3.5 high level woes and Paizo's hand in it.

[Spatula]

Then you've got the idea of deliberately built in rules mastery, where the "traps" are pretty obvious to folks that are paying attention. On the other hand, if designers try to eliminate that, they create a situation where it actually takes more skill to recognize which options are less powerful, because the gap is smaller and less obvious.

But the effectiveness gap also becomes mostly inconsequential.

I think that the extent to which rules mastery is a problem in 3E is proportional to the amount that players in a group are in "silent conflict" to have the toughest, meanest, baddest sumbitch of a character.

I don't think that an actual conflict is required, although one will probably excaberate the issue. It's very easy for the unitiated to make characters that aren't just suboptimal, but that are actively ineffective, which isn't much fun when placed side by side with some powergamer creation. No need to be "the best" - just a desire to be operating on the same plane of existance.

 

[Remathilis]

Heh... You just exactly described our high level 3.5 games.

Thankfully, we all play 4e now.

I've told this story before, but, hey, one more time.

A "Typical" Round of our last 3.5 20th level game.

PC 1: Wizard/Loremaster: Cast Bigby's Clenched Fist. Check SR. Make attack roll with Clenched fist. (+20 for CL, +11 str, +7 Int mod, -1 Str). Roll damage (1d8+11) and target rolls Fort save vs. Stunning. Then casts Quickened Magic Missile, Checks SR 5 times, 5 1d4+1 missiles. Then directs his 1d3 summoned, augmented huge earth elementals to make full attacks (2 attacks, +19 melee, 2d10+9.

PC 2: Cleric 20: Reminds everyone of their vigor spell (everyone gets 4 hp back. Uses Divine Power to up his caster level (turn check) then casts Cometfall, 20d6 damage, Reflex 1/2. Moves. Else, Casts Heal or Mass Cure to save Ranger, F/W and/or Rogue.

PC 3: Wizard/Arcmage: Begins with Polar Ray (20d6, ranged touch, checks SR). Uses Quickened Targeted Dispel Magic on Foe, rolling a CL check for each of the foe's buffs. DM recalculates foes stats. Moves.

PC 4: Ranger 20. Makes 5 attacks (4 bab, +1 speed) with +4 speed bastard sword, rolls damage (DM subtracts DR and notes), and rolling for three attacks with off hand (+3 cold iron holy shortsword) again doing damage and DM subtracting DR.

PC 5: Rogue/Thief Acrobat. If its sneak-attackable (which is rare) 5 foot, (to flank with ranger) make three attacks with primary hand (each doing 1d8+5 +8d6 SA) and one with off hand (doing 9d6 SA). DM notes totals and subtracts DR. If not, hang back with my shortbow and do three attacks at 4d6 (fire, holy). DM checks DR and Energy Resist.

PC 6: Fighter/Wizard/Eldrich Knight/Arcmage. Arcane Strikes with full attack for a +9 to hit, +9d4 damage on four attacks. DM notes, subtracts DR. Quickens a magic missile (checks SR, 5 1d4+1) for good measure.

Enemies Turn.

While in theory someone was typically getting shafted a full attack round (moving, etc) each PC's turn had at least three distinct parts, many had up to seven or more. It also assumes around round 3 or higher, rounds 1 & 2 were typically full of charging, the casting of haste and mass animal buffs, dispelling enemy buffs etc.

No wonder it took nearly half-an-hour to play out one round of combat...

 

[Agamon]

I admit, my group in AOW were mostly competent players, with one "master" and one player that loved making sub-optimal PCs. The sub-optimal PCs had a casualty rate about equal to the competents (but didn't help a whole lot in combat, often making things tougher for everyone).

The system master, OTOH, went through 11 PCs in RttToEE and 9 PCs in AoW. He was really good at maximizing his damage output...which made the nasties glare at him all the more. That, combined with the fact that his tactical ability is on the low end of the spectrum, and most of those attacks that made the party cringe were directed at his PC.

So far, he's fairing a lot better in 4e. (In fact, no PCs have died so far...I'm losing my killer DM rep...I need to run something by Paizo again )

 

[billd91]

Giving NPCs names and adding/altering plot is a far cry then having to adjust the difficulty of 3E monsters. The two are not comparable

They are absolutely comparable. In both cases, you change the off-the-rack product for personal consumption. Ever change the city where something was set? Ever change the treasure to be more fitting to your current group of PCs? Ever change a plot hook or character because it would then be more meaningful for the current PCs? Ever swap out one humanoid type for another because the use they were put to in the module didn't fit the campaign?

It's all the same thing. Published modules frequently need work to adapt them to the current game at the table. What that adaptive work needs to be will vary from table to table just as the make-up of the players and PCs vary.

 

[Rechan]

Uses Quickened Targeted Dispel Magic on Foe, rolling a CL check for each of the foe's buffs. DM recalculates foes stats. Moves.

This is about where I stopped, curled into a ball, and wept.

But then, I broke into a sweat re-calculating to-hit and damage after receiving a Bull's strength when using a two-handed weapon.

As a sidenote, I read over that and bang my head against a wall seeing the Magic Missiles. 20th level characters using a 5th level slot to do 5d4+5 damage (and checking SR five times). There's a reason I hate magic missile with a passion. It just brings the mental image of Rambo taking on Godzilla with a BB gun.

 

[Agamon]

They are absolutely comparable. In both cases, you change the off-the-rack product for personal consumption. Ever change the city where something was set? Ever change the treasure to be more fitting to your current group of PCs? Ever change a plot hook or character because it would then be more meaningful for the current PCs? Ever swap out one humanoid type for another because the use they were put to in the module didn't fit the campaign?

It's all the same thing. Published modules frequently need work to adapt them to the current game at the table. What that adaptive work needs to be will vary from table to table just as the make-up of the players and PCs vary.

Comparable, yes. Just like looking for a needle you dropped on the floor is comparable to looking for one dropped in a haystack.

 

[BryonD]

This is about where I stopped, curled into a ball, and wept.

But then, I broke into a sweat re-calculating to-hit and damage after receiving a Bull's strength when using a two-handed weapon.

It is difficult to respond to posts that involve people going on and on about what they can't handle.

 

[BryonD]

The new toy seems a lot more robust to me.

I agree. It certainly has a lot fewer moving parts.

 

[Rechan]

It is difficult to respond to posts that involve people going on and on about what they can't handle.

Then don't respond.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Do you think those two character examples are not representative of 3e? Because they seem pretty ordinary to me. A TWF and one of the main casters... it's not like I even gave them Leadership.


The new toy seems a lot more robust to me.

The old toy had wheels.

You broke the wheels off it.

The new toy does not have wheels.

Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!