 skills as opposed to spreading your points around to be a little more rounded.

[Maglubiyet]

Pyramid d4's in any system. They mock me when they stick to the table on their first bounce.

When I roll dice, I want to roll dice.

[Segev]

Fair enough. As long as you understand the reasoning - even if you don't like it - that was all I was going for.

As for d4s...yeah, they're frustrating when they won't roll. There's a Kickstarter that finished a few months ago (he's still working on fulfilling obligations) for d6s and d4s printed on dodecahedrons, which is pretty interesting. I got into it specifically for the d4s for precisely this reason: dodecahedrons roll.

[ngilop]

Fair enough. As long as you understand the reasoning - even if you don't like it - that was all I was going for.

As for d4s...yeah, they're frustrating when they won't roll. There's a Kickstarter that finished a few months ago (he's still working on fulfilling obligations) for d6s and d4s printed on dodecahedrons, which is pretty interesting. I got into it specifically for the d4s for precisely this reason: dodecahedrons roll.

I dislike how spellcasters have free reign to come up with whatever spell to overcome whatever obstacle they want.

BUT.. let the fighter come up with a new fighting style ( rea:Feat) NOPE DATS NOT ALLOWED.

basically the whole mundane hate that 3rd edition has is a mechanical pet peeve of mine.

[BWR]

I get you, but IMO putting "luck" in the hit points is a bit silly. Why would a fighter be luckier than a wizard?

They aren't - wizards have spells, which I would count as very lucky.

[Segev]

I dislike how spellcasters have free reign to come up with whatever spell to overcome whatever obstacle they want.

BUT.. let the fighter come up with a new fighting style ( rea:Feat) NOPE DATS NOT ALLOWED.

basically the whole mundane hate that 3rd edition has is a mechanical pet peeve of mine.

If you mean "can add to spellbook, but fighter's can't add feats except at levels," that's understandable.

If you mean, "Can't invent new ones," then... nothing prevents a fighter from inventing a new feat any more than a sorcerer couldn't invent new spells.

But you're right; wizards and clerics can just make new things up for nothing but gp.

[DigoDragon]

GURPS Magic system, specifically some of the crazy prerequisites you need for certain spells. Prerequisites you might never use so it's like... why? :3
I get that question a lot from players. We tend to just modify Powers as spells and be done with it.

[Segev]

GURPS Magic system, specifically some of the crazy prerequisites you need for certain spells. Prerequisites you might never use so it's like... why? :3
I get that question a lot from players. We tend to just modify Powers as spells and be done with it.

GURPS has a few that I dislike; it's largely why I avoid the system. The biggest, to me, is that it presents as a universal RP system, and yet if you build your character to fling a line of fire one way, it costs WAY more than if you build it another. And I don't just mean "take this power with this modifier instead of that one;" I mean if you build your character as a wizard able to throw fire, or build your character as a robot with a flamethrower attachment, you pay vastly different numbers of CP to get the same amount of area and damage.

[TurboGhast]

My biggest pet peeve with a system is 4e foes having too much HP, leading to fights dragging. On top of this, the system encourages having the PCs be stuck in place. Environs in future areas I make will be much crazier and movement forcing.

[DigoDragon]

The biggest, to me, is that it presents as a universal RP system, and yet if you build your character to fling a line of fire one way, it costs WAY more than if you build it another. And I don't just mean "take this power with this modifier instead of that one;" I mean if you build your character as a wizard able to throw fire, or build your character as a robot with a flamethrower attachment, you pay vastly different numbers of CP to get the same amount of area and damage.

Yeah, that goes well with my dislike of the magic system.

I still like GURPS, and used it all the time for modern-era "mundane" campaigns that lack magic/super powers. The inconsistent build costs were a bit more manageable then. But that kind of kicks it in the 'Universal' shin as it were.

[Telok]

Infinite linear scaling in d&d.

This is the quiet but fundamental shift from ad&d to 3e, 4e, pf, 5e. Hit points never stop going up, saves, damage, spell dc, stats. Everything goes up on a linear scale with no limit. I'm aware that 5e capped pc stats at 20, but the scale is still linear. The only things with diminishing returns are the prices of +# magic items.

In life most things are either on log or exponental scales. Both of those create diminishing returns which encourages a diversification of characters and abilities. Modern d&d rewards mailman builds, stacking caster level boosts, and +50 stat modifiers while it punishes people who want to be decent at several different things.

I'm tired of monofocused characters. I want to play a charismatic, ladies man, fighter that uses daggers again without having to make a 20 level character plan or have a spreadsheet of multiclassing and prestige classes.

