pdfcast.org/pdf/d-d-revision-full
now, something about this struck a familiar chord to me, so do like i did and go back to the website and check the submitter's info.
rofl.
checking your account creation date boraxe, i think this might be before your time, and i don't know if he's still posting or if his account is active but this guy was one heck of a troll back on the old concerns and criticism forums, way back when 4th ed was just announced, usually touting his view on what the right way of doing D&D is and everyone else who disagrees is badwrong.
Not sure if I remember PsychicRobot or not. Did he frequent the old Psionics forums? I was a frequent lurker there for a while a few years back.
But seriously, also check the date of the document. Back in late '08. People were still fussing over that crap at that point.
underneath the preview there is 2 buttons "download" & "share" and 3 tabs: Description, Document Detail & Submitter.
checking your account creation date boraxe, i think this might be before your time,
That date only applies to this account and identity. I've been posting here for like 8 years!
(I the absence of an emote of using a walker I picked one of me sleeping…cos I'm an old timer).and i don't know if he's still posting or if his account is active but this guy was one heck of a troll back on the old concerns and criticism forums, way back when 4th ed was just announced, usually touting his view on what the right way of doing D&D is and everyone else who disagrees is badwrong.
Ah, I thought you mean something specific on that forum. Now that you've reminded me I can't believe I forgot that guy. What an ass he was!
That date only applies to this account and identity. I've been posting here for like 8 years!
didn't know you were around that long. i'm guessing your original account got eaten in the forum switch? dunno how, but i managed to get the forum to spit mine back up after it got eaten.
But seriously, also check the date of the document. Back in late '08. People were still fussing over that crap at that point.
i know of the date. still, i'm amazed this document just came to light. i would have loved to have seen this in '08 when war was a 'ragin to see him try to defend his designs, many of which seem to be 4th ed ripoffs
I think the 4th edition is crap. They seemed to be trying to fix a lot of things that didn't need fixing.
I never understood the problems that people had with AD&D or even with 3.5 for that matter.
Back in the day when the DM saw something he didn't like in the rules he changed it or threw it out to suit the group of players to everyone's satisfaction and no one made a whole to do about it.
I didn't know jerkass came in a form that concentrated.
I remember PR back from the edition wars, and man was he annoying. But this... I mean, wow, I am in awe.
"I hate 4E! I hate Pathfinder! I use graphic metaphors! ... Here's a system I cobbled together by ripping off pathfinder and 4E."
I got all of 3 pages in before my brain started trying to leap out of my ears.
Hey, this gives me an idea for a drinking game!
The Rules: Read a page. Make a one paragraph summary and post it in the OTT. Take a shot. Repeat.
I vaguely remember PR but I lacked the interest in the fleshling's rantings and ravings.
I think the 4th edition is crap. They seemed to be trying to fix a lot of things that didn't need fixing.
That might be your opinion but the decision to make "much needed changes" was due to a huge player base asking for changes of certain things
Back in the day when the DM saw something he didn't like in the rules he changed it or threw it out to suit the group of players to everyone's satisfaction and no one made a whole to do about it.
And back when i was playing 3.5 the system was so heavily house ruled that almost nobody in any of the groups i played with could figure out if half o the rules actual rules or house rules.
As for a DM such as myself i do like house ruling things i don't like. I just find it annoying to have to house rule much of a system because it gets wanky quick. So as a DM I find a system that requires less tinkering on my part, to make the game as enjoyable as possible for me, best and 4e fits this bill for me. For me it has fixed many of the problems I had with 3e and for that I am greatful.
Yes some don't agree with it which is cool. We all have different things that tickle our fancy. Everyone needs to learn to live with what they enjoy though rather than trolling others out of being unhappy about trivial things. A big reason why i don't go to 4e general.
Yeah that thing is just as painful to read as any of PR's posts, if not more. I think I got all of three pages into it before the neurons in my brain cried out in protest. I'll probably have nightmares about it tonight.
Oh I have got to read this thing.
If that fan base was so huge, why didn't I meet any during the day?
Perhaps you are nocturnal?
If that fan base was so huge, why didn't I meet any during the day?
Don't get out much?
meh. Most everyone i played 3.5 hated grappling rules for example. Half of them took grappling out of their games completely so they didn't have to deal with it. Others house ruled it to the point where it was basically set up how it is in 4e now. Sure many didn't quite complain to wizards about the rules asking for changes but it was pretty much unanamouse that everyone i had played with didn't use the ol' grappling rules. Both young and old, and new and long time players.
