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

[Dimwhit]

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

Nope! We've never had a problem with too many crits. For that matter, we've never had spellcasters with out-of-control DCs, we've never had entire parties with multiple buff spells cast on them all day every day, we've never felt power attack was at all weak, etc.

It's funny, but before 3.5 was mentioned, I never saw so much debate over the rules as written as I have seen over the new 3.5 rules (and this only about the rules we know about). For sure, there was debate, and people felt some things needed to change, but the debate never seemed to be this big.

I will say, however, that there are a number of positive things I've heard come out of 3.5. But the ratio of good/bad isn't what I had hoped for. I guess I'll just wait and see what else happens when the books are released.

 

[Camarath]

No. The function of the lead designer for WOTC's R&D department is to discern what the majority of customers would like, and write THAT.

Amen, Pax, Amen

I had originally though that this "Revision" was mainly goning to revise the game's rules and mechanics based on inconsistencies in the current rule set and awkward game mechanics but the more of the new rule set I see the more it seems to me that they are reenvisioning the rules based on gameplay perefinces instead. The changes seem more and more stop gap to me. Some of them are needed but many are not. If something doesn't work the designers need to ask why it doesn't work and fix that not implement a work around. I can implement a work around what I can't do (very easliy) is adjust and balance the core rules system and it's principles.

 

[Delgar]

making house rules is all fine and dandy for your own home campaign, but for the living campaigns it doesn't fly.

If they want to tone down the living campaigns then they have to tone down the rules. Basically all of the rule changes I've seen so far have been heavily abused in the living campaigns. This is where the true powergamer/munchkin lives. This is where you get to see the rules fall apart.

If you just play with your home group and make up house rules as you go, you don't see the whole system. But trust me join any of the living campaigns and actually travel around a bit and play and you'll see a lot of different power combo's. Honestly they should really give the LG crowd the rules to playtest and they'll find all the loopholes in Month.

Anyway, no matter how much they fix it, the powergamers and munchkins will find the most powerful possibility and exploit it. It is the way of things. It doesn't change, it is the universal constant.

Delgar

 

[Dimwhit]

Anyway, no matter how much they fix it, the powergamers and munchkins will find the most powerful possibility and exploit it. It is the way of things. It doesn't change, it is the universal constant.

Exactly! That's why the designers need to stop changing the rules based on what the powergamers do and start looking at the 'standard' players (however you want to define standard).

 

[Pax]

making house rules is all fine and dandy for your own home campaign, but for the living campaigns it doesn't fly.

If they want to tone down the living campaigns then they have to tone down the rules. Basically all of the rule changes I've seen so far have been heavily abused in the living campaigns. This is where the true powergamer/munchkin lives. This is where you get to see the rules fall apart.

Actually, I daresay, an Arena campaign is where you see this, faster, more often, and with greater clarity. Arena's PROMOTE powergaming and munchkinism, as it's part of the AIM of such a campaign.

And huge crit ranges just aren't a problem in an Arena; it's far too easy for a high-level character to obtain SOME means of immunity to critical hits.

For good ideas of what sorts of things end up being broken ... go to www.rpol.net; in the Arena category, look up "Exodus", and check the various rulings (neatly categorised by threads, even). That covers the early Epic stuff, but games in the 17th-20th level range will see similar problems.

And I also say, to the "no houserules for Living Campaigns" -- bull! I've seen some of the rules for them; there ARE houserules for living campaigns, right in the players' guide for each one of them. Minimal, perhaps, but there nonetheless.

And those living-campaign-specific houserules should never be made CORE rules; I don't play in a Living Campaign ... wth should I have to buy rules designed to balance one of them?

 

[Lotus]

The fact that they had specific rules for stacking crit threat ranges in 3.0 is a clear sign that it was an intentional game mechanic. They've decided to revoke that rule because it was a mistake.

Using a mechanic that is specifically written into the rules isn't munchkinism. You might as well say that anyone who ever cast Harm or who used Power Attack with TWF is a munchkin.

The "bag of rats" uber-cleave mess... now that's munchkinism.

(And no, I never had a 12-20 crit range... because it's not as effective as it sounds.)

 

[Delgar]

Exactly! That's why the designers need to stop changing the rules based on what the powergamers do and start looking at the 'standard' players (however you want to define standard).

Oops I guess I didn't quite make my point clear in the last message. I think that there were a few things that needed to be cleaned up in the old edition to stop the powergamers and munchkins from eating the system alive.

Also with the living campaigns they depend wholly on the Core Rules, so they really need them to be as clean as you can make them. Abuse will still happen, but it won't be as dramatic. There were just too many things in 3.0 that were problematic.

I don't see the problem with fixing things that need fixing and clarify things that need clarifing. I also don't see a problem with nerfing or making things more challenging.

Personally I think most of the whiners and naysayers are the ones who are going to be affected by the changes. Really who cares if they change the ability to stack crit ranges, does it actually make the game less playable? Heck criticals didn't even exist in the older editions.

But alas my words will fall upon deaf ears. I think 3.5 is good, I think they're fixing up the things that need fixing and I will play it as is to see how all things work out. Seeing only one piece of the puzzle makes it very difficult to tell what the whole picture will look like. Then again your not supposed to judge a book by it's cover and I'm pretty sure most people do!

Delgar

 

[splitinfinitude]

I have to admit, the crit stacking never bothered me. It turned the character into an all or nothing gambler. Against many things, crit master was soooooo weak, and having so much invested in maxing the crits increased the problem.

I know that, theoretically, the critmaster can get some outrageous munchkin results, but IME it rarely worked out that way. Not even the scythe was, overall, that overpowering crit-wise.

Much like the double-dagger wielding halfing thief theoretically could do heckuv sneak attack damage (6x8d6, anyone?), and it was awesome when everything worked, but generally it was pretty average.

 

[Aelryinth]

People will still take improved Crit.

After all, at Epic levels, you can't have Devastating critical without it.

==Aelryinth

 

[Mike Sullivan]

Re: People will still take improved Crit.

After all, at Epic levels, you can't have Devastating critical without it.

Of course they will. Keen is what's likely to disappear.