Mine was in near the end of a year long D&D-type campaign I ran. The half-orc barbarian wanted to swim into a ship with his plate armor on.
He argued rules, and I told him that "I don't care if your Strenght is over 9000, you do not swim with a plate mail on."
Scion, the tick-clock combat system. We weren't combat heavy anyway, but none of us wanted to use that pile of steaming poo.
Tremulus. The game has a trust mechanic. You can decide you trust another member of the party and put trust points in them. Putting trust points in another character makes it easier to both help and hurt them.
It felt completely backwards to me. If I trust you, it doesn't make it easier for me to screw you over; it makes it easier for you to screw me over. At first, I thought it must be a mistake, but the rules are explained in two different places in the text, complete with examples that back it up.
I reversed it so that putting your trust points in other characters meant they had a bonus to help and hurt you. It actually made giving trust points to other characters an exciting decision. You might even say that it required you to trust them.
for D&D5e:
I just ruled recently that you can maintain one concentration spell for every 4 levels. I'm not digging the default rule on that, seems way to META game balance or die to me.
The last STUPID rule egregious enough for me to remember throwing out altogether was in the early days of 4E. (Yes, my group played 4E, we actually role-played during our 4E sessions, believe it or not, and we enjoyed it. Edition warriors can fuck right off.)
There was an early errata attempting to "fix' the stealth skill: it required total concealment (not partial concealment) for a character to make a stealth roll. Why partial concealment was no longer good enough, or why anyone with total concealment would need a stealth roll to begin with, I have no idea.
In any event, my entire group had a good laugh about that one, then we ignored the "errata" and moved on....
Quote from: trechriron;841491for D&D5e:
I just ruled recently that you can maintain one concentration spell for every 4 levels. I'm not digging the default rule on that, seems way to META game balance or die to me.
That sounds interesting, and I'd like to know how it works out.
I houserule and steamroll over systems so much it's hard for me to recognize RAW afterwards. I totally overlooked that 4e stealth rule. For me, it just became you can't roll for stealth while being watched. You had to escape the foe's ability to sense you before trying to be sneaky.
When I was starting my Legend of the Wulin play by post campaign, I took a long hard look at what kind of issues the game has, and which ones are actually part of the genre. Then I came up with solutions (http://www.myth-weavers.com/showthread.php?t=288407) to them.
So far it's working as intended!
Hit Points are dumb.
Saturday. Playtesting my latest project. :D
Trading in Ship Shares for cash in Mongoose Traveller is supposed to not be allowed. I allow it because it means some Players start out with wealth in the millions of credits, which usually translates into some expensive toys for the PCs starting out.
That means I don't have to start out going easy on the Players if they have the equipment to deal with the challenges.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;841551Hit Points are dumb.
Dumb people are dumb. Next.
Recent one for me was magic ammo in 5e D&D. It is effectively one shot??? Um. No.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;841551Hit Points are dumb.
Agreed.
When Runequest came into my corner of the world, I preferred the hit points per hit location approach to your basic D&D approach. When Cyberpunk 2020 first appeared I liked its approach the bestest.
What is kind of similar to CP2020 (there are many nowadays, even d20 things like Mutants & Masterminds) method is Silhouette Core. It has its problems, but I gave it a spin of my own and so far have done a pulp rules addition for it, and am in the process of making it do fantasy as well. Both are unplaytested though.
If anyone wants to take a peek, here it is:
http://blog.guildredemund.net/2014/12/23/how-i-made-my-peace-with-silhouette-core/ (http://blog.guildredemund.net/2014/12/23/how-i-made-my-peace-with-silhouette-core/)
A wound system appeals to me as well, but I've just being going with HP recently. Whether it's a d&d or Call of Cthulhu, I'm finding I'm just on the border of replacing HP with a wound system but after each session I usually get distracted with prep for the next session rather than working out the best way to do it.
Hell, I've houseruled GURPS heavily enough that I've got an "Apocrypha" document of several pages that I hand out to players, documenting the changes by page ref ...
... or I did, before I had enough changes in combat AND magic rules to warrant SEPARATE docs.
Quote from: jeff37923;841553Trading in Ship Shares for cash in Mongoose Traveller is supposed to not be allowed. I allow it because it means some Players start out with wealth in the millions of credits, which usually translates into some expensive toys for the PCs starting out.
I allow it mainly because it seems to me there's no reasonable in-world justification for why trading in shares for cash wouldn't be permitted.
