What is the mechanic you hate most in RPGs?

*Including "this system has classes, but no multiclassing"
That's the worst of the bunch.

... wouldn't that mean that the optimal strategy in those games would be to dip all the classes with level scaling abilities and then scale like 10 class's abilities instead of only 1?

Is there any game that even does that?

sitting around a table. for real though, class levels.

tfw I run D20s in WoW and levels literally are not even a thing at all. No one has any idea how good it feels to have the entire party never need rebalanced or me having to do some power gap unfun shit with the monsters. I literally just get to move a story and make fights have.more mechanics as time goes on. I guess the down side is less Character specfic rp but I still do all kinds of items and professions.

I don't want to say classes in general, but a few aspects of them irk me. The first is simple tasks that are nonetheless exclusive to certain classes. As an example, Rogues and traps. Not only are Rogues the only ones able to disarm traps, but they're also the only ones that can SEE them. A Wizard can't see a ward, a Ranger/Druid can't see a snare, a Cleric can't see an unholy godbomb, and so on. Only a Rogue can see and deal with this, no one else even gets a roll. If they do, it doesn't matter how high they roll because it just can't be seen by someone who isn't a Rogue. I can see disarming as a matter of training, but not letting anyone else even know there's a threat is just trying too hard to create different roles.

The other thing is allowing retarded amounts of multiclassing in a poor attempting at alleviating the first issue. I despise watching people try to roleplay how they were totally training in six different career fields at once, and concept of "dipping" for a single ability is too gamist for my tastes. There's not necessarily anything wrong with it, I just don't like it. Please stick to 2 (3 at most) classes and level them somewhat close to evenly.

Why even have level-by-level multiclassing if nothing cares about class level?

Is either of those ever an issue outside of D&D?

OP here. So, based on the posts, a game without levels or classes whatsoever, with reasonable amount of dice rolling, with logical wealth and logical mechanics, like mentioned in post about traps, would be better than the same game with those?

Outside of ONE edition of D&D.

Okay, well, technically Thieves had their % skills, but they were supposed to give them almost supernatural abilities, not restrict what others can do.

Presumably each class would have a comparable number of abilities under such a system.

Switching classes would simply determine which abilities you got, and better abilities would require a higher character level, a higher number of class levels before you get them, or both.

It's more or less how everything works in 5e, except for spellcasting.

>Exploding dice with no limiters. Yes, looking at you SW.
This.

Depends on the edition.

In PF, for instance, the only thing rogues get with regards to trap finding is abilities that make them better at them, and abilities to allow them to disarm some magic traps with unusually high DC.

And there are other classes (including rangers) that can get the feature.

Hard to pick one I hate MOST, but there are a few candidates.

>Multiclassing/Crossclassing
This is only ever abused by min-maxers, it's NEVER used to make interesting characters. No, shut up, no matter how much you say you're doing it for "story", you're not.

>Spell Slots/Vancian Casting
"Hurr durr I'm too exhausted to cast any more level 1 spells, but I can still cast a level 3 spell. Hurr durr all spells are just some autistic memory trick where you prepare the spell 99% at the start of the day and then complete it during combat.

>HP Bloat
Something about the game is lost when at high level you end up having like 120+ health and getting stabbed through the gut with a longsword only does 1d8 damage.

Yeah... judging by the pic I posted with this, HP Bloat is probably my most hated.

Nothing really scales in 5e. At best you get synergestic scaling; i.e. you get two attacks so now your action surge is twice as good when used with an attack action.

Classes and levels can work, they just need to be done to put emphasis on the strengths of those systems. Most mechanics are just tools, they can be used well. Being overcomplicated for complexity's sake or illogical is just bad design though.

Classes are nothing but thematically grouped abilities.

There's nothing to say that a character with 6 classes has switched to several different professions. They could be a single profession, they simply have a grab bag of abilities relevant to whatever they do, just like any single classes character.

If your monk is built using some weird combination of ranger/fighter/rogue/paladin, and it makes sense for the concept and doesn't suck mechanically, great.

If you fighter 1/cleric x, and play a heavy armored cleric with more focus on arms and armor, that makes perfect sense, go for it.

HP are Hit Points, not Meat Points.

>2 potential reasons:
1. They're convenient prearranged character paths, should you choose to focus on a single class, simplifying chargen.
2. They're tech-trees. The lower levels are a gate to the abilities you can pick up at higher levels.

I like #1. #2, depends on the implementation.

HP bloat is a consequence of starting at goblins and finishing with dragons.

The difference doesn't matter when they both turn you into a videogame character.

how skull-crushingly boring combat is in 5e, and pen and papers in general

>I don't understand the difference, so it doesn't matter.

A longsword through the gut is either a Coup de Grâce or the last hit that reduces you to 0 or less HP, not any regular 1d8 damage swing.

