You mean it shouldn't work on the DM?Sounds like the confusion attack went too far!![]()
Yes, I've noticed the same thing. In order to work around it, I suggest to ignore or fudge some powers, making up rules on the spot.
In this case for example, I'd have said that difficult confusion DC would be somewhere between 18 and 22, pick 20. And confusion means many things, most of them suck. So roll 1d10: On a 1 you will attack your friends for the rest of the encounter; otherwise you're just incoherent and will wander off (similar to a panic, except not so fast). Make confused stuff up on the spot, too.
If there is a template and you don't remember what it does, make stuff up. Fiendish suggests some sort of damage resistance. Pick 5/magic. And something to make it tougher. I suggest +4 to Con.
Done.
What do you think?
I also liked S'mon's comment elsewhere:
Sounds like the confusion attack went too far!![]()
Recently, my players have been using the 3.5e D&D PHB, while I use Castles & Crusades Monsters & Treasure. I strongly recommend this approach Treebore.
Generally speaking, the threat level is a bit lower - CR 8 3e monsters become around CR 4-5 when using C&C stats. This means I can run the C&C module Palace of Shadows with bulettes, gorgons, hags et al for 3rd-4th level 3e PCs, which I like a lot.
When I was playing 3E I cut down on in-game referencing by not being concerned enough with following rules to reference too many things in-game.When I was playing 3e, I cut down on in-game referencing by doing out-of-game preparation.
pre-statted 'advanced' creatures
I think that many, many people who were/are playing 3e don't think that's "Okay". That it's a rigid framework where there's a rule for everything, and because of that, you need to or at least should do it.When I was playing 3E I cut down on in-game referencing by not being concerned enough with following rules to reference too many things in-game.