Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="billd91" data-source="post: 6547346" data-attributes="member: 3400">Does 3.5 have the same problem? Yes. Lots of games do when there are lots of choices PCs can make in their development over a long playing time. Players diverge, little by little, from a common power level and from the game's baseline expectations and it's up to the GM to chart a course to work for their player group. By the time you're a dozen levels in, there are pretty significant differences that can cause problems.Since your players' PCs aren't heavily optimized and there seems to be no real will to re-optimize, it's up to you to pick or craft the right opponents for them to fight. If the fighter types are having trouble hitting even with their first attacks, cut down the monster's AC and/or hit points to the point you think you've got a better challenge for them. If the monsters are hitting too often and hard, cut down their attack bonuses (usually by trimming strength back several points). As far as whether it's worthwhile to shift to 3.5, it is for some things but not for others. While I appreciated the simulationist goal behind weapon sizing in 3.5, it's more of a pain in the ass than a valuable addition to the game. Rangers and bards get some very nice improvements. Several spells that were fairly broken in 3.0 got nice fixes. On the other hand, the 3.5 change is a poster boy for unnecessary &quot;project creep&quot;. Tons of spells got changes for no really good reason. It's a mixed bag. On the other hand, it's highly compatible. So you can fairly easily make a few changes to a 3.0 game, allow in some 3.5 materials, and have a hybrid game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="billd91, post: 6547346, member: 3400"] Does 3.5 have the same problem? Yes. Lots of games do when there are lots of choices PCs can make in their development over a long playing time. Players diverge, little by little, from a common power level and from the game's baseline expectations and it's up to the GM to chart a course to work for their player group. By the time you're a dozen levels in, there are pretty significant differences that can cause problems. Since your players' PCs aren't heavily optimized and there seems to be no real will to re-optimize, it's up to you to pick or craft the right opponents for them to fight. If the fighter types are having trouble hitting even with their first attacks, cut down the monster's AC and/or hit points to the point you think you've got a better challenge for them. If the monsters are hitting too often and hard, cut down their attack bonuses (usually by trimming strength back several points). As far as whether it's worthwhile to shift to 3.5, it is for some things but not for others. While I appreciated the simulationist goal behind weapon sizing in 3.5, it's more of a pain in the ass than a valuable addition to the game. Rangers and bards get some very nice improvements. Several spells that were fairly broken in 3.0 got nice fixes. On the other hand, the 3.5 change is a poster boy for unnecessary "project creep". Tons of spells got changes for no really good reason. It's a mixed bag. On the other hand, it's highly compatible. So you can fairly easily make a few changes to a 3.0 game, allow in some 3.5 materials, and have a hybrid game. [/QUOTE]

Verification