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

[DungeonMaster]

Er... What?

It seems like some people got lost in the context back there. I was replying to the game balance between 3rd and 2nd edition supplements not making a comparison on the editions as a whole.
In fact I play 3rd edition and I'm a strong proponent of it. But 3rd edition WotC supplements are utter crap and the 3.5 supplements are worse - and getting worse with each new book.
I still havn't seen anyone propose anything even approaching a Hulking hurler come out of the 2nd edition cheese and so I presume 3.5 cheese rules all.

 

[DungeonMaster]

Were you trying to convince us that D&D is bad or that you are a subscriber to Munchkin Weekly.

Not at all, just pointing out amazingly flawed game mechanics in the latest round of supplements to validate my point about disintegrating quality as quantity ramps up.

I can create a character that has a 95% chance to hide from ANYONE, whether this is a level one blind stablehand or a 593th-level fighter. I can obtain relatively cheep magic boots that let my steps be absolutely noiseless. I can play a core race with 90% immunity to enchantments.

Skill checks are opposed in 3rd and 3.5 edition and for all intents and purposes you can reach extremely high checks that no one of equivalent level can beat. This isn't even approaching Mr hulking hurler or shivering touch.
3.5 has warforged which are completely immune to much more than just enchantments - and that's a LA 0 race. You can do MUCH better with a template and a monstrous race.

 

[DungeonMaster]

The Hulking Hurler requires extensive character optimization to work. Even at his munchkiny best, he's a one-trick pony. He hits things and they die. Beyond that, he's worthless.

Er... you don't need to do 613 billion damage, only 1 thousand or even 500 and you're set for life. The miniature's handbook warhulk and the complete warrior are all you need.
I'de like to understand as well how the fighter is much more than "he hits things and they die".

Wraithform makes them touch attacks. As if a 20th-level rogue with a hydra's strength bonus isn't going to hit anyway?

No, no he isn't. But as touch attacks he surely will. This spell is nuts.

Maximized Empowered shivering touch dealing 27 dexterity damage no save... which is the same effect as Power Word Stun in most battles. Oh, and let's not forget that this is probably sudden, which means once per day.

3.5 introduced core metamagic rods, no need for sudden feats of equal dubious balance. Power word stun will do niet to the great wyrm. This spell in it's un-metamagic version is level 3 and has good chance of neutering the great wyrm through a zero dexterity. (Dragons have 10 dex). Dragons are immune to stunning and paralysis.

For instance, there actually being a design, rather than what author-of-the-week-#343 decides would be a wicked cool variant rule about an ogre's damage. For his book on Halflings of Athas. Oh, and that variant rule? It's now canon and gets referenced in a Planescape book about devils two years later. Yeah.

This I don't get. From what I can tell the design is completely arbitrary with author-of-the-month designing his set of rules that he likes without any consideration of what the previous authors have written in other books. That's how you get ludicrous combinations from the whole gamut of broken Prestige Classes, items, spells and abilities.
That's also evident in the fact that feats get re-named that do the same thing or superceed in all respects feats from other books (allied defense anyone?).
Even the in-book design is pathetic with metabreath weapon feats from say the draconomicon that ALL stack for instance.

 

[DungeonMaster]

your talking about the extremes and many of them are pretty high level examples. some are in the rules gray area. But the down to earth what people play uses of the books, third edition is better then second in balance.

Not all of these are high level. Shivering touch as an example is a 3rd level spell.
I agree that a sensible DM will lay these issues to rest within minutes of them being obvious in game - that's not my argument. My argument is the actual rules as written are horribly awful for balance. Their potential for game abuse is enormously more than anything I have heard/seen/experienced of 2nd edition.
I'm more than willing to hear horror stories, I just can't claim to have heard any nearly as horrifying as "race feat prestige class multiclass" land.
I don't think there's any possible way you can go from a system with more restrictions to a system with less restrictions (more variables) and come out on top in the balance equation.

