Trying To Decide...

[Tellerian Hawke]

A Little History on My Particular Situation: I'm a long-time D&D player. Started with Basic D&D in 5th grade (circa 1979), then went to AD&D, then 2nd Ed, then 2e S&P, then 3rd Ed. (3.0) I have a ton of gaming experience and knowledge of game mechanics. [...] I played 3.0 from 1999 (as a playtester) until 2005. At that point, the party (which consisted mainly of my two cousins, and two of their friends) was EPIC, and using the ELH. We had (along the way) purchased all of the 3.5 core rulebooks and a few supplements as well, but we never really took the time to sit down and start using them. And in 2005, when I got married, I pretty much quit playing D&D, until last year, at a 4th of July whole-family-get-together, my cousins expressed a desire to pick that campaign up again. I still had all the stuff, so I agreed, and began putting all of the custom content (character sheets, house rules, unique spells & items, etc.) on a Google Sites page, so that I could run the game anywhere, anytime. (We mainly do play-by-post these days, although we plan on having a sit-down session this coming July 4th [2015.])

So here's the deal: after a period of "refreshing my memory," I find that I am as sharp as I ever was with 3.0 rules. But I have also been looking at my 3.5 books, and wondering whether or not I should convert. There are a few nerfs that I don't like (Time Stop and Haste, for example) but overall, 3.5 looks to be a nice refinement of the 3.0 system.

My question is: Should I bother to switch to 3.5? If so, how will I handle the overwhelming task of taking an epic party whose average level was 42nd, and re-making them in 3.5 format?!? Or, are there any well-known hybrids out there? (i.e., Keep the core 3.0 rules, and just adopt these 12 feats, these 9 spells, and these 18 items, etc. from the 3.5 system as add-ons)

The reason I am considering switch at all is because of the seemingly broken 3.0 ed epic combat system. Most of the fighter-types (everyone is multi-classed, no one is "straight fighter") end up with a total, adjusted attack bonus of around +50 or so when it's all said and done (feats, magic items, et.al.) Many of the monsters they fight have AC 65+, which means that their first attack with each hand (if they dual wield) hits about 25% of the time, and then all of their subsequent attacks pretty much miss unless they roll a 20. And there seems to be no way to bridge this gulf. So the fighter types call max power attack, and pray for lucky die rolls.

It seems to me, that epic-level fighters at some point need about 10 more points of Base Attack Bonus in order to be able to compete with the insane monster Armor Classes they keep encountering.

Does 3.5 have the same problem? I have heard that some people can concoct builds that hit AC 90 no sweat, which is MIND BOGGLING to me. AC 65 seems insurmountable, much less a 90! But my thought was, perhaps 3.5 has found a way to bridge that gap between AC and Attack Bonus? Or are the players making such claims playing with house rules and/or mis-interpreting the rules as written?

As it stands now, if the epic party is fighting a monster with that kind of AC, he probably also has a high (50+) SR. So the fights go like this: the fighter types surround the baddie, and hack like mad, keeping him busy, while the mages try spell after spell, hoping that something makes it through. Fights drag ON and ON and ON... and most of the time, they win by WHITTLING DOWN the monster, little by little.

Has anyone ever discussed / addressed this problem before?

P.S. I am not going to adopt 4th or 5th edition. The money I laid out back in the day for 3.0/3.5 materials was IMMENSE, and I have no desire to repeat that process. My three options are to either stick with 3.0 ed D&D, or to go with either a 3.0/3.5 hybrid, or switch completely to 3.5. This old dog is through with "new and improved editions."

Thanks in advance for any insights / help / advice you can give me.

Hawke

 

[Dandu]

WotC did put out a 3.5 Update booklet (PDF). You download it here, just right click on it and select 'Save As'.

At epic levels, though, the game becomes difficult to adjucate as the system was never set up for it. I'd just start a new game, honestly.

Oh, and 3.0 Haste was broken, and AC 90 isn't difficult. Particularily if you have the 3.0 Book of Vile Darkness, a Cancer Mage, and the Vile Rigidity Disease.

