Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

The WORST Optional Rules in D&D (Extended) (Patreon)

Published:
2024-05-29 18:00:41
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Videos

Content

PDM focuses on five optional rules that will WRECK any game (or at least 4 of them will). Probably changing the thumbnail--because I LIKE D&D. "Even worse" gets so many views though. Feel free to suggest other titles.

Files

Previews only

Optional Rules

Comments

Bagel-Man

Excited to watch PDM!

Joel Guarna

Every time a bell rings, an Aasimar loses its wings. Brilliant.

NØKKEN_WAITS

"WOTC want to RUIN YOUR GAME with THESE RULES"

Tuska

Well said PDM. You are correct!

Eric Mason

The only time I can see sidekicks being a useable option is if you only have a couple players, so a party of two characters becomes a party of four characters. Maybe if there are three players and you're running the caves of carnage where numbers are pretty vital, but definitely not at any larger size though.

Jeff Heinen

100% agree with everything.

MrGunn

Dear Professor: You want my opinion you say; well you asked for it! I agree with you. Yes, all of it... I think D&D 5e will have even fewer human DMs willing to run it; so say hello to your new AI GM, Glee-Max! "I'm sorry Dan, I can't do that..." Great segment Professor, thanks again! Best, MrGunn PS: So I guess this is the seven weeks of feasting before your summer begins and we have the seven weeks of famine. Party on Garth!

Bryan Stephens

That was the most compelling ad ever

A Name Apart

I named my character "Zelda" and the game rewarded me by becoming much much harder

Timothy S Wattigny

Grids forever! (except when combat is purely narrative and the dice don't matter)

SJBehindtheScreen

Yeah, I'm agreeing with all of that. Except. My table likes grids, we enjoy the time-dragging tactics of it. Play what works!

Evil Chad

BOOM! Drop the Mic. Thanks as always, PDM.

Jeff Jones

Spellcasters should be looking up their spells before their turn. That way when it is their turn, they're ready to go and don't hold up the game's progress.

Elvis Ramone

"SO Funking Slow!" Five Stars

JoePest

I’ve introduced UDT in my Deathbringer & Shadowdark campaigns. I’ve found that it works great for dark places and interiors, but I like to break out the grid for daytime encounters in outdoor places.

MrGunn
>>139339324

@Bryan Stephens Yes, I am purchasing some 'Insert Ad' as I write this.

Kyle (saint)

My Aasimar players have to earn their wings. No freebies.

MrGunn
>>139336469

@Eric Mason You make a very good point, I think you are correct, with a small play group of one or two, sidekicks make sense.

Lemonsaurus

Hi Professor, I never have played with PCs that could fly but I've always felt like your hard stance against flight was a personal bias. This is your best explanation of why it takes so much away from the game and it's excellent. There are so many interesting encounters that involve the threat of falling a great height, I never really considered it like this before. You could add a threat of archers that can shoot down anything that flies, but it would seem pretty contrived putting them in every scenario you want a bridge or a collapsing tower or a pit or any other type of threat of falling, similar to having pass through walls spells that simply don't work in certain dungeons.

Brad and Aidan

Don't just limit the optional rules! I led a 2-year 5e campaign without a DMG. Just the PHB and YouTube videos. And I don't think anybody really missed the stuff I never knew.

Robyn Derme

Grids: I'm sorry PDM, but as a DM in a group whose core are players who have been playing together since the early 80's, grids are old-habit for us. Yes, we also use theater of the mind abstract positioning for some encounters but to truly engage the group in a combat encounter, the first thing they do is "clear the matt" (the Chessex Battle matt that doubles as a tablecloth. ;-) Now Feats...yea, I agree that many are OP, but my players (especially the ones who played WoW) love them and it is their game too...so I sigh, refer to the other grognards, who simply shrug "whatever" and the feats are Game On!. Sidekicks (and pets)? Only Monks get sidekicks (PUN!) and pets are tiny to small critters that get left at home, unless you're playing a druid (groan) who's into wandering the mean streets of Waterdeep or spelunking the Undermountain. Flying PC Races: Unless it's a spell, flight it's not very useful in my Waterdeep / Undermountain campaign, and none of my players have ever even inquired about playing a winged race. Multi-Classing: With the addition of the 3rd Level Archetype/Path/Circle/etc, I have yet to have a PC inquire about multi-classing. This surprises me, because of the plethora of multi-class characters in 3.5e. (I once played an 11th-level replacement PC who had 1 level in 11 different classes, AND each class had its own unique personality. AND the DM would roll randomly, especially in stressful situations, to see which Class/Personality would emerge. The players referred to him as "Sparky the Wonder-Guy". He was fun, until one Player had enough and killed him during a lesser boss battle, for no other reason than the player was annoyed.