It was like this for many rules. If rules are so complicated to the point where everyone either tosses them out or they get simplified so that they don't hurt people's heads then yeah there is a problem with the system.
But once someone caves and goes for the grapple, here comes the giant dire werewolf with a strength in the 40's and all the grappling feats.
And then no one grapples again for another few months.
i was browsing the paizo forums and i found a thread with this document linked. download and try reading it past page 4. if you did, you got further then me.
pdfcast.org/pdf/d-d-revision-full
now, something about this struck a familiar chord to me, so do like i did and go back to the website and check the submitter's info.
rofl.
After the first 12 pages or so his spite quickly fades into nothingness. It seems to include a little of 3.5, Pathfinder, and 4E. I skimed untill the random hatred faded then read about ten pages before becoming bored. It seems to me he just picked and chose thing from the 3 versions and filled the gaps with useless malice.
In my games we had a gentleman's agreement about grappling rules. Namely, if you don't start a grapple, then neither will the GM.
But once someone caves and goes for the grapple, here comes the giant dire werewolf with a strength in the 40's and all the grappling feats.
And then no one grapples again for another few months.
Hehe, noone ever expects the zombies and skeletons to grapple them. Best PC incap ever. Paladin got pinned by a skeleton in tall grass at night. Took them so long to find him. Heh.
Plus everyone can grapple, only casters and UMD skill users can use Silence.
Silence is a long range spell (400 ft+).
True that only casters can cast it, but what group doesn't have a caster?
casting silence on an object in someone's posession allows a will save (and if memory serves an item uses it's save or the owner's, whichever is highest), which is traditionally a caster's best save. best to cast it on an arrow or something and shoot the guy, or be a jerk and glue it onto them.
once you start being able to cast level 4 spells at level 7, grappling becomes far less of a hassle and is usually solved by a single dimention door (it's a DC20 to cast while grappled. 10 points in concentration at level 7 and a 2 or better con mod can make it so you have a 60% or better chance of success right from the get-go). and i've seen very few casters not pickup Dimention Door ASAP when level 7-8 come around.
and that's not even considering some other options like the "abrupt jaunt" variant in PHB2 (seriously check this out: A number of times per day equal to your Int bonus, you may teleport 10’ in a direction of your choice as an immediate action. the cost? you lose out on a familiar.)
as for the use of grappling, the "best" "grappling is awesome" i've heard comes from a few guys i know at the FLGS:
Me: [insert how grappling VS a guy your size it's ok, but against some large+ sized monstrosity it requires a large investment in feat, gear & sometimes class features to be viable and even then it's easily nullified]
Guy 1:"now way! grappling is awesome! I've use it to snap a dragon's wing, break a guy's neck and other stuff"
Me:"huh? so grappling is awesome because the GM allowed you to do something not covered by the rules? that doesn't say much about the rule when your best examples don't even use the mechanic/rule itself"
Guy 2: (he happened to GM Guy 1's PC)"what do you think the gm is there for? to cover stuff not covered by the rules."
Me:
"but you're not using the grappling rules though..."Guy 2: "yes he was"
Me:
"whatever, let's agree to disagree"Anyways a spontaneous caster would have to know the spell of which they have few enough already and prepared casters would need it prepared taking up one of the precious few spell slots. Either one is a serious investment of resources at low levels. Not to mention they get a will save (a low one at that) which for most casters is a strong save. Even then they could have Silent Spell or worse Sudden Silent. And the spell isn't given to wizards or sorcerrors instead the clerics and bards (bards don't even get this spell till a level later then the clerics and even then only if they have enough charisma to have bonus spells), this is at the same level as Hold Person why not just prepare Hold Person instead?
My group never had a problem with understanding or using grapple. It was pretty broken, but luckily it was also quite boring. So sometimes a grapple character would be made, but not too often because while powerful, they weren't the funniest character.
And we found that grapple worked amazingly well in dungeons with doors and narrow passageways. Basically the grappler would bottleneck the enemies and the group could focus their attacks.
And technically snapping someone's neck in a grapple wouldn't be a houserule. It'd just be an illustration of killing someone with unarmed damaged via a grapple, right? I used to always tell me grappler he snapped a neck or crushed their lungs or something like that if they killed an enemy in a grapple.
I do think the new grapple rules are more balanced, but they don't really seem to do much (just stopping movement). But its a fine switch since powers illustrate and give you options now.
My group never had a problem with understanding or using grapple.
