sniff sniff...Do I smell 2nd edition mistakes?

[Pants]

I've presented the release schedules

And they've been countered showing how tSR released far more product during 2e than what WotC is doing now.

I've shown the level of broken abilities that can be brought from non-core on-the-shelf today WotC products.

And people have shown that broken material existed long before 3.5.

But a kit is broken that did, get this, +1 to hit and damage, +1/4 levels to do a fancy maneuver and a level/2+1 AC bonus when casting spells, blindfighting and dancing.
No shields, one handed weapons only, nothing heavier than studded leather or elven chain, +2 casting time increase, loss of +1 to hit with bows, -1 to hit with all other weapons.

The problem here is, you're comparing 3e mechanics to 2e mechanics. On the whole, 3e characters are much more powerful and versatile than their 2e counterparts. Whether that is a good thing or not, is up to you personally, but in order to present an accurate and fair case, you have to think in terms of what 2e characters got.

Would the afforementioned 2e Bladesinger Kit be massively overpowered in 3e. Maybe, maybe not, depending upon how it was handled. Was it overpowered in 2e? Probably.

Is the Fochluchan Lyrist overpowered? Possibly. You can say all you want, but you fail to mention several facts:
1) The loosened Druid oaths. Big whoop. The druid can wear chain shirt now. Seeing as the Lyrist doesn't gain any
2) The lyrist doesn't gain any advanced wildshape abilities. In fact, since you need at least 2 levels of Rogue and 1 level of Bard, and you advance all the way to level 10 of FL PrC, your Wildshape will suck. Given that its one of the most powerful features of the Druid, this is a hard hit.
3) No 9th level spells from the druid. Yep, that hurts.

Now, given these facts, can the FL be overpowered to some individual people? Yes, it can, just like some still believe that the Mystic Theurge is overpowered. Let me state this up front, not everyone subscribes to the same tenents of balance as you or I do. Sometimes there is something that is so massively overpowered/unbalanced/broken that it may transcend this rule, but usually, there is a reason that multi-page debates about the quality of a particular rule exist: because no one can seem to agree on it.

You will not suddenly be the harbinger of the perfect measurement of 'ideal balance.' Neither will I, nor will anyone else. Claiming that we're all a bunch of biased WotC sheep won't win you any arguments, especially when you consider that this forum is very much a pro-3rd party site.

The level of bias is tangible and disgusting .

Hey Pot, how's Kettle doing?

 

[DungeonMaster]

And they've been countered showing how tSR released far more product during 2e than what WotC is doing now.

Y'now, I didn't even contest this one but I'm still curious where this idea comes from.
As far as I can tell from here:
http://home.flash.net/~brenfrow/
3.5 is doing some pretty good catch-up to 2E in under 5 years and the list isn't even up-to-date.
You could argue that 2E has hundreds more adventures and more campaign settings, which is true, but from hardbacks additions to the core game... well it's looking pretty similar. They've even run out of previous edition names to poach and so are creating new to 3.5 titles too. Like the "dungeon master's guide II"

And people have shown that broken material existed long before 3.5.

I didn't argue that. There's just so much more in 3.5 than ever before. And much more blatantly.

Would the afforementioned 2e Bladesinger Kit be massively overpowered in 3e. Maybe, maybe not, depending upon how it was handled. Was it overpowered in 2e? Probably.

Overpowered, maybe. Not even on par with the average 3.5 Prestige class though.


For the record:

1) The loosened Druid oaths. Big whoop. The druid can wear chain shirt now. Seeing as the Lyrist doesn't gain any
2) The lyrist doesn't gain any advanced wildshape abilities. In fact, since you need at least 2 levels of Rogue and 1 level of Bard, and you advance all the way to level 10 of FL PrC, your Wildshape will suck. Given that its one of the most powerful features of the Druid, this is a hard hit.
3) No 9th level spells from the druid. Yep, that hurts.

1/ mithral breastplate to be precise.
2/ wildshape is irrelevant when you can just buy a wand of polymorph self and usemagic device it, even less so when you can shapechange. You don't need rogue levels at all, a ring of evasion will do fine.
3/ Er... no. You can get 9th level druid spells. See 2/.

You will not suddenly be the harbinger of the perfect measurement of 'ideal balance.' Neither will I, nor will anyone else. Claiming that we're all a bunch of biased WotC sheep won't win you any arguments, especially when you consider that this forum is very much a pro-3rd party site.

