NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="SteveC" data-source="post: 1788830" data-attributes="member: 9053">No problem, after all it's just a matter of opinion, after all <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> sleepSleep had a save in 3.0 as well, and the rolling of 2D4 served to balance the spell a bit: if your rolled below average you weren't able to affect a 4HD creature after all. I think they really missed an opportunity with this spell: they could have made a save possible each round (like they did with Hold). That would have made the spell more balanced, and used the same mechanic for both effects. Oh, and they still left color spray as is. As it is, sleep is a spell that won't be used nearly as often...it's been made a "strike from surprise" spell. Sleep has always been a low level wizard's friend. As it is, they have few friends left. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I thought we were trying to move more towards balance for all classes at all levels. Sleep is a step away from that.levitateExcept that you can use levitate to move around on the ceiling at half speed, so it can serve exactly the same purpose. I have to ask, who thought spider climb was unbalanced? Although I don't post here often, I've been on ENworld since just about day one. I can't recall a single discussion about how spider climb was broken. I think this one falls into my "huh???" category for changes: a change that I have to wonder at why they did it and what problem was being addressed. JumpAnother example of "huh?" what was being fixed with this? Our group uses this low level spell to give improved mobility on the battlefield. It's also a dramatic way to move around the battlefield. I'm just not sure what was actually made better by changing the spell.BuffsAhh, that's why I wrote "pick any two." I didn't have any problems with buffs in 3.0: any character who relies on a second level spell to buff their primary stats at high level is asking for it at high levels. I really only saw these series of spells used at medium level (e.g., before stat boost items are common). I don't think this is an area that we'll agree on, so I'll just say that I do agree with you that keeping the duration at 10 min/lvl would have been a better idea.  First of all, I think that yes, it's perfectly acceptable for a save to be in this range for a 13th level caster. Especially because the opponent will get a new save each round. High level characters need to deal with spells that target their weak saves, especially if it's a will save, since the DCs reach the point where they need the help. That's a problem with the D20 poor save mechanic period. Now with that said, the solution to this is to have one feat that increases save DCs by +2 and leave it at that. There is simply not a good enough return for spending two feats to get a +2 DC on one school of magic. I just don't see it. This is a good example of addressing something that was a problem (spell DCs were a problem, especially with some prestige class/third party abilities) but they just didn't get it right.CoverBut they actually removed the rules. Yes, the DM can assign a higher bonus, but there were examples and actual illustrations of how the mechanic worked! This rule came up in our last session where we were attacking a castle. Opponents behind arrow slits should get a better AC bonus than +4...and they used to. Attacks of OpportunityOn the first point, that is your opinion (and a valid one: it's how I would probably run it) but it is not explained that way in the rules or really even discussed by them. I can see a perfectly valid interpretation that an AoO for standing up happens "in between" being prone and standing, so the target is not prone (no AC bonus) but can be knocked down again. When you take an AoO you're doing something at exactly the same time as the target is doing something else: moving, drinking a potion or something else. It has to happen at the same time because otherwise the trigger wouldn't be met. As far as it making sense to provoke more than one AoO in an action, I think the current rules make no sense: if I'm moving up to grapple with you as part of a continuous movement, why should you get two AoOs? Wasn't combat reflexes powerful enough? That's a good point, but I actually don't mind this one too much. Perhaps it's all the time playing Final Fantasy or something... Seriously, though, I'd give a paladin a choice about how to do the mount. These rules do help a lot where the GM had to kludge what happened with the mount before. It is a fairly unpopular rule, though... Again, not to say that there aren't improvements with 3.5, but it seems like each week when we discover a new rule, it's usually something we don't like, or that just makes us go "huh?"Once again, though, it's all IMHO and, of course, YMMV (and probably does) <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> .</blockquote>

Verification