Ed Stark's thoughts on the Complete Warrior and other 3.5 topics

MerricB · Dec 4, 2003

G'day people!

Browsing on the Wizards boards, and I came upon this thread, where Ed Stark gives some insights into The Complete Warrior.

Interesting was this quote:
Ed: I'm pleased you folks like the book! If there's anything in particular you like about it and would like to see replicated in future books (particularly, but not limited to, future "Complete" books), please don't hesitate to post suggestions!

Also interesting:

Querent: ...my only question is whether or not there will be a comprehensive list of "DELETED" prestige classes and Core Classes that WotC determines should not exist in 3.5.

Ed: Good question. I tried to address that briefly in the introduction to Complete Warrior . Any character class or prestige class or feat or other option you think is appropriate for your game is appropriate. Anything you don't like, you shouldn't use.

We modified certain game elements in CW not only because we felt they needed modification, but because we received enough interest in them to pursue a 3.5 update.

There are definitely 3.0 prestige classes, feats, and other game elements out there I would just as soon see drop out of D&D (for a variety of reasons), but I don't feel so strongly about those opinions that I feel the need to compile such an official list. I certainly didn't put anything in CW I wasn't happy with, but there are almost certainly game elements that got left out not because we didn't like them but because they either didn't fit or couldn't be made ready for the release. That doesn't mean they aren't useful for 3.5.

I'll think about this question some more and try to get back to you with further thoughts as I have them.

And in this thread:

Ed:Thrown weapons aren't really an optimal choice in D&D. The prestige class optimizes them somewhat because there are a bunch of us who think that hucking around big rocks or whipping razor-thin daggers is pretty cool.

A lot of the prestige classes in this book were designed--or revised--with that sort of thing in mind. Take an interesting but mechanically sub-optimal choice and make it more interesting and at least on par with other choices. I look forward to reading peoples' takes on the different classes and optimization ideas.

Hope you find this interesting.

Cheers!

darkbard · Dec 4, 2003

thanks merric! this kind of info is always interesting.

MerricB · Dec 4, 2003

A few more snippets from searching the Wizards boards:

Ed: (this thread):
When we first did the new edition of the game, we picked out 11 archetypical class concepts we wanted to support, and we felt it was important to continue to be clear and concise in what could, and should, make up a base class in D&D. The system was new to us, too, and as you've seen there were definitely things we felt we needed to learn about the system and how it would play in the real world before we tinkered with certain core concepts.

After a few years and a revision to the core rules, we feel more comfortable with the idea of introducing a wider variety of choices into the game. Part of this is due to our experiences with designing new D&D product, but lots of d20 product (including our own) have tried new things we're eager to test out in D&D. Call of Cthuhlu d20, d20 Modern , Wheel of Time , and a lot of d20 product from other publishers have introduced new class identities. We want to try some things out in D&D.

We've also learned a lot about prestige class design, too. Some of the restrictions we placed on prestige classes don't seem to be as meaningful anymore and we're testing assumptions. I think that some of the new classes and prestige classes you'll see in books like Complete Warrior and the Miniatures Handbook will be pretty interesting. Some of them might push the envelope too far, but I think the majority of them will be interesting additions to your game. We won't know until we try.

On Using 3.0E Material with 3.5E: (this thread)
I just had what I thought would be a helpful idea. If you're going to run a 3.0 adventure (or, heck, use a 3.0 product at all) with the 3.5 rulebooks, what are the "Top 10" (and you don't have to feel restricted either way by the number) things you should take into account?

Also, what are the "Top 10" things you shouldn't worry about if you use 3.0 material in a 3.5 game.

Let me throw a few ideas out there:

Top Ten Look Fors
Monster CRs: Some monsters changed power level when going from 3.0 to 3.5. If you use a 3.0 monster as written up it might not, in many cases, be as tough as its 3.5 version. It certainly won't use the 3.5 DR rules, and some of its spell like or supernatural abilities may be more or less powerful, but if you're running it from 3.0 stats, it's still a D&D monster.

PC Capabilities: You should be aware that some character classes have more/different class abilities. If your PCs can do things you don't know about, it could surprise you. Familiarize yourself with each PCs' abilities.

Spell Lists: Many spellcasting encounters were built with 3.0 capabilities in mind. If, for example, you see a creature that's supposed to have bull's strength on it all the time, the duration's shorter now. You might want to account for that by giving the creature a magic item or forcing it to cast the spell during combat. Check out the spell lists and see if there are any major differences; since spells are descibed in the PH, you shouldn't have much trouble.

Top Ten Don't Worries
NPC Capabilities: You've got all the capabilities for the NPC in front of you, in the stat block. If you run a 3.0 monk or bard, your players might not even notice; you probably don't need to convert them unless you feel the character is going to be recurring and will progress along with the party.