Oh fuck. Here's one.

>"Hit points are an abstract thing representing both meat points and exhaustion and luck" in fluff justifications, yet the mechanics treat them exclusively as meat points in every goddamn way.

If you want stamina and HP and luck, make them separate goddamn pools.

If the mechanics treat them as meat points, I'm going to use them as meat points.

"This is a world where life experience eventually means you can swim through lava with minimal harm if you're a bad enough dude, and seasoned warriors can easily survive several gunshots to the face at point blank, especially if the guy shooting is less experienced."

I will play in such a bizarre superhero world before I try to pretend your shitty "abstract" HP system does what you say it does, when in fact all the game mechanics suggest otherwise.

>Yeah... judging by the pic I posted with this, HP Bloat is probably my most hated.
Hah. I love exactly that. Meat points are the greatest. Following the game mechanics to their logical conclusion in general is awesome.

D&D is a superhero world when you get into those higher levels.

>"Yeah, I'm level 20, so my body is made of kevlar and depleted uranium now. An 8 damage slash that could kill or put a regular person in critical condition is just a scratch to me."

So basically chunky salsa rule applies when you want it to apply but still makes no goddamn sense the rest of the time?

The Rogue and trap thing was one of the more extreme examples from 3.5 in particular, but I'm also speaking generally about not being able to do things unless it's part of your class, which stayed a thing in later editions but isn't quite as pronounced. Still irks me, but not to the degree of a more autistic rant.

Classes would ideally be THE BEST at [thing] rather than the only one even capable of [thing].

Damage is relative. a 10 damage hit to a character with 50 Hp would be the same as a 1 damage hit to a character with 5.

Shadowrun: PCs are able to buy off Notoriety, which is a stat that tracks how infamous the PCs have become as a result of their actions in the game. They buy it off by sacrificing points from their Street Cred stat.

It's basically a huge handwaving mechanic to allow players to escape the consequences of their actions. I don't like that in the first place, and to make things worse the mechanics overly abstracted in a way that doesn't relate to the game world very well.

>If the mechanics treat them as meat points, I'm going to use them as meat points.

And yet when the Warlord shouts the supposed meat points back,autists flip their shit.

This.

What a weird ring. It seems to have only one side even though it has two. One of those topical illusions.

Doesn't that mean that they hide out for a while until things cool down around them? Loses them notriety when they didn't do shit for a while, but also makes them lose street cred, cause pussy bitch ran away like a fucking pansy ass coward.

Relative WHY? Because the higher level character has a higher amount of hitpoints, despite taking an attack of the same force and magnitude as the guy with lower hitpoints? Is the guy with higher hitpoints literally made out of something besides flesh and blood?

Hitpoint logic is retarded, and lets not even get into what healing represents if HP is something besides Meat Points.

"Yeah, I'm level 20, so I have become the stuff of which legends are made. An 8 damage slash that could kill or put a regular person in critical condition takes no more effort than a tiny step or a flick of my finger to avert."

FTFY

Again, where is that ever an issue outside of D&D?

Unless you're playing a anime game, you're not reflecting a blade with a flick of your finger as any kind of mortal human being.

Then again I suppose thats more the realm of stat-bloat in general, rather than just HP-bloat.

>despite taking an attack of the same force and magnitude as the guy with lower hitpoints?

Pretty huge assumption to make.

>Is the guy with higher hitpoints literally made out of something besides flesh and blood?

Is one explanation. Could be made out of BETTER flesh and blood. Godly stuff. Could be also just incredibly skilled and lucky and turn blows that a normal guy would run into into grazing hits.

>Hitpoint logic is retarded

Only when you make it retarded. You bitch that on one hand HP are meat points and how stupid that is, but also refuse to accept any other explanation, no matter how well supported it is in the game world.explanation.

>Again, where is that ever an issue outside of D&D?

I never said it was. This thread is about gripes with mechanics, mine just happened to be D&D specific. And also not bad enough for me to stop enjoying D&D.

Because not all attacks are equal in that fashion. Higher level characters are more than just regular mortals though. If you want regular joes going at it, don't play D&D, where a man can wrestle an elephant.

Level 20 is so far beyond "mortal human being" that I'm not sure what your point is.

>Unless you're playing a anime game, you're not reflecting a blade with a flick of your finger as any kind of mortal human being.

Level 20 characters can routinely make the universe their bitch 1/day. Deflecting a hit that would injure a lesser man should be well within their capabilities.

Notoriety isn't about how aware people or organizations are of the PCs, there are other stats for that. Notoriety is for the PC's negative reputation. It's about having a reputation for trying to cheat fixers and Johnsons, or for killing innocent bystanders, or for failing to fufill missions. I think the current rules for decreasing Notoriety make all that go away too easily. I prefer to have players have to deal with a negative reputation when it comes up in the narrative, by RP and social skills for example.