 

[GMMichael]

The big changes that I noticed between 3.0 and 3.5 were the elimination of facing (adoption of "space"), spontaneous casting for clerics, and as I'm about to mention, uniformity of monster gen.

If 4.0 was 3.5, Book of Nine Swords, and the Warlock in a blender, then 3.5 was 3.0 and the Miniatures Handbook in a blender.

My question is: Should I bother to switch to 3.5? If so, how will I handle the overwhelming task of taking an epic party whose average level was 42nd, and re-making them in 3.5 format?!?

Yes, switch. Your epic characters don't need to be remade, unless they had levels in Bard.

The reason I am considering switch at all is because of the seemingly broken 3.0 ed epic combat system. Most of the fighter-types (everyone is multi-classed, no one is "straight fighter") end up with a total, adjusted attack bonus of around +50 or so when it's all said and done (feats, magic items, et.al.) Many of the monsters they fight have AC 65+, which means that their first attack with each hand (if they dual wield) hits about 25% of the time, and then all of their subsequent attacks pretty much miss unless they roll a 20.

Monsters received a lot of the conversion. Since I stuck with the 3.0 MM, it was pretty easy to see that the monster generation system was pretty chaotic in 3.0, and became more uniform in 3.5

P.S. I am not going to adopt 4th or 5th edition. The money I laid out back in the day for 3.0/3.5 materials was IMMENSE, and I have no desire to repeat that process.

That process inspired me to write a free RPG. Don't worry, the money you've spent on 3rd ed. books is not wasted so long as you reference those books and allow the endless good ideas to inspire your roleplaying, no matter what game it is. My 3rd books sit proudly where I can easily reach them, and sometimes just looking at their covers makes ideas happen. But I'm not about to start playing a 3.5 game; I don't want to inspect another prestige class to see how broken it is, look through three different core books to find a rule about summoned monsters, or argue about how much cover bonus I was supposed to get because I was 40 feet from low cover while my opponent was only 20 feet, but he moved during his turn and the shot could possibly have happened in the middle of his movement instead of at the end.

Thank goodness for 5e!

 

[Tellerian Hawke]

[...] At epic levels, though, the game becomes difficult to adjudicate as the system was never set up for it. I'd just start a new game, honestly. [...] Oh, and 3.0 Haste was broken[...]

Dandu, with all due respect,

1) Yes, it becomes very difficult to adjudicate, but it is possible, except for the problem that I described.

2) This group has started other games with other characters, but they (as do I) love their epic characters, and want to keep playing them as long as possible. And I don't blame them one bit. I don't like the idea of giving up on a character just because he's become epic. There's plenty of stuff left to do; it just plays out on a different tier. All of the pre-epic "world saving" has turned into epic-level "universe saving," but the core adventure elements remain the same. And the game gets deadlier, because your main rivals are no longer mortal, and you can't just go crush them like you could in the old days. When your rival controls a whole plane of existence, and commands an army that can't be counted (I'm talking about Graz'zt, here) then going to his castle and taking him out takes on a whole new level of meaning, LOL

Long story short: we won't ever give up these characters. We might play them less, in favor of other campaigns, but they will never go away completely. These characters are not supermodels, boxers, or football players, and their careers don't end at age 25.

3) Yes, Haste is broken, I saw that long before 3.5 was published, so I changed the spell myself. And I happen to like my version better. No biggie.

Hmmm, I think I need to make myself a signature block now.

Hawke

 

[delericho]

My question is: Should I bother to switch to 3.5?

The reason I am considering switch at all is because of the seemingly broken 3.0 ed epic combat system.

No, don't bother. For the simple reason that there is no meaningful update to the Epic Combat System between 3.0e and 3.5e - in fact, the "Epic Level Handbook" remains the go-to resource for pretty much anything epic. That being the case, making the switch won't improve things for you meaningfully, but just create some work.

Now, if you were creating a new campaign, I would say go for it (or even advocate switching to 3.75 aka Pathfinder). But since you're sticking with those same characters, I say stick with the same system.

