Particle_Man said:
Except, of course, that the 1e crowd were RIGHT!
But I do luv 3e, and will luv 3.5e even more. I have liked every change I have heard rumour of, without exception. I just pray they will change the half-elf race too. [/QUOTE
Well, I hear that in Urban Arcana they get +2 to..what is it...Diplomacy and Gather Information, to represent their skill in interacting with different peoples.
Not a huge boost, but a nice bit of flavor.
Outrage! Let's send a message to WotC!
- Thread starter Gyr
- Start date
Enceladus
First Post
EricNoah said:
You know you're right. But I think I'm not alone when I say I get tired of seeing the same tollish posts over and over again for the sake of it seems nothing but attention, and the same flame wars erupt with the same crap.
Do these people live in such a vacuum that they do not read any other posts on the same subject?
It gets tired.
Gez
First Post
I agree it looks more like a new edition than like a revision. Bumping the CRs of the devils all by about 5 points, modifying favored classes, etc. I'll probably would have prefered if they simply applied errata, clarified rules, and added some new stuff (like the new gauth monster, or the new prestige classes). They've decided to tweak everything.
We'll see what it looks like in the end, and personally, I'll continue to enthousiastically use house-rules.
We'll see what it looks like in the end, and personally, I'll continue to enthousiastically use house-rules.
MeepoTheMighty
First Post
Gez said:
Uh, that doesn't sound like a new edition at all. Could you imagine if 3E came out and the only thing changed from 2E was a few extra hit dice on a devil and small change in the racial abilities of the gnome?
Andion Isurand
First Post
Yes, and what I have heard across the boards... it is a little too sweet. Remember, if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
************************************************
This is a rough summary of what I have heard is included in the new ranger class:
d8 hit dice (in truth, the only real penalty I have heard thus far)
high BAB, good fort, bad reflex and will
(and im not even sure of the reflex saves)
( 6 + int skill points per level ) (new increase)
4 Divine Spell Levels
Track at lvl 1
slightly improved favored enemy
3 bonus feats (1 of them could be considered new)
free endurance feat (new)
animal companion
evasion (new)
hide in plain sight (new)
wild empathy (new, it replaces a skill, freeing up even more skill points.... it does this by combining two skills into one)
And by this point, I am already starting to get dizzy.....
*********************************************
If the above is true, multiclassing abuse may become more pronounced, due to the increased number of skill points.
With this new revised class, many physical combat oriented characters will be hardpressed to ingore taking thier first two levels in the Ranger class before multiclassing (for all those tasty skill points at first level, and a ranger bonus feat at level 2)
(2 Rgr, 10 int) 6 x 4 + 6 = 28
(2 Ftr, 10 int) 2 x 4 + 2 = 10
*********************************************
With more skill points floating around, the new Ranger can simply switch his Constitution score with his Intelligence score to make up for the reduced Hit Die.
( Oh, and from other things I have heard... Intuit Direction and Wilderness Lore are now combined into the Survival skill... possibly freeing up one or two more skill points )
*********************************************
With this new revised class, the Fighter's appeal would be much more diminished... and the Rogue's deal would be somewhat more threatened by the Ranger.
Unless of course, many of the other classes are similarly "beefed up". However, if such a thing were true, it would create a lot of extra work to make sure it didn't tilt the whole system.
And if WotC starts beefing up this class here and that class there, people will compliain that thier favorite class got the short end of the stick, and complain about it until a game designer is influenced to make the change (whether or not it is wise).
If not contained, this pattern will only prove to 'escalate and over-complicate' the game.... since the increased power of everything would remain somewhat relative with everything else, as time continues to pass.
*********************************************
While a Ranger should be portayed as skillful, I think ( 4 + int ) skill points per level can still do that. And I also believe the ranger could stand to lose one of its added class abilities... also that free endurance feat.
With that, my 'current assertion' on the new Ranger class is concluded.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
As for the Rock Gnome change... I don't find it that bad.
A Rock Gnome illusionist, will benefit greatly from a +1 racial bonus to the DC of any Illusion spell they cast.
The Rock Gnome's new prefeered class of Bard, does make a cultural appeal to their humorous, peaceful and fun-loving ways.
And besides, Bards are not listed very often as a race's favored class. If anything, this change lends the Bard class another support.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
And in any case...
...while it is expected of these products to strive for and maintain greater levels of approximation and precision (whether or not the 'human beings' designing it, blunder or not)....