[Spore]

D&D overdoing flight: Dragons, Flight magic and air transportation should be something special. Hell, even World of Warcraft's heroes can't fly in combat. And their omnipotent and anonymous group of heroes slay any threat coming to the realm. You can't just add another layer of tactics and movement when you are not allowing all characters to participate in it.

D&D alignment system: You can't even pinpoint a single iteration of Batman under the same author in this convoluted mess of a philosophical grid. And neither should you be able to get all of human emotions and opinions into a two-dimensional grid.

Grittier system's need to destroy characters: Call of Cthulhu makes your character insane after a number of adventures. DSA's system call kill you with the strike of a well-placed dagger. Degenesis kills you either by survival challenges, by mugging your possessions (no water filter for hundreds of credits means polluted water), by combat wound or by spore infections (did I mention polluted water?). It's like Fallout, only if radiation where permanent, technology is nigh-unpayable (rocket launcher? energy weapons? nope) and due to the games' approach towards classes there are xenophobes everywhere.

And who invented broken equipment? I agree that breaking weapons mid-fight is a fun thing to do to add suspense and to force players to get creative. But there's a difference between: "I'm going to subtract hit points every time you hit something with your sword." and "He attacks your sword, breaking it."

[Xuc Xac]

The majority of your hp represent your ability to turn fatal blows into near misses or glancing injuries. A combination of luck and stamina.

Until it's time to heal.

[Anonymouswizard]

Grittier system's need to destroy characters: Call of Cthulhu makes your character insane after a number of adventures. DSA's system call kill you with the strike of a well-placed dagger. Degenesis kills you either by survival challenges, by mugging your possessions (no water filter for hundreds of credits means polluted water), by combat wound or by spore infections (did I mention polluted water?). It's like Fallout, only if radiation where permanent, technology is nigh-unpayable (rocket launcher? energy weapons? nope) and due to the games' approach towards classes there are xenophobes everywhere.

Not to say you're wrong, but some of us like this style. I personally prefer it if the players have a 'cheat death' resource (such as fate points or edge) or characters where they have a continually worsening chance to die (like GURPS), but I like systems where a character can be taken out of combat on round 2 of 5, at least more than I like the luck and dodging are hit points (until you rest) model of combat.

[Magic Myrmidon]

Until it's time to heal.

Eeeehhh, not really. The spell description says you "channel positive energy, healing that cures damage". It does not specify what kind of damage, or how the healing takes place. If it IS extreme durability (which I think is fair for Barbarians or the like), then sure, closing wounds. But for lucky, dodgy people, just give them back that spring in their step, take away fatigue, let positive energy restore their luck, or whatever works with the fluff you're using.

[AxeAlex]

Eeeehhh, not really. The spell description says you "channel positive energy, healing that cures damage". It does not specify what kind of damage, or how the healing takes place. If it IS extreme durability (which I think is fair for Barbarians or the like), then sure, closing wounds. But for lucky, dodgy people, just give them back that spring in their step, take away fatigue, let positive energy restore their luck, or whatever works with the fluff you're using.

Then why does it take like 23 days to heal that fatigue, or that bruise naturally?

I guess you could come in and say that the rules for natural Healing are flawed too... But really scaling HP has alot of problems.

[Segev]

Then why does it take like 23 days to heal that fatigue, or that bruise naturally?

I guess you could come in and say that the rules for natural Healing are flawed too... But really scaling HP has alot of problems.

This is a legitimate complaint. But if you read hp as also, as it progresses, representing pulled muscles, minor lacerations adding up, etc., then eventually you're just worn down enough that it does take time to heal. Even so, yes, healing being linear presumes that you're healing real wounds of that severity.

It might be better if it scaled more with level. One thing I like in 5e, in fact, is the ability to roll your HD once per day for personal healing. (It's a little more complicated than that, but that captures it in a nutshell.)

[Lord Torath]

*snip lots of discussion about how hit points work/don't work in-game*
Eh, the point remains that scaling hit points is a mechanic that is one of AxeAlex's Pet Peeves. Which is, after all, what this thread is about.

My pet peeve is (pre 3.0 D&D) level-draining undead. I never liked it, either as a player, or a DM. Let an undead get too close to you, and, "poof!" Congratulations, you just lost 50,000 xp! Oh look! It got you again! It's as if the last 10-20 sessions never happened! Except for everyone else! And since Restoration is a 7th-level spell, good luck finding someone to cast it before you've regained the xp the hard way.

I kind of like how 3rd Ed handled it, with you gaining "negative levels" that you can pass a save to lose the next day, and any unsaved ones going away over time.