3rd Edition too quick? too powerful?

[navriin]

First of all let me start off by saying I've been playing 3rd ed since it came out and love the d20 system (finally, no cross-referencing of contradictary rules and different mechanics). I prefer it over any previous incarnation of D&D, and it is the easiest and prefered fantasy ruleset for myself.

Now for the rant...

As much as I like the mechanical aspects of 3rd ed, the general strategy of building a character and speed of advancement seem to sour my experience playing the game. I've noticed a great many people I play with having drastic changes in the attitudes about how things work, and not for the better IMHO.

First is experience. You level to fast. In 2nd edition I remember the players having a real sense of accomplishment upon earning a level, and they were able to count the various scenarios their characters triumphed over to earn their xp. Now in 3rd ed, players look at me like I'm cheating them if they don't level AT LEAST once a game session (about 8 hours). It's very common for me to see players plotting their advancement into epic levels, because it really isn't many game sessions until they get there. in second edition a couple of rl years translated to about three or four levels gained for the higher level players, my time in third ed has seen about 9.

Second is the amount of wealth. Since the system is balanced based on GP values of eq per level, you are required to give certain averages of treasure per encounter to keep players up to snuff. Economics used to be reasonable to me, but now it's not atypical to find a group of kobolds or gobins with HUNDREDS of gold coins, based on the ECL. If these humanoids are so rich, why don't they become businessmen and landowners, instead of 'cannon fodder'?

Third, and related to the second, is the sheer amount of magic items in a game. It used to seem that anything beyond a +2 sword was a major find, but now everyone has magic, and tons of it. There is nothing special about magic anymore, PCs are often worried about unloading the EXTRA items they have for coin, and plan their characters next item like they are browsing in a department store. What's worse is that the system is set up to where the PC's don't stand a chance if they don't have the tons of glowy things needed to fight monsters, their skill is practically irrelevant compared to the +'s of their equipment.

Lastly, I find people expect the equal to the party level CR a thing of law. Players complain that it is unfair to throw harder monsters at them, even though a balanced CR consumes only 20% of a party's resources-in other words an appropriate CR has no real chance of killing a PC and does not seem worthy of the xp it gives. 13 easy fights or so and a level is gained, throw harder monsters at them and after the whining, they are just that much closer to a level (see issue one).

phew ok, I'm done ranting.

I fully know if i don't like it i can stop playing it. And i also know that i can change what i don't like. Since i don't have time to come up with my own game system, i'm 'stuck' with 3rd ed, which isn't so bad, i know the system like the back of my hand. So my second option is to change things, which i find hard to do. I'm the type to fully consider any change to the rules, and toning down things for a 'low magic, realistic approach' will take MAJOR retooling to be balanced. Mainly I'm wondering if people have the same problems taht i do, or even if they consider it a problem. Also what has been people's experience with toned down campaigns?

Input is welcome..

 

[-Ekimus-]

i find it much more entertaining and keeps me much more interested in it. it also has the same EXP lvls for every class, which really pissed me off in 2nd edition... for the better i say

 

[Alchemist]

Heh. There's loads of threads on the topics you cover. Poke around.

I have similar problems after DMing through an unmodified campaign. My thoughts, and how I'm doing it the next time around:

Experience: Don't do it by the book. If you feel the characters were not challenged by an encounter, penalize the xp. How are they meant to be learning and growing by doing the same old to foes who are pushovers? As a note, it's one thing for an encounter to be easy because they're tough. It's another thing if it's easy because they're clever. Don't penalize the clever victories.

Wealth: You don't *have* to give out x gold for y encounter. And if I had rich kobolds, they wouldn't be loitering around in poorly defended caves. See Magic for more.

Magic: I had a similar problem. My solution? No item creation feats for players except for Craft Potion and Scribe Scroll. Magic shops are nonexistant, and the only source for custom items is the artificers' guild. Potions and scrolls are available from the appropriate guilds/churches, but you have to be a member or pay a premium. On a similar vein is ressurection magics. To get that raise dead is going to cost you more than just cash, and may not be available at all if you're not a worshipper of that deity. Even then, you have to perform a service to the church for the boon. In 3.5 DR is apparently being adjusted so that if you aren't packing an appropriate weapon to pierce it, you can still do some damage through brute force. I could ramble on forever about lowering magic in the world, but in a nutshell I'm restricting access to magic items they don't find and cutting back the availability of raw spellcasting power so the casters don't outstrip the non-casters.

The last point you make is somewhat related to earlier points. They get xp for stuff that's no problem, so why risk your neck for xp that might get you killed? Your players are expecting to Diablo their way around and are unimpressed by "real" challenges. Complaining that the encounter dosen't match the level of the party is, well, whining. It sounds like they don't want a challenge, just to level up and be the biggest butt-kicker on the block. Talk to your players before starting the next campaign and lay it all out before them so they can voice their objections before it's too late.

I hope you can implement some of these sort of ideas. I don't think the whole game needs a major retooling but it will take some work to step back from the high-magic assumption of the rulebooks. Take away the magic shops and make spellcasting more difficult. Low magic worlds make more sense with low magic monsters, or at least a rarity of magical monsters.

Bleagh. I'm rambling. If any of that made any sense, I salute you. If any of it was helpful, I'm overjoyed.

 

[navriin]

Nod....

