D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] Threat ranges no longer stack!

[coyote6]

Indeed, the presence of the Comic Book Store Guy is strong in this thread.

Worst. Post. Evar!

PS: It's kind of inevitable that Andy Collins get the blame; he's "Senior Designer", and has largely taken point on the 'net with respect to the revision. Point always draws the fire. And then there's the bit that some changes were first mentioned as house rules of Andy's -- e.g., druid's spontaneously casting summon nature's ally -- that gives a convenient hook to hang comments on.

 

[Murrdox]

It is one more silly, pointless, unneccessary change that appears to have been made just to make a change. Andy has come out and provided half-baked justifications for about all of them. Perhaps if he had given good justifications, he wouldn't be the subject of criticism. [/B]

Discuss the rule all you want. I think this is a good rule change, and I enjoy reading everyone's analysis of it. What I DON'T enjoy is seeing posts in the midst of the rule discussion that are solely devoted to bashing Andy Collins.

But if you or anyone else want to keep blaming Andy Collins for this, or any other rule revision that you don't like, then go to the General forum and start a "Why I hate Andy" thread. That sort of tripe doesn't belong here.

 

[dravot]

Worst. Post. Evar!

This rule is, without a doubt, the worst rule ever. Rest assured I was on the internet within minutes registering my disgust throughout the world.

 

[Grog]

(snip crit monster stats)

So, you're complaining that a munchkined-out character who is totally optimized for crits and has access to a non-core rules PrC and spell crits a lot? If this is a problem, the solution is not to nerf the core rules to make up for it.

This is becoming a trend in 3.5, and it's not a good one IMO. Sure, a munchkin fighter who uses a lot of supplemental material can get a high threat range. Just like a munchkin wizard who uses a lot of supplemental material can crank his DCs to astronomical levels. But instead of addressing the supplemental material, WotC is choosing to nerf stuff in the core rules instead. The problem is, this doesn't just affect the munchkins, it affects all players.

And the really stupid part is, stacking threat ranges isn't abusive 99% of the time. Maybe some characters can get a lot of damage out of it (I don't feel like doing the math on your crit monster), but if that's the case, the answer isn't to reduce the options for every single fighter just to get at those few.

Oh, and btw, if the character you mentioned is really that big of a problem, any 18th level character wielding a +1 sword is just begging to be sundered (even if they GMW it, that can be dispelled).

 

[Dimwhit]

So, you're complaining that a munchkined-out character who is totally optimized for crits and has access to a non-core rules PrC and spell crits a lot? If this is a problem, the solution is not to nerf the core rules to make up for it.

This is becoming a trend in 3.5, and it's not a good one IMO. Sure, a munchkin fighter who uses a lot of supplemental material can get a high threat range. Just like a munchkin wizard who uses a lot of supplemental material can crank his DCs to astronomical levels. But instead of addressing the supplemental material, WotC is choosing to nerf stuff in the core rules instead. The problem is, this doesn't just affect the munchkins, it affects all players.

Amen, brother! (or sister!)

 

[Wolffenjugend]

IMO, a lot of the problems with munchkin characters can easily be solved by a DM who puts his foot down.

When I see a post complaining about a character that's been min/maxed out the yin-yang, I blame the DM moreso than the player. I mean, take back control over your game DM!!!

Anything that's not in the Core Rules is optional (in fact, EVERYTHING is optional to some degree) so DMs need to exercise their option and put the smack down on a lot of the silly things I read about on these boards.

Not In My Campaign. Words to live by...

 

[Celebrim]

This is yet more evidence that leads me to suspect that:

1) You really have to wait about a decade before a good consensus develops about both what is wrong with the rules and what the best way to fix them is. The reason third edition brought me back to D&D after having sworn off it was that so many of the new rules looked like extraordinarily well thought out variations of my own house rules.

2) Fourth edition (for that is what 3.5 really is) is looking more and more like a particular DM's set of house rules and less and less like a consensus that will be widely accepted by the DMing community.

I do agree with the poster that part of this change was probably based on the effects of having a +1 keen falchion with improved critical and power attack.

Why couldn't they have stuck to just applying errata, adding obvious and well recieved rules extensions, fixing typographical errors, and fixing only those things that 80% of the community had already changed (Harm, for instance)? When you change something that needs changing, 90% of the time if its a well done change, I'll accept the official fix over my house rule because it a) keeps down the number of notes I have to keep b) makes communicating my rulings to a new player all easier. But if you start changing alot of thingsI never saw the need to fix - indeed never even heard anyone say they felt a need to fix - then you are introducing a book that is actually less like the rules I'm using than the one I already have. As such, I don't see a point in buying it.

Barring a couple of breakable PrC's, was anyone actually having troubles with this in thier campaign?

 

[vanguard13]

Another stupid 3.5 over-ruling

This is a stupid 3.5 rule that I would not use in my games. The old critical threat range rules are fine so there is no need to change it. The Zorro pc out there had to spend the time to train with his rapier 18-20/x2 weapon and spend a feat on Imp Critical to make his base drop to 15-20/x2. Now, Zorro needs to be lucky enough to find a masterwork rapier and have it enchanted with the Keen ability or be lucky enough to have a good mage or sorceror friend that could conveniently cast Keen Edge each day. If by some chance after many dangerous missions and rising up in levels, Zorro saves his gold pieces to pay for the enchantment and if such a service is available in his area then frankly he earned his Keen, Imp Critical rapier 12-20/x2 with the mediocre d6 damage dice. Oh yeah, Zorro forgot to say that even though he gets a threat with almost every other roll, he still has to roll to confirm it and just might miss anyway.
The DM only needs to make the PC earn his 12-20 threat range sword and of course, even magic weapons break and can be stolen like anything else.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Anything that's not in the Core Rules is optional

Sometimes you'll find problems even in the Core Rules - this is why they're fixing Harm and Haste, for instance.

 

[Fenes 2]

This whole trend reminds me of Everquest. Some uber-guild made of fanatic minmaxing 24/7 multiboxing players defeat a boss mob with less PCs than the designers expected, and the boss mob encounter gets adjusted to compensate... and no one cares about the "normal" players whose characters are not sporting the best gear, and whose guilds are not composed of the ideal mix of classes.

Fortunately, in D&D I am not forced to adapt every rule made to counter minmaxers and powergamers, but can cater to my own group's playstyle with house rules.