D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] What did they do to improve Spider Climb?

[Kae'Yoss]

It's amazing! The vast majority of changes has been for the better, at least IMO, and still the people find the few things they don't like any more and bark loudly about it. The usually 3.5-complaint sounds like: "3.5 is crêpe because xxx has changed" while it should sound like : "3.5 is nice, but I don't like what they did to xxx."

 

[bret]

It's amazing! The vast majority of changes has been for the better, at least IMO, and still the people find the few things they don't like any more and bark loudly about it. The usually 3.5-complaint sounds like: "3.5 is crêpe because xxx has changed" while it should sound like : "3.5 is nice, but I don't like what they did to xxx."

I thought it was a legitimate question.

I wanted to know what people saw in the spell that would make it worthy of a 2nd level spell, especially since the spell had been around since the first printing of the 1st edition as a first level spell.

I've never had a problem with the spell at first level. That doesn't mean that there isn't a problem, just that I haven't seen it. Thus the question.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

It's amazing! The vast majority of changes has been for the better, at least IMO, and still the people find the few things they don't like any more and bark loudly about it. The usually 3.5-complaint sounds like: "3.5 is crêpe because xxx has changed" while it should sound like : "3.5 is nice, but I don't like what they did to xxx."

hm well I think about 1/2 the spell changes were bad changes, feat changes almost universally bad, new prestige classes I don't like, new DR bad, and things they some things didn't change are also bad, dwarf changes, gnome change, weapon size, facing.

Good: class changes, the other 1/2 the spells, most the new feats, combat chapter, many of the beefed up monsters, some of the new spells.

Some of the good I think are really important, and some of the bad really minor so I put it at 50-50 good to bad changes. I find it absolutely astounding how many people simply ignore the bad and continue to see 3.5 through their rose colored shades.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

It should only sound like "3.5 is nice, but I don't like what they did to xxx" if 3.5 actually is nice. My considered opinion, having seen the SRD now is that, while some of the changes are for the better, the majority of them--and especially the most significant changes (the practical elimination of stat buffs, the new alter self, the new DR, wizard changes, the new face/reach system, the new weapon size system, and the dramatically increased availability of size enhancing magic)--are for the worse. So, the form I would choose to describe 3.5e changes is "3.5 is crêpe but the change to xxx was actually nice."

It's amazing! The vast majority of changes has been for the better, at least IMO, and still the people find the few things they don't like any more and bark loudly about it. The usually 3.5-complaint sounds like: "3.5 is crêpe because xxx has changed" while it should sound like : "3.5 is nice, but I don't like what they did to xxx."

 

[Kae'Yoss]

I thought it was a legitimate question.

It is.

It was the reaction of many here that I don't quite like.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Some of the good I think are really important, and some of the bad really minor so I put it at 50-50 good to bad changes. I find it absolutely astounding how many people simply ignore the bad and continue to see 3.5 through their rose colored shades.

Truth is, there are not many things I don't really like, and those are quite minor.