Converting to 3.5 woes...

[coyote6]

Or you could, y'know, wear lighter armor. There's no law that says you must wear the heaviest armor your class permits.

Actually, according to page 23 of the PH, you must.

A lot of people seem to miss that rule. Probably due to all the <fnords>.

 

[Staffan]

Take a simple example, two 2nd level fighters, 16 STR, vs. a DR 5 creature. The two-handed fighter gets one attack for 2d6+4 damage, the dual wielder gets one attack for 1d6+3 and one for 1d6+1.

On the other hand, a smart dual-wielder makes sure that his weapons are versatile. So instead of getting two cold iron short swords +2, he gets one cold iron shortsword +2 and one adamantine shortsword +2. That means that he's more likely to have the right stuff to bypass DR entirely with at least half his attacks.

So, despite the fact that it now costs one less feat, I still maintain that dual-wielding is less effective now than it was in 3.0.

Costs one feat less, and allows for more attacks total than 3.0 (with lessened prereqs for Improved TWF and the addition of Greater TWF).

That said, I personally don't have any problem with two-weapon fighting being inferior to two-handed and sword & board fighting, except in certain corner cases. There's a reason it wasn't common in real life.

 

[Celtavian]

GMW no longer trumps it.

That's it huh? I am removing Adamantine damage resistance from my game anyhow. Players and monsters will just have to bash through the damage resistance of casters with Stoneskin and golems irregardless of weapon type.

There are quite a few spells that still last long enough to go through multiple encounters. However, Fly is simply too good at that duration for a 3rd-level spell. It's much more effective than, say, Stoneskin ... at least this is how I've found it.

Which ones? All the ones I can think of to counter combat are 1 minute per level duration spells save for Stoneskin and Protection from Arrows which only helps in certain situations.

That happened to me two combat ago. A monk ... with the 3.0 pre-errata'd boots of striding and springing. The sorcerer got dropped to 1 hit point - after he got healed during combat. I was playing a wizard, and I think I took four damage. Something like that.

If you had had an active Fly spell you could have got off the ground possibly before the monk went to work on you. That is the kind of crap I am talking about. Fly and very few other spells are all we have to survive melee attack given our low hit points and AC.

This has happened on a regular basis at higher levels as well. Readied action fireballs are a great way to break concentration, also taking down my low hit points at the same time. It doesn't help to cast protection from fire before combat either, since my opponent may have many other direct-damage spells available to him, and could just as easily start with chain lightning. Or good ol' flesh to stone, which is just nasty.

Exactly why Fly isn't overpowered. There are plenty of options for a caster to be hammered with. Why was it so important to limit the duration of FLy and Invisibility and such given the lethality of spells and melee combat to an arcane caster. Isn't the low hit points and AC enough to counter some higher duration spells that help an arcane casters survivability?

That's a good way around the change self tactic

I tried this. It worked for a little while. The advance scout quickly figured out that the person who didn't belong must be the caster by making sure everyone else was present and accounted for.

Yup. Too bad I can't cast persistent see invisibility otherwise I might be able to blast them.

Many of the scouts weren't invisible. They were just Rogues or Fighters watching the battle from a distance and running when it looked like the advance ambush force meant to test our abilities was almost dead.

IME as soon as my buffs are up the tide turns - that's when the wizard gets to kick-butt. The hit point increases that 3.5 monsters will (hopefully) experience should make this even easier. I've found improved invisibility very useful, but for obvious reasons this won't work all the time. I've found using any kind of spell that increases my durability without necessarily making me nearly invincible (somewhat tongue-in-cheek) also works well. It does take up more spell slots (and higher level ones) than using fly only two or three times, but I can deal with that.

Often the fighter types have already killed everything before I have the chance to enter the combat save for the really tough combats. I guess I get a chance to shine during crunch time, which is nice.

I haven't done this, but my party has walked around invisible for literally hours at a time. I'm sure WotC isn't planning on giving out cheap see invisible items or give tremorsense to five times as many creatures in the MM 3.5. It means my party will have to change some strategies, but I don't see this as a bad thing.

We don't do this. It doesn't seem very heroic or story like to us. It isn't in character for most of our characters to walk around a dungeon invisible. Our group and probably many other groups term for this is "cheesy".

Glad you don't do it.

Just the caster I can't cast Fly 12 times per day but I can certainly cast it four times per day. (I guess I can't do that at fifth level though )

We usually cast Fly when it is needed. We worry about not having a spell when we might need it, so we don't cast any spell casually.

Obviously every campaign is different. I'm glad to hear that your campaign hasn't been abusing these spells. Sounds like you've got admirable self-restraint.

I haven't played D&D any other way for years. I think the big reason we play the way we do is because we are really emphatic about character development. If we can't see the characters doing it, then they don't do it. If it would look cheesy in a movie or book, we don't do it either.

Do you get extra XP for all that counter-scouting?

No extra xp. We just consider it a sound tactic.

It sounds like you don't use random encounters that often. IME I can fly right past a good chunk of creatures in the MM and I can walk right in front of them, invisible, even more often. I don't think the wizard should be able to cast improved invisibility for 10 minutes, allowing the rogue to sneak past and assassinate multiple opponents while scouting.