I've thought about regulating clerics to prestige classes, and perhaps mages as well. Casting types would become really rare, a spellcasting cleric would be a one of a kind saint, and a mage a terror indeed, to go along with this perhaps a reduction in available spell levels like d20 modern? (These classes would require RP requirements in addition to numbers).

To tone down magic items i'm considering allowing all creation feats, but those beyond potions and scrolls, and perhaps wands/staffs are usuable once. I.E. You take craft wonderous item once, you get to make ONE wonderous items, this would make magic rare and unique to the creator I hope.

thoughts?

I may ramble off further thoughts if this thread goes on.

 

[Dark Jezter]

1) Firstly, I love it how in 3E it dosen't take an eternity to level up like 2E did. IIRC, WotC did a survey and found that the average D&D session lasts 9 months. They readjusted how expirience is handled so that if characters on average fight four encounters per session, with one session per week, then they will level up on average once per month. That way, the players will be able to expirience a range of levels during the duration of the campaign.

2) As for the wealth, I've never seen a problem with it. Monsters have always carried lots of gold in D&D. Always have, probably always will. Does it always make sense why an ogre is carrying around enough money to buy a small town? Nope, but that's adventuring for you!

3) I kind of agree with you that the game becomes a little too reliant on magic weapons later in the game, due to the fact that lots of monsters have damage reduction. Luckily, this is going to be remidied in 3.5E. Magic Items will still be useful for fighting tough monsters, but they won't be required.

4) If your players are complaining when you throw a tough monster at them, it's thier problem, not a 3E problem.

 

[jdavis]

It sounds more like a problem of what your characters expect than what is in the rules. If they get mad because a CR is over their party level or they expect to level up every session then it's about what they expect not what is. As DM they get what you give them, it's sort of the reason why the DM exist, if not they could just play Neverwinter Nights and let the computer DM. It's funny but I have none of those probles with the game I am running right now. I don't care for the prevailance of magic items but we had the same problem when we played 2ed and 1ed, we always had too much crap. I control the magic items pretty well now, we also play a style where there might only be one combat in a whole module, so it is a big one. It's all a matter of the style you play, don't let them hit you with a bunch of rule book stuff, play the game to make it fun, the DM decides what the encounters are and how much treasure you get not the rule books.

 

[WayneLigon]

First is experience. You level to fast. ...players look at me like I'm cheating them if they don't level AT LEAST once a game session (about 8 hours)....

I'd say your players are either the luckiest people on earth, to routinely survive that number of encounters (almost unscathed, you seem to imply - sorry if that's a wrong asumption), or something funny is going on. I'd be looking at some character sheets to make sure they've calculated things correctly. It's easy to foul up something there.

Alternately, look at DMG 167-168. If an encounter has been a cakewalk, adjust the XP. Or use the variant for simply reducing XP across the board, if you're more comfortable with a slower level progression.

Second is the amount of wealth.

I haven't really found it to be a problem. Just reduce the treasure gained.

Third, and related to the second, is the sheer amount of magic items in a game. ... What's worse is that the system is set up to where the PC's don't stand a chance if they don't have the tons of glowy things needed to fight monsters.,..

I have seen exactly the opposite effect. In 2E, if you didn't have a magic weapon, some things (like gargoyles) were invulnerable to you, unless you were a spell caster. If you didn't have a magic weapon by about fourth level, you were a dead man. In 3E, I've actually seen some characters get to mid levels with no magic weapon and, furthermore, no real need of one. Same with wands, rings, etc.

Lastly, I find people expect the equal to the party level CR a thing of law. ..

Most of the time, when I've miscalculated an encounter or tried to break the CR thing by more than one, I've ended up very close to a TPK. It's still quite possible to die in an equal CR encounter; ask anyone who, at first or second level, is critted by an orcish great-axe. No, wait, you can't ask them, 'cause they're dead

 

[Alchemist]

More thoughts from my midterm-studying addled mind:

I like faster levelling too, but I think it can come too fast, especially in combat-heavy campaigns. It was a little disconcerting that my party made it to 8th level in about 6 months of game time. I need to put some sort of control on that too to make it slower at higher levels.

I've seen low magic worlds proposed that casters have to multiclass in equal levels with non-caster classes.

Introducing some sort of Spellcraft (or whatever) DC to cast a spell with a failed check still casting the spell but the caster suffering for it by taking damage or whatever other mechanic you like.

I considered a flat spell failure percentage, much like the armour restrictions. The failure percentage would drop around ley lines and would disappear at nexuses. Wizards, Clerics and magical monsters would all vie for command of such places of power.

I like the second option, and will probably blend it with the ley line/node concept to reduce DC's on these sites. I mightlimplement some sort of extended casting time to lower the DC of the casting check would be good too.

I think that if you were to make the creation feats a one-shot deal, nobody would take them. I would rather take my chances with the DM's favor than throw away a feat on a stinking ring of protection.

 

[Ds Da Man]

I don't mind any of the things you mentioned, I just have a problem with prestige classes. I don't like having to "aim" a character a certain way. You have to know what you want to be before you even get there. It seems so linear. I think i will get rid of requirements for prestige classes, and only "offer" them to PC's from now on. That way, you can play your character anyway you want. I can then really offer prestige classes as rewards, and even if your a thief, and you do something truly noble, you can get offered into knight's prestige classes and such.

 

[hong]

I think i will get rid of requirements for prestige classes, and only "offer" them to PC's from now on. That way, you can play your character anyway you want.

Hmmm. What happens if I want to play my character as aiming for a given prestige class?