Yes I know, it's clear from the snide interjections I'm angering the wildlife. As a result this will be my final word on the matter, for good or ill.
There's not much more to be brought forward on the "discussion" when some people claim "hitting things with rocks sucks" when you're talking hundreds of damage - I know it's time to back down and this really isn't my *ahem* territory.

 

[Pants]

You could argue that 2E has hundreds more adventures and more campaign settings, which is true, but from hardbacks additions to the core game... well it's looking pretty similar.

3.5 is only catching up when you ignore all the stuff above. Considering we're speaking simply of products and not specifically, 'hardback optional books.'

They've even run out of previous edition names to poach and so are creating new to 3.5 titles too. Like the "dungeon master's guide II"

Aw, now the names make them inferior.

I didn't argue that. There's just so much more in 3.5 than ever before. And much more blatantly.

Apparently everyone doesn't agree with those claims.
See: Rest of the thread.

Overpowered, maybe. Not even on par with the average 3.5 Prestige class though.

The average? Or the flukes you mean? Until you prove that over 50% of the 3.5 PrC's are broken (!!!111), average doesn't mean anything but a knee-jerk generalization.

Also note that the Class will need at least two good stats for spellcasting (Wis and Cha, likely not very important cross-stats for Bards or Druids), a decent Int to get all the skill prereqs. up, and maybe a good Dex (this could be a dump stat). Str and Con could easily be dumped as well.

For the record:
1/ mithral breastplate to be precise.

Big whoop.

2/ wildshape is irrelevant when you can just buy a wand of polymorph self
and usemagic device it,

No it's not, because of several reasons:
1 - Wildshape is longer. The forms offered are much more limited, but the duration sucks.
2 - You have to have SOMEONE keep making you wands when that one runs out. This is prohibitively expensive to emulate a class ability that costs no gold and no xp.

even less so when you can shapechange.

A 9th-level spell... usable once or twice a day maybe... Wild Shape... usable many more times a day.

You don't need rogue levels at all, a ring of evasion will do fine.

Assuming we're following the Core guidelines on everything, a Ring of Evasion is 25,000 gp. Unless a character saves up every coin and never buys anything, by Core rules, he should be able to purchase one at level 8. Assuming that he is able to find someone to buy it from. Taking 2 levels in rogue is much easier and less pricey.

I know you will retort with saying 'The Wizard can make him one.' This also assumes that the Wizard even HAS craft item feats. Making one, while cheaper, uses up the Wizard's valued XP and time for adventure.

3/ Er... no. You can get 9th level druid spells. See 2/.

Assuming you can buy it, of course.

There's not much more to be brought forward on the "discussion" when some people claim "hitting things with rocks sucks" when you're talking hundreds of damage - I know it's time to back down and this really isn't my *ahem* territory.

You're overlooking important points. THE ONLY THING THE TWINKED OUT HULKING HURLER CAN DO IS HIT THINGS WITH ROCKS, WHICH HE MIGHT NOT EVEN DO SINCE HIS TO-HIT SUCKS.
Is he good at doing that? Yes he is, he's very good at doing that, but he's terrible at everything else.

Oh, I forgot, Hulking Hurler requires the character be large... oh, I guess even the very concept of this character is under the purview of the DM... Damn.

Lets also overlook the fact that a single 3.0 6th level clerical spell could reduce a several thousand HP creature to 1d4 hp with only a touch and no save. Obviously, 3.0 must be a prodigously unplayable system because one spell is poorly balanced.

Oh wait...

 

[FireLance]

This is ridiculous . No seriously. The level of bias is tangible and disgusting . I've never seen anything like this in my life, not even on the WotC boards. And I play 3E. This almost makes me ashamed to do so.

Yes I know, it's clear from the snide interjections I'm angering the wildlife. As a result this will be my final word on the matter, for good or ill.

You see, the problem is this. Almost everyone here on these boards loves D&D in one or more of its incarnations (some like certain incarnations more than others, but that's a different story).

Coming here and saying that D&D is a bad game because of a handful of questionable rules is like going to someone and saying of their favorite aunt, "I just saw your Aunt Dee Dee at the restaurant. She ordered a plate of oysters and she started getting out all red and splotchy and threw up all over the waiter. Your aunt is a disgrace! She is ugly and has a terrible personality! And she smells bad too!" What sort of reaction do you think you will get?

On the other hand, if you had asked something like, "Your Aunt Dee Dee has a rather violent reaction to oysters, doesn't she?" You'd probably get a more measured response, along the lines of, "Yes, she's allergic to all seafood. That's why we try not to serve her any when she visits."

 

[Illvillainy]

I want to know the precise penalties for the following:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20040305a
I'm REAL curious how you're going to explain that Prestige Class to me.
This is standard fare in 3E.