GURPS 4e "Wait" maneuver wants you to specify what you will react to and what you'll do, like "If an orc approaches, I swing my sword at him." But, after discussing on the GURPS forums, it's clear to me this is a broken attempt by people who don't play combats with maps to avoid people making decisions during other people's moves. So, we keep playing Waits basically as we have all along, as I think being able to react is actually one of the best parts of the system.
not so much a stupid rule, but to avoid superfluous arguments and insubstantial speculations while also streamlining the system, I vastly prefer to replace specific armor types (like leather armor, chain mail, and so on) with broad, generic armor weight classes (light, medium, heavy) and maybe an extra rule or two for the more complex systems to include stuff like helmets or partial cover. It's slightly more abstract, but the exact strengths of weaknesses of various armor types is one topic that I honestly don't need to include in full detail. Likewise, for the more simple games, abstract weapon weight classes are completely sufficient, even though there seems quite a lot of players who take a significant part of their character identity from the choice of weaponry.
Quote from: Beagle;843165Likewise, for the more simple games, abstract weapon weight classes are completely sufficient, even though there seems quite a lot of players who take a significant part of their character identity from the choice of weaponry.
Yes, some of us do:). But I don't see the need for those weapons to have different statistics. I can still do that in a game like Scarlet Heroes, which has all of 4 different weapon groups. The choice between wearing a machete or a jian in this game is enough, although they're in the same weapon group.
Caveat, it's enough if the GM would allow me a circumstancial bonus at times to reflect an iconic use of the weapon. It doesn't have to happen every session, or even often, but once in a while it's nice and what my character decided to be prepared for can speak volumes for the kind of person he is at his core;)!
Quote from: Moracai;841449Mine was in near the end of a year long D&D-type campaign I ran. The half-orc barbarian wanted to swim into a ship with his plate armor on.
He argued rules, and I told him that "I don't care if your Strength is over 9000, you do not swim with a plate mail on."
I'd have allowed it. They'd have been making a roll every round, with double the armour penalty, as per the rules, but with a high enough swim skill and strength bonus, they might have managed it.
I've seen humans capable of so many amazing feats that I wouldn't have thought possible. I've seen people do acrobatics in plate armour, do parallel bars, jump off a horse, roll, and come up standing (it's not jousting armour!). And I've also seen too many GMs disallow things that they personally didn't think possible, despite being already achieved in the real world.
The Batavi (a Germanic tribe who took part in the Roman invasion of Britain) were noted for having soldiers swim across turbulent rivers in full armour. If a soldier can be trained to do it, a warrior in D&D should certainly be allowed a chance of success.
Quote from: Omega;841555Recent one for me was magic ammo in 5e D&D. It is effectively one shot??? Um. No.
We have always played magic ammo as expended when used. I usually place magic ammo in groups of 6, 12, or 20.
This is for 5e. To solve the problem of everybody always trying to roll for every check and thus trivializing the skill proficiencies, I take all the rolls as one effort (instead of just one needing to beat the DC) and if more than half beat the DC then it works.
Quote from: spaceLem;843338I'd have allowed it. They'd have been making a roll every round, with double the armour penalty, as per the rules, but with a high enough swim skill and strength bonus, they might have managed it.
I've seen humans capable of so many amazing feats that I wouldn't have thought possible. I've seen people do acrobatics in plate armour, do parallel bars, jump off a horse, roll, and come up standing (it's not jousting armour!). And I've also seen too many GMs disallow things that they personally didn't think possible, despite being already achieved in the real world.
The Batavi (a Germanic tribe who took part in the Roman invasion of Britain) were noted for having soldiers swim across turbulent rivers in full armour. If a soldier can be trained to do it, a warrior in D&D should certainly be allowed a chance of success.
Indeed, this has happened. And swimming sure works with Japanese heavy armour.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLcT5J7yg9k
I remember there was a test with somebody swimming in plate, too, but was unable to find a video in short order.
Quote from: Moracai;841449Mine was in near the end of a year long D&D-type campaign I ran. The half-orc barbarian wanted to swim into a ship with his plate armor on.
He argued rules, and I told him that "I don't care if your Strenght is over 9000, you do not swim with a plate mail on."
I'd certainly allow it at the standard D&D penalties since its actually been done.
The thread at my armoury (http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=20316) here has a video link.
Also I second the folks here being allowed to sell ship shares in Traveller , heck i'd allow trades in them simply because its simpler to have one ship for most parties. As a house rule the event someone gets a scout ship or other kind that is not a "share" ship and its not that sort of game, I allow them to simply choose whatever they like from the list. It seems a fair trade.
