The Most Broken Crunch in 3.5 (or what should I be banning)

[Henry]

My recommandation is: Allow only the Core rule books and the Eberron book as a starting point.
Each player has to individually ask you if he wants something from a different source, and if there is any doubt on your side, he should explain why he is wanting the class, feat or spell found there.

This is EXACTLY what I did for my current Eberron game, and it worked well. I allowed only the 3.5 core, PLUS Eberron Campaign Setting, PLUS Expanded Psi Handbook, amd told them any outside feats or PrCs would be handled on a case-by-case. It's worked beautifully, as they only ask me on things they REALLY want, and I can narrow my field of focus to only those items, leaving me more time to campaign-plan.

 

[Cheiromancer]

The save to hold your breath in each round. Then comes the fact that it lasts for 5 ROUNDS A LEVEL!

And Psion, that was my assesment of the RSoP. Hence my referring to it usually as the Cleric Plus.

An errata was issued that it should have a fort negates saving throw.

Though IIRC no such errata was issued for MotW, where Miasma first appeared.

 

[kenobi65]

Power Attack

Especially two-handed!

Eh, just ban all the feats. They're all cheese. Except Endurance, that's a good one.

 

[Shade]

Enlarge person severely breaks the game. Beware the fighter with one level of sorcerer who has reach and whose weapon does damage one size category bigger. Combined with the 2-for-1 power attack, this gets really, really ugly, especially at low levels.

 

[Sejs]

Enlarge person severely breaks the game. Beware the fighter with one level of sorcerer who has reach and whose weapon does damage one size category bigger. Combined with the 2-for-1 power attack, this gets really, really ugly, especially at low levels.

And True Strike. Can't forget True Strike.

It's verbal only, too. Handy, that.

 

[Anthelios]

No saving throw except 'Fortitude negates', you mean?

Uh, the spell says "See Below". Fort negates wasn't needed to be added, considering it wont effect most PCs because of their CON.

1.) It checks it every round, as a CON check.

2.) Each round it gets harder if you succeed. If you fail, you drop to 0 hp. Round after that drop to -1, then your suffocating.

3.) It lasts for 3 rounds/level, and is a level 6 spell.

So lets see the breakdown:At level 11 ( level 6 spell ) 33 rounds of duration.

Round 1: DC 10 CON check, Round 2: DC 11, Round 3 DC 12 ( Assuimg those are successful saves. )

If you happen to last 33 rounds, the last round would be a DC 43 CON check. Even rolling a 20, and using the ( 20 counts as 30 rule ) You'd need to have a CON score of 36 to succeed.

Though in my experience, Ability checks are pretty average on the roll. With a +3 modifer ( Average PC ) they'll be unconscious after 4 rounds.

Thats how it looks broken. It would be broken except for one thing...

.. Right in the text, it says PCs can hold their breath for 2 round per point of constitution, and you dont make the saves until after that time has expired. So with a say, 16 con, you'd be pretty much immune to the effects of the spell ( With 32 rounds of holding your breath ).

I almost missed that part, too.

 

[Eremite]

I think that staying away from most things in Book of Exalted Deeds is a good idea if you want to stay away from "broken crunch".

 

[Psion]

I think that staying away from most things in Book of Exalted Deeds is a good idea if you want to stay away from "broken crunch".

Oh good lord. How could I forget "Nymph's Kiss"?

 

[ruleslawyer]

I think that the above posts may have contradicted AMG's initial recommendation; congrats, guys!

I agree with all of the above, especially the suggestion that you start with the core books and Eberron only, and make everything else subject to DM approval. One exception: I think Power Attack is balanced just fine in 3.5. It was a worthless option in 3.0, and actually gets used somewhat now. There are numerous mathematical analyses of how the feat actually works in 3.5 (including a PA optimization calculator) on these boards, if you'd care to search.

As to suspicious stuff in the core rules:

1) Druids + Natural Spell. This may in fact work just fine in most games, but I personally find the druid a tad strong for my tastes, and the combination of wild shape and spellcasting is especially problematic. I'd stand by and prepare to house rule this one: Two decent house rules I've heard of would be to give Natural Spell a +1 level adjustment (my rule, which may be a bit extreme), or to make it a metamagic feat that makes the spell prepared with it possible to cast only when the druid is wild shaped. Or you could just use the AU greenbond...

2) Disjunction. Not overpowered or underpowered, just a mess to play. It's basically an extended middle finger to fighters, who not only automatically lose their buffs but also have a pretty good chance of losing their precious magic items (and fighters are equipment-dependent, after all). The fact that the spell has vastly dangerous consequences that almost never actually come into play just makes it that much more unwieldy.

3) Gate. If you find that you have crazy powergaming players, watch this one. 1000 xp seems like a lot, but for an ally with a CR 5 or 6 above the effective party level, it can make for an awfully cheap way to win battles. This is one that simply might not come into play, but then again...

My only calls. As to the ECSB, I still find the warforged + juggernaut combo and the Heir of Siberys slightly too powerful for my tastes (lack of healing really isn't a liability if there's an artificer or someone with a wand of repair x damage in the party). The armor enhancements can be a slight problem too, but overall, I'd say you're good to go.

 

[qstor]

I'd say Boots of Speed. At least make them take an action to activate.

Power Attack is fine as written IMHO.

Spiked chains can be pretty bad but the PC can still be hit by ranged attacks. Drop a maximized fireball on them or have archers target them <WEG>

Mike