Another thing that bothers the freaking hell out of me is the willingness to repeat these same damn mistakes. We all realised 2E multiclassing was way better than single classing but they you have freaking Unearthed Munchkin Domain that brings back exactly that with "gestalts" and even the bloody PrC like the Mystic Theurge.
It does smell like 2nd edition - a lot, minus the good smells.

 

[Crothian]

Another thing that bothers the freaking hell out of me is the willingness to repeat these same damn mistakes. We all realised 2E multiclassing was way better than single classing but they you have freaking Unearthed Munchkin Domain that brings back exactly that with "gestalts" and even the bloody PrC like the Mystic Theurge.
It does smell like 2nd edition - a lot, minus the good smells.

You were starting to make sense until here where I relaly begin to see a fundamental problem.. Gestalyt is a very strong option, the book does not pretend otherwise. And the Mystic Theurge is not near as powerful as to be close to any of these other options. In fact, until about character level 15 it is actually weak.

It is an option, all these are options. You are free to use them or not. You know, some people like that the Hurler dud can doo 500 points of damage. The great thing about third edition over second is that it is easier to choose what options you want and what you don't want.

So, this is nothing like second edition.

 

[Ranger REG]

You should be playing RuneQuest.

Why?

 

[DeadlyUematsu]

Why?

It was a joke. I really didn't expect a serious response.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Er... you don't need to do 613 billion damage, only 1 thousand or even 500 and you're set for life. The miniature's handbook warhulk and the complete warrior are all you need.
I'de like to understand as well how the fighter is much more than "he hits things and they die".

You're almost sort of technically correct: as far as I can see, using the miniature's handbook Warhulk and the Complete Warrior's Hulking Hurler, you can, by my calculations, get to 83d6 damage at ECL 18. That's 291 average damage, and maxes out around 500. That's sufficient to kill basically any CR 18 creature in one shot, which is excessive.

Now, you'll only get one throw per round with it, your to-hit is merely OK (+25 with an absolutely miniscule range increment, so you'll usually be taking heavy minuses), and you won't be any more reliable at effectively one-hit-KOing most CR 18 creatures than a spellcaster of the same level.

The fighter is a poorly designed class, so I won't try to defend it. However, the hulking hurler in this example is a Large (space restricted) Equiceph (normally evil and suspicion-rousing race) War Hulk (NO mental skills whatsoever). He makes the fighter look like the rogue.

Also, this combo kicks in at EL 18. It could work a bit earlier if the character took hurler levels sooner, but it gets exponentially better with each War Hulk level and so doesn't put him even on equal footing with ordinary fighters until about EL 14 or 15.

No, no he isn't. But as touch attacks he surely will. This spell is nuts.

Rogue 20 (BAB +15), Hydra Str 23 (+6) - that's +21 to hit with every bite.

Since the MiniHB-CW-only hulking hurler is allegedly a massive threat despite normally having a worse to-hit than this (his range increment is 10 with those rocks), I assume the rogue can hit a flat-footed opponent most of the time. But if our bold rogue regularly employs his hydra schtick, and as such gets no bonus for his weapons:

BAB +15
Str +6
WF (Bite) +1
Greater magic fang spell +5

Now the rogue has a better attack bonus (+27) than the hurler, gets to try 12 times to attack, targets a flat-footed AC, and deals 2d8+6+10d6 damage with each attack. (average 50 per attack) He can ramp up 600 damage if he hits every time, and since he has a better chance to hit than the hurler, who apparently almost never misses, he's presumably doing about 550 of it at least. Without wraithform. Using, in fact, nothing non-core. Wraithform lets him go from 550 to 600 and IT'S what's broken?

Except he doesn't deal 35 of that average damage per hit to constructs or undead or anyone/thing wearing fortification armor. And a single dispel magic turns him into one very embarassed rogue.

3.5 introduced core metamagic rods, no need for sudden feats of equal dubious balance. Power word stun will do niet to the great wyrm. This spell in it's un-metamagic version is level 3 and has good chance of neutering the great wyrm through a zero dexterity. (Dragons have 10 dex). Dragons are immune to stunning and paralysis.

Metamagic rods (a core option) might possibly be broken. But not by this.