 

[Celebrim]

So here's the deal: after a period of "refreshing my memory," I find that I am as sharp as I ever was with 3.0 rules. But I have also been looking at my 3.5 books, and wondering whether or not I should convert. There are a few nerfs that I don't like (Time Stop and Haste, for example) but overall, 3.5 looks to be a nice refinement of the 3.0 system.

My question is: Should I bother to switch to 3.5?

No. The vast majority of changes in 3.5 are for the worse. In a few cases - Haste for example - the spell nerf was necessary, but for every spell they fixed and made better, they broke 2 spells more egregiously (Alter Self, Blasphemy). My suggestion is to use the weaker of the spell, which ever edition it is in, and you'll be closer to balanced.

If so, how will I handle the overwhelming task of taking an epic party whose average level was 42nd, and re-making them in 3.5 format?!? Or, are there any well-known hybrids out there? (i.e., Keep the core 3.0 rules, and just adopt these 12 feats, these 9 spells, and these 18 items, etc. from the 3.5 system as add-ons)

Start over. Pretty much every system out there breaks down when the range of modifiers begins to approach or exceed the range of the fortune mechanic. GURPS breaks down when the only way to fail is fumble. D6 breaks down when you get 10 or more dice in your dice pools. D20 breaks down when you have modifiers close to or exceeding 20. It's great you got to 40th+ level. Time to retire those and get a new cast of PCs. You can always revisit them when events at the inter-planar level justify bringing in beings that can kill most gods.

Does 3.5 have the same problem?

There is tremendous amounts of power creep in 3.5. It's fairly easy to create characters in the low 20's that can do millions of points of damage or auto-kill pretty much anything, no save.

As it stands now, if the epic party is fighting a monster with that kind of AC, he probably also has a high (50+) SR. So the fights go like this: the fighter types surround the baddie, and hack like mad, keeping him busy, while the mages try spell after spell, hoping that something makes it through. Fights drag ON and ON and ON... and most of the time, they win by WHITTLING DOWN the monster, little by little.

Has anyone ever discussed / addressed this problem before?

Balance in D20 at high levels is extremely poor, both in 3.0 and 3.5e. Basically, the higher the level you are, the better off you are being a pure spell-caster. Fixing this for levels below 20 is daunting in and of itself. Fixing it at the levels you are at might be impossible.

 

[Tellerian Hawke]

Ok, then, delericho, let me ask you this:

Is there any way (feat / class ability / etc.?) to make up the "10-point disparity" between the fighter classes and the high ACs they are encountering?

For example, let's take Jynx Maylosu, the weakest member of the epic party. He's a Former Human (Outsider, Div Rank 0) 25 Fighter / 12 Rogue. He dual wields twin Katanas (which are both +10 Keen Ghost Touch Defending weapons.)

Base Attack +29

Katana Enhancement +10

Wpn Foc +1

Epic Prowess (x2) +2

Magic Item (Vestment) Luck Bonus to-hit +6

Strength (27) +8

Dual wield penalty -4

Total to-hit: +52 [Which breaks out to +52 / +47 / +42 / +37]

In the aforementioned example, a monster with AC 65 would be:

Requires 13 to hit w/ first attack

Requires 18 to hit w/ second attack

Requires 20 to hit w/ third attack

Requires 20 to hit w/ fourth attack

(Repeat for off-hand weapon also)

Is there anything that he is missing, in regard to his attack bonus? He had to spend a lot of feats to dual-wield Katanas (Exotic Wpn, Ambidex, 2-wpn, Imp 2-wpn, Grtr 2-wpn, Perf 2-Wpn) not to mention Imp Crit, and 2-Wpn Rend.

By the way, another maddening thing is that Jynx is no slouch in the AC department. He has a 60 AC, and can bump it up to AC 70 if he uses the defending ability of each sword (+5 from each); yet, most monsters hit him EVERY TIME. (Ok, maybe 95% of the time, if you count the occasional 1 on the d20.)

 

[Celebrim]

Hawke: For someone that has reached such a high level, you are playing with hugely suboptimal characters. I wouldn't be surprised if Dandu can come up with a 20th level character with significantly higher to-hit bonus while doing more attacks per round.