No, we don't. We usually use planned random encounters. That means we roll random encounters, but we plan out why they happen in advance.


I understand that everyone has different experiences playing this game, so they may see some of these changes as increasing the challenge. I only wish I knew how the majority of folks run a campaign. Then I might better understand why they clap for certain changes and hate others.

I just know reducing Fly and a few other spells like Invisibility and Improved Invisibility does nothing but make life nearly intolerable for are already besieged casters. We don't plan on incorporating this particular change.

I and the other members of the group grimaced when we heard about this change because we know how tough a time casters already have surviving in our campaigns. The Haste change we didn't mind, but that was because we could see how troublesome it was for both DM's or players. It seemed that whichever side had Haste was guarateed victory, and if both sides had it, someone was going to die on both sides every round.

We will incorporate the changes we like and house rule or keep the old rule for those we don't. Overall, Revised D&D is an improvement. I like most of what I hear.

Even the Revised Ranger is making its way into our game. I decided that the Revised Ranger was a perfect Ranger tradition for Elves, Halflings and Half-elves raised in elven societies. It fit perfectly the traditional elven forest warrior theme with elves that use Archery and can disappear into the forest. I am constructng an alternate Ranger for Dwarves, Humans, Half-orcs and Half-elves raised in human socieities. This Ranger will have more versatile weapon choices, be able to wear heavier armor, and use d10 Hit Die, but will be lacking a few of the options of the Revised Ranger.

I'm glad each edition has helped get the creative juices flowing. I like taking the time to construct what I consider to be my perfect or near perfect campaign world.

 

[EtherHulkRending]

I'll address two things in this post, the DR issue and the 18th level fighter potentially killing a CR 25 dragon by himself



First off, so what if DR requires you to have different material weapons?. Are you telling me that you never carried around a bludgeoning weapon incase you fought skelatons or xorns? Are you telling me you never carried around a ranged weapon incase there's something you don't want to fight HTH? If you want to survive you carry the tools of the trade. IF you fight with 2 weapons, sure you may have to fork over more money to get an extra weapon of (insert material here) but is it that different concept wise from forking over for another MAGIC weapon when you fought with 2? Most TWF characters I know wouldn't just get 1 weapon enchanted, they would get both, and keep progressing that way so they could continue to hit with both weapons, other than cost this is not that different than the new DR system.


next, as for the 18th level fighter dropping the CR 25 dragon...oy...where to start....

First off, the fighter isn't doing it himself, he is being buffed up BEFORE the fight, if you take the same character and send him at the dragon w/o being buffed, ask yourself...will he still be able to dish out that damage?

Secondly, in this scenario you aren't playing the dragon as a dragon, to his full potential. It's a challenge to 25th level PC's because he uses his ABILITIES to keep himself from danger and to weaken his foe. If that sword is being pesky and the guy is buffed, have that Dragon GREATER DISPEL from up in the air. Next pass, obliterate the fighter with a breath weapon. Use spells on him, or use your REACH to keep the fighter from closing in to take his full attacks on you.

Third, the fighter is tackling something roughly 7 CR's above him....
on two failed saves a 7th level wizard can kill CR 14's on his own, Phantasmal Killer will do the trick nicely. Just because he CAN beat the high CR creature, doesn't mean that he will or that he should.
If you want to get techical, a str1 commoner could the same said dragon if he got a GMW from your high level cleric and coup de graced the dragon, 1's happen on fort saves, does it mean the common is broken? no, it means a 1 got rolled.

I think most of the headache is based off of bad tactics by the DM and not knowing what his limits are. I ran a high level campaign that played weekly for a year, we went from level 8 to level 16 to 17 and we obliterated the gold caps....the group could do almost anything and buy anything they wanted, my only restriction was no evil PC's....and I never had a hard time challenging them. I bet they could kill a CR 25 Red Dragon too , if I let them, but I play creatures based on how they SHOULD be run, an INT 2 creature knows not to stay in one place if it's getting wailed on, so why would a 20+ INT Dragon ?

 

[Plane Sailing]

"I don't quite understand how an 18th level fighter can single-handedly kill a CR 25 dragon in 2 or 3 rounds. "

Well, here's how it breaks down, and by the end of this I'll show you how a single PC can approach 1000 points of damage in 3 rounds, so stick with me.

Take a Great Wyrm Red Dragon. CR 25, AC 41, avg HPs 660.

18th level PC: 8th level fighter, 10th level weapon master with 20 STR. He uses a +1 frosting, shocking burst holy greatsword (two handed) with a scabbard of keen edge, and boots of haste. He does need 3 spells cast upon him (provided by the cleric): GMW (+5) for the sword, Sanguine Strength (from Relics and Rituals) which gives him a +18(!) STR, and Assassin's Senses (increases his Crit range +1 and his Crit Mulitplier by x1).

So, in round 1 the Colossal Great Wyrm Red Dragon institutes a crush attack. can the fighter make the dc40 reflex st? I didn't think so. So the fighter takes 4d8 + 26 damage every round that the dragon just lies there... he is pinned unless he can grapple his way out (good luck... the Colossal dragon has a grapple check of about +65 and the fighter will have, what, +18 BAB + 14 STR for +32).

