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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lord Pendragon" data-source="post: 1636829" data-attributes="member: 707">I believe this is incorrect.  The halfling/gnome would take a -2 penalty to attack rolls for using an improperly-sized weapon.  3.0 is the version that allowed the halfling to just pick up the human-sized short sword and use it as one-handed weapon.I haven't played or run anything larger than Large, so perhaps I'm not aware of the issues, but 3.0's weapon-sizing seemed to work perfectly fine.  I'm interested in what wonkiness there is, since I still use 3.0 weapon-sizing rules.I believe he was referring to the new rule that all creatures take up a square-space.  i.e. a warhorse is no longer 10'x5', it's 10'x10'.  And I believe you knew that.This is an interesting illustration of how everyone's game is different.  I've never had buff spells last 3 encounters in 3.5 (and very rarely 2).  And in 3.0 after the first wizard cast Haste and then [some other spell], the other wizard's next spell was usually Greater Dispelling.But again, this can be different in every game.  Personally, I do think there were some problems in the 3.0 spells, but 3.5 goes much, much too far.I didn't have a regular group back during 1e and 2e.  Why should I have to deal with imbalanced rules now, because the wizard stole the show in your campaigns then?This one I have to agree with.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /></blockquote>

Verification