A character with that PrC is terribly restricted in terms of when and where he is allowed to adventure.

Also, it is nowhere near 'standard fare', it's an extremely specialised example limited to a small section of the dwarven population of a relative small part of the main continent of a specific campaign setting. How is that standard?

You seem to be becoming very obtuse here.

 

[Belen]

Coming here and saying that D&D is a bad game because of a handful of questionable rules is like going to someone and saying of their favorite aunt, "I just saw your Aunt Dee Dee at the restaurant. She ordered a plate of oysters and she started getting out all red and splotchy and threw up all over the waiter. Your aunt is a disgrace! She is ugly and has a terrible personality! And she smells bad too!" What sort of reaction do you think you will get?

On the other hand, if you had asked something like, "Your Aunt Dee Dee has a rather violent reaction to oysters, doesn't she?" You'd probably get a more measured response, along the lines of, "Yes, she's allergic to all seafood. That's why we try not to serve her any when she visits."

Granted, DungeonMaster tends to have a prickly tone when discussing these issues, but I do not think he really means to offend anyone on a personal level.

He has a point in that 3e tends to be more powerful on average than the worst mistakes of past editions. Even during its height, there were no were near the number of kits available for 2e as there are PrCs available for 3e.

The large number of options in 3e can be a real detriment/ albatross for the game. Feats alone are not bad and neither are skills. However, when you combine feats, skills, spells, classes, magic items, and prestige classes, then you get a mix rife for exploitation. All of these items are made to interlock in 3e. Spells, on the whole, directly modify or expand class abilities, feats or skills.

Magic items are designed in the same manner. In addition, there are so MANY ways to stack items and spells. A smart player can make sure that everything stacks with no overlap.

It's not that 3e can be abused. Any edition could be abused. It's that a proficient player does not need to abuse the system in order to significantly increase their power.

The sheer number of options designed to interlock and increase PC power IS a detriment to the game. For new players, the sheer numbers of rules and options can be overwhelming.

Proficient players can really expand their characters, but at the cost of real balance.

I love having more options in 3e, but they really go too far. Feats and skills would have been fine alone, but the game was designed in such a way that magic items, spells, and PrCs are "options" as well.

And let's not get into the GM nightmare. Some of you may find the work required to be on top of the game easy. I am not in that camp. I actually HAVE to use a computer program these days to stat up encounters. I could not run 3e without e-tools. I would not even try to GM without it. It cuts my challenge creation time down from about 10-15 hours a week to an hour.

Doing it by hand burned me out on 3e 3 times.

In any event, I play 3.5 and enjoy it, but I can admit that there is room for significant improvement.

 

[Belen]

A character with that PrC is terribly restricted in terms of when and where he is allowed to adventure.

Also, it is nowhere near 'standard fare', it's an extremely specialised example limited to a small section of the dwarven population of a relative small part of the main continent of a specific campaign setting. How is that standard?

You seem to be becoming very obtuse here.

I could be wrong, but I do not think he got personal with anyone in this thread. He just seems passionate in his arguments. No need for name calling.

 

[Illvillainy]

I could be wrong, but I do not think he got personal with anyone in this thread. He just seems passionate in his arguments. No need for name calling.

Yes, but I think he is becoming a little too passionate, considering...

This is ridiculous. No seriously. The level of bias is tangible and disgusting. I've never seen anything like this in my life, not even on the WotC boards. And I play 3E. This almost makes me ashamed to do so.

I don't know, but that strikes me as at least a bit hypocritical and somewhat insulting. Also, what I said was intended as a warning rather than insult.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Coming here and saying that D&D is a bad game because of a handful of questionable rules is like (snippedy-snip)

You don't get it, do you? No, you don't!

You see, you're absolutely right. But that's not the point. The point is that he wants to come here and p*** off everyone. That's because he's a troll. Or near-troll, I think trolls need terrible spelling, too. But that name is a dead give-away

There's this post, where he starts using two or three rules to state that 3e is the worst thing since Hitler, and the other where he attacked Andy Collins (or was it someone else) personally, saying that everything he touches turns to poo (or something to the same effect).

Do the same as I do, just Ignore him, and he'll go away faster than a snowflake in the City of Brass.

 

[Mad Mac]

DungeonMaster is a well known..(insert favorite term here. "Troll", "Passionate Writer", whatever) on the Wizards boards. His most infamous thread was the one where he switched his name from Daelack to DungeonMaster midthread, in order to conjure up someone who agreed with him. He's best ignored, in my experience.