In the event I didn't allow a trade i'd certainly allow it in game. Finding a buyer could make for a pretty interesting adventure
'Swimming' a whopping 10 feet with head under water the whole time isn't what I would actually call swimming. Also, what I count as a full plate has padding and chain under the plates. That dude did not have a full plate. A field plate at best.
My ruling stands.
In that thread you linked to the maker of the video says:
QuoteIf I owned a coat of maille I would be happy to try, but I think that walking would work, but swimming would be impossible. So much heavier, and a lot of drag.
Quote from: Moracai;843491'Swimming' a whopping 10 feet with head under water the whole time isn't what I would actually call swimming. Also, what I count as a full plate has padding and chain under the plates. That dude did not have a full plate. A field plate at best.
My ruling stands.
If they've pumped their swim skill to superhuman levels, are the amongst the strongest people in the world, and are a fantasy race, I'd want them to succeed.
I mean, amongst all the ridiculous things you can do in D&D, why pick the one thing with actual historical precedence to ban?
Because for this particular campaign I wanted to include a smidgeon of verisimilitude. This might not be the case in some other games I'd run. A few of you seem to think that swimming in full plate might be actually possible IRL. Go pull your heads out from your asses, please :)
Quote from: Moracai;843558Because for this particular campaign I wanted to include a smidgeon of verisimilitude. This might not be the case in some other games I'd run. A few of you seem to think that swimming in full plate might be actually possible IRL. Go pull your heads out from your asses, please :)
A smidgen of verisimilitude by preventing something that is to an extent actually possible in the real world? KEK
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;843343This is for 5e. To solve the problem of everybody always trying to roll for every check and thus trivializing the skill proficiencies, I take all the rolls as one effort (instead of just one needing to beat the DC) and if more than half beat the DC then it works.
I'm pretty sure that's the actual rule? Like if everyone is sneaking if half or more of them make the roll the group passes. I'm at work so I don't have the book handy...but, yeah. Pretty sure that's how it works.
Quote from: AxesnOrcs;843574A smidgen of verisimilitude by preventing something that is to an extent actually possible in the real world? KEK
Obvious troll is obvious
Quote from: Moracai;843583Obvious troll is obvious
No, I just think you are something of a jackass for over-riding a rule to fit your personal, and erroneous, sense of verisimilitude.
https://vimeo.com/13634653
Quote from: AxesnOrcs;843585No, I just think you are something of a jackass for over-riding a rule to fit your personal, and erroneous, sense of verisimilitude.
https://vimeo.com/13634653
If that dude fell into the ocean off the site of a boat, he'd drown in about two seconds.
Quote from: AxesnOrcs;843585No, I just think you are something of a jackass for over-riding a rule to fit your personal, and erroneous, sense of verisimilitude.
https://vimeo.com/13634653
Isn't the GM's job to be the authority on such things? If the GM hasn't seen certain YouTube spectable-demonstration videos (or has and still doesn't think it's reasonable in the game situation), it seems to me it's exactly what he's supposed to do, to provide the game universe's answer to how well certain tactics work or not, and to not give in to willful players who think they're right or not, even if it turns out eventually maybe they had a good point.
(Though when I do this, I try to stick to saying what is or isn't possible in the specific situation, rather than getting into a discussion about what is or isn't theoretically possible. I'd go with "Your character is sure he's going to sink to the bottom if he tries to swim in his armor." If the player insists, then roll dice and "It's not working! You're going to sink to the bottom unless you turn back now!" rather than "No one could ever swim in full plate.")
I think this GM also explained that even in the demo, the guy who did swim in armor said he thought he'd sink in chain, and this GM says full plate in his world means plate, chain and (soaked when swimming) padding, so it sounds like he's not even proven wrong.
Quote from: AxesnOrcs;843585No, I just think you are something of a jackass for over-riding a rule to fit your personal, and erroneous, sense of verisimilitude.
https://vimeo.com/13634653
What the fuck, man?!
You are linking to a video that has been linked to previously on this thread, with a link to the relevant discussion on armory forum, where the
maker of that video said that it would be impossible to swim in a mail, which happens to be part of a
full plate.
You seriously need to practice your reading skills...
Edit - I'm done with this line of discussion. Anybody eager to prove me wrong can go jump off a ship in a properly fastened metal armor.
Quote from: Moracai;843609What the fuck, man?!
You are linking to a video that has been linked to previously on this thread, with a link to the relevant discussion on armory forum, where the maker of that video said that it would be impossible to swim in a mail, which happens to be part of a full plate.
