3.5 Dungeon 100 info

[Felon]

If all characters have to have that to compete, that means that a lot of interesting (but non-maximizing) options (in magic items, feats, etc.) will perforce be neglected. That's boring, IMO.

If you choose to go for an outre character design at the expense of bonuses, then yeah, you usually won't hit as often or as hard as the optimized characters. And against powerhouses like pit fiends, powerhouses are what it takes. That's all quite sensible IMO.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

The notion of "powerhouse" monsters doesn't belong in D&D. If the pit fiend is a CR 20 creature, is shouldn't be a "powerhouse" CR 20 (as opposed to a weenie CR 20) because it's a pit fiend and pit fiends are supposed to be 133t d00dz biznatch. It should be devastating against 15th level parties, a powerhouse against 16th to 18th level parties and a speed bump for 19th and 20th level parties. That's what CR 20 is supposed to mean.

Whether the CR ratings should assume that PCs are relatively optimized is another question entirely. (I myself like the idea of basing them off a four character iconic array party of single-classed characters with a semi-optimized selection of DMG equipment and standard feats). However, it should no more require "powerhouse" level 20 characters to take on a CR 20 pit fiend than it should require "powerhouse" level 2 characters to take on an ogre or "powerhouse" level 5 characters to take on a troll. CR should be CR should be CR.

If you choose to go for an outre character design at the expense of bonuses, then yeah, you usually won't hit as often or as hard as the optimized characters. And against powerhouses like pit fiends, powerhouses are what it takes. That's all quite sensible IMO.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Well, most of my mid-high level play experience is either in Living Greyhawk or Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil. (And the DM is supposed to be out to get us in the latter module).

A number of the big challenges were creatures advanced by HD (especially athachs, owlbears, assassin vines, and shambling mounds). Since, I think I saw something somewhere about the HD advancement effecting CR very differently in 3.5e (I don't remember where but it was in the small print of one of the previews--I think it's +1 CR per 2 HD or so which is much more close to the power level obtained by advancing by class level), they may be effectively toning down the monsters I face too. I'm not sure though.

It seems our experiences are different. Perhaps your DM is more competent than myself, or perhaps he's out to get you?

 

[Enceladus]

Hey I just picked this issue up at my FLGS. Sweet!

I'm noticing more high level dungeons lately. I for one am glad to see this. And they work well too! It certainly disproves that stupid theory I see bounced around on the internet that 3E breaks down at higher levels. Something I never bought into.


I hope they do more.

 

[Felon]

The notion of "powerhouse" monsters doesn't belong in D&D.

Sure it does. Their are heavy-hitting tank monsters just like there are heavy-hitting tank PC's. A mind flayer isn't a powerhouse, nor is a medusa or a spectre, CR be darned. None can inflict a lot of direct damage, nor do they have massive hit points or particularly formidable AC's. They have a nasty trick or two up their sleeve, and that's why they rate the CR's they have.