MrGunn
>>139375068

@Robyn Derme If your group likes the grid, you keep on gridding. However, try an experiment and introduce UDT for a couple of sessions. Explain you are going to ease up on the 'tactical wargame' aspects of the game, and see how your players respond. Of course you will need to adjust your GM approach too. However, you may find the combats are faster and more cinematic.

samurguybri

I’m ok with multi-classing, even on the occasion I run 5E. They still have to split xp to level up in my game. So they can do more but suck at it.

Robyn Derme

I have gone gridless, not to the UDT 'extreme' but more of a DM-arranged free flow. And it's works okay for smaller encounters, but the Players just want to default to a Tactical Grid for bigger encounters,

Jim Havoc

At 9:45 you say "Inspiration, that's a great rule . . . . I don't know how that came to me." Awesome!

Bryan Stephens

Now, as I have a bit more time, my actual thoughts. My group loves the grid for tactical games. Playing Champions, much of the game are superhero fights. The powers are all tuned to the tactical map and a big part of the fun is how to interact with the environment to make things happen. When we use the Hero system for lower power levels, the use of the hex map is a lot less important. For Pathfinder, we tend to use maps for combat, but not always. Our last fight had something akin to zones to speed things up (two fights were going on in different places). For Call of Cthulhu we do all theater of the mind. For Travaller we go back and forth depending on the fight and if we have a map. So we like tactical fights and combat. Except when we don't. I totally agree with the biggest possible point: Saying "No". I stopped a player in a high level pathfinder game who loves to power game. He is a great guy . He just loves to plumb the rules and squeeze out of them everything he can. This can cause imbalances. Following rules as written for Pathfinder (1e) he upped the power of a cloak. I asked him point blank if that was just to do a bit more damage. He owned it and I told him on the spot that damage did not land and to take that off his cloak. Another time, after leveling, the same player had a power that let him use a rouge talent to jack up his effective AC 8 over the main fighter and 10 over the party average. I told him "No" on the spot and said why. I can see why GMs don't want to do that sort of thing, and frankly, it is a lot of work to keep on top of all those feats and permutations and the power creep we see. One walking away on this was to not allow any of the "Ultimate" classes. Great episode.

MrGunn
>>139425027

@Bryan Stephens Great insights, however, Pathfinder 2e has 23 classes and 40 'ancestries', D&D 5e has 13 classes and 123 sub-classes and 9 playable races. Given the preponderance of character permutations and rules crunch of games like Pathfinder 2e and D&D 5e, all these permutations are easy for min/max power gamers to exploit. No one, neither GM nor players can be expected to keep up with the non-sense. I predict, class proliferation will only get worse, they cannot redesign the base game, they can only add tweaks. Like fast-food burger joints, expect more abominations like: the Swiss cheese and onion, pepperoni, jack-fruit baconator, with BBQ sriracha sauce Impossible Burger to become the norm.

Bryan Stephens
>>139425027

Well, I specifically mentioned Pathfinder 1e, which is based on 3.5. We find that limiting classes and rules to Core Rules and Advanced Player's guide deals with most of the power creep. And, as I said, as GM, I just say "No". We have played Pathfinder 2e some, mostly because we wanted to explore the Blood Lords Adventure Path. We happen to like long stories and modify them as we go. The consensus we have on 2e is that it is too much like a video game. While I imagine there are ways to break 2e, it is clear it is much, much more tightly wound, with game balance as its god. The player choices are highly controlled. The GM in this game (not me) is making rulings quite a bit to get around silliness in the system. For a game clearly designed to avoid rulings, not a vote of confidence. I cannot speak to 5e as I have barely played it. What I love about the Hero System (4th Ed) is that with point builds you can see exactly what someone can do. I can remember all the rules and don't need to look up all those exceptions. The game even comes with Magnifying Glasses and Stop Signs as warnings. Also, with point builds, the escalation to being a demi-god does not happen. My bottom line is that the GM has to be in control and set the limits. And. The players need to accept limits. PS: I agree with you about class proliferation. I don't really like classes anyway.

