RigaMortus2
First Post
Quasqueton said:
I was thinking the same exact thing.
New haste on WotC website!
- Thread starter CRGreathouse
- Start date
I was thinking the same exact thing.
Kraedin
First Post
They forgot to change it to a Will save; undead are still immune to haste.
The "with any weapon he is holding" clause is unnecessary and will just lead to debates that should have been nipped in the bud with better wording. (I can see it now – most of it will revolve around two-weapon fighting, unarmed strikes, and natural weapons.)
They need to define “normal movement,” as well as indicate if the bonus applies to the creature’s base speed or current speed.
“Multiple haste effects don't stack” implies that other spell effects do stack with themselves. That sentence should be eliminated, unless they are doing something horrific with the stacking rules.
The "with any weapon he is holding" clause is unnecessary and will just lead to debates that should have been nipped in the bud with better wording. (I can see it now – most of it will revolve around two-weapon fighting, unarmed strikes, and natural weapons.)
They need to define “normal movement,” as well as indicate if the bonus applies to the creature’s base speed or current speed.
“Multiple haste effects don't stack” implies that other spell effects do stack with themselves. That sentence should be eliminated, unless they are doing something horrific with the stacking rules.
Elder-Basilisk
First Post
Re: ok ok sheesh
Well, one 3rd level spell, one sixth level spell (Mass Haste), and several magic items (Weapons of Speed, boots of Speed, etc). But I understand your point. It may not be the best way to balance the game. However, if the changes to the rules don't take the far-reaching effects of changing those important features of the game into account--by balancing TWF with THF and melee with archery or creating other methods of balancing them they will not be an improvement.
If you ask me, including a clearly worded version of Lion's Charge in the PH would go a long way towards rectifying a lot of the balance issues raised by the Haste changes.
You really need to make up your mind here: is the choice in 3.0 between casting Haste and "sucking" or have you--as you later claim--seen a lot of "effective wizards without Haste." If you've seen the latter, that would seem to undermine your dramatics about the power of haste. (Although it doesn't necessarily undermine my point WRT Haste and game balance--I'm maintianing primarily that Haste is integral to the balance between various kinds of FIGHTERS not that it's integral to the balance of all wizards (although I think it is very important to blaster wizards--enchanters, necromancers, and transmuters focussed on save or die spells can make do without it)).
That's what all the detractors of Haste say. Yet somehow it's not boring if the battle starts and the archer uses rapid shot. Battle starts. Archer uses Rapid Shot. Did I mention Archer uses Rapid Shot? Or the fighter doing the same thing with power attack. Or the fighter using a bastard sword. Fight starts. Draw sword. Fight starts draw sword. Did I mention "draw sword?" Or Full attack. Charge. Full attack. Charge. Etc. Or a rogue tumbling behind the villain and sneak attacking. Or a different kind of wizard doing the same thing with fireball. Or a sorceror casting magic missile repeatedly until things die.
The point is that there seem to be some tactics that people get bothered about their repetition but there's far more repetitiveness that nobody is bothered about. If you look at Haste as a part of a typical mid to high level group's battle tactics--just like drawing a sword or using rapid shot, I think it will become clear that the addition of 3.0 Haste's partial action creates more opportunities for creativity and variation in combat rather than less.
I think druids are as worthwhile as the next guy but even I wouldn't pretend that they wouldn't be taking a huge power hit if they lost animal friendship. Could they still be a playable class. Probably. Would it be a good thing? Definitely not.
I don't think it's necessarily a "cop out." The ability to cast spells is the point of some classes. If Paladins couldn't cast Holy Sword, they'd be much weaker. Giving them a good spell isn't a cop out--part of what separates paladins from fighters is that fighters get weapon specialization and lots of feats and paladins get Divine Grace, Lay on Hands, Smite Evil, and Holy Sword. And if that means that Paladins who pretend that Holy Sword isn't on their spell list will often be weaker than paladins who use Holy Sword, that doesn't make the inclusion of Holy Sword a cop out. What exactly would the designers be copping out of? The duty to make Paladin a worthwhile class? I rather think that a good spell list is part of what makes a class worthwhile.
