Poll: Power creep in 3.5, how significant?

[Ltheb Silverfrond]

I voted option #2: Some feats/PrCs are just plain sick together (Incantrix + Another Spellcaster, Powerattack + Leap-Attack + Shocktrooper) but most of the stuff is pretty tame.

I ran a few Core-only games last year, and some of my players complained their characters were bland. The current game I run is Core + feats from the Complete Series, (No PrCs) with a few house rules here and there. (like "the Divine Metamagic feats do not exist" )

 

[Sejs]

I wonder if the power creep wasn't a design goal. Releasing supplements that allow more powerful characters, and thus with an incentive to purchase, is exactly the strategy developed by WotC to their collectable card games. Why they wouldn't apply it to their roleplaying line?

The truly ironic part of this being that many of the most desireable, abusable and powerful cards... are the older ones.

 

[Moon-Lancer]

There is indeed power creep, and it can't be helped with each new book. It's not really a factor of new feats/spells/classes being "broken" (although there are certainly some that are), as much as it is the simple fact that each new book allows a player to further specialize his character. To pick an arbitrary number, of the various options in the Player's Handbook, say 50% of them are great for your character. That means the other 50% are sub-optimal. By adding additional non-core books to the mix, you widen the number of optimal choices for your character, and reduce the amount of sub-optimal choices you're forced to make.

Taken individually, in other words, the elements aren't necessarilly power creep. But the fact that each book adds so many new choices means that as a whole, a character built with all the books rather than just the core books is going to be stronger.

rather insightful. I dident think about it like this, but yeah, it seems right. I hate taking sub optimal feats or feats with icky flavor to them. Gotta love the strong feats with chocolate sprinkles

 

[wildstarsreach]

Based solely on the campaign setting-independent books (not FR or Eberron books for example), I would say that there is a list of offending items that can be counted on both hands, and maybe require a few toes. Oddly enough, three of the biggest offenders are found in the core rules.

Power Attack
Metamagic Rods
Multiclassing (too good, too easy, and no drawbacks--it should be less beneficial and have more drawbacks)
Sudden Metamagic Feats
Divine Metamagic
Divine Insight
Warblade
Elusive Target
Radiant Servant of Pelor
Frenzied Berzerker
Craft Contingent Spell
Vow of Poverty
Warshaper

Now Power Attack in and of itself is not that bad, but if I take Power Attack off the list of things that I think are overpowered, a number of other things immediately jump on that I have a problem with, such as:

Leap Attack
Shock Trooper
Dervish
Wraithstrike
Exotic Weapon Master
and more...

If Power Attack were just toned down a touch so that it wasn't so easy to add stacking "doubling" bonuses, then I think all this stuff is fine. If the bonuses are limited to "half-double" then that would probably eliminate most problems I have with it.

But overall, I think 3.5 is a well-designed, well-balanced system.

Wraithstrike
Divine Metamagic
Divine Insight
Warblade
Elusive Target
Radiant Servant of Pelor
Frenzied Berzerker
Craft Contingent Spell (especially bad if an artificer takes)
Vow of Poverty
Warshaper
Power Attack (if made like combat expertise, limited to upto 5 points of BA and a second that would limit to 10 points of BA)

These are the problematic for me. Wraithstrike as much as I love it has now been shown to be among the worst. However, a Radiant Servant of Pelor is a close second, he out clerics the cleric. PA is can be corrected in my opinion though.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

Just the options alone sometimes makes a difference. I don't recall any spells in the Complete Wizard that alone are more powerful than the PHB spells, but used well, a wizard or even a sorcerer with access to the PHB spells and the Complete Wizard spells would be more powerful than one with access to the PHB spells alone.

Complete Arcane?
Aside from the hideous array of no-SR conjuration damaging spells, the book introduces some amazing new options for beating SR with ordinary spells. Is this what you mean?
Take either Arcane Mastery (feat) or Assay Resistance (spell), and combine with SR-but-no-save spells from the PHB (necromancy and enchantment have some great ones), and you take out many high-level opponents with little problem.

 

[I'm A Banana]

In general, the power isn't as creeping as it could be. I mean, if the Frenzied Berserker and the Warforged and the like are evidence to go on, it's really even debatable if there *is* power creep.

I mean, the most egregious example seems to be the Bo9S, where you have something that is a head better than anything else at doing what it does.

 

[Hussar]

I think Kamikaze Midget has the right of it. The power creep, such as it is, is pretty mild. In a core only campaign, where you only use core monsters as well, the core casters are still ahead of everyone else. Opening things up to supplements doesn't really change a whole lot. I've yet to hear anyone talking about how a given class/race/whatever, stands head and shoulders ahead of any other choice.

 

[FireLance]

I mean, the most egregious example seems to be the Bo9S, where you have something that is a head better than anything else at doing what it does.

Some might argue that the Book of Nine Swords was about correcting an imbalance in the core rules, and not "power creep".

 

[Aaron L]

Some might argue that the Book of Nine Swords was about correcting an imbalance in the core rules, and not "power creep".

Making an existing class obsolete isn't correcting anything. If they wanted to embiggen the Fighter, they should have done something about the Fighter, not released replacement classes.

 

[hong]

People, people. The solution is to ban fighters.