D&D General D&D 3.5 - splatbook power creep or no?

[Maxperson]

I can't speak for anyone else, but I typically did play casters who had utility spells when playing 3.5. (I still do when I play D&D now.)

Seems odd to me that I would have the power of the universe at my fingertips and I would limit myself to direct damage, when I can do things like alter the fabricate of reality; control minds; change the shape of a battlefield; etc.

You aren't understanding. Yes, you had utility spells. No you couldn't use them to be the rogue, the fighter, the ranger, and fill all the other holes in the group. You simply did not have enough slots. Once you memorized a variety of combat spells, a variety of defensive spells, you didn't have enough slots left over to fill the holes and even be one of the other martials in the group.

If you used your limited slots to do what the rogue could already do, instead of using your utility in other ways, you were being a jerk. Not saying you did that personally.

Though, I'm also the type of player who enjoyed playing a divination-focused sorcerer in 3.5. (I was asked by the DM if I would make a different character.)

There aren't too many divination fighters and rogues out there. No worries there.

So, I don't think it's an entirely unusual experience for a caster at a D&D table to do things other than toss fireballs.

I didn't say or imply any such thing, though.

I don't disagree with you that there are ways to address casters in 3rd Edition. (I also think that a lot of problems often came from groups handwaving away certain rules.) But I do disagree that it is unusual for a caster to use utility spells, and I also don't think it is unusual for a 3.5 caster to be able to also function as another niche.

Again, not saying that.

 

[Argyle King]

You aren't understanding. Yes, you had utility spells. No you couldn't use them to be the rogue, the fighter, the ranger, and fill all the other holes in the group. You simply did not have enough slots. Once you memorized a variety of combat spells, a variety of defensive spells, you didn't have enough slots left over to fill the holes and even be one of the other martials in the group.

If you used your limited slots to do what the rogue could already do, instead of using your utility in other ways, you were being a jerk. Not saying you did that personally.

There aren't too many divination fighters and rogues out there. No worries there.

I didn't say or imply any such thing, though.

Again, not saying that.

I do think I may be misunderstanding some.

Though, I will also add that (for me personally,) I didn't "memorize a variety of combat spells." I prefer to focus on things that most people likely don't think of as being combat spells. It's less that I was intentionally trying to be a rogue (or specific other class) and more that the utility spells I had could be used in a variety of ways.

Though, that's not necessarily unique to 3rd Edition. Even in 5E, spellcasters have access to things that allow a party to circumvent a lot of obstacles. It's arguably more noticeable in 3rd Edition because the power increase from one level to the next is a bigger gap, but I believe it's still an issue that exists.

 

[Alzrius]

No you couldn't use them to be the rogue, the fighter, the ranger, and fill all the other holes in the group. You simply did not have enough slots.

My understanding is that, for the people who argued otherwise, they were of the opinion that rings of wizardry, pearls of power, and lots of lots of scrolls would make this a non-issue (and that wizards would take the feats necessary to craft those for themselves if they couldn't be found or purchased).

 

[Maxperson]

My understanding is that, for the people who argued otherwise, they were of the opinion that rings of wizardry, pearls of power, and lots of lots of scrolls would make this a non-issue (and that wizards would take the feats necessary to craft those for themselves if they couldn't be found or purchased).

Yes, but that's a DM created problem, not one the game creates. If the DM hands those items out like candy, has magic mart, and/or just pauses the entire world while the party creates items, then you get that problem. If you don't, the problem doesn't exist.

 

[Maxperson]

I do think I may be misunderstanding some.

Though, I will also add that (for me personally,) I didn't "memorize a variety of combat spells." I prefer to focus on things that most people likely don't think of as being combat spells. It's less that I was intentionally trying to be a rogue (or specific other class) and more that the utility spells I had could be used in a variety of ways.

Though, that's not necessarily unique to 3rd Edition. Even in 5E, spellcasters have access to things that allow a party to circumvent a lot of obstacles. It's arguably more noticeable in 3rd Edition because the power increase from one level to the next is a bigger gap, but I believe it's still an issue that exists.

Typically, wizards would do something like the following. I'll use a 5th level wizard with an 18 intelligence.

First Level: 4
Magic Missile
Charm Person
Mage Armor
Shield

Second Level: 3
Invisibility
Scorching Ray
Knock(if no rogue)

Third Level: 2
Dispel Magic
Fireball

That's a variety of combat, defense and utility, but there's not a lot of any of it, really. The spells chosen there were picked quickly as an example, so nobody bother to talk about how it would be better to pick something else instead of X spell on that list.