Of course, a great wyrm white dragon has SR 27.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that we have a 5th-level wizard who blew two feats on Spell Penetration and its Greater form just so he could use this spell against a great wyrm to prove it's broken. He has a grand total of... wait for it!... +9 against spell resistance. He needs an 18 to affect the dragon (15% chance). That's a "good chance?" The dragon has at least a 5% chance of failing any saving throw; does the wizzy have a "good chance" of negating it with any save or die spell?

And what dragon lets a wizard make a melee touch attack on him, anyway?

This I don't get. From what I can tell the design is completely arbitrary with author-of-the-month designing his set of rules that he likes without any consideration of what the previous authors have written in other books. That's how you get ludicrous combinations from the whole gamut of broken Prestige Classes, items, spells and abilities.
That's also evident in the fact that feats get re-named that do the same thing or superceed in all respects feats from other books (allied defense anyone?).
Even the in-book design is pathetic with metabreath weapon feats from say the draconomicon that ALL stack for instance.

The "whole gamut" of broken PrCs, items, spells and abilities of which you've identified four serious possibilities (hulking hurler, Ring of Blinking, polymorph and metamagic rods), three of which are core?

There are broken elements in 3.5. The hulking hurler is one of them, albeit a very limited one. Eberron's Dragonmark Heir with its ability to produce an essentially infinite amount of resources is another, subtler, one. The "Cheater of Mystra" and its ability to cast miracle without expending XP is a third, and by far the most powerful.

Ironically, these options are not only rare, they're not terribly disruptive. A hulking hurler is basically a ranged fighter taken to the nth degree; he still fills a single niche in the party structure and he definitely needs other characters to help him out on an adventure. A dragonmark heir can make infinite resources, but doing so isn't very fun, nor does it overshadow other characters on an adventure. The dweomorkeeper (sp?) is about the only thing that is truly stepping on everyone's toes, and he's not only setting specific, he's a single very complicated isolated incident. AND, he still isn't truly universal.

2e's problems were much simpler. They weren't as stupidly over the top. And they were much, MUCH more poisonous - the bladesinger was flatly better than other party members. The elven multiclass was flatly better than his companions. The kitted character could be flatly better than the un-kitted character. All of this from 1st level up through 20th, with no delay, no difficult start, and no specialization that gave others their niche.

3e's unbalanced stuff may be more unbalanced vs. the monsters (insofar as anything can be "unbalanced" against "Rocks fall, everyone dies."), but it isn't as unbalanced between PCs. Which, unless you're going by the CR system (which didn't exist at all in 2e), is the only kind of balance that could matter.

 

[haakon1]

Will this stop me from buying the books?

Has anyone else noticed this trend? Do you feel the same?

It's stopped me. The last WOTC products I've bought were MM3 and issues of Dungeon . . . which, of course, is now Paizo, doh. I've got no interest in adding more rules to the games I run, and I discourage my players from bothering with it either, by not allowing most "supplemental" rules. The core books are great, why mess with it.

What I'd like from WOTC:
- stuff like Frostburn is OK. I may break down and buy it.
- good adventures. Good means generally low-mid level, with plots more around interesting folks and connections to bigger picture issues, rather than "neato wacky stuff is going on" plots.
- Greyhawk stuff. Like, the Dungeon maps, and I'd go for a more intensive gazetteer that explains all the new stuff on the maps, and more on where all the modules fit in, and conversions of old 1st Edition stuff to 3.5

What I don't like:
- More prestige classes
- More spells
- More rules

 

[haakon1]

yep...3.x in infinitly better than 2e.

The problem with WOTC is they think they can maximize their profit by making splatbooks and ever more prestige classes. We need to convince them that's not what we (I, anyhow) want and will buy, and that there's more money to be made in other ways.

I'd rather see WOTC charge a modest fee for allowing other companies to publish under the OGL (like console game machine makers charge a fee to game publishers) rather than trying to "churn" us into a new edition, or slight "upgrades" like the Complete Books that, IMHO, get in the way of fun by over complicating the game.

If I promise to buy 5 PHB's a year, would they promise no new editions?