Mortality Radio # 30: Ed Stark interview available...

[Zaruthustran]

And that's my point. How about giving them things they can use? The class let them down, even if they didn't know it. The classes should be their to help a player's concept, not restrict it.

You'd assume if a ranger was trained in something, it would be so they could use it, not abandon it.

"Today, young Aragohrn, I'm going to teach you to fight with two weapons."

"But, I REALLY want to fight with a whip. Or maybe a long spear!"

"TWO WEAPONS!!!"

How about enabling those non-TWF and non-Archery ranger-players? Why MUST rangers get their greatest benefits from twf and archery?

Vrylakos

Awesome. And right on.

If D&D 3.5 is all about options, then why are rangers given mandatory feats/fighting styles?

That said... TWF is extremely helpful pretty much always. My 3E ranger uses a longspear for range and spiked gauntlets/spiked armor to threaten adjacent squares. A 3.5 Ranger who wanted to do sword and board style can use his shield or his armor spikes (shoulder, knee) for the extra attack. The ranged feats should apply to whip (it's a ranged weapon); it'd be silly and illogical to make the ranged feats apply to bows only.

Actually, that's an important point. Did Ed refer the ranger's alt virtual feats as "archery" feats or "ranged" feats?

-z

 

[bayne]

Wow, I can't believe anyone would think Magic Missile is over powered.

1) A Wizard only gets one of these per day at first level (not including bonus spells). It does a whole d4+1. The party fighter can do double that damage per round using a simple longsword.

2) D4+1 isn't even likely to bring down a single Orc - the average damage (statistically speaking) from 1st level Magic Missile is 3.5, the average Orc is 4HP.

3) Magic Missile is far from the most powerful spell at low level - Sleep can take out 8HD of creatures in one shot. To use the Orc example - a single Magic Missile has a chance of killing a single Orc, but a single Sleep spell can take out 8 of them.

4) Magic Missile does not scale unreasonably. A buff mid-level Barbarian or Fighter can easily do more damage with a single attack than a 9th level Magic Missile. Plus, the Fighter and Barbarian gets multiple attacks per round.

5) Magic Missile is not infallible - It can't be used against invisible targets (while a Fighter can hit an invisible target with a little luck), it must pass spell resistance, and it has verbal and somatic components (a fighter doesn't need to speak to use a longsword, but a Wizard or Sorcerer does to use a Magic Missile).

In short, while the Magic Missile may require no attack roles and have no saving throws, it is balanced by the facts that it does little damage, a spellcaster has only a limited amounts of them, and there are other ways to foil it.

 

[Skaros]

If D&D 3.5 is all about options, then why are rangers given mandatory feats/fighting styles?

The same reason rogues are given limited weapon selections, sorcerers are given limited spell lists, and monks are given a limited and pre-chosen list of abilities, I'd guess.

Seriously, you have to draw a line somewhere. Otherwise we'd have a classless system right?

That said, I can understand people out there that are dissapointed by the changes in particular elements they are seeing, as those changes won't meet everyone's tastes, but unless it presents a serious balance problem (which we won't really know until its all released), then we're mostly complaining about not seeing our personal opinions put directly into the rules. Oh well. Get a DM that agrees and put in your own alt.ranger if its important to you personally.

-Skaros

 

[Zaruthustran]

In response to Bayne: Overpowered or not, MM is the best spell in the game. Ask any sorceror.

Our party had a gnome sorceror who focused on illusions. He chose spells like Silent Image, Ventriloquism, Color Spray. He used to always come up with clever plans and whatnot.

Then, at 5th level he picked up magic missile. Now, pretty much all he does in combat is roll 3d4. Many, many times. Last night, half the party was caught in a water elemental's whirlpool. The other half could not swim fast enough to reach the elemental. Who killed the monster? The sorceror--all by himself, thanks to MM.

Magic Missile affects everybody. It can always be relied upon. It's a life-saver when you're fighting non-corporeal creatures, acidic creatures or other nasties you don't want to fight toe-to-toe, elementals, snipers with 9/10s cover.. pretty much everything. Overpowered or not, it's a great spell.

-z

 

[Vrylakos]

Oh God, people, do you want any cheese with your whine?

And, why not only 2 weapon fighting or archery feats? Rogues are restricted to certain weapons… put them in a gladiator campaign with only greataxes, greatswords and longspears available, and the rogue is screwed. Why can’t he use big weapons? My God, I am really screwed if I wanted to play a Halfling rogue that wields a greatsword.

Rogues are restricted to certain weapons based on thief-type weapons. It makes sense - the class plays to the archetype. If he wants more, he can spend a feat.

Hey, I'm glad you had fun with your Ranger 25, but really, can you get off the attitude that your opening sentence reeks of? What some of us are asking is not stopping you from having fun. We just want more OPTIONS so we can do what *we* want with the ranger. We're not messing up your fun.

Vrylakos

 

[bayne]

In response to Bayne: Overpowered or not, MM is the best spell in the game. Ask any sorceror.

Our party had a gnome sorceror who focused on illusions. He chose spells like Silent Image, Ventriloquism, Color Spray. He used to always come up with clever plans and whatnot.

Then, at 5th level he picked up magic missile. Now, pretty much all he does in combat is roll 3d4. Many, many times. Last night, half the party was caught in a water elemental's whirlpool. The other half could not swim fast enough to reach the elemental. Who killed the monster? The sorceror--all by himself, thanks to MM.

Magic Missile affects everybody. It can always be relied upon. It's a life-saver when you're fighting non-corporeal creatures, acidic creatures or other nasties you don't want to fight toe-to-toe, elementals, snipers with 9/10s cover.. pretty much everything. Overpowered or not, it's a great spell.

