[3.5] What Ten Rules Would You Remove?

[Childe]

If you could remove any ten rules from 3.5, what would they be, and why? (How do you feel that rule hurts the game or what would be improved by removing it?)

(Note: This is for general rules, not specific spells or feats, etc.)

[veekie]

Grappling - It's a mess of exceptions, rarely a significant part of play, and balanced around size and Str scores, which are only tangentially related to level, character specialization and competence.

Defensive casting - Basically undermining the biggest reason for casters to work at range. It's just way too easy.

Full attacks - I can't think of any other single mechanic that traps melee as hard as this does.

AoOs for movement - Locking combat in place isn't fun. Tactical movement is nullified simply by needing to wade through these to get anywhere.

[SneeR]

I have two related problem rules:

1) Go unconscious below 0 hp


2) Die at -10 hp

There is absolutely no room for error with these two rules together, or even separately. I love the imagery of a character slowly killing himself through determination, and that 10 hp cushion is worthless at higher levels.  I would have the rules be exactly the same, except you do not go unconscious right under 0, and you don't die until you reach your max hp in negative hp, or some fraction thereof. Obviously, the numbers need to be tweaked, but that is a great rule, at least applied to humanoids. Maybe not other monsters.

Also, why is "giant" its own subtype? They are just humanoids that are Large size. Nix that idiotic redundancy!

[Garryl]

Also, why is "giant" its own subtype? They are just humanoids that are Large size. Nix that idiotic redundancy!

It's so you don't use Alter Self as an ersatz Enlarge Person that stacks with Enlarge Person, obviously.

Also, historical reasons (though it could have been a subtype).

[Unbeliever]

AoOs for movement - Locking combat in place isn't fun. Tactical movement is nullified simply by needing to wade through these to get anywhere.

Mixed feelings about this.  I love the idea of tactical movement, so something would have to be included to reintroduce how it really matters where you are positioned and how anyone can try and take advantage of getting into the right position.

[ksbsnowowl]

I have two related problem rules:

1) Go unconscious below 0 hp


2) Die at -10 hp

There is absolutely no room for error with these two rules together, or even separately. I love the imagery of a character slowly killing himself through determination, and that 10 hp cushion is worthless at higher levels.  I would have the rules be exactly the same, except you do not go unconscious right under 0, and you don't die until you reach your max hp in negative hp, or some fraction thereof. Obviously, the numbers need to be tweaked, but that is a great rule, at least applied to humanoids. Maybe not other monsters.

Maybe something like this would be to your liking?

http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=6522.0

(click to show/hide)

... Vitality/Wounds system ...

0 Wound Points
When your current wound points drop to 0, you’re disabled.  You can take a single move or standard action each turn (but not both, nor can you take full-round actions).  You can take move actions without further injuring yourself, but if you perform any standard action (or any other strenuous action) you take one point of damage after completing the act.  You are now at -1 wound points, you are disabled, and you are bleeding out.

Bleeding Out (-1 to -[Constitution Modifier] Wound Points)

When your character’s current wound points drop to between -1 and a negative number equal to his Constitution modifier, inclusive, he is conscious, but disabled, and bleeding out.  At the beginning of each turn he makes a DC 20 Fortitude saving throw.  If he succeeds, he stabilizes, though he is still disabled.  If he fails, he loses one vitality point (if he has vitality points remaining, typically because his wound points were lowered from critical hits).  If he has no vitality points remaining, he instead loses one wound point.  This continues until the character dies or becomes stable (see below).  If this damage does not drop him to negative [Con mod] wound points, then he may act, though he is still disabled, and is thus restricted to a single move or standard action, and any standard action will cause him to lose one additional vitality or wound point, and remove the stable condition if the character has stabilized.

Also, once a character’s wound points drop below 0 he becomes exhausted.  An exhausted character cannot run or charge, moves at half speed, and takes a -6 penalty to Strength and Dexterity until he has had one hour of complete rest, at which point he becomes fatigued.  The exhausted and fatigued conditions are removed once the wound damage is completely healed, if that occurs first.

