Casters Nerfed, Melee Ascendant (3.5)

[Belen]

Actually, I would stop all ranting and/or raving should they make it possible for casting classes to stack. As is, you're an idiot to multi-class as a caster unless you only want a few low-level spells for flavor.

To date: I have seen nothing that benefits casters in 3.5 except the MT and even they will find it hard to get the most powerful spells.

Dave

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Brown Jenkin

So the fighter outshines the wizard at low levels and sometimes at high levels as well. But since the wizard outshines the fighter at other times at higher levels they need to be scaled back. Do I have this right? Is there any time that a wizard should outshine the fighter?

I think wizards should be given d6 hp/level and more spells at the low levels, so they can keep up with a low-level fighter. However, I don't think haste plus improved invisibilty plus disintegrate and then disintegrate makes for a fun playing experience.

It didn't help that only incorporeal creatures and Chosen of Mystra are immune to disintegrate, and it's pretty easy to tell if you're fighting the former.

I recently used three barbed devils [3.5] in an encounter. Running the encounter without knowing the stats for scorching ray was pretty difficult, but we all had fun. The encounter actually lasted six rounds, due to their high AC and hit points, good saves and SR. In the end, the party actually felt challenged, and used up some resources too, rather than ending the battle in round one with a hold monster or two followed by sneak attack action

Cloudgatherer,
you double posted

Buzzard

You did not get my point. The Wizard does not stand up front. He never stands up front. He doesn't have to take the pounding (or poison, or level drain, or ability drain, etc.). I can accept that he who takes the risks gets the rewards.

Your DM must be nicer than mine. I've faced spellcasters, summoned or mobile creatures, archers, etc. Personally I think wizards have too strong offense and not enough defense. It's like I'm always only one roll from death. Sheesh, one good chain lightning could take me out. Conversely, I can pretty much end an encounter with a single confusion spell, which also isn't that much fun.

ByronD

it has been revealed that weapon and ammo enhancements no longer stack

Really?!

Hong

Eh. Why on earth would you want to put GMW on the arrow, when the DR is in the material? The cost is in getting those adamantium, cold iron and whatnot arrows in the first place. Not to mention that bow and arrow bonuses won't stack anymore, apparently.

Simple. I can still carry around a +1 flaming burst bow, then get +4 cold iron arrows, for a total of +4 to hit and damage, plus another +1d6 damage, and cold iron penetration.

 

[Quixon]

The actual stats are:

Strength: 26

Fighter 7
Ranger 1
Blademaster 4

Blade: (1d10) Katana +1, Flaming, Keen

Use the weapon two-handed for a 1.5 strength increase.

Str: +12, Specialization: +2, Improved Crit, Improved threat (blademaster ability), Parting the silk (3/day): max damage.

Anywho...minimum damage without rolling is like 20. I do not have his sheet here, and I am missing another ability.

The mage, who is not a powergamer, just cannot complete.

Problem isn't your Mage, problem is you are using a class NOT MEANT FOR NORMAL DnD. Wheel of Time is a Stand alone D20 product, the stuff there isn't balanced with the rest of DnD classes and spells. It even has it own magic system because of that(and the fact its simulating a entirely differnet world/Magic system concept-same as the Classes).

Closest you can get with a "Regular " DnD PC is Weapon Master class, which is almost the same but you can't use the Max damage ability and Improved Crit together so that lowers the damage.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Which is to say Disintegrate is still probably Save or Die for PCs. But not necessarily for BBEGs, may of whom have more than enough hit points to take the damage.

In that way, it's similar to Harm. The HP cap isn't low enough to limit its usefulness AGAINST PCs but is low enough to limit its usefulness BY PCs.

Point-of-Law: We don't actually know exactly what the changes to disintegrate are, yet. All we have to go on is the information contained within the stat block of the Githyanki's Lich Queen, who, among other things, is a 20th level sorceror.

More than likely, the spell will be 2d6/caster level or 20d6+1d6/caster level. Both of which are powerful to kill about the more powerful beasts and BBEGs, if they fail their saves, and will likely cause a save vs. massive damage, as well.

 

[WizarDru]

Which is to say Disintegrate is still probably Save or Die for PCs. But not necessarily for BBEGs, may of whom have more than enough hit points to take the damage.

In that way, it's similar to Harm. The HP cap isn't low enough to limit its usefulness AGAINST PCs but is low enough to limit its usefulness BY PCs.