...a game's DM still maintains the power of Rule Zero, and thus the final, final say in all things within that game.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
((( Now, I am only 'extending' what Gyr has said, in making a few hypothetical statements as a means to illustrate an assertion. Thus, this may apply, in part, to others who may be reading this. )))
I probably will buy the new books, just to give myself a hard copy of the new rules... although, I may be inclinded to pick and choose from them at certain points where I feel it is appropriate.
In addition, I am sure that not every new change appearing in the upcoming material will provide enough grounds for attempting to boycott the product as a whole.
Gyr, it sounds like you are being a little adversarial towards these human beings for thier honest efforts. ( indeed, even if these efforts have gone astray here and there )
However, if a substaintial boycott did occur, it would only prove to hurt the company (especially if the books are already at the printer as you claim) and work against them when they try to do a better job the next time around.
Gyr, I and many others do welcome you to debate the decisions made... but please, support the game, the company, and to a larger degree, the industry as well.
If it is your wish to not buy these books and to prevent others from making the same mistake... then please do so. But why organize such an adversarial petition against WotC? Any successful company desires to better satisfy their frequent customers and win new customers in order to sell more of thier product. If WotC succeeds, then the game of D&D will continue to live on.
Now, if it is not the game material you find offensive, but the business decisions and practices behind this product... then try to speak to someone in charge of the business itself, before drafting this petition.
And perhaps... if you have enough enthusiasim to do such a thing, why not try to get a job at WotC yourself... and see how well you do.
Finally, Gyr, if your starting this thread... was only a means for you to vent your frustration and let out some steam, then I am with you. I am likewise, irritated by the inequities that occur from time to time. However, I am not about to let my frustrations manipulate me into partaking in a futile attempt to reach a goal. (even if it is or is not a potentially worthwhile goal)
I would look further ahead Gyr, to what may become of D&D (the game itself) after 3.5 has come and gone, without disrupting the current (and past) decisions that WotC has made. Preventing mistakes is easier than correcting ones that have already been made.
I apologize... if I took too much liberty in what I have said. But I do hope you can find some wisdom in it, even if you don't agree with the better part of it.
Thanks for reading this lengthy post. I guess I just had a lot to say this time around.
Last edited:
Andion Isurand said:
But let us not forget, those are (a) thematic to each other, and (b) spread out more than the mostly-front-loaded "three bonus feats" the Rangers get now (Amdi and 2WFight at 1st, ImpCrit at 8th).
Actually, you're incorrect here; Rangers already have Animal Companions ... having an animal companion is a direct result of beign able to cast Animal Friendship. Ranger animal companions are simply lesser than druid ACs, because Rangers have half as many caster levels.
No, it doesn't replace a skill. It shifts all the uses of "Animal Empathy" into the skill "Handle Animal"; rangers will still need ranks in a skill to use the benefits, those ranks will simply also make them able to CARE for the animal, as well as make nicey-nice with it.
Yet, many of the abilities that cause people to take one (and only one) level of ranger, ar ebeing spread out ... so there's always a reason NOT to multiclass out of ranger, unlike presently.
I perhaps agree that 4+ for skills owuld have been better ... even 5+ (does anyone know why 3E seems stuck on even numbers of base skill points?). However, levels 1 and 2 of ranger gives you (with a 10 INT) 12 skill points and one feat. The same levels of FIGHTER, OTOH, give you 4 skill points and TWO feats.
Are 8 skill points REALLY worth more than one feat, in EVERY situation?
I disagree. Rogues, IME, aren't truly selected for the skill points; it's the sneaking and sneak-attacking that's the primary draw to that class. Fighters, OTOH, will, in the long run, consistently outperform Rangers in terms of sheer general melee "oomf".
Hypersmurf
Moderatarrrrh...
3E Rangers don't get Improved Critical free. It simply points out that witha BAB of 8+ and their "virtual" feats, they qualify for the prerequisites.
A 3E ranger's third bonus feat is Track.
-Hyp.
Elder-Basilisk said:
I agree. Ironically it was the very loud whining and moaning of the same people that gave us the 3.5e we have today. I can't believe they have the gall to then turn around and call people who voice legitimate concerns whiny and spoilt.
In response to the topic starter. I very much agree. No one can tell you you MUST use/buy 3.5e. If you're content to use your houserules with your existing 3e materials then continue to do so. Be happy in the knowledge that you have saved yourself $$$ and endless frustration and boredom in buying a product you don't like.