Why do people so often assume that "I don't like this rule" means "I don't understand this rule"?
The 3e grapple rules are not difficult to understand, they are simply bad game design. The main problem is it's an overly complex* system for accomplishing the desired results, coupled with the fact it is generally failure uncommon. People generally dislike the grappling system no cos they don't understand it but cos every time someone says "I want to grapple him" the game comes screeching to a halt as books are pulled out and a everyone has to wait around while the DM and one player work their way through a separate multi-stage mini-game.
*Before the pedants chime in hear I want to clarify that complex is being used hear to mean "an intricate or complicated association or assemblage of related things", not "so complicated or intricate as to be hard to understand or deal with", so please don't bother trying to misrepresent what I'm saying by applying to wrong definition.
best use of silence? cast it on a 3rd ed warlock/mindbender. invisibility, silence + 100ft telepathy. and if you happen to have Lords of Madness, there is a feat that allows you to locate all intelligences or lackthereof within your telepathy range.
as for the 2 guys, not playing by the rules isn't what was breaking the game. heck, from what i understood, ignoring the rule actually made that subsytem playable.
no, the problem with balance in those editions were that balance didn't really exist, or if it "existed" it was because both the GM and the players skirted the issues "well polymorph/gate/[borked spell /feat/thing] isn't a problem in my game because we don't play with it" doesn't solve the issue. you acknowledge there is an issue, but rather then offer a fix it you sweep it under the rug. out of sight, out of mind... right?
2nd ed tried to solve the issue with slower leveling, longer prep time, longer cast time, etc... doesn't mean much if you still have access to the problem. it just relates it to later in the game or gives the players a few extra hoops to work out beforehand. it swept the problem under the rug.
3rd ed removed many of those limitations, which is why the issues became more apparent since the spellcasting was generally easier to use.
"well, the GM can work out what's best for his game" is just sloppy design, either in implementation or forethought.
yes the GM can work out what's best for his game, but this shouldn't mean the guy has to pretend he's a Dev and scrutinize spells & feats for potential mechanical issues. it means he should be able to look at an element in the game and remove/modify it for thematic reasons and not mechanical ones.
many spells in 3rd ed were just too powerful:
grease VS golems/unintelligent undead & sleep/color spray. golems/zombies generally don't have the mindset to slowly inch/balance across the grease and their reflex saves are laughable. a CR 13 iron golem VS a level 1, 18 int caster using grease? the golem only has a slightly better then 50% chance of success. the stone or lower level golems? these guys will need a 12 or better. now up that caster by 7 levels and give him a headband of int +4 for a DC 18+ save (he might have DC boosts via gear or feats). gordspeed golem, gordspeed.
same goes for mindless undead. both of these enemies will just flounder around and get picked off as they are laid low by a first level spell.
alter self at level 2 can give you access to the sahaguin, a form that has a swim speed twice that of your average person's move speed. this level also gives you glitterdust, which at level 3 a DC 15-16 will save or be blinded (sure it's only 3 rounds when you get it, but at level 3 things don't have a lot of HP. a traditional low level bruiser, the ogre needs a 14-15 or better to save and has 29 HP. a rogue with a shortsword and 10 str deals 10.5 damage on average. a barbarian with an 18 str and a greataxe deals 12.5, 15.5 if he's raging), that imposes a -40 to hide checks and outlines invisible creatures regardless of the save's result is VERY powerful. also: invisibility.
and it gets worse as the game progresses.
playing the game by RAW is what breaks it. playin it RAI, not so much, but the overall versatility that casters have is IMO far too great.
Plenty of people came out and said they simply didn't get the Grapple rules. Not all, but not a tiny percentage. Jus' sayin'.
We also need to remember that part of D&D is houseruling to make the game suit the group. What doesn't work for some works fine for others. You can tweak whatever the hell you want and doing so is playing the game as designed. This obsession with perfect rules has, IMO, taken something from the game. In other words, stop whining and start redesigning. It's part of the friggin' game. Make it fit. There is no way in hell to design a game that works perfectly as written for every group out there. Trying to do it is a waste of time. /rant
My favorite 3.5 spell - for those rare occasions I played a caster - was Blindness. Yep, a level 2 spell. Totally crushed casters. Targets Fort and permanently makes them incapable of targeting you. Oh, it's also a really fun way to **** with the commoners. Heh. Just totally ruin someone's life with that spell. Sorry Farmer John, you'll never see again. Good stuff ... if you're playin' Evil. ;) I made such good use of that spell that the DM eventually had to use Spell Turning (on a shield, IIRC) to blind me - with my own friggin' spell. Stupid low Fort ... But I deserved it. I was prepping it enough to spam it (which kinda violates the 'don't be an ass' code) and that made me able to blind tough melee stuff, too. That 50% miss chance was seriously annoying him. But no matter. I didn't learn any lesson. I did, though, retire that character when an RP option opened itself up to me. The DM still had the last laugh, though. He killed my NPCd character off soon after he retired. Good times. 
