[3.5] Enormous number of changes - some make me wonder why...

[Chris_Nightwing]

There have been many reviews, comments, trolls and flames. I was pretty annoyed about the new books. Now, I can't wait to get my copies. It all sounds very exciting. At the end of the day, anything I don't like, I won't have to play. Thanks for all the info, has been a most positive experience!

 

[Plane Sailing]

I'm very glad, Chris.

I enjoyed reading all the little titbits from other people leading up to my purchase, and I hope that those who are still waiting will find these bits useful too.

n.b. I noticed another monster change - it looks like the devils which used to have animate dead have lost that power (and quite a lot of them used to have it).

Also Ice Devil and Horned Devil (Cornugon) have swapped places in the infernal heirarchy, Ice Devils are no longer #2 in the list. For shame!

 

[Anubis the Doomseer]

Bad choice on the spell revisions - I think they went the wrong way totally. Instead of limiting things with fixed ranges, they should have gone the other way - it would have added more flexibility to the metamagic system (which, as it stands, only sees use with Empower munchkins).

Maybe 4.0 will allow a truly fluid spell system with feats that will:
- alter the spell level of a spell (DC, damage cap, etc)
- change the damage/energy type
- alter the area effect
- alter the range
- alter the duration
- alter the result of the spell (Empower, Maximize)
- chain spells
- contingent spells (I love the argument about this)
- "mass" spells (so adding the "mass" effect is a feat instead of an entirely new spell)
and so on.

Options, not restrictions.

- Ma'at

 

[Cloudgatherer]

Burning hands is a 15ft cone instead of a 10ft semicircle.

Hm. Ok...

Shocking Grasp does 1d6 per caster level (max 5d6) electric damage (touch attack)

Pretty neat.

Lightning bolt is now a line attack with a fixed range of 120ft rather than the option of Medium range and 5ft wide or half that range and 10ft wide. It is no longer as good at clearing our wide corridors, and this change seems to have been to fit in with the battlegrid description of spell effects.

Line? Was there a burning need to create a new type? The old version didn't 'fit the mold' but there was nothing wrong with that.

Shillelagh - happily specifies that it affects both ends of the quarterstaff at once (yes!) but it ups the damage by two size categories (thus a medium qstaff does 2d6(!)). Presumably a change to give different benefits to Small and Medium druids?

Not really an issue for me.

Globe of Invulnerability *doesn't* negate previously cast spells, so the wizard could buff himself up with his 1st-3rd level buffs and *then* sit inside a globe (although it does eliminate it's usefulness as a counter to being silenced

*blinks* Huh? Wouldn't it just be simpler to say that spells can't pass through the globe? I mean, that is almost what we have here, but before you could fling spells through it, just not into it. It's always been a strange, rarely used spell, IME.

Endure Elements only protects from adverse cold and hot weather, not against damaging energy at all.

Then what good is it? That's a 'combat oriented' response, agreed, but dressing warmly/cooly seems to have the same effect (or creative use of ray of frost or burning hands).

Sleep is a full round casting time and a max of 4HD who all get a saving throw - that used to be a real killer spell and now its almost completely useless!

One of those 'why did they do that' changes. It's not like it was easy affecting a 4HD creature to begin with in 3.0.

Cone spells (like Cone of Cold) all seem to have a fixed range

Another 'why did they change that' issue.

The Enlarge spell metamagic has been redefined to only increase the range of spells without a fixed range (i.e. if they are close, medium or long it works, if it is a cone or line it doesn't work). Wonder why they wanted to stop people getting longer lightning bolts and cone effects? I think that is a change I'll be ignoring (I wonder how long my list of ignored changes will be?). Oh, I know, it is so we might take the *Widen* feat instead to increase the area of Cones. At +3 caster levels

I think I've seen one poster, ever, who thought the +3 adjustment was fair for Widen. I even had a character play the PrC that ups the ability to +100% area and he rarely used it (couldn't even Widen a fireball during the time we played). Especially with the ruling that the same metamagic feats don't stack, give all the 'doubling' feats the same treatment: +1 spell level.

As for Enlarge, it was rarely taken before, IME. Good for fireing off large cones, but this always ran the risk of blasting your own party as well.

The more I read of 3.5, the more I'm tempted to cancel my order. Monte especially pointed out several things I had not heard before that made me think: 'Why? It wasn't an issue so why was it changed?'

 

[drnuncheon]

I've not checked the stirge yet but I'm sure that our eight-legged friend is going to be condemned to a future with four legs and four (?) wings.