Thinking about this, you and I may have completely - and I mean completely different needs - as GMs. I don't adopt 3.5 because all of the broken cheese renders the game (IMO) unplayable, because the range of balance (tiers) between the classes and different builds is all over the place. But you may in fact need 3.5 because you need all the broken cheese to make up for the extreme lack of balance you are experiencing in your game. 3.5 kinda has this unspoken design pattern of, "Since everything is broken, including straight cleric or wizard, it doesn't matter if we dump more brokenness into the game". It sounds like you actually NEED more brokenness in your game.

As for what your epic swashbuckler is doing wrong, my guess is that among other things he's paid no attention to debuffing his foes. For example, I'm surprised he can't feint as a free action at his level. If your target is denied their DEX bonus, it will drop it's AC by between 5 and 20 points depending on the sort of monster you are facing, as well as opening up sneak attacks without needing to flank. Debuffing as much as the foes DEX bonus will turn whiffs into near autohits. Conversely, against things with high armor bonuses, there are usually feats, items, weapon types, and spells that will allow you to resolve one or more attacks with a 'touch attack' or with an attack that ignores armor and shield bonuses.

 

[Tellerian Hawke]

Hawke: For someone that has reached such a high level, you are playing with hugely suboptimal characters. I wouldn't be surprised if Dandu can come up with a 20th level character with significantly higher to-hit bonus while doing more attacks per round.

Thinking about this, you and I may have completely - and I mean completely different needs - as GMs. I don't adopt 3.5 because all of the broken cheese renders the game (IMO) unplayable, because the range of balance (tiers) between the classes and different builds is all over the place. But you may in fact need 3.5 because you need all the broken cheese to make up for the extreme lack of balance you are experiencing in your game. 3.5 kinda has this unspoken design pattern of, "Since everything is broken, including straight cleric or wizard, it doesn't matter if we dump more brokenness into the game". It sounds like you actually NEED more brokenness in your game.

Celebrim,

You read my mind! I have always endeavored to keep my games balanced and "believable," to the extent that a fantasy game can be. I have been told that these characters are extremely weak, in 3.5 ed terms, which just blows my mind, since they came by their powers and abilities through a lot of blood, sweat, and tears. In my world, these characters are pretty much unstoppable on the Prime Material plane. They don't start meeting challenging foes until they plane travel (which is where they spend most of their time---either in Sigil, Union, or the lower planes.)

I have also been told, by the same people who told me they were weak in combat, that these characters have "crushing strong amounts of powerful items." The aforementioned Jynx has a pair of magic gloves that give him +30 to both Open Lock and Use Magical Device. But it seems that even with all of this fantastic magic at their disposal, they are only mediocre in melee. (By the way, Jynx carries a Portable Hole, and several Maximized Cure Light Wounds wands (50 charges, heals 13 pts. per charge), and acts as the party's backup healer, albeit usually not until after the battle, where there is enough downtime to put the hole down, and open it up.)

I don't allow my players to go crazy, and stack on every feat and spell from every splat book on the market. Before I allow a new power / spell / feat / prestige class into my campaign, I look at the game mechanics carefully, and try to spot areas of potential abuse. I try to make my campaigns as "medieval" as possible; I try my best to avoid having an "anime / monty haul" feel. Which is why I am now in the situation that I am, it seems. I need to fill the gap, somehow. The most immediate solution I have considered is designing a secondary feat for Epic Prowess. But I hesitate to implement "house rules" unless it's absolutely necessary. (I have about 8, single-spaced, 12-point, narrow-margin pages worth of house rules, and every one of them is carefully thought out to correct some imbalance that I have discovered.)

Anyways, the idea for the feat was: Improved Epic Prowess (Pre-req: Epic Prowess taken at least 3 times) You gain a +3 to hit. This feat can be taken multiple times, and its effects stack, both with itself, and with the previous Epic Prowess feat.

Doing that would put the feat WELL out of reach of "newbie epics," while making it available to "senior epics" who are the ones I am trying to help.

What do you think?

Is there another, published / official way of helping out my players?

Let me know.

 

[Tellerian Hawke]

Oh, wait, I skimmed over that last part about de-buffs... Hmmm. I will look into that! Thanks!