Search results

I had considered granting martially inclined characters access to the ranked abilities from the fan-created Tome of Prowess to even the odds but perhaps it is less work simply to cut down the number of spells a spellcaster can use (e.g. after all, the wilder, despite only having 11 powers, is...

Agreed. Too much and always resulting in an unreasonable uptick in power. I'm fed up with prestige classes as a whole but I can see why allowing one per character seems like it might be an acceptable compromise. Personally, since players always focus on PrCs that give up too little in exchange...

3.5e Spacing: I prefer 3.0e spacing (I found I could have more natural maps with it than otherwise). Simplified spell durations: Having ran a 4 year campaign with something similar (though a few caveats), definitely make a list of spells that are the exception to this rule. Unaligned...

Fair assessment. Looking over your posts, you're a wiser man than I in your assessments of supplementary material. I'll keep your words in mind when I move forward with my new 3.0e campaign.

That's a very neat idea! Maybe I'll try it myself.

I'm curious about how you would handle no save spells like ray of dizziness, solid fog, wall of force, etc. IME, players have worked around DC corrections by going hard on DC-less spells. I've floated a resilience system where ongoing magic effects could be suppressed or broken effects could be...

With 3.5e, some of my players ended up stacking initiative bonuses so high (some guy had a +29 initiative roll, others were not so far behind) that leaving Improved Initiative on the stat block was effectively worthless. Depending on monster, I usually substituted in Brutal Throw, Combat...

Fussy is a great word. For me, I've upped the number of skill points per class and ditched the class/cross-class/non-class skill distinctions. The weirdest result has been spellcasters with Escape Artist and fighters with Tumble but nothing that was overly off-putting. My real issue has been...

As for my own tweaks to 3.0e, besides taking a lot of cues from Blacky the Blackball's 3.Y rules, I would do the following: In general, there are numbers (AC, to-hit, etc.) that should have been capped (soft or hard, doesn't matter) by character level. I know the real culprit were all of the...

I too am a fan of 3.0e and I found the changes in attitude that erupted in 3.5e to be negative in the long run. A more conservative approach to introducing additional game components would have done great service to 3.X's reputation as a whole and right now, I only see very devoted powergamers...

It wasn't needed. Some of the minor revisions they needed to make were made, others weren't even addressed, and the rest were pointless or caused more problems.

Not Reynard but I haven't found a community for 3.0e. Might have to make one myself.

Having played and ran campaigns where over-optimization was an issue (whether single person or not), I really don't tolerate it anymore. I got better things to do with my time than keeping up with any paradigm of the sort.

The answer is no. Reasonability is key.

3.5e failed to fix the charop problem of 3e because they made it play less like 1e/2e AD&D instead of re-introducing the decisions that worked in the prior editions and enforcing the 1e/2e play style.

I would appreciate a 3.0e D&D discord being setup.

Mind rewording that, friend? That sounds mightily on the line of instigating. As for high system mastery players, I'm still out to lunch on that. I've had recent experiences where very high level (14+) players were mostly neutralized because they neither had a means to fly or didn't invest in...

3.X has rules issues but it pales in comparison to the people issues. I've had numerous players who just wouldn't reign themselves in despite pointing out the problems they were causing. When I took the opposing tact of just strengthening the world, players would also get upset that they...

IME optimizers steamroll combat encounters initially only to fall against first grade puzzles, traps, and situations before wailing when their tactics are either used against them or they face actual opposition. At least role-players and casuals have the courtesy to be entertaining, inoffensive...

Having ran and played in multiple 3.X campaigns, I disagree that tactical combat is a draw given the percentage of players I've seen that seem to enjoy circumventing it through spells and huge numbers.