Boraxe, I was not trying to imply no one liked grapple because it was too hard to use. I said that we didn't have a problem understanding or using the rules. I know that the rules made dedicated grapplers basically win every grapple situation. And I said that the rules made grappling boring, but someone asked why players would grapple so I presented situations where we found grappling to be extremely useful (albeit tedious).
Also, I didn't think it made the game come to a screeching halt. I haven't played 3.5 in a while, but wasn't it just melee touch (the opponent get an opportunity attack to stop you if you don't have the proper feats) then opposed grapple checks. For most actions (pinning, moving, attacking), its another opposed grapple check with different costs.
I can see how people who didn't use it could think it was overly complex, but if you used it often, it wasn't too bad. Like I honestly think the current Stealth rules are worse, but that's primarily because I haven't DM'ed a game where Stealth is heavily used. I imagine anything that you don't use will appear more complicated than things which you are familar with. And like I said, I DMed at least two characters who were dedicated grapplers.
And with all that said, I do think the grapple rules were bad. Basically if you invested into grappling, you never failed and really made encounter creation hard to balance. But that was a heavy problem with basically anything in 3.5. (Not to say I didn't enjoy 3.5.) So I don't think it was user error. I think the grapple system is poorly implemented.
EDIT: 'Course there are times when houserules are the only way you can go. Still, IMO, not a big deal.
And I didn't know the effectiveness of a grappler at a chokepoint (doors) before designing a dungeon and it'd be a little odd if all of a sudden, the dungeon just stopped having doors and narrow passageways after the group used them to their advantage.
I honestly think the problem with grapple (like many 3.5 things) was that there were so many feats that if you wanted to be good at grappling, you'd basically never lose to someone who didn't invest into it. There's also tons of equipment and prestige classes that aid it also.
But overall, it wasn't so bad since recently the same group of players were positively talking about how effective that group was at using chokepoints and ganging up on individuals. So it may have been frustrating for me, but if the group has fun, you can't really complain.
____________
GRAPPLE
Grapple Checks
Repeatedly in a grapple, you need to make opposed grapple checks against an opponent. A grapple check is like a melee attack roll. Your attack bonus on a grapple check is:
Base attack bonus + Strength modifier + special size modifier
Special Size Modifier: The special size modifier for a grapple check is as follows: Colossal +16, Gargantuan +12, Huge +8, Large +4, Medium +0, Small –4, Tiny –8, Diminutive –12, Fine –16. Use this number in place of the normal size modifier you use when making an attack roll.
Starting a Grapple
To start a grapple, you need to grab and hold your target. Starting a grapple requires a successful melee attack roll. If you get multiple attacks, you can attempt to start a grapple multiple times (at successively lower base attack bonuses).
Step 1: Attack of Opportunity. You provoke an attack of opportunity from the target you are trying to grapple. If the attack of opportunity deals damage, the grapple attempt fails. (Certain monsters do not provoke attacks of opportunity when they attempt to grapple, nor do characters with the Improved Grapple feat.) If the attack of opportunity misses or fails to deal damage, proceed to Step 2.
Step 2: Grab. You make a melee touch attack to grab the target. If you fail to hit the target, the grapple attempt fails. If you succeed, proceed to Step 3.
Step 3: Hold. Make an opposed grapple check as a free action. If you succeed, you and your target are now grappling, and you deal damage to the target as if with an unarmed strike.
If you lose, you fail to start the grapple. You automatically lose an attempt to hold if the target is two or more size categories larger than you are.
In case of a tie, the combatant with the higher grapple check modifier wins. If this is a tie, roll again to break the tie.
Step 4: Maintain Grapple. To maintain the grapple for later rounds, you must move into the target’s space. (This movement is free and doesn’t count as part of your movement in the round.) Moving, as normal, provokes attacks of opportunity from threatening opponents, but not from your target.
If you can’t move into your target’s space, you can’t maintain the grapple and must immediately let go of the target. To grapple again, you must begin at Step 1.
Grappling Consequences
While you’re grappling, your ability to attack others and defend yourself is limited.
