3.5 Scoops Discussion

[Shard O'Glase]

Here is an example where you take the power up and ignore the power down.

If those exampes effected the same class you might have a point for his group.

 

[Dimwhit]

The improvement of Power Attack doesn't really bug me. I always thought it was a fairly lame feat, only useful in certain situations.

No offense, but that's a silly argument. Just about all feats are only useful in certain situations. That's kind of the point, I think. Power Attack, IMO, is the best utility feat a fight can use. If nothing else, think of all the times they only get a standard action to attack (charge, move and attack, draw a weapon and attack, etc.). I think it's an awesome feat, and they just made it really, really nasty.

But, to each his own.

Evokers are all going to have the same prohibited schools - Enchantment and Necromancy.

Not true. I took Enchantment and Abjuration.

I've never seen a wizard character built at 5th level or above that was a specialist. Never.

The first Wizard I tried a year or two ago started at 7th level. He was a specialist. Don't remember which school, though. Transmutation I think. So there's one!

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

These discussions really make me appreciate my group (gotta remember to bake them some cookies next time or something). I could go to any of my players, say 'I think 'x' is a little too powerful and is causing some game issues.' and they'd say 'change it' right away.

Fortunately, they trust me enough to know that I'll play fair with encounters. They know that they can get killed, but they know if it happens it's because of poor planning or bad luck, not because I threw stuff at them that they had no chance of beating. They know they don't have to min-max everything just to survive.

It's nice to have players who play for the story and camaraderie and not to compete with each other over who can do the most damage.

 

[Storm Raven]

So it looks like people are eager to adopt changes that help their characters and are just going to ignore changes that hurt their characters. Sure, take all the good without the bad. That'll make a balanced game.

The change to wizard specialization is not a "power down" and yet many people are talking about ignoring it.

It is actually a "power up" for conjurers, transmuters and evokers, since it makes the relative cost of specializing in those schools less than it is now. It also unbalances those spcializations with respect to enchanters, illusionists, and necromancers.

Your theory needs work, since it doesn't hold up under scrutiny.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

Agreed Psion, nor do I hear people griping about the following monster changes:

Skill points equal, animals getting feats. (Hey just because you HAVE an animal companion doesn't mean it will work for you.) Beast and shapechanger becoming subtypes, damage reduction altered so now it requires more than just a standard + whatever type. Pit Fiend being revamped.

Seems to me all I'm griping about is changes that make SENSE. This is not one of them.

But there was quite a discussion of the new DR when it was released. By virtue of it being first it has been displaced as the topic on conversation. I still stand by by my opinion that this goes against fantasy stereotypes of the hero only needing his one magic weapon not a golfbag of special weapons from cold iron to moldy cheese. This aspect alone has left me cold on 3.5 and is by far the worst rule change that I have seen so far.

As for the other monster changes, many have complained that major changes to monsters hurt backwards compatibility and force major reworks of 3.0 adventures to ensure proper CR balance.

 

[Psion]

Pick another barred school, and mark off some spells, I guess.

You don't know how much that wigs with my sense of consitency. Not to mention I currently see no balance reasons to do so. I am having a hard time imagining that this was a balance-oriented change.

I'm pretty lenient when it comes to allowing players to alter their characters... so long as it does not invalidate what has transpired in the game. I'm not letting the 3.5 design team get away with a consistency problem my players wouldn't be allowed to.

 

[Psion]

But there was quite a discussion of the new DR when it was released.

Y'know, I was dubious about it from the get go (again, mainly for backwards compatability reason), and on the way to work I thought of another problem that I wonder if they have addressed.

With the blood war and fueds in the abyss, we know outsiders fight each other. But how does the "you can hit something that is invulnerable to the same thing you are" (or less) work. They might have just used the same principle, but how does it work with the "and/or" thing they have going on now?

I still stand by by my opinion that this goes against fantasy stereotypes of the hero only needing his one magic weapon not a golfbag of special weapons from cold iron to moldy cheese.

LOL. Cute image.

"Nodwick... looks like a balrog. Hand my my holy putter!"

 

[bret]

From the other thread, about Sorc spell swapping:

One and only one. And the spell must be 2 Levels lower than the highest level you can cast.

This is interesting. If I recall the Sorc spell table correctly, the first swap (at 4th level) can only be used for a Cantrip.

 

[Selvarin]

The only problem with this is that it has little effect on schools with few spells that have save DCs. For example, this change would be of almost no benefit to Abjurers or Diviners, while being of tremendous benefit to Evokers or Enchanters.

Perhaps a better options would be: by choosing to specialize in a school, all spells of that school are cast at +1 caster level, and all spells of other schools are cast at -1 caster level (yes, this severely limits your options at 1st level, specializing should have a price).

I won't deny that specialist wizards who have more combat-orientated spells get to benefit more but that's always been the case. In the case of abjurers their protections are that much harder to dispel, and one could say the bonus would also apply when an abjurer attempts to dispel/bypass abjuration spells cast by others. For illusionists, the same thing. For diviners, it should make it harder for others to conceal themselves--and easier for them to thwart divination spells themselves. Ack, so many ideas to consider, and part of my interest (and irritation) stems from me not quite liking how specialist wizards were rendered in 3.0 to begin with.

OK, let's see....a slightly revised 3.5 idea:

1) +1 DC to all spells from the specialist wizard's chosen school; +2 on Spellcraft checks relating to the school; +1 on saves vs. spells from the chosen school; -1 DC penalty to spells cast by the specialist wizard with regard to two other schools.

The bonuses would, of course, stack with Spell Focus and greater Spell Focus, providing another incentive for one to specialize since a generalist wizard would at best get +2 from taking the two feats whereas the specialist would have +3 and has other benefits as well. (Depending on how one looks at it, being able to take Spell Focus/greater Spell Focus in 3.0 is either a boon or curse since it allows one to cast more certain spells more effectively without requiring one to be a specialist in the first place, and allows one to keep access to all schools even if it's at the expense of not gaining a bonus spell/spell level.)

 

[Shard O'Glase]

this isn't new but now semi confirmed monks hit magic/lawfuladamantine gaining these abilities at various levels. I guess silver/holy/unholy you jsut say to the monk sucks to be you.

I think this was done poorly. IMO it should of been at 4th level can overcome one DR choose as your swinging the punch at 10th level can overcome a two DR combo like Holy/Silver again choose as throwing the punch, at 16th level can overcome a 3 DR combo like Chaotic/holy/silver again choose as the punch lets fly.

Then again I jsut think it would be fun to call out the styles you slip into, HAHA fiend you can't survive my holysilver droping griphon technique.