Oddly, it hasn't...

J

 

[Plane Sailing]

I'll check again tonight, but I'm sure that it does the damage and IF you bring it to 0hp it disappears.

I've checked the details, and this is correct. Oops!

 

[Destil]

Lightning bolt is now a line attack with a fixed range of 120ft rather than the option of Medium range and 5ft wide or half that range and 10ft wide. It is no longer as good at clearing our wide corridors, and this change seems to have been to fit in with the battlegrid description of spell effects.

Change for the sake of change? I think this has suddenly become my least favroite change, by far. It's just soooo petty, no one ever complained about this spell it was a bit underpowered vs. good old fireball in almost every situation. Why was this changed? There's no point to the change, and it's so slight and stupid (as in it's stupid to care which way it works. It's a fine spell either way) it really makes me have to ask if the change is simply because it could be changed...

A double annoyance since I like the cleaner wording of the revision and wanted soo baddly to use it as a default and house rule bad changes. But little things like this and changed spell names make me want to instead stick with the less elegent wording in the original books and just change things that need it (the new classes, haste... noe even harm and heal, I'd just add a will save for half on harm).

Endure Elements only protects from adverse cold and hot weather, not against damaging energy at all.

Does the second level spell now grant resistance 5 now? Why was this nessessery? At least tieflings and assamar will feal a little more special now, mabye.

Sleep is a full round casting time and a max of 4HD who all get a saving throw - that used to be a real killer spell and now its almost completely useless!

I LOVE full round casting times. Love em, love em, love em! It's such a great way tweek a spell that may be a little too good for it's spell level. But... with that sleep dosn't need any further downtweeks,. Do you mean it's now 4HD vs the old 2d4 and no creature over 4HD is affected?

The Enlarge spell metamagic has been redefined to only increase the range of spells without a fixed range (i.e. if they are close, medium or long it works, if it is a cone or line it doesn't work). Wonder why they wanted to stop people getting longer lightning bolts and cone effects? I think that is a change I'll be ignoring (I wonder how long my list of ignored changes will be?). Oh, I know, it is so we might take the *Widen* feat instead to increase the area of Cones. At +3 caster levels

Pointless. They fixed most 'abuse' already by not allowing stacking. And since it was never even that bad to begin with....

 

[Henry]

Maybe 4.0 will allow a truly fluid spell system with feats that will:
- alter the spell level of a spell (DC, damage cap, etc)
- change the damage/energy type
- alter the area effect
- alter the range
- alter the duration
- alter the result of the spell (Empower, Maximize)
- chain spells
- contingent spells (I love the argument about this)
- "mass" spells (so adding the "mass" effect is a feat instead of an entirely new spell)
and so on.

Options, not restrictions.

- Ma'at

I don't think I understand your statement. They do these things now, do they not? Some are in supplements, but less of them now rather than more.

 

[Anubis the Doomseer]

I don't think I understand your statement. They do these things now, do they not? Some are in supplements, but less of them now rather than more.

That was the point - that there was a good (not perfect, becuase the feats themselves were either non-core/SRD or in need of minor tweaking) metamagic system in D&D 3.0 - it defined the Wizard as the arcane metamagic caster and gave the sorceror endurance (making the value of those early spells last longer into the higher levels) and sometimes flavor (making an ice/cold based sorceror was a matter of a single feat, etc). The move away from this, back to the sacred cow of fixed sizes and shapes for spells is a poor choice. When the changes hit the SRD what you get is a more limited toolkit to build third party materials or games (the intent of the SRD/OGL project).

Fixing spell areas and range/duration would only make sense if the underlying mechanics allowed for tweaking (ala DYI dynamic magic system).

Making standard templates is fine (cone, ray, standard ranges like Personal, Touch, etc) but fixing certain variables _within_ these templates hampers diversity, and that impedes not only game development (for example, writing a supplement on magic) as well as at-the-table playing (my wizard's lightning bolt is now always going to be the exact same thing as the next wizards).

I may be alone in this but it isn't exactly the sort of design philosophy I would choose if I were building a ruleset like D&D.

 

[Spatula]

Are you sure? I thought they'd made it like the deathtouch domain ability, i.e. roll 2d6 per caster level, and if you match the target's hit points, it's disintegrated outright (not the same thing as actually taking all that damage).

So does disintegrate no longer do damage on a successful save? It would look silly if a target with a lot of hit points is better off failing the save than making it.