If it becomes too difficult to remember the varying Bleeding Out threshold for each character, I may just switch it to -1 to -9 is Bleeding Out, and -10 to -19 is Dying, and -20 is Dead.  That's how I had originally written these V/W rules for a Wheel of Time game.

Rules I would remove (and have for my game):

1) Improved Crit and Keen not stacking.

2) Not being able to power attack with light weapons (I've worked with a tomahawk; you can PA with it)

3) DR/Magic.
I would revert to tiered DR/+1, DR/+4, etc.

4) The Polymorph subschool crap.  Give me real Polymorph.

5) Cross-class skills cost double.  I haven't actually used this one yet, but probably will in the future.  I'd still keep the cross-class max ranks as half that of class ranks, though.

[linklord231]

Multiclass XP penalties, and the whole "Favored Class" system in general.

"Special" fluff prerequisites for PrCs

Edit:  the Dodge and Mobility feats.  And several others too, but those are the biggest offenders in my mind.  They have no purpose except to serve as prerequisites for more interesting (though certainly not overpowered) abilities. 

[Libertad]

10 things I'd get rid of:

1. Multiclass EXP penalties.

2. Cross-class skills.

3. Grappling, replace it with something simpler.

4. The increasing penalty for full attacks, and the idea that you can only full attack by standing in place.

5. Save Or Die spells and abilities.

6. The Craft/Profession sub-systems for making money and items.  Too situational and useless for their costs.

7. Prepared casting, if using supplements.  I found out that I really like spontaneous casters, especially for NPC creation.  Acquisition of spell knowledge would be done entirely on a per-level basis.

8. Alignment as is.  Too vague, contradictory, full of holes, and otherwise restrictive for character concepts.

9. ECL for monsters.  Ditch that and use the system from Oslecamo's Improved Monster Classes.

10. CR System and Experience by combat.  Horribly inexact and encourages "grinding" for monsters.  Quest-based experience, or simply leveling up every other game session, would be preferable.

[bobthe6th]

1.WBL as it relates to game fluff... just give full WBL at level up, and give out real story based rewards.
2.% miss chance... just make the bonus a function of AC.
3.epic levels... level 20 is already goddamn epic, adding rules so people lower their expectations for lower levels is a major problem in the game.
4.Gods stat blocks as they are. Make them powerful extra-planers.
5.epic feats. Most of them should be mid to high level feats, giving some continuity to the feat system.
6.full attacks...
7.the TWF feat chains... should be a few consolidated feats.
8.Save or die spells/No save just die spells.
9.creatures without constitution modifiers.
10.casters without class features.

[veekie]

AoOs for movement - Locking combat in place isn't fun. Tactical movement is nullified simply by needing to wade through these to get anywhere.

Mixed feelings about this.  I love the idea of tactical movement, so something would have to be included to reintroduce how it really matters where you are positioned and how anyone can try and take advantage of getting into the right position.

Well, doing it properly includes modifying or adding rules as well, but the thread does ask for rules to remove.

While Craft/Profession, etc also matter they don't generally get much in the way of gameplay. Magic item crafting is just as problematic but it has positive aspects.

[dman11235]

veekie, you just gave me an idea.  Dodge now grants you the ability to pick a target and avoid all AoOs from movement against that target (you don't provoke).

Anyways, rules that need to go:

1: multi-class xp penalties

2: cross class skills

3: CR

4: the economy (change it to a level-based economy, kind of like Incarnum)

5: defensive casting

6: polymorph spells as-is

7: unarmed strike nonsense

8: TWF/THF non-sense

9: grappling

10: truenaming.  Surprised no one's mentioned that.

[ksbsnowowl]

veekie, you just gave me an idea.  Dodge now grants you the ability to pick a target and avoid all AoOs from movement against that target (you don't provoke).

Now THAT is an interesting idea, and a feat probably worth taking...

It would be a good counter to Robilar's Gambit, for example.

[zugschef]

robilar's gambit doesn't need a counter. it's a shitty feat. just don't attack the stupid sob who took it.

[linklord231]

robilar's gambit doesn't need a counter. it's a shitty feat. just don't attack the stupid sob who took it.

Not always an option - see any Lockdown or Crackdown build.