Or you know, you could assume that magical healing does all the things resting to heal does. Eases pain, removes fatigue, soothes strained muscles, as well as healing big fucking gashes.

A guy who's low on hitpoints will be tired, sore from the twists and strains of vigorous life or death combat, as well as being a cut the fuck up.

A level 20 fighter is still mostly a normal human (elf, dwarf, whatever). They can't really do anything special other than fall off a tall cliff and live.

No, thats what a level 20 Fighter SHOULD be, but in DnD and it's derivatives, a level 20 fighter is basically a DC Comics superhero.

Yes, it's retarded.

That has to do with the fighter class being the epitome of shit class design. It is not an issue with HP.

I understand your issue and even agree with it on some level. I just think that that exchange can be made to make sense.

And kill like 200 orcs, when a lvl1 fighter can kill maybe one.

Bullshit. if you don't like superheroics, just play low level.

Or I guess also de-power the other classes, that works too, but is kinda silly when you can just play low level.

A regular mortal wouldn't be able to keep up with anything he'd face at those levels.

I force my players to roll heal skill checks to bandage wounds and stop bleeding before I allow them to drink potions for HP.... it's always seemed really fucking dumb that they can drink a liquid that will close a sword slash

And a fighter can't keep up with anything he'll face at those levels.

Depends on edition...

>Depower the other classes because FIGHTERS are overpowered.

Holy shit, if this doesn't make it blatantly obvious you've never played DnD in your life, I don't what possibly could.

Go back to the proper editions of the game when that and other bullshit like pieces of string that require wifi to work properly aren't a thing.

So you'd make it so he has no HP scaling as well?

If I'm playing in a world with escalating meat points and there's a Warlord class that can restore them by shouting (not a thing in Pathfinder or 5e), that's fine, the Warlord has a magical or mutant ability to heal people by shouting.

It's D&D. We left any potential for playing realistic characters behind around level 4.

>FIGHTERS are overpowered.

Who the fuck said that?

I suggested depowering the other classses to be on level with a fighter who, I quote
>A level 20 fighter is still mostly a normal human (elf, dwarf, whatever). They can't really do anything special other than fall off a tall cliff and live.
>No, thats what a level 20 Fighter SHOULD be

If you want a level 20 fighter to be mostly mundane, and make sense with being in the same party as the wizard/cleric/paladin/druid/whatever, those guys should also be powered down

I hope all of you who complain about typical DnD problems don't play DnD

>NO HP IS MEAT POINTS!
>I DON'T CARE THAT THE GAME CONTRADICTS ME MULTIPLE TIMES, THEY CAN ONLY BE MEAT POINTS

>If you want a level 20 fighter to be mostly mundane
You should probably not play heroic fantasy D&D.

Any mechanic that randomises the amount of XP players get is inherently bad.

The same goes for any mechanic that make one player get more than other.

I am pretty sure we're talking about 3.PF.

No, I was just calling attention to lackluster argumentation.

I get the second but not the first.

>Enchanter
>Fire Swords
>Touching people for buffs

Dropped the ball.

Or keep it to low levels.

That was my other suggestion.

>I am pretty sure we're talking about 3.PF.

It could be 5e. Fighters in 5e are at least kickass demigods in battle but STILL can't do anything a demigod would do outside of battle.

Bounded accuracy for skills was a mistake.

>>Touching people for buffs
Where'd you get that idea
>Make bitches think you the shit
Is obviously mind control shit

Whether or not the fighter actually stands up at those levels doesn't mean he wouldn't have to be superhuman to do it.

Bonded accuracy on the scale modern D&D works at was a mistake. D&D really needs more than 20 levels if it wants to represent the kind of power curve it has.

Are you implying enchanters are flaming homo lala men?

Mind control, charm person, hypnotism etc. It's license for the GM to basically make a player sit in the corner for a while and it's almost always used in a bullshit manner. I can't fucking think of a particularly good way it's ever been used.

And he got that way from hitting the ground at terminal velocity, or swimming through a VAT of sulphuric acid, or being tossed face first into a pool of lava.

Unless they make the HP consistently rational, I'm simply not going to pretend they're a realistic rational thing.

And I'm okay with D&D being gonzo capeshit. I've got GURPS for when I want gritty realism.

I'm guessing randomized xp leads to getting under-rewarded, especially if the variance is high.

Bounded Accuracy was a mistake. Fullstop.

Sort of shit you want to use in faggy art games where no one complains about how shitty the game balance is because admitting you did combat would lose you all your tragic hip points.

No, non-abstract wealth turns into accounting and, if the world is detailed enough, potentially even spreadsheets. If I wanna do that shit I have actual taxes I could be working on, thank you.

