Non-Ranger 3.5E Changes
- Thread starter Tarrasque Wrangler
- Start date
Druid Armor
Druids can use wooden Ironwood armor, right now. Wooden plate armor, anyone?
Druids revere not only nature, but see the Sun, Moon, and Earth as deital. Druids don't use metal because mining is seen as "rape of the Earth". Hence, no metal armor, and little or no metal in their weapons.
You're right in that the restrictions on weapons and armor aren't well explained in 3e, though. A nice rewrite might fix that.
I might even favor a line saying that Druids can't use metal, at all, and all their Scimitars are Ironwood. YMMV, of course.
Saeviomagy said:
Druids can use wooden Ironwood armor, right now. Wooden plate armor, anyone?
Druids revere not only nature, but see the Sun, Moon, and Earth as deital. Druids don't use metal because mining is seen as "rape of the Earth". Hence, no metal armor, and little or no metal in their weapons.
You're right in that the restrictions on weapons and armor aren't well explained in 3e, though. A nice rewrite might fix that.
I might even favor a line saying that Druids can't use metal, at all, and all their Scimitars are Ironwood. YMMV, of course.
Vaxalon
First Post
Re: Things I'd like to see
DMG, page 86
You want to be calculating lines of sight for every light source in the party, every time someone moves? No thanks!
I find that the ammunition restrictions and the inability of an archer to prevent enemies from overwhelming the spellcasters to be an adequate tradeoff.
As others have noted, they do.
A common houserule. They'll probably do that one.
Social skills are hard to make hard and fast in the rules. What do you have in mind?
Given that the average damage from a greatsword smashes an average skeleton to flinders in one hit, what's the problem?
And the glaive, and the longspear, and the shortspear, and the trident, and and and...
And then where would that leave the guisarme?
The fact is that you can't trip someone by whacking them in the knee with a staff. If you want to be able to knock someone down by whacking them, take the "Knockdown" feat.
Zaruthustran said:
DMG, page 86
Zaruthustran said:
You want to be calculating lines of sight for every light source in the party, every time someone moves? No thanks!
Zaruthustran said:
I find that the ammunition restrictions and the inability of an archer to prevent enemies from overwhelming the spellcasters to be an adequate tradeoff.
Zaruthustran said:
As others have noted, they do.
Zaruthustran said:
A common houserule. They'll probably do that one.
Zaruthustran said:
Social skills are hard to make hard and fast in the rules. What do you have in mind?
Zaruthustran said:
Given that the average damage from a greatsword smashes an average skeleton to flinders in one hit, what's the problem?
Zaruthustran said:
And the glaive, and the longspear, and the shortspear, and the trident, and and and...
And then where would that leave the guisarme?
The fact is that you can't trip someone by whacking them in the knee with a staff. If you want to be able to knock someone down by whacking them, take the "Knockdown" feat.
Last edited:
Re: Things I'd like to see
2) They've already said you'll get this.
3) Allow bow/arrow bonuses to effect the attack, but not stack. An attack with a +1 bow and normal arrow works the same way as an attack with a +1 arrow and normal bow (currently, creatures with DR have it bypassed only with the arrow), but an attack with a +5 bow and +2 arrow is only at +5, not +7, as it would be now.
4) Agreed! It's also silly that Rangers don't have Knowledge (Geography) and Profession: Guide, too. Every class should have an appropriate Knowledge skill (History, for Fighters, as it covers Wars), and either a Profession or a choice of several. Also, why don't Fighters have Intimidate? Why don't Wizards and Sorcerers have Use Magic Device? At least they finally gave Druids Animal Empathy! (I always wondered about that, in 2e!)
5) Disagree. Paladins can be whatever they want, before and after, but they're called/chosen, they don't choose to become. Monk can also be whatever they want, before/after, but seeking spiritual perfection is a full-time job.
7-8) Yep, yep.
Zaruthustran said:
2) They've already said you'll get this.
3) Allow bow/arrow bonuses to effect the attack, but not stack. An attack with a +1 bow and normal arrow works the same way as an attack with a +1 arrow and normal bow (currently, creatures with DR have it bypassed only with the arrow), but an attack with a +5 bow and +2 arrow is only at +5, not +7, as it would be now.