Well, most of the outsiders, NPCs and anything but the hardiest of monsters I've used won't be able to stand up to 140 points of damage on a failed save...or if they do, they won't be able to last against the follow-up from the rest of the party.

Speaking as a DM who watched a CR23 Winterwight go down to a Disintegrate, I'm feeling that's a good thing, not bad. It seems like a better idea to make tougher monsters...well, tougher. The new version will still lay most creatures low. Unless the marilith receives a dramatic infusion of hit points, for example, then she could be slain easily by 15th-level disintegrate, let alone a 20th level (again, assuming scaling).

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I don't know about that. In Living Greyhawk, PCs regularly face 200 hp elementals, advanced owlbears, advanced dire bears, advanced Athachs, etc, starting at level 8. Maybe that experience has skewed my perspective on monster hp (and outsiders, undead, etc certainly have fewer hp than animals, magical beasts, giants, abberations, etc).

And IIRC from your story hour, the CR 23 Winterwight was going up against an 18th level party and was pretty much tearing them to shreds. Hadn't they gone four rounds or so with the Winterwight without being able to touch it when you rolled a "1" on the saving throw? It seems to me that there were really only two possibilities: the winterwight was going to go down like it did or the PCs were going down (except those who could teleport out). Anyway, that's the kind of situation that kills PCs all the time, (and talk to me about nerfing save or dies across the board if medusas, bodaks, etc have their abilities toned down). I don't see anything wrong with NPCs being vulnerable to it as well.

Well, most of the outsiders, NPCs and anything but the hardiest of monsters I've used won't be able to stand up to 140 points of damage on a failed save...or if they do, they won't be able to last against the follow-up from the rest of the party.

Speaking as a DM who watched a CR23 Winterwight go down to a Disintegrate, I'm feeling that's a good thing, not bad. It seems like a better idea to make tougher monsters...well, tougher. The new version will still lay most creatures low. Unless the marilith receives a dramatic infusion of hit points, for example, then she could be slain easily by 15th-level disintegrate, let alone a 20th level (again, assuming scaling).

 

[Valiantheart]

Ya know when people start talking about how a fighter is somehow doing 120 points of damage per round I dont know whether to congratulate the player on his build or shake my head in bewilderment at a DM stupid enough to give a 12th level character +6 stat boosting items plus a keen, firebursting, frostbursting, shockbursting, bursting bursting sword of ultimate buttkicking +10 and then pit them up against 40 1HD goblins with 10 for AC.

I have news for people who point out all that 'rad' melee damage potential: the fighter isnt going to hit more than twice a round against an enemy with anything close to resembling a descent AC. Blame the dumb DM not the so called Caster neutering.

 

[Marshall]

The concept of the "average" has been around for at least 400 years, probably more. You should give it a go, if adding up numbers proves too taxing.

Yeah, But the poor evoker can only throw around a 15d6 Con of Cold while the transmuter is tossing 40d6 Disintegrates.

Bad, Bad, bad idea.

 

[Cloudgatherer]

<snip>

Regarding monsters:
-Monster ACs are up
-Monster SR is down (compared to things we know from before)
-Elemental Resistances are down
-Immunities are being reworked
<snip>

True, I ignored monster changes, but then again I was not taking them into consideration, only comparing the changes from 3.0 classes to 3.5 classes. Like I said before, I was summarizing based off of what we've seen, not the entire revised monster manual.

For the sake of discussion, let us assume the above is true in regards to monsters. There are at least a few DMs who use NPC villains with levels in a character class. Also, when players go to make characters, especially those coming from the 3.0 system, they are going to see a lot of disadvantages in 3.5 as compared to 3.0 in regards to spellcasters.

I'm not saying "spellcasters got the shaft" because I don't have the complete picture. Maybe they didn't, I don't know. However, I am raising the concern that the vast majority of information we have seen increases the class abilities of melee types, while spellcasters remain the same, but with "reduced" spells (which essentially is the class ability of spellcasters).

 

[drnuncheon]

Yeah, But the poor evoker can only throw around a 15d6 Con of Cold while the transmuter is tossing 40d6 Disintegrates.

Bad, Bad, bad idea.

As opposed to now, when the poor evoker can only throw around a 15d6 Cone of Cold while the transmuter is tossing (effectively) infinite d6 Disintegrates?

J