The default method of rolling dice to determine ability scores, while charming and nostalgic, is absurd. Consider the following:

• Do PCs have to roll these dice in the presence of the DM? If so, how can they ever create characters outside a session? If not, how do you determine if they are faithfully recording their rolls?
• Assuming PCs are perfectly trustworthy and reliable, are only the first-rolled stats valid? What if they are terrible? Should a PC be forced to play a terrible character? What's stopping them from immediately committing suicide, then re-rolling a new character?
• In which alternate reality is it fair that one PC might have a character with all 8s and another with all 18s?
• Are you supposed to keep track of your original rolls, plus any fudging that occurred along the way, plus racial mods, plus stat adds, etc? Most character sheets have no place for this, supporting only the final 6 scores. What if you forget a step? How do you know if you forgot to add two +1s at level 8? Or if you entered your racial modifiers wrong?

D&D is a game designed by disorganized hippies. Thankfully, latter-day entries added a few alternatives, such as "point buy" and the "standard array". These are, unfortunately, flawed. Consider:

• Why charge more points for a higher score? In what way is it desirable to have weak fighters, stupid wizards, and foolish clerics?
• Is it not obvious that standard point buy strongly incentivizes "jack-of-all-trades" characters with the infamous 14-14-14-14-14-10 spread? Is it not boring and pointless to have all PCs have that spread?
• Perhaps the weighting is due to a desire to balance the method against rolled stat characters. Are they assuming DMs allow multiple stat methods in one game? That seems like a recipe for chaos. Organized play requires point buy or standard array. That would seem to eliminate the need to "compete" against the die roll method. Also, consider all criticisms of the die roll method above.

For the last 15 years or so, I've advocated for "unweighted point buy". The system is clearly built around linear growth formulae, and unweighted point buy fits the bill perfectly. Furthermore, 20 unweighted is mechanically similar to the standard 32 unweighted, but allows characters to have one or two exceptional stats (which, frankly, the game requires them to have).

In 3rd edition, all characters, regardless of class, progressed in a predictable, linear manner along several power axes: Base Attack Bonus, Fort/Ref/Will Save, number of Feats, Skill Points, Hit Points, number of attacks/rd, etc.

In 5th edition, several of these mechanics were moved into class descriptions. In my opinion, this was done to "busy up" the class tables to make it seem like classes granted more abilities than they do. Consider the following:

• Every single class table includes an entry for "proficiency bonus", despite this being a core mechanic which has an identical level-based value for all classes.
• Fighting classes have a "bonus attack" ability of some kind, loosely approximating the extra attacks based on Base Attack Bonus in 3e. This has been arbitrarily denied to several fighting classes, and arbitrarily capped at 2 attacks, for no apparent reason.
• Feats officially exist in the SRD, despite not being allowed by default, and having only one entry. The PHB feats are actually not too shabby, but, alas, are disallowed by default, and relegated to a DM's option.
• Skill selection is baked into classes, despite the usefulness of "proficiency" in a skill being highly dubious with 5e's very, very modest proficiency bonuses. In 3e, proficiency in a skill typically meant +4 at level 1 and up to +20 at level 20. Now it means +2 at level 1 and +6 at level 20. And yet, it's still apparently quite important to make sure Wizards can't use Stealth and Rogues can't use Arcana.

Even if all of these were acceptable, there is one single, unforgivable consequence of these decisions, in my opinion: most PCs have almost no choices to make after level 1. Apart from spellcasters--the ever-privileged golden children of D&D--everyone chooses a class and a path at level 1, then...nothing. Ever.

5e Advanced allows all PCs, regardless of class, to gain new skills and feats as they advance, and to branch into new paths--or enhance existing ones--as they see fit.

Also, the proficiency bonus is higher, because seriously fuck +2 at level 1. Fuck you, WotC. Fuck.

I could go into a lot of detail here, but I'll just say this. I've been fucking with D&D rules since 1998. I've made dozens of alternate systems and hundreds of alternate feats, spells, classes, etc. And by far...by FAR...the best idea I've ever come across is Action Points. If D&D took nothing from all of my experience except for Action Points, I'd be perfectly happy.

Spell slots. Sigh.

I'm not really sure what the argument for spell slots is. I guess I'll play devil's advocate:

• No math required
• Uh...