You seriously need to practice your reading skills...
Edit - I'm done with this line of discussion. Anybody eager to prove me wrong can go jump off a ship in a properly fastened metal armor.
A full plate harness is not worn over mail. It is worn over an arming doublet, which may have mail voiders sewn to the inside of the joints. But I am so sorry to bring up facts.
There is an accord from the conquest of Cyprus in the third crusade about an English nobleman fleeing to his ship while saracen archers shot at him. He jumped into the water, swam to the boat, and climbed upwards while being under attack. Medieval reports like these aren't particularly reliable, but at least to the contemporaries, the whole 'swimming in armor' thing seemed not completely implausible.
We have video evidence of people wearing some armour swimming a small distance, and historical accounts of people crossing rivers in full armour (whatever they mean by that).
Most of the accounts I've read of people who've worn armour don't say you'd sink immediately, they typically say you'd struggle and get exhausted really quickly, so you could maybe swim a few feet before sinking. It's not an "absolutely not" but "maybe a little way but I'm not trying it".
And the d20 rules actually cover this pretty well. DC 10 to swim in calm water, double the ACP, so full plate is -12. So someone untrained wearing armour is going to sink like a stone (even with a strength bonus).
But, with a good strength (half-orc barbarian Strength 20 +5), all the ranks into swim, so +5 at level 1, we're up to 5+5-12=-2. So we need to roll a 12 to swim for one round. That's a 45% chance of swimming for 6 seconds (20'). That pretty much matches with what the experts are saying. Chances of swimming for 30 seconds is 1.8%. Not high, but sometimes possible. Chance of swimming for a minute is 0.03%, which is unlikely. They'd tire quickly, as predicted.
So I'm not saying it's easy, even for someone who's the strongest half-orc in the tribe, who's been swimming their entire life. A good con and they might be able to hold their breath and keep going underwater for a bit until they reach the anchor and can climb up. A minute at half speed is 160'. Far enough to reach an anchored ship? I don't know how far out they typically stay. But possibly enough to give it a try.
Now factor in that armour designed to trap air as a floatation device *cough* +10 magic bonus to swim, a higher level half-orc barbarian who's stronger than just about any human who's ever lived, and who's really pissed off, then they're managing it if it's still water, but still failing if it's rough.
Frankly someone who's dedicated that much effort to being good at swimming and has magic to help them damn well deserves to be able to make it to a boat anchored off shore in calm waters.
Oh for fuck's sake. My own curiosity led me back to this discussion ;)
Batavi dudes were famous for crossing rivers in armor, but they were probably using some kind of flotation devices.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batavi_%28Germanic_tribe%29 (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batavi_%28Germanic_tribe%29)
The armor used back in those days didn't resemble anything like a knight's armor though.
What Beagle mentioned seems interesting. I tried searching stuff from 3rd crusade Cyprys, but didn't find that one. Anyone feel like they have better luck?
Anyways, as for the actual situation at the game table, the players just said that they'll use some other method, and the whole party got safely to the ship without any rolls. There was like a 2 second pause in the game because of my ruling.
Off topic but a denser being like a dwarf or orc might have a harder time swimming. Could be the reason for the tales of water being deadly to ogres or trolls. They simply cant swim being so dense.
but really. Whatever fits your campaign. Ive seen some where dwarves could not swim at all and sank like stones.
Back on topic.
Another one the DM for the game I am playing in overrode was the whole splitting of some of the armor feats into two. Such that you had to blow two feats to get certain bonuses. Shield mastery was the main case as it pertained to my characters shield use. That and the feat changed somewhat from the playtest. minor to be sure and only an issue for fringe cases. I am ok with things as they ended aside from the removal of shield mastery from being able to attack. We added that back in.
Quote from: Moracai;843491'Swimming' a whopping 10 feet with head under water the whole time isn't what I would actually call swimming. Also, what I count as a full plate has padding and chain under the plates. That dude did not have a full plate. A field plate at best.
My ruling stands.
I myself would allow it at the D&D rules granularity especially since anyone over 6th level or so is pushing superhuman and the rules are pretty punishing as is. Also full plate is IMO, YMMV something like a Milanese harness and doesn't include chain under it. That combination certainly was known and is possible but its non standard and given decent plate, utterly redundant. A good harness would stop basically any weapons except specialized armor piercers or attacks to weak spots anyway.
However In his own game, the GM is always right and its a perfectly reasonable ruling.
