Search results

My suspicion is that Wizards were in a tough spot in the runup to 4e. They wanted to tweak the rules of 3.5e, and they also needed to release a new edition for the sake of their company's fiscal health. The latter factor also required that whatever was produced be called "Fourth Edition." In...

I am thinking about using the following hit point rule in my next campaign. Players roll as normal. If they roll lower than the average (rounded down), they get the average. If they roll above the average, they get the higher number BUT the DM gets the "extra" hit points as well, added them...

Failed Saving Throw wrote: "I also find this thread a bit strange. I and several other long-time players I know love rogues and love playing them." The point of the thread is NOT that rogues suck and no one likes playing them. The point of the thread is to ask this question: could you play...

I think T. Foster and Pickaxe have helped convince me that just doing away with the rogue class instead of fixing it is a fine way to go. All of the archetypes mentioned for thieves could essentially be replicated with a 3.5e fighter if that class was given a few more skills and the ability to...

Sacred Cow that Needs Help I believe that the rogue is a sacred cow but not an essential class in 3.5e. The things that the rogue does well can be done by other classes or aren't essential for party success. 1. Rogues are skill monkeys it is true but if a four person party is built well the...

Nice Idea You are right about making the extra move into a special. I will have to think about the prereqs and how it all fits together, but I appreciate the response and the ideas.

Rogue Specials Nyeshet, very interesting idea. I do like it and will think about it some more. I think I like your last idea with more specials early and making trapfinding, etc. into specials. I like the choice this allows. I am still interesting in the idea of an extra action because of...

Use Magic Device Lord Tirian, thanks for the reply and I think you are right about Use Magic Device's utlity. Furthermore, I don't think rogues are terrible characters, just not essential or different enough for my tastes. I just see other characters being able to duplicate the rogue's...

Revised Rogue Class A friend of mine and I have been complaining about the rogue for years. Although the character is seen as one of the four “core of the core” along with fighters, wizards, and clerics, we find this class to be far more expendable than the other three. Although the rogue...

I prefer a 28/29 point buy with humans getting 29 points and demihumans 28. The reason I vary the point buy is to give humans a bit of a boost and to compensate for the fact that I think a point buy system favors demihumans who can min/max the point buy. For example, 28 point buy fighter...

MarkB, Good catch! I hadn't seen that but it confirms that there is something strange going on. Or, as a friend of mine said in an email when I first broached the question, "it sounds like the Sage is on crack ... again." Marnak

After doing some thinking, the answer to my own question is obvious: shield bash attacks need to be considered martial weapons becuase they have to be something and if they were simple weapons classes that get proficiency in simple weapons but not shields would concievably have the ability to...

In latest issue of Dragon, the Sage weighs in on armor and shields. He states that a character who possesses a shield proficiency also possesses proficiency in the related shield bash attack. For example, bards can use light shields for AC and so can also use light shields to bash (with or...

Replacement PCs This varies for me, but my preference is start them at level one if possible. If I could, I would run a solo adventure (or two) with generous xp rewards that would boost the character up to the level where I thought they could hang with the main party. I find this isn't too...

"Revised Third Edition" I think Nellisir is right. 3.5 was a terrible name because it put WoTC in its present predicament. Namely, revise along lines most people seem to want (i.e. slight revision what I have called 3.75E) and be stuck with either giving it the aesthetically unpleasing name...

My Vote and Thoughts I voted for "Think 3.75E, Hope for 3.75E," but I do think there is a decent chance that we will go straight to 4E. I am fairly happy with 3.5E right now, but I wouldn't mind an updating of the core rules, incorporating some of the best ideas from the non-core books...

My question: which do you think is the more likely next announcment from Wizards of the Coast: 3.75E or 4E? And, regardless of which one you think is coming, which one are you hoping for? I should add that I am defining these two as follows: 3.75E: Slight updating of current rules, similar...

I can somewhat understand eliminating scrolls and wands (though I tend to favor allowing their use with shared spells, see post above), but I really think that you should be able to use staffs to share spells. Staffs are not only spell trigger, but they also allow the caster to personally use...

Much Appreciated Thanks for the thoughtful response. I tend to agree that scrolls, wands, and staves are ok while potions are not. Are there any other dissenters out there?

I need help. I have found some discussion of this issue on various threads, but there seems to be a certain amount of disagreement or at least confusion. The question: Can you "share spells" with your animal companion or familiar when you are using scrolls, potions, or wands OR just merely...