Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dark Jezter" data-source="post: 1636811" data-attributes="member: 1015">Halflings and gnomes can still use standard-sized short swords.  They're simply considered a one-handed weapon instead of a light weapon.The 3.0 weapon size rules did make sense, until Savage Species came out and people began to notice that the 3.0 weapon size rules created a whole lot of problems when it came to playing as PCs larger than medium-sized.  I, too, was skeptical with the 3.5e weapon size rules until I got used to them.  Now, I prefer them over 3.0's weapon size rules.Unless you're using the variant rules for facing found in Unearthed Arcana, there are no facing rules in 3.5e.I played 3.0 without miniatures, and I play 3.5 without miniatures without any more degree of difficulty.  Although you are correct; WotC should not have listed miniatures as a requirement.When exploring dungeons, I've had buff spells last for 2-3 combat encounters.  I also don't feel sad about haste getting nerfed, as it was too powerful before.  In 3.0, combats often became "quick-draw" contests between the mages on each side.  Whichever mage got the higher initiative roll would cast haste on himself, and then blow the opposition out of the water with two spells per turn.Generally, I don't feel too bad about the nerfing of the wizard in 3.0 and 3.5e, because in 1e and 2e, mages were the dominant class after the first few levels.  Now the other classes finally have a chance to shine.It seems like if you were to ask 10 people what a ranger class should be like, you get 10 different answers.  Some people say that a ranger should be like Davy Crockett, some people say that a ranger should be like Aragorn, some people say that it should be like Legolas, some people say that a ranger should be a medieval green beret, some people think that a ranger should be a woodland ninja, et cetera.It's gotten to the point where I've started tuning out rants by people who are upset because the ranger dosen't fit their own personal vision of what a ranger should be.Then by all means don't use them.  The descriptive paragraphs at the start of each monster entry were meant to exemplify how a DM might describe a monster to his players.  I personally thought that they were a nice touch.I agree with this one.  There should have been playtester credits included.</blockquote>

Verification