Quote from: 5 Stone Games;843690I myself would allow it at the D&D rules granularity especially since anyone over 6th level or so is pushing superhuman and the rules are pretty punishing as is.
I agree. I ran that game as an E6 variant. The one that puts the levelcap at 6th level (only feats are gained after that). When starting that pirate-themed campaign, I said to the players that nearly everyone uses light or medium armor onboard ships. Doing otherwise would be having a deathwish. I guess that the player wanted to test my resolve on those words I made nearly a year earlier.
In Traveller, I routinely over-ride the variable jump time rules. Mainly because they weren't there when I started back in '77.
Usually, I specify a jump takes exactly 7 x 24 hours = 168 hours; navigation skill can be applied to reduce that. Also if extra time is taken, then a fleet navigator, based on skill level, can get everyone in the task force at the destination together.
Just one rule as written that I dislike.
Quote from: Moracai;843702I agree. I ran that game as an E6 variant. The one that puts the levelcap at 6th level (only feats are gained after that). When starting that pirate-themed campaign, I said to the players that nearly everyone uses light or medium armor onboard ships. Doing otherwise would be having a deathwish. I guess that the player wanted to test my resolve on those words I made nearly a year earlier.
I like E6 best of all D&D variations save maybe some old school at low/mid since it covers the D&D experience to a high degree and has surprising verisimilitude. E8 is more I'm Batman! meets the feel of classic D&D which has it charms too
Under those situations I think your call was very good, No one is getting much swimming done at -10 (plus whatever encumbrance)
In truth its a tad generous to even allow it as I do given that say your PC is a Micheal Phelps clone in 3.5 his swim skill is at most 15 or so (skill focus swim, athletic feat, Stat of 16 max ranks in swim, l4 expert)
In theory he could swim but hey D&D and he is monolithically focused on swim as a skill. It might be more realistic to give him skill 13 (l2 expert, max ranks, plus the rest)
A normal PC, Joe the fighter might have swim 5 or 6, at DC15 check that's blub, blub, blub for either
Quote from: BillDowns;844046In Traveller, I routinely over-ride the variable jump time rules. Mainly because they weren't there when I started back in '77.
Usually, I specify a jump takes exactly 7 x 24 hours = 168 hours; navigation skill can be applied to reduce that. Also if extra time is taken, then a fleet navigator, based on skill level, can get everyone in the task force at the destination together.
Just one rule as written that I dislike.
Huh. I thought the rules were still exactly 1 week unless there was a fowl up.
Quote from: 5 Stone Games;844058Huh. I thought the rules were still exactly 1 week unless there was a fowl up.
Not in Mongoose Traveller, but I always make it exactly one week too.
Falling damage capping in D&D.
Spelljammers addition of a save vs death. But the burnup damage was the real gem. Falling from orbit to earthside on an earth class world? A total of 150d4 non-resistable fire damage and then 20d6 impact damage and then save vs death if you actually lived through all that.
We calculated the damage from falling into a Saturn or Jupiter size world. By the 12th turn just before impact you take 20480d4 damage... +20d6... and a save vs death...That is of course on top of the 10240d4 damage the turn before, and the 5120d4 the turn before that, and the 2560d4 the turn before that and... :jaw-dropping:
I wouldn't call such rules "stupid", but lately I have been writing about overriding all "YOU CAN'T" rules in D&D, as I mentioned in some other thread. So wizards can use any weapons and armor, everybody can cast spells (lie thieves, they have a chance of spell being reversed), anyone can turn undead if faithful enough, etc.
Also, I let abilities go beyond 20 in 5e, using diminishing returns.
Quote from: Eric Diaz;845606I wouldn't call such rules "stupid", but lately I have been writing about overriding all "YOU CAN'T" rules in D&D, as I mentioned in some other thread. So wizards can use any weapons and armor, everybody can cast spells (lie thieves, they have a chance of spell being reversed), anyone can turn undead if faithful enough, etc.
Haven't seen your other post, but I'm interested in your ideas;).
Quote from: AsenRG;845621Haven't seen your other post, but I'm interested in your ideas;).
Thanks!
I'm writing a series of posts on the subject, but so far I only got two. If you want to check them out, feel free to tell me what you think!
http://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com.br/2015/07/no-limits-d-part-i-classes.html
http://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com.br/2015/07/d-unleashed-part-ii-above-and-beyond.html
I tend to ignore rules about weapon restrictions, at least by class. There can be weapon taboos based on social class, though. And sometimes very specific ones by religion.