No Threatened Squares: You don’t threaten any squares while grappling.
No Dexterity Bonus: You lose your Dexterity bonus to AC (if you have one) against opponents you aren’t grappling. (You can still use it against opponents you are grappling.)
No Movement: You can’t move normally while grappling. You may, however, make an opposed grapple check (see below) to move while grappling.
If You’re Grappling
When you are grappling (regardless of who started the grapple), you can perform any of the following actions. Some of these actions take the place of an attack (rather than being a standard action or a move action). If your base attack bonus allows you multiple attacks, you can attempt one of these actions in place of each of your attacks, but at successively lower base attack bonuses.
Activate a Magic Item: You can activate a magic item, as long as the item doesn’t require a spell completion trigger. You don’t need to make a grapple check to activate the item.
Attack Your Opponent: You can make an attack with an unarmed strike, natural weapon, or light weapon against another character you are grappling. You take a –4 penalty on such attacks. You can’t attack with two weapons while grappling, even if both are light weapons.
Cast a Spell: You can attempt to cast a spell while grappling or even while pinned (see below), provided its casting time is no more than 1 standard action, it has no somatic component, and you have in hand any material components or focuses you might need. Any spell that requires precise and careful action is impossible to cast while grappling or being pinned. If the spell is one that you can cast while grappling, you must make a Concentration check (DC 20 + spell level) or lose the spell. You don’t have to make a successful grapple check to cast the spell.
Damage Your Opponent: While grappling, you can deal damage to your opponent equivalent to an unarmed strike. Make an opposed grapple check in place of an attack. If you win, you deal nonlethal damage as normal for your unarmed strike (1d3 points for Medium attackers or 1d2 points for Small attackers, plus Strength modifiers). If you want to deal lethal damage, you take a –4 penalty on your grapple check.
Exception: Monks deal more damage on an unarmed strike than other characters, and the damage is lethal. However, they can choose to deal their damage as nonlethal damage when grappling without taking the usual –4 penalty for changing lethal damage to nonlethal damage.
Draw a Light Weapon: You can draw a light weapon as a move action with a successful grapple check.
Escape from Grapple: You can escape a grapple by winning an opposed grapple check in place of making an attack. You can make an Escape Artist check in place of your grapple check if you so desire, but this requires a standard action. If more than one opponent is grappling you, your grapple check result has to beat all their individual check results to escape. (Opponents don’t have to try to hold you if they don’t want to.) If you escape, you finish the action by moving into any space adjacent to your opponent(s).
Move: You can move half your speed (bringing all others engaged in the grapple with you) by winning an opposed grapple check. This requires a standard action, and you must beat all the other individual check results to move the grapple.
Note: You get a +4 bonus on your grapple check to move a pinned opponent, but only if no one else is involved in the grapple.
Retrieve a Spell Component: You can produce a spell component from your pouch while grappling by using a full-round action. Doing so does not require a successful grapple check.
Pin Your Opponent: You can hold your opponent immobile for 1 round by winning an opposed grapple check (made in place of an attack). Once you have an opponent pinned, you have a few options available to you (see below).
Break Another’s Pin: If you are grappling an opponent who has another character pinned, you can make an opposed grapple check in place of an attack. If you win, you break the hold that the opponent has over the other character. The character is still grappling, but is no longer pinned.
Use Opponent’s Weapon: If your opponent is holding a light weapon, you can use it to attack him. Make an opposed grapple check (in place of an attack). If you win, make an attack roll with the weapon with a –4 penalty (doing this doesn’t require another action). You don’t gain possession of the weapon by performing this action.
If You’re Pinning an Opponent
You can attempt to damage your opponent with an opposed grapple check, you can attempt to use your opponent’s weapon against him, or you can attempt to move the grapple (all described above). At your option, you can prevent a pinned opponent from speaking.
You can use a disarm action to remove or grab away a well secured object worn by a pinned opponent, but he gets a +4 bonus on his roll to resist your attempt (see Disarm).
You may voluntarily release a pinned character as a free action; if you do so, you are no longer considered to be grappling that character (and vice versa).
You can’t draw or use a weapon (against the pinned character or any other character), escape another’s grapple, retrieve a spell component, pin another character, or break another’s pin while you are pinning an opponent.