Doesn't this contradict the hysterics about the inordinate power of Haste?
two said:
Well, one 3rd level spell, one sixth level spell (Mass Haste), and several magic items (Weapons of Speed, boots of Speed, etc). But I understand your point. It may not be the best way to balance the game. However, if the changes to the rules don't take the far-reaching effects of changing those important features of the game into account--by balancing TWF with THF and melee with archery or creating other methods of balancing them they will not be an improvement.
If you ask me, including a clearly worded version of Lion's Charge in the PH would go a long way towards rectifying a lot of the balance issues raised by the Haste changes.
You really need to make up your mind here: is the choice in 3.0 between casting Haste and "sucking" or have you--as you later claim--seen a lot of "effective wizards without Haste." If you've seen the latter, that would seem to undermine your dramatics about the power of haste. (Although it doesn't necessarily undermine my point WRT Haste and game balance--I'm maintianing primarily that Haste is integral to the balance between various kinds of FIGHTERS not that it's integral to the balance of all wizards (although I think it is very important to blaster wizards--enchanters, necromancers, and transmuters focussed on save or die spells can make do without it)).
That's what all the detractors of Haste say. Yet somehow it's not boring if the battle starts and the archer uses rapid shot. Battle starts. Archer uses Rapid Shot. Did I mention Archer uses Rapid Shot? Or the fighter doing the same thing with power attack. Or the fighter using a bastard sword. Fight starts. Draw sword. Fight starts draw sword. Did I mention "draw sword?" Or Full attack. Charge. Full attack. Charge. Etc. Or a rogue tumbling behind the villain and sneak attacking. Or a different kind of wizard doing the same thing with fireball. Or a sorceror casting magic missile repeatedly until things die.
The point is that there seem to be some tactics that people get bothered about their repetition but there's far more repetitiveness that nobody is bothered about. If you look at Haste as a part of a typical mid to high level group's battle tactics--just like drawing a sword or using rapid shot, I think it will become clear that the addition of 3.0 Haste's partial action creates more opportunities for creativity and variation in combat rather than less.
I think druids are as worthwhile as the next guy but even I wouldn't pretend that they wouldn't be taking a huge power hit if they lost animal friendship. Could they still be a playable class. Probably. Would it be a good thing? Definitely not.
I don't think it's necessarily a "cop out." The ability to cast spells is the point of some classes. If Paladins couldn't cast Holy Sword, they'd be much weaker. Giving them a good spell isn't a cop out--part of what separates paladins from fighters is that fighters get weapon specialization and lots of feats and paladins get Divine Grace, Lay on Hands, Smite Evil, and Holy Sword. And if that means that Paladins who pretend that Holy Sword isn't on their spell list will often be weaker than paladins who use Holy Sword, that doesn't make the inclusion of Holy Sword a cop out. What exactly would the designers be copping out of? The duty to make Paladin a worthwhile class? I rather think that a good spell list is part of what makes a class worthwhile.
Doesn't this contradict the hysterics about the inordinate power of Haste?
I absoultely HATE the new haste! It's awful! What the hell is a Sorcerer supposed to do now? From what I've heard they still are using the stupid rule of increased casting times with metamagics, which means Sorcerer's can't Quicken. So how is a Sorcer supposed to keep up in combat anymore?
Why would a Wizard or Sorcerer care about an extra attack? They suck in melee anyway. Of course now this is a fighter's wet dream. A mass haste spell at 3rd level to make him even better. Now the Wizard and Sorcerer just get to sit back, buff their friends and watch the action boringly. Even spells like Fireball just can't compete with the consistent damage output of fighters and rogues, especially when they're hasted. This really sucks.
I really liked the orignal 3e haste. It was powerful, yes, but it enabled the spellcasters a chance to compete. Leave the party buff spells to the clerics, I say. Wizards and Sorcerers needed that edge, and now they've lost it.