Here's why they suck:

• In both 3e and 5e, the mechanic for how many slots you get per level is always some sort of growth formula scaling with level, delayed by spell level. So maybe you get 1-2-2-3-3-3-4... (3e wizard) or 3-4-5-6... (3e sorcerer), or even 5e's more complicated nonsense. Either way, you have anemic spellcasting at the lowest levels, but before you even get to level 10, you have an amount of spell slots you can't even cast. The Mana system offers something like 25% as many spells per day at level 20. It's just mathematically absurd.
• Spell slots make no sense. The leaps of logic required to explain what's happening in-game are ridiculous. The magic enters your brain from a book, then disappears the moment you cast it? What's going on? Mana is an incredibly simple system, and the most intuitive of all possible systems...which is why it is used by every single RPG in existence *except* D&D.

More importantly, the concrete advantages of Mana:

• Mana is a very simple system. Your max Mana = some number based on level, class, and ability scores. You spend it when you cast spells. At 0, you're out of magic. It works exactly like Hit Points, a time-honored, proven mechanic.
• Metamagic is a giant pain in the ass with spell slots. "If you cast this spell with a 3rd-level slot, it does +1d8 fire damage. With a 4th-level slot, it does +2d8. Etc." Wtf? How about this: "Any damaging spell whatsoever can be empowered. For each +1 mana you spend, add +1 die." Write it down once, it's usable for all spells everywhere.
• Spell slots are a complete non-starter for multiclassing. They fuck it up so bad that 5e banned multiclassing entirely. Meanwhile, Mana works perfectly. Again, it works exactly like Hit Points. Suppose you have 5 levels of wizard (2 Mana/level). You take one level of Sorcerer (3 Mana/level). How much Mana do you have from classes? 13. Duh. That was easy.

You've sat through 25 minutes of other people's turns. You've read through every book you have, to make absolutely sure of the wording of the rules. You've rehearsed the words you plan to say a dozen times. Your turn comes up. You make your move. Your enemies are doomed! They ought not have trifled with the likes of you!

Then you roll a 4.

Look, dice are part of D&D. If nothing else is sacred, dice are. I get that. A natural 20 or natural 1 at the right moment can pivot the whole story and become a moment to remember for years to come.

But there are 20 faces on an icosahedron, and 90% of them are boring.

D&D has decided that 2-9 are worthless numbers. An odd choice, considering that accounts for 45% of all possible d20 rolls. Every DC starts at 10. Every single one. Which means an average joe, without special training, has an absolute minimum 50% failure chance at every action, and it only gets worse from there.

Imagine that. Turning left through a busy intersection? 50% chance to crash. Tying your shoes? 50% chance to bungle it. Trying to recall the most basic information relevant to your situation (e.g. "who is the president? what state do you live in? what color is the sky?")? 50% failure chance.

Obviously, DMs can prevent this sort of asinine nonsense (not that they ever do), but the root of the problem is the all-too-human desire for balance and numerical niceness. A d20 rolls 1-20, so 10 must be the root of all numbers. Sure. Why not? Yay for failure.

The discussion on how to fix the d20 system's mathematical flaws could easily consume the remainder of mankind's time on this planet. However, consider this:

• Focus lets you reroll a few failed dice every day.

Simple solutions ftw.

If rolling stats is stupid, rolling Hit Points is pants-on-head retarded. (I'm allowed to say that because I have special-needs children)

Consider:

• What if you roll all 1s?
• What if you roll all maximum rolls?
• Who is policing these rolls? Is the DM sanctioning each an every roll? How are they recording it?
• I've never...EVER...seen a rolled-HP character who didn't have SUBSTANTIALLY higher HP than average. Ever.
• No organized play allows HP rolling.

This is a stupid, stupid, stupid mechanic. It should have been abolished in 1st edition. The only reason to keep it around is some sort of neckbeard-fanboy-douche nostalgia, an appeal to the Comic Book Nerd archetype.

TEAR. DOWN. THIS. WALL.

Already noted above. In brief:

• PCs should have meaningful choices each level. Choosing all skills at level 1, then no more forever, is the opposite of that.
• Class choice shouldn't lock you into skill choice. Certain skills are obviously going to mesh well with certain classes. If a PC really wants to break the mold, they should be allowed to.
• The proficiency bonus system eliminates the sky-high skill modifiers at high level in 3e (DC 105 perform check, anyone?), and that's good. But it'd still be nice to have some meaningful advancement after level 1--thus, expertise and mastery.