If You’re Pinned by an Opponent
When an opponent has pinned you, you are held immobile (but not helpless) for 1 round. While you’re pinned, you take a –4 penalty to your AC against opponents other than the one pinning you. At your opponent’s option, you may also be unable to speak. On your turn, you can try to escape the pin by making an opposed grapple check in place of an attack. You can make an Escape Artist check in place of your grapple check if you want, but this requires a standard action. If you win, you escape the pin, but you’re still grappling.
Joining a Grapple
If your target is already grappling someone else, you can use an attack to start a grapple, as above, except that the target doesn’t get an attack of opportunity against you, and your grab automatically succeeds. You still have to make a successful opposed grapple check to become part of the grapple.
If there are multiple opponents involved in the grapple, you pick one to make the opposed grapple check against.
Multiple Grapplers
Several combatants can be in a single grapple. Up to four combatants can grapple a single opponent in a given round. Creatures that are one or more size categories smaller than you count for half, creatures that are one size category larger than you count double, and creatures two or more size categories larger count quadruple.
When you are grappling with multiple opponents, you choose one opponent to make an opposed check against. The exception is an attempt to escape from the grapple; to successfully escape, your grapple check must beat the check results of each opponent.
Zombie_Babies: I agree. I don't think I'm a big fan of the over emphasis on balance in the new edition (not that the new edition isn't fun). Besides the customing like you said, I think the fact that the game is non-competitive means it doesn't have to be balanced in a similar fashion as something which players compete against each other. But that's a completely different topic which always degrades into an edition war.
Boraxe: I think the rules you listed accurately represent what I said above. Melee touch (possible attack of opportunity), opposed grapple checks... then lots of opposed grapple checks of various costs depending on the action. Which I think is kind of retarded since it shouldn't be equally hard to break out of the grapple as it is to draw a weapon, but I guess that would only make it more complex. Although I actually didn't know that as soon as you started a grapple, you did unarmed damage. I thought the first round you only held your opponent and had to wait until the second. But its been a while.
Zombie_Babies: I agree. I don't think I'm a big fan of the over emphasis on balance in the new edition (not that the new edition isn't fun). Besides the customing like you said, I think the fact that the game is non-competitive means it doesn't have to be balanced in a similar fashion as something which players compete against each other. But that's a completely different topic which always degrades into an edition war.
Yeah, all I know is how it played for me - and that was totally fine. It's like a different culture now. Well, at least from my perspective. Before, if something was 'borkeded', you got together with your pals, talked about how stupid it was and fixed it. Now you go online, talk about how stupid it is and then demand some official change to the material. I just don't get it, I guess. The power was always yours. Always. There's that whole Rule Zero thing for GMs that, though it's come under some fire with the new edition, most seem to get. Well, there's another rule out there, too. The game is yours to bend to what suits you best. For all the snarky 'WOTC's not gonna send ninjas to your home to take your books' stuff that got shouted out when the EW started, it's kinda stupid, IMO, that a lot of people are demanding pretty much that. Send your ninjas to my house and fix my books. Now.
But yeah, edition war bait an' all that. I ain't lookin' to argue with anyone. This is just how I feel. I could be totally wrong. Whatever. And I ain't sayin' 3.5 was better or 4e is worse or 2e was the best or anything like that. For me, I prefer to play 3.5. I don't ever wanna run it again, though. I don't know how I feel about running 4e yet, but from what I've dug into, I really think it'll be a much better experience. That's not from what people say about it, either. That's me reading the rules. I also don't hate playing 4e. It's just not as fun, for me, as 3.5 was. So that's about it. I get preachy when I'm tired. Sorry all.
Boraxe: I think the rules you listed accurately represent what I said above. Melee touch (possible attack of opportunity), opposed grapple checks... then lots of opposed grapple checks of various costs depending on the action. Which I think is kind of retarded since it shouldn't be equally hard to break out of the grapple as it is to draw a weapon, but I guess that would only make it more complex. Although I actually didn't know that as soon as you started a grapple, you did unarmed damage. I thought the first round you only held your opponent and had to wait until the second. But its been a while.
One of the problems I have with it is that it just doesn't fit within the design paradigm of the rest of the system. The rest of D&D combat is abstracted in service of playability but for this one thing they decided to skew decidedly toward the simulationist.
I think this sums many people's reaction to the grappling system. ;) (warning: contains a naughty word)
But I honestly think they make too many changes. And many of these changes aren't critical, uber broken aspects. They're just minor tweaks that I do not feel warrant making the book more and more obsolete. Again, since its not a competitive game, I do not feel it requires the heavy regulation.