MrGunn
>>139425027

@Bryan Stephens Thanks for such a great response. From you love of the Hero system it sounds like you prefer a bit of crunch with your rules, have you ever played GURPS?

Bryan Stephens
>>139425027

I have a bit. I was not a fan as too much was game dependent. With Hero, I don't actually need any supplements at all. The Big Blue Book let me do it all. Supplements were work done for me which was nice, but I did not need them the way GURPS worked, at least in the 90s. No idea on now. And we are not doing a Hero game at the moment. Two Pathfinders (1 and 2e) and a Travaller. (Mongoose). Yes, I like crunchy games. Being bounded by rules unlocks my creativity.

Bryan Stephens
>>139377090

This is what I liked about AD&D and 3.0+. You can multiclass. but it slows you down. I had a blast playing a Mystic Thurge in 3.5, but man, it took forever to get the good spells.

Michael Vetor

I was happy to learn that your Top 3 were my Top 3. I barred Feats years ago, cut the grid in the last year, and multiclassing is on the chopping block. Thanks for the video!

Jay

PDM, it’s rare I agree with everything in your videos yet this time I simply must agree with you 100% specifically with D&D 5E only. 1. Sidekicks: They are nothing short of a pain in the ass. They slow things down and over complicate things for both the player and GM in tracking the sidekicks’ actions, position, HP, and all that mess. 2. Flying: Completely derails the railroading….umm directing the players toward the session objectives….kidding…sort of. Anyway, it complicates for sure. Especially, if the objective is in the high tower. 3. Multiclassing: Yes! It is simply an attempt at power gaming. It can, however, hinder the character’s development and may not really achieve what the player wants if both their classes do not advance simultaneously. LeeLu Dallas (5th Element) says so. 4. Feats: Specifically D&D 5E Feats are unbalanced and they don’t make sense to me. Those who enjoy them can go enjoying them. However, I like the concept of Perks and Feats. They seem to work in other games such as Savage Worlds and Five Torches Deep just not D&D 5E. 5. Grids: I agree that it is difficult to see a game being both tactical AND cinematic by using a grid. DM Scotty convinced me to get rid of grids in terrain years ago in addition to using UDT and Runehammer’s zones of CLOSE, NEAR, and FAR work much better. Rough estimates in distance are better for cinematic games. Much better than saying “Well you would have made it behind cover if it just weren’t just one more square away.” I call BS and say you make it behind cover but are out of breath. A good tool for measurement is the BAAA NAAA NAAA…as the minions say. Exception – Savage Worlds and Savage Worlds for Pathfinder have Edges (Similar to Feats and Classes). Savage Worlds does not require Characters to have a Class. However, they do have optional Edges that allow for both Classes as well as individual Feats. These Edges (Feats) are well balanced and do not make Characters overpowered. Taking a Class Edge, for example, gives the Character all the advantages (Edges) of that class in addition to its disadvantages (Hinderances) that Class. So, a Character with both Fighter and Magic User Edges might not be allowed to wear armor to cast spells and must choose the one or two things they might get when they advance to the next Rank (Level). This makes it much more difficult to be a power gamer. Also, I prefer DM Scotty’s “LUCK DICE” in place of Proficiency Dice and Inspiration.

Smarting

I want to point out in regards to your "imagine if someone writes down 'Max' as character name and declares he can do X"-Argument: You have yourself made the point in a previous video, that you would ignore or change difficulties, if a player makes a movie stunt and points out that he plays a character like Jack Reacher/John Wick/some other "Invincible White Guy". And Games like FATE work exactly like that! It is better to argue, that you don't like the fiction, these rules try to imitate. Because, they are not rules for Pulp Fantasy like Conan or for High Fantasy like Lord of the Rings, but for Superhero Fantasy like Dragon Quest. It contradicts the Generic Verisimilitude (not the same as Cultural Verisimilitude, which you usually use the term for), you try to recreate with your playstyle.