New Spells: Your 3.0 casters won't have many of the new spells. So what? They don't have any of the spells from, oh, Tome and Blood either. Add 'em in as you see fit, or swap 'em out--or don't use them.

Magic Items: I wrestled with this one a little bit, but it came down to if an NPC has a magic item that got reworked, chances are good you can use the 3.5 version without missing a beat. The names didn't change in every case I can remember. There might be a few wonky stats (hello, boots of striding and springing ), but when that occurs it'll be "behind the screen" anyway. If you take a quick glance at the 3.5 versions you should be able to make quick calls on whether an upgrade is necessary--and it probably isn't for purposes of an encounter. When your PCs get the item, give them the 3.5 version.

On Adventure Modules for 3.5: (this thread)

I strongly recommend Dungeon magazine as a source for D&D adventures. The guys who work at Paizo coordinate with our RPG staff on a regular basis, and many of the adventures written there are written by authors who have done work for Wizards RPG R&D. They really understand D&D and they're comfortable with the rules set.

As for Wizards publishing adventures, we will occasionally do some but while we really love writing them, the effort that goes into them isn't usually reflected in their sales. A strong super adventure (like Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil or City of the Spider Queen is usually much more resource-intensive to produce than a similarly-sized sourcebook or accessory and doesn't usually sell nearly as well.

Shorter adventures usually only do well when they're linked to something very specific. When we released The Sunless Citadel , it was the first full-length 3.0 adventure and it did extraordinarily well. The later adventures in the series experienced typical series dropoff.

Right now, I have to say that Dungeon is a great value for you and for us. Because of the magazine format, you get (usually) a couple or even several strong D&D adventures for less cost than one adventure from virtually anywhere else. Even those tiny little 16 pagers I've seen around are priced only a little bit under a full-length Dungeon magazine. Add to that the more important consideration--quality--and I think you've got an excellent source of adventure material.

On the D&D RPG staff: (this thread):

Charles Ryan is the Category Manager for RPGs (and was previously an editor focusing on d20 Modern and Star Wars, but with D&D experience). Charles will be joining our business team, and I'll let him introduce the rest of those folks if he wishes.

On the R&D side, Andy Collins, Bruce Cordell, James Wyatt, David Noonan, Rich Baker, and Jesse Decker (all of whom you may have seen frequenting these boards) are RPG designers (Andy and Rich also do development duty).

Andrew Finch is our Development Manager, while Chris Perkins and I are the Design Managers for d20 products and D&D, respectively. Mike Donais is one of our developers and miniatures-focused people, while Jonathan Tweet is the Design Manager for minis and Rob Heinsoo is the lead designer.

Kim Mohan is our senior Managing Editor, while Gwendolyn F.M. Kestrel is also a Managing Editor (late of editing fame). Michele Carter is also a Senior Editor focusing on RPGs. Bill Slavicsek is, of course, our boss, the Director of RPG and Miniatures Design and Development.

There are other staff who work on the R&D side of RPGs, plus several other wizards staff members who frequenty the RPG boards.

Hope you find these quotes interesting!

Cheers!

Felon · Dec 4, 2003

Good stuff, Merric. Dunno what happened to my WotC membership, but I'll be putting in my two cents as soon as I get that darn account activiation email that just seems to be taking its own sweet time.

Son_of_Thunder · Dec 4, 2003

Good job Merric

Merric,

You're freakin' amazing. Thanks for the info. I, like yourself, can't wait for the new basic to come out next year.

Son of Thunder

Ranger REG · Dec 4, 2003

Hmm...

<a href='http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb008' target='_blank'><img src='http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_12_1.gif' border=0></a>

johnsemlak · Dec 4, 2003

Great scoop MerricB. Thanks for posting it

Psion · Dec 4, 2003

Any character class or prestige class or feat or other option you think is appropriate for your game is appropriate. Anything you don't like, you shouldn't use.

The thing to take home here...

Anubis the Doomseer · Dec 4, 2003

Psion said:
The thing to take home here...

Yep - gotta stretch your "DM says 'no'" muscles - the exercise is a hassle at first but once you get into the discipline the result is worth it.

- Ma'at

Chronosome · Dec 4, 2003

Good stuff...thanks, Merric.

Ed Stark's thoughts on the Complete Warrior and other 3.5 topics

MerricB

Eternal Optimist

darkbard

Legend

MerricB

Eternal Optimist

Felon

First Post

Son_of_Thunder

Explorer

Ranger REG

Explorer

johnsemlak

First Post

Psion

Adventurer

Anubis the Doomseer

First Post

Chronosome

Explorer

Similar Threads

Into the Woods