Boraxe: I can see what you mean. Its basically "normal combat" and "grappling combat". I'm not familar with grapple rules from older editions so I wonder if it was a historical product of previous editions or if they wanted to garner appeal to wrestling/grappling fans with the system.
Zombie_Babies: I agree. I don't know when "houserules" became such a negative term.
It's the internet's fault. Once people had a publice, easy accesible forum to post all their house rules everyone started to realize most of them were horrible. Before then, the only house rules most people were familiar with were those of their own group. Thanks to the 'net, we can now see that the majority of most people's house rules (especially those designed to make the game more "realistic", IMO) are complete crap.
So really, "house rules" became a negative term when we realized how negative (bad) were most house rules.
"Rule X is really broken and needs to be fixed."
"No there's nothing wrong with Rule X."
"What do you mean? We had a character optimize for Rule X and singlehandedly bitch slap Orcus. And he was level 5!!!"
"Oh well our DM would never have let that work. He decided that Rule X should actually work like Rule Y."
"So you agree that Rule X is broken?"
"No, because if you change it to work like Rule Y then it works fine."
"..."
Zombie_Babies: I agree. I don't know when "houserules" became such a negative term. Its like if someone says they played a way that's different, people will attack them for using houserules and disregard their comments. Also, the emphasis on "official" makes the "official" fixes more demanded.
But I honestly think they make too many changes. And many of these changes aren't critical, uber broken aspects. They're just minor tweaks that I do not feel warrant making the book more and more obsolete. Again, since its not a competitive game, I do not feel it requires the heavy regulation.
Heh, this is gonna sound crazy, but I really think the internet is terrible for D&D. The game isn't supposed to be played the same across the board. Rules are only bad when they don't work for your group, houserules are only bad when they're bad for your group, other peoples' opinions of them are wholly irrelevant. Too bad we all like to tell other people what to do (how to play) so much. ;)
But yeah, if you're talking about rules as written, its kind of counter to the point to add houserules to the equatioin.
Zombie_Babies and Boraxe: Yeah, the internet do tend to ruin lots of things.
Of course, the real fun part is when you confuse your house rules with the real rules. For example, in 3.5 me and my group would swear that there was a rule somewhere about how an unconscious creature is considered willing for spell effects that say "willing creature", but I've never been able to find it again. Or the part where you lose your dex bonus to reflex saves while in a grapple (you lose your dex bonus to AC from attacks outside the grapple, so why not your dex bonus to reflex saves?). I'm pretty sure those are house rules, but I just don't know for sure.
But hey, they worked for our group (and led to many terrible jokes about unconscious creatures being "willing") so I've never sweated it too much.
It can also be a problem when players forget what is a houserule and what is an actual rule. I used to have a player who insisted that it was an actual rule that you could substitute your strength mod for your charisma mod while using intimidate if you are armed or something. I told him no, but I'd give a +2 or something and he insisted it was a rule somewhere. It didn't really matter, but I'm sure he still thinks its a real rule to this date.
Edit: I also think its funny how if there are multiple interpretations of a rule, if you don't interpret it as the worst, most broken way which makes no sense, you are using a houserule.
alter self at level 2 can give you access to the sahaguin, a form that has a swim speed twice that of your average person's move speed.
Only if your caster is a monstrous humanoid, or a cheater.
Now a Tiefling Mountebank, with an alternate identity that is a Xorn: that is Legal, OP, and Hillarious.
People always forgot the pesky requirement that the PC actually see the creature they're morphing into before they actually do it. ;)
Yeah, thats not actually a rule.
People always forgot the pesky requirement that the PC actually see the creature they're morphing into before they actually do it. ;)
Yeah, thats not actually a rule.
Hrm. I always thought it was, heh. Well, it only makes sense that you can't shape change into somehing you've never seen. At least to my group it did. ;)
Zombie_Babies: I agree. I don't know when "houserules" became such a negative term. Its like if someone says they played a way that's different, people will attack them for using houserules and disregard their comments. Also, the emphasis on "official" makes the "official" fixes more demanded.
I think "houserules" have had a bad rep because of abusive DMs. I never played with such DMs (only DMs that didn't know the rules) but it sounds like abusive DMs are common and that they use the "houserule" to justify their abuse.
I can understand why some people can't stand the word.
@Bone_Naga: I think the probelm is the opposite:
Poster1: Rule X is horrible as RAW because it lets a level 5 bitch slap Orcus.
Poster2: How is that possible?
Poster1: Well we use Rule X like this...
Poster2: Well it's not Rule X anymore or RAW, it's Rule Y and RAI, no wonder it's overpowered.