Sounds like me that the Ftr just gets squished, without the dragon even bothering to use any of his arsenal of 9th level wizard and cleric spells...

 

[jasper]

I stop before reading all of the first page.
Just grandfather the current characters. And set a level limit. So your character uses the 3.0 phb and spells. New characters use the new methods.

 

[Grog]

On the other hand, a smart dual-wielder makes sure that his weapons are versatile. So instead of getting two cold iron short swords +2, he gets one cold iron shortsword +2 and one adamantine shortsword +2. That means that he's more likely to have the right stuff to bypass DR entirely with at least half his attacks.

Even if the dual-wielder has two different material types for his weapons, he's still likely to be inferior to the two-handed fighter overall. Consider the possibilities:

1. Two-hander has correct material; dual-wielder does not. Advantage: Two-hander.
2. Dual-wielder has one weapon of correct material; two-hander does not. Dual-wielder is roughly about as effective as the two-hander. Draw.
3. Both have correct material. Advantage: Two-hander.
4. Neither have correct material. Advantage: Two-hander.

Keep in mind, also, that there's more than just material-based DR out there. There's also alignment-based DR, so even with two weapons, the chances that one will be the correct type is probably considerably less that 50-50.

That said, I personally don't have any problem with two-weapon fighting being inferior to two-handed and sword & board fighting, except in certain corner cases. There's a reason it wasn't common in real life.

It wasn't common in real life because it required much more dexterity and skill on the part of the wielder. In D&D, that's not an issue, because you can (within limits) build whatever type of character you want.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That happened to me two combat ago. A monk ... with the 3.0 pre-errata'd boots of striding and springing. The sorcerer got dropped to 1 hit point - after he got healed during combat. I was playing a wizard, and I think I took four damage. Something like that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



If you had had an active Fly spell you could have got off the ground possibly before the monk went to work on you. That is the kind of crap I am talking about. Fly and very few other spells are all we have to survive melee attack given our low hit points and AC.

I think some other long-term option is a better idea, rather than Fly. Stoneskin lasts a long time and cuts down on the damage taken (now if only they'd get rid of the diamond dust), but Fly lets me avoid damage entirely from the monk.

(Yes, the monk had a ranged weapon but, who am I kidding, he's a monk.)

Ina ny event I survived without using Fly ... and that monk was higher level than myself. The sorcerer only got dropped to one hit point since he had an AC score of 10!

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This has happened on a regular basis at higher levels as well. Readied action fireballs are a great way to break concentration, also taking down my low hit points at the same time. It doesn't help to cast protection from fire before combat either, since my opponent may have many other direct-damage spells available to him, and could just as easily start with chain lightning. Or good ol' flesh to stone, which is just nasty.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Exactly why Fly isn't overpowered. There are plenty of options for a caster to be hammered with. Why was it so important to limit the duration of FLy and Invisibility and such given the lethality of spells and melee combat to an arcane caster. Isn't the low hit points and AC enough to counter some higher duration spells that help an arcane casters survivability?

The problem is that they're both too good for such a long duration. I'd love to see some long-duration spells that boost AC (other than Mage Armor) and hit points (see Andy's spoiler thread - False Life is in the new PHB) rather than ones that make me nearly invincible* to physical combat. That would work great with the shorter term buffs like Mirror Image

I personally have only had trouble with Teleport being used to avoid encounters once. I used a frustrating monster (the new bone devil) and so the players teleported back home. Fortunately, they don't pull the "kill one monster, go home and rest, then go back next day with full spells" cheese, but it's still possible under the rules.

* IME most opponents have both ranged and melee weapons, but their ranged weapons are usually much weaker than their melee weapons (eg lower attack bonus, lower damage, and so forth). On the other hand, flying opponents are just nasty, since they can usually out-fly me.

 

[Lamoni]

Killing dragons

It amazes me how many posts were made about the level 18 fighter killing the dragon. I agree that it is true that if the dragon was played well, the fighter doesn't have a chance.

But people seem to have a great knack for missing the point in people's posts. The point was that the level 18 fighter could do 5 times the damage as anyone else in the party. So ignore the dragon, and come up with your own creature that could challenge the fighter but not win every time. Then imagine using the creature against characters that did 1/5 the damage. It wouldn't work out too well.

Also, as has been repeated many times, it was already fixed in that campaign. The point was that there are areas in 3E that are easily taken advantage of. Only one example was given to help illustrate the point. 3.5 edition will help the issue. No, 3.5 edition won't eliminate that scenario entirely (especially when using splat books), but that has never been the claim. It was claimed that it is frustrating to have to fix things so often. With 3.5 you should have to fix things like that less often.

 

[Hardhead]

I just know reducing Fly and a few other spells like Invisibility and Improved Invisibility does nothing but make life nearly intolerable for are already besieged casters. We don't plan on incorporating this particular change.

Here's an idea: Make a new self-only version of Fly that still lasts for 10 minutes/level.