3.5 Dungeon 100 info

[Christian]

Re: Re: 3.5 Dungeon 100 info

My problem with this is that I don't want to have to roll 40d6.

You don't? Why not? My DM instincts are revving up already.

Me: "Roll a Fortitude save."

Player: "Um, does a 13 make it?"

Me: (Grins evilly and picks up handfuls and handfuls of d6's.)

Of course, I already have handfuls and handfuls of d6's, from my days of playing Champions and Shadowrun.

 

[Arnwyn]

Excellent changes! I'm happy with all of those. Stoneskin is just like it was before (as opponents with adamantine will virtually never be encountered). The insta-death removal of disintegrate is also good (though I can see a logistical problem with that many dice to roll - but since the example was of a 25th level caster, there are *always* logistical problems at that level...).

My fears that 3.5e is dramatically beefing up the monsters while, at the same time, dramatically nerfing the PCs were initially pooh-poohed as paranoia. Every change so far seems to be reinforcing this understanding.

Fantastic. If this is truly the case, I'll be pretty pleased. Anything that beefs monsters and nerfs characters get the big thumbs-up from me. It seriously helps the DM to balance encounters in a campaign while maintaining an appropriate level of believability and avoiding encounters that pass beyond the point of idiocy just to challenge the PCs - DM: "Crap. Now I need to use *three* pit fiends just to challenge the PCs." (*Three* pit fiends? WTF?)

 

[Technik4]

Re Disintegrate:

So, can we infer that Disintegrate will do 2d6/level, max 40d6 (at 20th level)? If so, what does this mean for wiz/sor spell caps?

Hopefully Disintegrate will still automatically pop Walls of Force and such.

Re Bull's Strength:

I heard on another thread that all the buffs will provide a flat +4 to an ability score. IMO, thats worth memorizing. While maximizing it would not have any effect, an empowered one would be +6 (I think). Just doesn't seem that bad to me.

Personally I think capping the time on all spells to 12 hours makes sense. Spells that are inherently longer are exceptions (like Endure Elements). I always hated when spells lasted into the next day, just creates min/maxing for players and if its good for players I have to figure it out for enemies.

Re Auras on Magic Items:

Thank God! I used to hate when players (esp newbies) would ask what aura a particular item generated. It almost always caused me to stop, look up the spell in the item description, then explain. I suppose this is a failing on my part, but it will be nice to be able to give an answer more quickly.

Technik

 

[Radiating Gnome]

I think I spotted another change -- one I hadn't seen before (but others may have) -- in the Derthan Kaderas Agents and Allies entry, he's listed as having an AC of 14, 18 with mage armor, and 22 with shield, which would indicate a dramatic change in shield, which currently offers a +7 bonus to AC for cover.

-rg

 

[Trainz@work]

In d20Modern enhance ability lasts only one minute per level and my players use it all the time, but it boosts for +5 on a stat.

Buff spells at 1 hour/level used to be a big problem IMC. I'm quite glad about that change.

Originally posted by Saeviomagy

My problem with this is that I don't want to have to roll 40d6.

Back in the 1st edition days, we used to roll 30d6 fireballs. It was FUN. I WANT to roll 40 d6.

Originally posted by Felon

My fears that 3.5e is dramatically beefing up the monsters while, at the same time, dramatically nerfing the PCs were initially pooh-poohed as paranoia.

It is much easier to boost PC's to be able to defeat critters, than it is to boost critters to be challenging for the PC's. I am not afraid of that, I could actually use some of it. That said, I am sure all classes will (and do) receive some enhancements.

Now I want to play a rogue, a ranger, a paladin, a sorcerer, a druid, a barb, a monk...

So many classes and so little time...

 

[Pelenor]

Personally I have no problem with them reducing stat buffs to 1 min./level. A minute is still 10 rounds of combat. That means even at say 3rd level you have stat buffs for 30 rounds of combat. That's a really long combat.

Also If they are powering down pc in 3.5 I don't have a problem with that either. I'm a bit old school and I think 3ed. leads far to easily to powergaming in fact in encourages it.

 

[Wolffenjugend]

I'll be glad to see the 1 hour/lvl duration of bull's str et all go the way of the dinosaur. IMO, 1 min/lvl is much better as the 3.0 version basically meant that PCs were artificially enhancing their stats 24-7. This is a big improvement.

 

[Tzarevitch]

I must admit, as DM I am not sobbing too much about reducing the duraction of the buff spells. I would've used 10 minutes/lvl personallty though. T

he correction I really want to see however is for 3.5 to de-power Delay Poison and Greater Magic weapon by reducing THEIR durations. The Buff spells weren't too bad as far as I was concerned because the NPCs could easily do it too. It just meant that the damage threshhold and the durability threshhold for everyone was a bit higher than normal.

I am also glad to see that 3.5 stoneskin will be fixed to be useful again. I too would have gone for 10/- but at least you can't cast a spell to grant your weapon the properties of Adamantine. In 3e, Stoneskin became useless in high level games because any spellcaster and his brother knew greater magic weapon.

Tzarevitch

 

[Ron]

I really liked the stat buff time reduction. I played before by the book and I think it spoiled the game. Players were spending a lot of time deciding what spells to place in the party hours before any combat activity in order to maximize the number of spells in each party member. As a lot of bookeeping is necessary to do so, the game became to be very boring. Worse of all, the only way the DM has to counter this situation is doing the same with the opposition, but I don't have much time to do that kind of preparation (buff spells, extension spells, etc).

The new version is still fairly powerful and will reduce the amount of spells working upon each individual, thus reducing the overall bookeeping. I love it!

 

[Jeremy Crawford]

In the Derthan Kaderas Agents and Allies entry, he's listed as having an AC of 14, 18 with mage armor, and 22 with shield, which would indicate a dramatic change in shield, which currently offers a +7 bonus to AC for cover.

d20 Modern strikes again, assuming the shield bonus was added on top of the mage armor bonus. In d20 Modern, shield gives a +4 bonus to Defense.