I let my players buy anything their characters should reasonably be able to afford and anything beyond that can be quested for or made some other kind of arrangements for. For instance, mid-level PCs are assumed to be able to buy mid-level armor and weapons, but that isn't license to get the best of everything.

Not really, they just bound it too low in relation to what a level 20 character should be capable of. It works perfectly well in games where the power levels don't rise to such a ludicrous degree over the course of the game.

Is it possible roleplaying games aren't for you?

>No, shut up, no matter how much you say you're doing it for "story", you're not.
Just because it doesn't happen to you doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

>The game says they're not meat points.
>The game mechanics have weird disconnects that only make any sense if they are meat points.
Either I rewrite the rules so you can't survive being covered in magma and whatnot, or I treat them as meat points.

Meat points is easier, and perfectly fitting in a capeshit game about characters who can punch dragons to death and take down armies like they're using automatic rifles to kill rats.

It takes control of player strength out of the gms hands, mostly.

Plus it sucks if the players make concentrated effort to do something interesting or co and the game itself atbitrarily decides not to reward them for it.

The entire negative section is about "touchin' up on people" presumably for the purpose of giving them fire swords. It's also apparently mandatory. Really what I'm taking issue with here is the fire swords.

Why the fuck did D&D have to give the mind control school the name name everyone else uses for the "giving shit magic powers" school.

But all the complaining in this thread has been about weird disconnects in the game mechanics that are only disconnects if you treat HP as meat points.

>Either I rewrite the rules so you can't survive being covered in magma and whatnot, or I treat them as meat points.
Oh come on, most games have a "chunky salsa rule" or equivalent thereof nowadays.

And many that don't explicitly expect the GM to describe the action in a way that makes sense. Saying "You fall into lava. Oh, look, you're fine." is obviously nonsensical and only an incredibly dense GM or a troll on a mongolian basket-weaving forum would interpret the results of an exchange in such a fashion. Coming up with some reason why the results would happen is the GM's fucking job.

>You managed to avoid the worst of the lava, but a splash of it painfully burns into your flesh. That's gonna hurt - but it could be worse!

That's where the high fantasy and limits of rules kick in.

High level characters are a bit mad, but a level 10 Fighter still dies in the fall, two rounds in the acid, or one round in the lava.

Even the might level 20 Fighter is going to be between fucked up and mighty fucked up by any of those hazards and that's assuming you have acid/lava damage end entirely as soon as the immersion ends.

The have been a couple such complaints, but most of the complaints are the opposite.

It says they're not meat points, but the game treats them as meat points in most ways.

This. It's not like any character who can take the avg. 70 damage per round from taking a dip in lava isn't obviously ate up with magical gear too.

>the game treats them as meat points in most way
Concrete examples?

How ludicrously can the power levels rise when, as they tell it, non-Tucker kobolds can still fuck up a party of high level adventurers?

>It says they're not meat points, but the game treats them as meat points in most ways.

No. You treat them as meat points. The game never says a fighter losing 10 HP loses 10 ounces of blood or whatever. You never get your limbs lopped off when you take damage. Fuck, having a bleeding wound itself is a separate effect from losing HP.

It's not meat points. They are almost never treated as meat points. Things that take away from your meat are almost always CON damage.

In 5e? Tough fucking luck doing that. You'd need a really huge amount of them, in favorable conditions for it to work. I mean at some point you get so many that they can statistically instagib a target/turn, but until you reach about half way to that point I'm betting on the party.

Sure. At lower levels you can get away with "HP is an abstraction" easier.

We routinely play higher levels though, often 10 is "starting level".

, you need magical healing to refill your HP in most editions, otherwise it could take weeks, which is not so much a thing of you're just a little tired.

I'm fine with it not being realistic, most of the rest of tje later levels are capeshit anyways. I'm just not going to pretend it's realistic if the mechanics don't back that up.

>you need magical healing to refill your HP in most editions, otherwise it could take weeks, which is not so much a thing of you're just a little tired.

In almost all editions the HP you regain by resting raises with your HD. In 3.5, you regain 1 or 2 HP/level when resting, for example. It's almost as if you got a % of your HP back because the wounds damage you take are relative to your HP you lost.

And when I say I'm fine with it being capeshit, to clarify, that's why I'm playing it.

If I want a more realistic power level, I have a dozen other games that do it better.

>10 is starting level
w h y

Because 12-16 is the sweet spot in terms of capabilities (not in terms of tier disparity - tier restrictions are a thing).

And because a campaign typically only lasts 6-8 months. One that lasts longer than that is a rare thing.

May as well make sure the bulk of the campaign is in the level range you're looking to play.

Sometimes we start at 8, and in a "low level" campaign we might start at 6.

>bullet/arrow counting in games where bullets/arrows are actually plentiful.
The only thing I could accept this working for is slings, but even then It'd be a movement action to gather them from your surroundings.