This one is pretty simple. Consider this:

• How many cantrips does a level 5 wizard know? A level 9 cleric?
• How many 3rd levels spells does a level 6 sorcerer know? How about 4th-level spells at level 12?
• How many weapon specializations does a fighter have? How many favored enemies does a ranger have?

The answer to all of these is "read the entire class description". These kinds of rules are always class-specific, and if they do follow a formula, it's vague, secret, and more of a guideline than a rule.

Skill alternatives were originally conceived as a dump for excess skill points for PCs who don't want more skills as they level. However, I think they are best served as answers to the above. Any time there is something "skill like" about a class which is adequate when introduced, and could conceivably grow over time (but doesn't strictly need to), skill alternatives make perfect sense.

So...yeah.

In 3e, there was a core attribute for Base Attack Bonus, and derived attributes for Touch Attack, Ranged Touch Attack, etc.

In 5e, there are...no, wait, before I tell you, gun to your head: tell me the formula for a spell attack without looking it up. Seriously. The system's been live for 3 years. Tell me how to calculate a DC. What do you add to the d20 when casting a touch spell? Ranged spell? HOW DOES THIS WORK?

Yeah. This is a fucking shitshow. For all their bluster on simplification (this is a system where wizards and fighters have equal modifiers to weapon attacks), they've completely shit the bed on these mechanics.

Here's how they have it:

• All skills checks are uber-simple. Roll 1d20. Add the designated ability modifier. If proficient, add proficiency bonus. Done. (Wow, that's really simple!)
• Weapon attack? Same thing. Roll 1d20. Add Strength (or Dex, if it's a finesse weapon and you've chosen to use Dex). Add proficiency if you're proficient with the weapon. Done. (Holy shit, this is some admirable consistency)
• Spell attack? Well, uh...that depends. Is it ranged? Like some sort of ray? Then I guess you roll 1d20 + Dex? Right? Or do you use your spellcasting mod? Are you proficient?
• Oh, there's something called a "spellcasting attack bonus". It uses your spellcasting ability modifier (given by your class) plus proficiency. Okay. But it only applies to "some spells" (quoting from the SRD). Um...which spells? Oh, and "Remember that you have disadvantage on a ranged attack roll if you are within 5 feet of a hostile creature that can see you and that isn’t incapacitated.". Remember that! It's buried incredibly deep in the minutiae of the SRD, but remember it. It's super important.
• Turns out spells that aren't "some spells" just automatically hit, because it's super easy to place a 20-ft sphere in an exact x/y/z coordinate 150 feet away from you using a human's depth perception. Fine. So do you use that attack roll? Of course not! It's time for an entirely different mechanic, the spell DC!

Now, I've got to step aside here and talk about Dex saves (aka Reflex saves, aka Save vs Breath Weapon, aka...).

In the beginning, there were just dudes wearing chainmail smacking each other with maces. The system allowed for lots of variables in both offensive and defensive capability, based on weapons, armor, tactics, terrain, etc.

Then, some fool added monsters. Pretty soon, there were dragons in them thar dungeons. And they had 12d8 fire damage breath weapons. And people got mad when the DM just rolled a couple dice and killed them. And why not? It's pretty lame. If you can just roll some dice and declare the PC dead, with said PC having absolutely no options or recourse whatsoever, you're basically playing Calvinball. Why not simply declare "I got you!" to which the PC replies "No you didn't!", then you say "Uh huh!" and he says "Nuh uh!" ad infinitum.

Clearly, a solution was needed. And that solution was Action Points.

Seriously. I'm sorry Gary and Dave. You were great. Your ideas were awesome. But you should have thought of AP. They solve SO MANY FUCKING PROBLEMS. OH MY GOD. Jesus fucking christ. The amount of shitty, awful, terrible rules added to D&D over the decades simply because nobody thought of AP is mind-boggling.

Consider this:

• The dragon breathes fire on the PCs. The system doesn't require attack rolls for area effects for some reason, so the attack automatically hits, bypassing the entirely super-complicated system for determining if things hit.
• The DM rolls 37 fire damage. The wizard, having only 22 HP, is apparently dead.

Option 1: saving throws.