Just one more reason to stick with 3e and tell Wizards and their 3.5 crap where to go. What is this anyway? A computer game which has to be patched?
Why would a Wizard or Sorcerer care about an extra attack? They suck in melee anyway. Of course now this is a fighter's wet dream. A mass haste spell at 3rd level to make him even better. Now the Wizard and Sorcerer just get to sit back, buff their friends and watch the action boringly. Even spells like Fireball just can't compete with the consistent damage output of fighters and rogues, especially when they're hasted. This really sucks.
I really liked the orignal 3e haste. It was powerful, yes, but it enabled the spellcasters a chance to compete. Leave the party buff spells to the clerics, I say. Wizards and Sorcerers needed that edge, and now they've lost it.
Just one more reason to stick with 3e and tell Wizards and their 3.5 crap where to go. What is this anyway? A computer game which has to be patched?
Number47
First Post
Unlike the fighter often charging or the rogue getting into position for sneak attacks, the thing with haste is that the wizard would cast it first thing, on himself, no matter what the situation was. It was a no-brainer. You cannot tell me that a fighter charging into battle is always a no-brainer unless your fighter has no brain.
Henrix
Explorer
Finally a Haste that is usable!
I have basically refused to use Haste in my games, and discouraged my players from using it.
Why?
Because two years ago we were planning on having an event at a Con where you brought your 10th lvl character and duelled.
While we were trying the form out they all tended to start like this:
Round 1 - Both combatants get Hasted, by one mean or another
Round 2, etc. - Both combatants take effectively 1½ round each.
Haste was necessary for basically any viable tactic.
It wasn't an option, it was obligatory.
I have basically refused to use Haste in my games, and discouraged my players from using it.
Why?
Because two years ago we were planning on having an event at a Con where you brought your 10th lvl character and duelled.
While we were trying the form out they all tended to start like this:
Round 1 - Both combatants get Hasted, by one mean or another
Round 2, etc. - Both combatants take effectively 1½ round each.
Haste was necessary for basically any viable tactic.
It wasn't an option, it was obligatory.
the_mighty_agrippa
First Post
you know, no one complained when haste cost you a year of your life and wizards were dominant above 12th level. hell, the only spells above 7th were arcane spells for years!
man, quit complaining and play the game. you have dungeon masters don't you? either keep it the way it has been or change, because it looks to me like wotc has put in way more time trying to make "you" happy than most speciality companies would do.
man, quit complaining and play the game. you have dungeon masters don't you? either keep it the way it has been or change, because it looks to me like wotc has put in way more time trying to make "you" happy than most speciality companies would do.
DiFier
First Post
Haste now seems to be a better version of exp. retreat. I like that too.
I am a spell sword. I think I used Haste once to cast 2 spells in a round. I have also used it to cast true strike and then channel a spell on my attack. (unfortunatlly when I have done that the recipient had SR and I failed to bypass it so only 1d10+1d6+5 rahter than 1d10+1d6+5+8d4)
I thought that Haste was overpowered. I think that the new haste is underpowered. but I will not lose any sleep over it. I had haste in my spell book but I didn't always memorize it.
I think that Dispell is way more important of a 3rd level spell than Haste was. Sometime I do not memorize haste but I always memorize dispell.
I am a spell sword. I think I used Haste once to cast 2 spells in a round. I have also used it to cast true strike and then channel a spell on my attack. (unfortunatlly when I have done that the recipient had SR and I failed to bypass it so only 1d10+1d6+5 rahter than 1d10+1d6+5+8d4)
I thought that Haste was overpowered. I think that the new haste is underpowered. but I will not lose any sleep over it. I had haste in my spell book but I didn't always memorize it.
I think that Dispell is way more important of a 3rd level spell than Haste was. Sometime I do not memorize haste but I always memorize dispell.
Only bards have more potential utility outside of combat than wizards. I think it's a shame that the ability to dish out damage-per-round is the litmus test of how useful a class is. Of course, I suppose it doesn't help that the spells in D&D are heavily biased toward combat...
Similar Threads
