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

[Ravellion]

If they do that, the bow will be kindiling the first time they come up against an intelligent opponent. Unless the sunder rules have been changed too.

Actually, come to think of it, they must have been changed. Since DR doesn't have plusses anymore, I wonder how the rules for monsters sundering magic items will work now?

Friendly Druid (hostile tot he party) with the Magic Fang spell

Intelligent opponents are more often than not NPCs anyway, or can advance in character class.

Rav

 

[Shard O'Glase]

I just hope to god sundering isn't easier than it was before. It was so dang easy I just removed it from the game. I felt it was a ability that if used to its logical extension becuase it was so easy, would steal the fun from the game as weapons and items got sundered left and right.

Some like it I guess and either for some reaosn don't have a sunder fest 2003 every game, or that the tactical option makes the game.

 

[Dimwhit]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Dimwhit


OK, since I was the one who said it was abusive, I'll concede that you're correct. Having those two are not abusive. However, if every one of your characters has a Keen Falchion and Imp Crit with it (or rapier, or scimitar), that's abusive. Or at the very least, it's a good example of constantly exploiting the rules out of munchinism, not roleplaying and character development.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Um I do it just because I think its cool. If making a character because I think its cool is munchinism then step aside whoever has/had that sig I'm the munchkin king.

And I think it is character developemnt oriented, if you focus on a weapon taking any feat that directly applies to your chosen weapon is character develpment oriented. The keen well its a modifier that is more improve your weapon while not changing its focus, so again it fits. A flaming weapon I think is a much bigger styalistic change to a weapon than merely making one of its hidden funcitons(crits)better.

I don't disagree. I have a 12th level fighter who uses a Falchion and has Imp Crit. It's a style that I developed with him, and I like it (he doesn't have a keen falchion yet, but I'm working on it. ). I have no problem with that. But my other fighter doesn't have the keen, imp crit, falchion/scimitar/rapier combo. Neither does my Rogue, Wizard, or Druid (man, we play a lot of different campaigns). I don't begrudge anyone using that combination when it works well with the character. But doing it over and over with different characters because it gives you more damage is exploiting the option. Occasionally is fine...that's why the rules are (or were) there, and I would never call that being a munchkin. But if 75% of your characters have that combo, that's another story...

Edit: I really need to check my spelling before I poist...

 

[Shard O'Glase]

well 2 points

1. it really doens't give more damage

2. this isn't a problem with the style or a problem really. I don't get on my friends case for playing a rogue every time, because that's what he likes to play. If someone likes to play crit machine every time so what, as long as there having fun big deal if they play the same thing over and over.

 

[Dimwhit]

If someone likes to play crit machine every time so what, as long as there having fun big deal if they play the same thing over and over.

Right. But isn't that the very definition of a munchkin? I agree...if that's what they like to play, fine. I just don't think the rules should be changed based on the designers not liking how those players use the rules. (What that even my point to begin with? I don't even remember anymore. )

 

[Pax]

Right. But isn't that the very definition of a munchkin?

Um, playng what you like every time is not munchkin. Should I be considered a munchkin because I like playng sorcerors, or Undead (or preferably both), as often as possible?

Another type I like to play is the very young sorceror (I mean, HS underclassman young). Is that munchkin?

Ofc, each character has their own approach to how they handle the world; one character I had planned on having all five possible EnSub feats, and lots of elemental-damage-type spells, at least one per spell level if not more. Currently, I've one going for the "pseudo-Illusionist" route. I've also had [force]-effect obsessed sorcerors.

And "PseudoNacromancer" sorcerors.

Etc.

Having a general category, tactic, etc, that you usually or always pursue is not munchkin, not even close. Now, if you always have to have such-and-such EXACT spread of attributes, and such-and-such EXACT array of feats. and such-and-such EXACT assortment of classes and prestige classes, every single time you play, now that Iwould call munchkin.

Or at least, "imagination challenged".

 

[LuYangShih]

What irritates me most about this change is the fact it seems to have been implemented simply because Andy Collins did not like PCs having a high crit range. It is not abusable, munchkin, or overpowered, as has been mathematically demonstrated. It is, if anything, underpowered, since crits cannot affect elementals, constructs, undead and objects. You will almost always be better off using a weapon with a high base damage, rather than a higher crit range. This change has no logic or well founded reasoning behind it, and was brought about just because of the preference of one member on the redesign team.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

and was brought about just because of the preference of one member on the redesign team.

Prove it.

 

[Metalsmith]

Originally posted by Zhure I concur. Trying to crank out a really awesome critical wielder takes a lot of specialized abilities:

Assuming the character wants to be self-sufficient he needs to either max out UMD and take a level or two of Rogue or Bard, or sucks it up and takes three levels of Cleric

You did take the Hard Road on this character build.

Being self-sufficient is fine if you play with a bunch of bastards who you can't count on, or if you are playing mano a mano with just the DM and you. If you're playing with a group you can atleast half depend on you can eliminate much of the cost in class abilites you'd have to cough up. A few Wands of Keen, Assn Sense and a willing Cleric or Sorcerer or Rogue in the party and you can take just pure levels of Fighter and Weapon Master.

I honestly dont understand the Pissing and Moaning about Threat Ranges not stacking opon each other. You're still able to Double your Threat Range, you just are not able to Tripple it or Quadruple it anymore.

 

[Apok]

Funny, but I really don't have much of a problem with this change. Yeah, it does kinda suck that your high multiplier weapons will never be able to crit on anything better than a 19-20 roll, but it could be worse.