• The wizard rolls a Save vs Breath Weapon, which, according to the arcane calculations made by eternally tormented misbehaving CPAs in hell, for a level 6 wizard, is 16. Okay, whatever. He rolls less than 16 (predictably), and turns into a pile of ash. Yay, he got to roll a die before dying.
• Okay, so 2e sucks. Now it's 3e. Instead of an arbitrary, seemingly random number, his Reflex save is 1d20 +2 (Reflex is a "bad save" for wizards) +3 (this wizard has a high Dex, because of course he does, it's the obvious second stat for wizards in 3e). A +5! But...against what? Well, the dragon has a DC. Okay. And for monsters, we use the simple formula of 10 + floor(HD/2) + Con bonus. What's an HD? Hit Dice, of course? What's a Hit Dice? HAHAHAHAHAFUCKYOU.
  • Anyway, the dragon's DC is, like, 16. A random, arbitrary number. Hmm, where have I seen those before? Anyway, the wizard will fail on a 1-10, instead of a 1-15, so that's progress, I guess. He rolls a 12...and passes! Yay! Of course, it was a save for half, so he still takes 18 damage, which leaves him a sitting duck next round, and he dies anyway.
• Okay, now it's 5e. The whole "good save / bad save" idea was...bad, in some way? I guess? So this wizard is now rolling a "Dex" save, not a "Reflex" save, because changing the name makes it different! So he rolls 1d20 + 3 (Dex) + 0 (proficiency, because of course he isn't proficient at Dex saves, not that he had any choice in the matter). And the dragon's DC? Well, now, instead of being determined by a semi-predictable formula, it's determined by unknown voodoo conducted by unknown people and recorded as an arbitrary quantity in the DMG. So we're right back to square one. What the fuck ever, WotC.
  • Moving on, the DC for a monster of his level is 15 (for real). Okay, so he fails on a roll of 1-11. Not much has changed, really. A whole lot of number-crunching to distinguish between a 50%, 55%, or 75% failure chance. Oooh. Impressive.
  • Again, this is a save for half damage. Why? Not sure. Every save that isn't Dex is a save to negate (more or less). Why is Dex just "half effect"? A save against Dominate Person doesn't make you half dominated? What the fuck is going on here?

Consider this alternative:

• The dragon attacks a bunch of PCs with a breath weapon. It is considered to be "proficient" with a breath weapon, because it was born with the damn thing. Being a physical ability, the default mod is Con. So the dragon rolls 1d20 + 3 (proficiency bonus) + 4 (con bonus). Rolls a 10, gets a 17. Great.
• Now you can go one of three ways here. I honestly don't care which.
  • PCs can roll a Dex save to negate (or halve, I guess, for no reason) the damage, DC 17.
  • PCs can rely on armor, which stops every kind of physical attack that is considered a "weapon", so why can't it stop flames? Treat it as an attack vs AC 17.
  • PCs are just hit for full damage, because fuck you. Spend some AP if you want to evade.
• Pick one. The point is, it's much, much simpler, and the numbers are easily predicted and make sense to humans.
  • Personally, I prefer the AC method, or the "fuck you you're hit" method, because who has time to roll 47 saving throws? Just because a fireball hit 47 monsters doesn't mean it wasn't a single attack. If I swing a sword once, that's one die roll. The targets don't have their own die roll to resist. That would take FOREVER to resolve. Roll to hit AC 15. You hit? Roll damage. The end.
  • And can that be mean to PCs? Sure! Whether it's a sword or a breath weapon, it sucks to be insta-killed without any recourse. And you know what? It fucking sucks 99.99% as much to have only one recourse, which is to roll a single, random die roll (which will probably fail) to mitigate or negate the whole thing. THUS, ACTION POINTS.

Saves only exist because Action Points didn't. At this point, I think all saves against simple damage are stupid and should just go away. Save or die? Sure, why not. Save or lose control? That's fine, but "save ends" is more mechanically simple and interesting.

So here we have it. If you cast a spell--any spell at all, period--you roll a single skill check (1d20 + proficiency (of course you're proficient, you just cast the damn thing) + spellcasting ability modifier), and that determines what AC you hit, what the DC was, and whatever else is numerically required. No more magic formulae.

My fucking browser deleted this entire section. Here's the short, short version:

• PCs are creative. History isn't. Let PCs express themselves with their weapon and armor choices, but also let them comprehend the rules of the game. Simplified weapon stats accomplish this.
• Multiple attacks/rd is a waste of time. Want fighters to hit harder? Add damage dice.
• Dual wielding is unrealistic. Forget reality and balance it around fun and playability. No more arbitrary, impossible-to-remember penalties.