Even if you got rid of the 3 combat spells and made them utility, you still wouldn't have a ton of utility, and certainly not enough to bypass one of the martials AND cover holes in the group.

 

[Argyle King]

Typically, wizards would do something like the following. I'll use a 5th level wizard with an 18 intelligence.

First Level: 4
Magic Missile
Charm Person
Mage Armor
Shield

Second Level: 3
Invisibility
Scorching Ray
Knock(if no rogue)

Third Level: 2
Dispel Magic
Fireball

That's a variety of combat, defense and utility, but there's not a lot of any of it, really. The spells chosen there were picked quickly as an example, so nobody bother to talk about how it would be better to pick something else instead of X spell on that list.

Even if you got rid of the 3 combat spells and made them utility, you still wouldn't have a ton of utility, and certainly not enough to bypass one of the martials AND cover holes in the group.

Fair enough.

For me, I likely would get rid of charm person, mage armor, and some of the combat spells. Instead, I would pick utility spells that also have uses in combat. A lot of my combat spells would often be battlefield control (like web). I'm not saying that to debate spell choice. Just expressing that my approach to being a caster was different. I also am in the minority of people who preferred druid (or even sorcerer) over wizard, so I'm likely not the best person to talk to concerning spell preparation. (It's also been quite a long time since I have played D&D at all, let alone 3rd Edition.)

Suffice to say that I partially agree that 3rd is not quite as bad as message boards may make it seem, but I also partially disagree with some of the previous posts because I have been in groups that included casters capable of covering multiple party roles.

The old memories I have of the player who usually played a wizard is that he would eventually have scrolls and wands to cover most situations. He got around needing downtime by having hirelings and cohorts do some of the work for him.

Typically, past a certain level, the players in that group who wanted to be a fighter or rogue would end up multiclassing.

 

[Voadam]

Yes, but that's a DM created problem, not one the game creates. If the DM hands those items out like candy, has magic mart, and/or just pauses the entire world while the party creates items, then you get that problem. If you don't, the problem doesn't exist.

Being able to buy low gp magic items in most populated areas is a general core assumption in 3e and 3.5.

In the 3.5 DMG it says

This is copied over with the same chart from 3e.

"Anything having a price under that limit is most likely available, whether it be mundane or magical."

A cure light wound wands is 750 gp, available in most small towns of more than 900 people.

A wand of knock is 4,500 gp available in small cities of 5,000 or more people.

Being able to use your crafting feats and skills at some point I would think is another general assumption. It is possible to have a countdown clock running continuously for a campaign and have everything happen one after the next level one to twenty like a season of 24 with no break for even a day of downtime to craft a scroll, but most have periods of a break at least between adventures or when the adventure says something takes a period of time and time advances.

 

[Maxperson]

Being able to buy low gp magic items in most populated areas is a general core assumption in 3e and 3.5.

In the 3.5 DMG it says
View attachment 432421
View attachment 432422
This is copied over with the same chart from 3e.

"Anything having a price under that limit is most likely available, whether it be mundane or magical."

A cure light wound wands is 750 gp, available in most small towns of more than 900 people.

A wand of knock is 4,500 gp available in small cities of 5,000 or more people.

Being able to use your crafting feats and skills at some point I would think is another general assumption. It is possible to have a countdown clock running continuously for a campaign and have everything happen one after the next level one to twenty like a season of 24 with no break for even a day of downtime to craft a scroll, but most have periods of a break at least between adventures or when the adventure says something takes a period of time and time advances.

And yet I only played with one DM who ever played that way. Magic item purchasing is like 1e demi-human level limits. Most DMs I played with didn't want to play a game broken like that.

 

[Voadam]

And yet I only played with one DM who ever played that way. Magic item purchasing is like 1e demi-human level limits. Most DMs I played with didn't want to play a game broken like that.

Whereas most I played 3e with did and I did not find it broken, just a different baseline.

 

[Marc17]

Whereas most I played 3e with did and I did not find it broken, just a different baseline.

Ya, it was a decent guideline. Obviously pretty easy to break even for mundane items if taken that every possible things is automatically always present. Still, for the prevalence of magic in 3.x, most of the village in my game were assumed to have a resident cleric and magic user, both low level, non-adventuring. They probably make their living selling the odd potion or scroll here and there through the year to travellers and merchants that would come through picking them up on consignment.