4) Agreed! It's also silly that Rangers don't have Knowledge (Geography) and Profession: Guide, too. Every class should have an appropriate Knowledge skill (History, for Fighters, as it covers Wars), and either a Profession or a choice of several. Also, why don't Fighters have Intimidate? Why don't Wizards and Sorcerers have Use Magic Device? At least they finally gave Druids Animal Empathy! (I always wondered about that, in 2e!)
5) Disagree. Paladins can be whatever they want, before and after, but they're called/chosen, they don't choose to become. Monk can also be whatever they want, before/after, but seeking spiritual perfection is a full-time job.
7-8) Yep, yep.
Zaruthustran
The tingling means it’s working!
Re: Re: Things I'd like to see
Yeah, I want better rules.
Who ever said anything about calculating? I just want a rule that says that light sources provide full light to X feet, 50% light to Y feet. Right now, a torch fully illuminates 20 feet--but something 21 feet away is in *pitch black darkness*.
That's dumb.
That's fabulous. Me, I find that I'd like to see changes to archery. Thus my post title "changes I'd like to see".
As I've pointed out, they don't. Fighters don't have Profession. Alas.
Or, since that scheme is not much more than renaming the skills, something like "Feint", "Converse", and "Scare". Feinting is for achieving a physical response (in combat, or to make someone look away). "Converse" is when you use language to achieve a goal. "Scare" is when you make someone fear for their lives (with the effect of inducing the "Shaken" and "cowering" conditions).
I posted more complete ideas in a thread a couple months ago.
It's not a major problem. Just tossing out ideas.
Clearly you've never used a staff. The staff can be used for whacking, sure, but it's also used to hook someone's leg and send them to the ground.
The other weapons you mention are primarily used to stab, slash, or whatever. Staves are used to trip at least as often as they're used to whack. The rules should reflect this.
-z
Vaxalon said:
Yeah, I want better rules.
Who ever said anything about calculating? I just want a rule that says that light sources provide full light to X feet, 50% light to Y feet. Right now, a torch fully illuminates 20 feet--but something 21 feet away is in *pitch black darkness*.That's dumb.
That's fabulous. Me, I find that I'd like to see changes to archery. Thus my post title "changes I'd like to see".
As I've pointed out, they don't. Fighters don't have Profession. Alas.
Here's to hoping.
Well, I'd hate to hijack into a social skills thread, but I was thinking of reshuffling the social skills to "Mislead", "Convince", and "threaten". Use "Mislead" to feint or lie, "convince" when you're trying to change someone's mind or achieve a goal through honest conversation, and "threaten" when you're trying to scare someone.
Or, since that scheme is not much more than renaming the skills, something like "Feint", "Converse", and "Scare". Feinting is for achieving a physical response (in combat, or to make someone look away). "Converse" is when you use language to achieve a goal. "Scare" is when you make someone fear for their lives (with the effect of inducing the "Shaken" and "cowering" conditions).
I posted more complete ideas in a thread a couple months ago.
It's not a major problem. Just tossing out ideas.
Clearly you've never used a staff. The staff can be used for whacking, sure, but it's also used to hook someone's leg and send them to the ground.
The other weapons you mention are primarily used to stab, slash, or whatever. Staves are used to trip at least as often as they're used to whack. The rules should reflect this.
-z
zoroaster100
First Post
I hope they fix the damage spells!
The change I'd most like to see with 3.5 is a slaughtering of the sacred cow of having magic missile and fireball screw up the damage guidelines for spells. It's not so much that these two spells are overwhelmingly powerful, but rather that I always find annoying that spells of the same level should be so varied in usefulness. I'd like to see them take a step back and make the damage spells consistent in how much damage all energy damage spells can do at each level, and how much damage spells that do bludgeoning, piercing or slashing damage can do.
The change I'd most like to see with 3.5 is a slaughtering of the sacred cow of having magic missile and fireball screw up the damage guidelines for spells. It's not so much that these two spells are overwhelmingly powerful, but rather that I always find annoying that spells of the same level should be so varied in usefulness. I'd like to see them take a step back and make the damage spells consistent in how much damage all energy damage spells can do at each level, and how much damage spells that do bludgeoning, piercing or slashing damage can do.
Last edited:
John Crichton
First Post
Re: Re: Re: Non-Ranger 3.5E Changes
Zee Book of Hallowed Might has Monte's alt.paladin(s). Good purchase, IMO.Skullfyre said:
Similar Threads