Poster1: You suck! I hate you! 3.5 is broken, thats it! End of discussion. You're just a 4E hater, rant rant rant.
Yes that does happen a lot too. I think that's why 4e ended up with so much errata just to change the wording. I remember the early days right after its release where people had arguments over things like whether or not you could use stealth after combat had begun (I believe people were arguing over something about your enemy being aware of you). RAI went right out the window most of the time. Or using the demigod ED and elven accuracy to automatically hit with any attack (despite the wording of elven accuracy clearly indicating it's only supposed to be used once per attack). So yeah. The internet kills D&D. But then again, some of my favorite houserules were ones that I found on the internet, so it's not all bad.
Hahaha. All the fuss about Alter Self kind of proves my point.
Oh, geez, Alter Self. I abused the crap out of this spell with a Warforged. I Alter Self into an animated object. I could be almost anything. A small cart or wagon was my favorite. "I'm a Delorian!" "Warforged, transform and roll out!"
If that fan base was so huge, why didn't I meet any during the day?
Don't get out much?
meh. Most everyone i played 3.5 hated grappling rules for example. Half of them took grappling out of their games completely so they didn't have to deal with it. Others house ruled it to the point where it was basically set up how it is in 4e now. Sure many didn't quite complain to wizards about the rules asking for changes but it was pretty much unanamouse that everyone i had played with didn't use the ol' grappling rules. Both young and old, and new and long time players.
It was like this for many rules. If rules are so complicated to the point where everyone either tosses them out or they get simplified so that they don't hurt people's heads then yeah there is a problem with the system.
Why would a PC start a grapple anyway?
Many reasons. As mentioned already to stop casters. It can also be used to subdue people you may want to capture alive especially if they are not to be harmed. Also if used right grappling can be extremely over powered. Other times you're forced into a grapple because of monster abilities and so it is best to both know the rules as well as be compotent at grapples.
Best way to take a caster out of a fight, really. Unless the caster specifically prepares for it (harder at low levels then high levels) you can completetly shut them down, at little to no risk, by grappling them.
I always thought casting a Silence on some piece of the caster's clothing was much more simple.
silence can be gotten around just as how grappling can be.
An example of the getting around grappling is that I designed a fighter/wizard that would only use spells with no somatic components this way their casting would not be hindered by armor. This would also allow for them to cast while in a grapple. It could also allow for my caster to be designed as a grappler and could use their grapple plus spell casting to deal with other casters.
Similar thing could be done with silence. There are spells that do not require verbal components. your enemy could have these. Also I've found that in many cases casting silence in a room to cancel a caster you as a caster yourself are caught in the radius of your own spell. So unless you have non-verbal spells you've just cancelled yourself out.
there were also several other things wrong with 2e and 3e IMO. one would be with starting out with such a low life that for the first 5 levels or so it was quite easy to basically 1 shot many things as well as be one shotted yourself. this was especially true at levels 1 and 2 as well if you've been rolling poorly for hp. Then the way the system was designed it started to get broken as far as BAB, skillz and saves to where you'd have no chance at success once you got to higher levels unless of course you were specialized.
A lower level general character could survive. you could afford to have a general skill set at low levels in 3.5. but in order to succeed at skill checks at much higher levels you'd almost maxed out ranks in skills. Of course only being trained in about 4 skills means that you'd fail every other skill if you so much as tried it. Again at lower levels you could effectively have a chance at succeeding with any skill. Not only can such make a DM's life a hell but if someone isn't there for a season then much prep work might have to be scratched due to a certain bit of needed skill sets now being unavailable. In 4e such would still be doable. it would be difficult but at least doable.
Some of these work arounds included things like starting out with max health or at lvl 3. Which seems to be the approach that 4e went with. ;)
As for the other base stats stuff that got unbalanced as levels stacked on i found that most campaigns ended before lvl 10 either due to RL junk or because nobody had any desire to go higher. So yeah things kinda stayed in the more balanced spectrum region of the game.
As mentioned above many wizard spells are quite powerful. I played in a game before where the DM liked low magic and this included scrolls for wizards to learn new spells were almost nonexistent. If i remember correctly such campaigns were also restricted to the core 3 books as well as many things from there being removed for possible abuse issues.
but yeah these are just some of the issues. And well with a lot of the issues I have found that a lot of the common house rules that were used to fix or simplify something are things that we're seeing in 4e. Of course 4e isn't perfect but it really does seem to help make things less troublesome