[Jackinthegreen]

robilar's gambit doesn't need a counter. it's a shitty feat. just don't attack the stupid sob who took it.

Not always an option - see any Lockdown or Crackdown build.

There's also Mindless Rage.  Several creatures are entirely immune to it of course but it's still a worthwhile spell.

[ksbsnowowl]

robilar's gambit doesn't need a counter. it's a shitty feat. just don't attack the stupid sob who took it.

If it keeps the bad guy from attacking you, that sure seems like a pretty good feat to me.

Also, when the DM gives Robilar's to the BBEG, is your solution to 'not attack the stupid sob who took it?'

[zugschef]

robilar's gambit doesn't need a counter. it's a shitty feat. just don't attack the stupid sob who took it.

If it keeps the bad guy from attacking you, that sure seems like a pretty good feat to me.

Also, when the DM gives Robilar's to the BBEG, is your solution to 'not attack the stupid sob who took it?'

a bbeg with robilar's gambit is not to be taken seriously, because this means it's no monster and no caster. and yeah, there are other ways to deal with this type of opponent than just attacking it in melee.

[dman11235]

In what kind of campaign?  Sure, in tier 1 and 2 campaigns it might not be the best, but in tier 3?  Or heck, lower?  Jeez, it's overpowered in tier 5 and 6.  But as was said, if they take the feat, they are going to have ways to make you hit them, or at least try.  Typically, it will be via lockdown.  You will not be able to do anything but stand still without provoking an AoO, so yeah.  Either hit them, or stand still (can't move, you got tripped, can't cast, got interrupted, can't ranged attack, got tripped, etc.).

Anyways, not in this thread.

[ksbsnowowl]

a bbeg with robilar's gambit is not to be taken seriously, because this means it's no monster and no caster.

A War Troll with Combat Reflexes and Robilar's Gambit seems a pretty decent challenge, albeit not a caster.  But every hit has a chance to daze the target.

[FlaminCows]

1. Pointless prereq feats. The best feats in the game have hardly any prerequisites, while basic combat styles require a crapton of tax feats.

2. "+1" magic items. Ugly, flavourless, and could functionally be replaced by just trimming down the numbers in monster statblocks. Magic items need cool effects, and just increasing the digit attached to it has no coolness whatsoever.

3. Multiclass penalties and favoured classes. They don't do what they are intended for, are pretty much worthless in every way.

4. Aid, Bless, and similar buff spells. Keeping track of miscellaneous minor bonuses is tedious, and getting +1 to attack doesn't make anything more fun, nor are other narrow miscellaneous bonus.

5. The skill system's "max ranks is class level+3, half that for cross-class skills, a point spent on a cross-class skill buys ½ rank, multiply skill points by 4 on first level" aarg too complicated. I'd reduce the skill DCs a bit and just make max ranks equal to character level for class skills and four for cross-class. That way class skills remain important (since I feel they help define the classes well), but you don't have to deal with any math.

6. Feats that just give universal passive bonuses to your numbers (for example: improved toughness, improved initiative, iron will). They make for boring characters, adding these bonuses all over the character sheet is tedious, and I don't feel they make the game any better with their presence.

7. "All base classes are 20 level." I think that the need to stretch these out so far is one of the causes of balance issues. Multiclassing can be a normal and expected thing that is encouraged by the core rules, especially when a class just plain sucks after a certain level. If it ran out of decent class features, then it probably should just be cut off and the player moves on to another class.

8. Sucky feats. Making them suck less would definitely be an improvement.

9. Dead levels and boring classes. I wouldn't go the PF route of clogging the classes with a ton of minor features, but often major features are perfectly justified in these classes. Spellcasters are an exception, since so much of what they do is attached  to their spell list and slots, but even casters could use some features here and there.

10. Iterative attacks. Keeping track of what bonuses each attack is using. I'd use a slower gain of attacks but all at the highest bonus, so you can roll them at the same time without paying attention to which die is which.

I'm stretching it a bit now, but if I try I can keep going for quite a bit. Indeed, give a dude enough time and he'll make a whole new edition of D&D, step by step!