Examples of Power Creep?

[Navar]

I think the question should be clarified. Has power creep taken place in the 3.5 core rules, or as a result of 3.5 supplements?

To the first question, I would say no.

The second question, I would say yes, for the reasons cited above. The worst imbalances come with mixing and matching unbalanced feats and prestige classes from different books and materials which were not designed with each other in mind.

The question is "Has power creep taken place in the 3.5 core rules as a result of 3.5 supplements?"

 

[Navar]

For instance, a straight druid 10/bard 10 will be significantly inferior to a druid5/bard 5/fochulcan lyrist 10.

Right but a straight druid from the core phb is more powerful than your build.

 

[Henry]

I'll give you one in 3E (not necessarily 3.5, because it's a little too early yet).

In 3.0 D&D, Spell DC's are set by 10 + Level of Spell + attribute bonus. There was one feat in the PHB capable of boosting the Save DC, Spell Focus, and it only did it for one Spell school.

Along comes in June 2001 The Forgotten Realms setting, which introduce the new innocuous feat, Greater Spell Focus, for a +4 total bonus. A bit more powerful than +2, but still manageable.

Then, Red Wizards and Archmages enter the picture, attainable at higher levels, but still within the lifespan of most campaigns. There is this rather neat feature called Spell Power, which boosts the DCs by up to +6 for the very dedicated.

Oooh, look! Spellcasting Prodigy! +2 effective bonus to attribute for purposes of extra spells and DCs. this is another +1 bonus.


Now, the caster is flinging off spells at a save DC of +11 more than was capable in 3E. Admittedly, this requires a good bit of resources, BUT it is resources the caster is by no means put off by expending. By late 2001, casters are in combination with attribute bonus and magic items that boost attributes casting first level spells with DCs in the low 30s, and high level spells with DCs approaching 40. Compare this to just using the Players handbook, where the DC of a first level spell cast by a caster with a 24 intelligence is about an 18.

If someone doesn't think it is power creep, then why did WotC change the rules on Spellcasting DC enhancers in 3.5? It's because they vastly underestimated what bonuses to save DCs do to the overall game balance.

Though I can't name as many for 3.5, I'm sure some of the rules masters out there can quote some examples for me. Consider the series of spells in 3E which lower spell resistance for example, and monsters with SR get far weaker. Consider magic items which allow rogues to sneak attack undead, which simply BREAKS a cardinal rule on the books by changing the nature of undead themselves.

For every example, people can explain away why this or that is balanced, and I can agree. But where power creep is duly called "creep" is because it is more subtle than the above examples. It never comes from ONE source, it comes when multiple sources are used together. The Practiced Spellcaster feat? by itself, not a problem, especially because multi-classed spellcasters do need some mechanical revision. However, the first time someone combined Practiced Spellcaster and the Wild Mage PrC in the Rules forum here, there were at least two multi-page threads of people arguing why it SHOULD or SHOULDN'T work together. (I think the "shouldn't may have won, but both sides had strong arguments.)

SUMMARY: I'm not saying it's good, and I'm not saying it's bad. I'm saying it IS, because it's human nature, and people gotta sell books.

 

[Illvillainy]

For instance, a straight druid 10/bard 10 will be significantly inferior to a druid5/bard 5/fochulcan lyrist 10.

If the latter was a valid build, yes.

 

[the Jester]

Right but a straight druid from the core phb is more powerful than your build.

Oh, agreed. But my point is, for a druid/bard mix, the prc makes for a more powerful build than the 'straight' option.

However, imho, this 'power creep' just puts the multiclass combo where it should be.

 

[Navar]

I'll give you one in 3E (not necessarily 3.5, because it's a little too early yet).

In 3.0 D&D, Spell DC's are set by 10 + Level of Spell + attribute bonus. There was one feat in the PHB capable of boosting the Save DC, Spell Focus, and it only did it for one Spell school.

Along comes in June 2001 The Forgotten Realms setting, which introduce the new innocuous feat, Greater Spell Focus, for a +4 total bonus. A bit more powerful than +2, but still manageable.

Then, Red Wizards and Archmages enter the picture, attainable at higher levels, but still within the lifespan of most campaigns. There is this rather neat feature called Spell Power, which boosts the DCs by up to +6 for the very dedicated.

Oooh, look! Spellcasting Prodigy! +2 effective bonus to attribute for purposes of extra spells and DCs. this is another +1 bonus.


Now, the caster is flinging off spells at a save DC of +11 more than was capable in 3E. Admittedly, this requires a good bit of resources, BUT it is resources the caster is by no means put off by expending. By late 2001, casters are in combination with attribute bonus and magic items that boost attributes casting first level spells with DCs in the low 30s, and high level spells with DCs approaching 40. Compare this to just using the Players handbook, where the DC of a first level spell cast by a caster with a 24 intelligence is about an 18.

If someone doesn't think it is power creep, then why did WotC change the rules on Spellcasting DC enhancers in 3.5? It's because they vastly underestimated what bonuses to save DCs do to the overall game balance.

Though I can't name as many for 3.5, I'm sure some of the rules masters out there can quote some examples for me. Consider the series of spells in 3E which lower spell resistance for example, and monsters with SR get far weaker. Consider magic items which allow rogues to sneak attack undead, which simply BREAKS a cardinal rule on the books by changing the nature of undead themselves.

For every example, people can explain away why this or that is balanced, and I can agree. But where power creep is duly called "creep" is because it is more subtle than the above examples. It never comes from ONE source, it comes when multiple sources are used together. The Practiced Spellcaster feat? by itself, not a problem, especially because multi-classed spellcasters do need some mechanical revision. However, the first time someone combined Practiced Spellcaster and the Wild Mage PrC in the Rules forum here, there were at least two multi-page threads of people arguing why it SHOULD or SHOULDN'T work together. (I think the "shouldn't may have won, but both sides had strong arguments.)

SUMMARY: I'm not saying it's good, and I'm not saying it's bad. I'm saying it IS, because it's human nature, and people gotta sell books.

Actually I agree with you here 3.0 did have power creep, but I think that WOTC has learned how to stop that. You are correct that the spell save DCs was a bad thing. (Actually I preferred the Shadow Mage to complete the DCs for illusion spells and using Phantasmal Killer.) I just don't think that something like this (Fantastic example) exists in 3.5, but I welcome anyone that can prove me wrong.

And @ Jester to me it isn't power creep if it still isn't more powerful than a straight core class. I still think that several things need to be made more powerful (ECLs, Multiclass casters, etc) but the Overall power of the game is not raised if everything is set to be EXACLTY as powerful as the Human Wizard for example.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

For instance, a straight druid 10/bard 10 will be significantly inferior to a druid5/bard 5/fochulcan lyrist 10.

Except that the Fochulan Lyrist requires Evasion, so you need to take at least two levels of Rogue.

 

[Jdvn1]

I don't think the new books are so creepy. More options, but not unbalanced.

 

[DungeonMaster]

Except that the Fochulan Lyrist requires Evasion, so you need to take at least two levels of Rogue.

No it doesn't. You need only a ring of evasion. It's cheap and easy.

 

[Jdvn1]

... I don't think that works. It has to be an ability you have, not an abilitiy that's granted to you through an item.