-z

I am not saying it isn't a very usefull spell, I am just countering the idea that it is over-powered. Heck, a maximized-empowered Orb spell can do 270HP of damage in one shot with a critical hit.

 

[Green Knight]

Of course, you might have a question of how your bard alignment (any non-Lawful) and Paladin alignment (Lawful Good) stack up... Are you going to be an ex-Paladin, or an ex-Bard, and which abilities are lost from which class

(OTOH, I'd love to play a Paladin with the "inspire courage" ability - inspiring my mates as I charge into battle!)

Well, first off, unlike Paladins, Bards don't lose class abilities if they change alignments. So my plan is to go up about 3 levels in Bard, change alingment from Neutral Good to Lawful Good, and then continue on as a Paladin. I won't be able to advance as a Bard, again, but I won't lose any class abilities, either. And besides, if I were to go back I wouldn't be able to advance as Paladin (Nevermind losing my Paladin class abilities). DAMN the Bard alignment restrictions and the Paladins' multi-class restrictions.

Anyway, I'm thinking of being a Purple Dragon, so I'm picturing my Bard/Paladin singing The Cormyte's Boast song, a lot (I'll be damned before I sing it myself, though. HELL no!)

 

[bayne]

In response to Bayne: Overpowered or not, MM is the best spell in the game. Ask any sorceror.

Our party had a gnome sorceror who focused on illusions. He chose spells like Silent Image, Ventriloquism, Color Spray. He used to always come up with clever plans and whatnot.

Then, at 5th level he picked up magic missile. Now, pretty much all he does in combat is roll 3d4. Many, many times. Last night, half the party was caught in a water elemental's whirlpool. The other half could not swim fast enough to reach the elemental. Who killed the monster? The sorceror--all by himself, thanks to MM.

Magic Missile affects everybody. It can always be relied upon. It's a life-saver when you're fighting non-corporeal creatures, acidic creatures or other nasties you don't want to fight toe-to-toe, elementals, snipers with 9/10s cover.. pretty much everything. Overpowered or not, it's a great spell.

-z

I hope your DM is balancing your encounters properly - there should and can easilly be encounters where a Magic Missile spell is useless and the party will have to rely on party members with different skils to survive. For example, if you bump into a Golem, almost all magic will be useless. If you fight monsters with spell resistance the spellcasters will have difficulty harming them. If you fight something that can cast silence (2nd lvl cleric spell) and the Sorcerer does not have the Silent Spell feat he will not be able to use Magic Missile.

My point in this case is that if the party and the adventure are properlly balanced that there will always be times when different members of the party will have to step up to save the party, and perhaps kill a creature by themselves. If one character is dominating, then perhaps the adventure is not balanced.

 

[Acmite]

Yes I know this. Wizards under Peter Adkinson was a good company, I thank them for saving D&D. I thank Peter Adkinson for buying (saving?) Gen-Con. But Wizards is not under Adkinson anymore it is under Ha$bro and is not the same company it used to be. Adkinson's love for gaming has been replaced by Ha$bro's love of the bottom line. SKR told a wonderful story of Elves and Bean Counters discussing this. Gone as well are others who brought the love of gaming to the company like Monte Cook who many consider the main creative mind behind 3E and Ryan Dancey who gave us the SRD. Additionally the R&D staff has been obliterated by layoffs leaving but a shell of the talent they once had. Just because a company previously under different management once did wonderful things doesn't mean I should support them now no matter what.

We agree on most of this then. You said, "Instead I will spend my money on d20 publishers who care about the hobby rather than milking the customer out of as much money as possible. D&D will not die, the SRD can't be revoked, so I will spend my money with companies who do care" and that's what got me going.

I honestly think that a good chunk of R&D likes what they're doing. I think they want to make a good game. Monte has suggested that some of them don't even play the game, but I'm thinking that they are the minority. Did it hurt to lose people like Monte and SKR (although neither of them were fired or laid-off)? Sure.

Does that leave the talent pool dried up? I don't think so, but we won't know until we see more material made after they left--we're still seeing products that had their mark on it (Savage Species, Unapproachable East, Races of Faerun, etc).

Wizards, the company, cares. But they have big wigs at Hasbro breathing down their necks--and I think it was that pressure that instigated everything that led up to the Bean Counter story.

Some of the best products coming out now are from other d20 publishers (have you seen Mutants and Masterminds? Wow!) I agree, but Wizards still fills an important role in R&D--a role I certainly wouldn't trust to some of the "major" third party publishers, like Mongoose for example.

 

[Trepelano]

Still they are shoe-horning the ranger. My last ranger character used to fight with a spear, dismissing his 2WF abillity. Under 3.5 he will still be penalized for not accepting non-sense restrictions. Why not giving the ranger a limited choice of military feats like the fighter, but in reduced number?

Worse is that they insist in stupid 2ed favorite enemy. I would rather see it replaced by something more ranger-like such as advantages in the wilderness.

I guess that, after a few months, we will go back to the alt-ranger design contest.

BTW, I have seen a player very happy with his 1ed barbarian, who was found of using throwing axes as his primary weapon.

Hey guy,

you know -if you were happy playing a 3.0 ranger that way - you'd probably be able to convert the same character concept over to the fighter class with better results. Just boost up you DEX, wear light armor, take the track feat. All your missing from your old character is the favored enemy, but you get more feats to tailor your spear use. If you need more skills, mix in a few levels of rogue.


The great thing about the four basic classes: cleric, fighter, rogue, and wizard - is that they don't have any predetermined background - so you can make them as "woodsy" as you like.