D&D 3E/3.5 Using 3.0 Spell Durations with 3.5 Spells

[SteveC]

As far as the buff spells, I think once you change them from a random element that can be empowered, you deal with all of the problems associated with them.

A medium level party can cast a few buff spells and have their core ability scores improved for the day, in exchange for second level spell slots. About the time those second level spell slots are getting useless, you already have items to buff your stats, so the animal spells are not used.

I hate the mentality of "buff/fight/rest" that short durations almost seem to mandate, so I'm all in favor of putting that duration back in.

For the rest of the spells, I'd take them case by case.

Just my $.03...

--Steve

 

[frankthedm]

I hate the mentality of "buff/fight/rest" that short durations almost seem to mandate, so I'm all in favor of putting that duration back in.

The short buffs are supposed to encourage people to get thier stat boosting through magic items, rather than spell buffs. The shorter durations mean you cast them if you need them, not cast them every fight.

The 3.0 durations had to go because players buffed so much, a targeted dispel magic took off nearly all their bonuses. A lot of monster in the epic book needed greater dispel at will, just to keep up with this.

The 3.0 1d4+1 had to go to get rid of people extending, maximizing and empowering the spells instead of buying magic items for their ability score enhancements.

I'd say, if you let the animal buffs last hours, require a minute casting time in which the caster applies war paint to the recipients’ body over the Chakras/item slots/dragon lines and have the spells tie up those appropriate magic item slot [2 slots if the caster gets to pick them]. But even then, letting the animal buffs last hours really powers up druids further so you might want to say wildshaping disrupts the paint, thus the spell.

 

[Archade]

I created a metamagic feat to get back the 3.0 durations.

I don't recall what I called it, but it worked better than Extend Spell, making rounds into minutes, minutes into 10 minutes, and 10 minutes and otherwise extending the time of a spell by 10x, at a metamagic increase of +2 levels.

 

[Li Shenron]

The short buffs are supposed to encourage people to get thier stat boosting through magic items, rather than spell buffs. The shorter durations mean you cast them if you need them, not cast them every fight.

...

The 3.0 1d4+1 had to go to get rid of people extending, maximizing and empowering the spells instead of buying magic items for their ability score enhancements.

Exactly. But because stat-boosting items are among the few magic items I never liked, long-lasting buffs are another reason why I'm glad to be stuck at 3.0

 

[Olaf the Stout]

Of course once you start Extending, Empowering and Maximising 2nd Level spells they are no longer 2nd Level spells.

Olaf the Stout

 

[SteveC]

The short buffs are supposed to encourage people to get thier stat boosting through magic items, rather than spell buffs. The shorter durations mean you cast them if you need them, not cast them every fight.

The 3.0 durations had to go because players buffed so much, a targeted dispel magic took off nearly all their bonuses. A lot of monster in the epic book needed greater dispel at will, just to keep up with this.

The 3.0 1d4+1 had to go to get rid of people extending, maximizing and empowering the spells instead of buying magic items for their ability score enhancements.

I'd say, if you let the animal buffs last hours, require a minute casting time in which the caster applies war paint to the recipients’ body over the Chakras/item slots/dragon lines and have the spells tie up those appropriate magic item slot [2 slots if the caster gets to pick them]. But even then, letting the animal buffs last hours really powers up druids further so you might want to say wildshaping disrupts the paint, thus the spell.

Well I certainly know the reasons they gave for nerfing them, I just think that, with the exception of the whole multiple empowering rules, there really was no problem to begin with.

At the levels where you can afford to tie up all of your level two spell slots, you most likely already have items that permanently boost your stats. With the ability to grant extra spells, I don't know too many spell casters who don't use items to buff their casting stats, which pretty much leaves the fighting characters. I really don't see how having these spells last for a whole adventuring "day" makes the game overpowered in some way.

With the one minute durations, you have this endless cycle of "buff-fight-rest" that just annoys me to no end. In the campaign I'm playing in at the moment, we're at the point where we're resting for a full day after each battle! The character I play in the game (a fighting bard) can keep on going, but the difficulty of the battles pretty much requires us to use up more resources than normal to get through them. Buff spells that you can cast once, and then go through 3-4 battle with would be a godsend!

As long as you're using buff spells, the GM always has the dispel magic card to pull if things are getting too out of hand, and I just don't see that as a problem.

But this is one of those things that I disagree with the designers on, so I'll just kind of slink off into the corner and say things like "in my day, the only stat you could increase was Strength! And we liked it!"



--Steve

 

[Justin Bacon]

The shorter durations mean you cast them if you need them, not cast them every fight.

Theoretically, maybe that the intent. In practice, however, it's not the case.

In 3.0 my party would buff up, generally sucking up about half their spell slots to do so. Then they'd have several hours in which to explore the dungeon complex, frequently calling it quits because other daily resources (such as healing) were beginning to wear thin before their buffs came to an end.

In 3.5 that same party still buffs up, sucking up about half their spell slots. Then they go into the 1 or 2 encounters they've been scouting out for the day, overwhelm them in an orgy of spellcasting fury as they rapidly burn through all of their daily resources in one glorious explosion, and then head back to their carefully prepared and fortified camp.

There's nothing wrong with that, per se, but I preferred the exploration model of 3.0.

The 3.0 durations had to go because players buffed so much, a targeted dispel magic took off nearly all their bonuses.

How has this changed? A targeted dispel magic still strips off all their buff bonuses.

The 3.0 1d4+1 had to go to get rid of people extending, maximizing and empowering the spells instead of buying magic items for their ability score enhancements.

This was a solid change. Although the motivation for people to buy stat-buffing items hasn't changed in my campaign: People but stat-buffing items so that the spellcasters wouldn't need to zap them with a buff spell, freeing up that spell slot for other uses. That's as true in 3.5 as it was in 3.0.

Ultimately, there's a schizophrenic element to the WotC design team on this issue: On the one hand, they talk about how the buff/fight/rest cycle isn't fun or thematically "right". On the other hand, they shortened the buff durations and made that buff/fight/rest cycle even more pronounced and prominent.

 

[frankthedm]

Ultimately, there's a schizophrenic element to the WotC design team on this issue: On the one hand, they talk about how the buff/fight/rest cycle isn't fun or thematically "right". On the other hand, they shortened the buff durations and made that buff/fight/rest cycle even more pronounced and prominent.

That is not schizophrenia on Wotc's part. Far too few DMs go for the kill when a party burns up its resourses and then tries to rest. A party that spelldumps and relies upon buff/fight/rest too often should be faced with rude awakenings and higher CR reinforcments ariving for ther foes.

 

[mirivor]

Monte Cook commented on this. He talked about how the older durations, especially those on the old Fox's Cunning type, Encouraged players to "go, go, go! I only have half an hour left on my buffs!". He said that this sort of play lead to a degrading of game quality because players tended to become less cautious as well as unwilling to explore further once their buffs expired. If you think about it makes a little sense, although that may not be the case in every game.

 

[Justin Bacon]

That is not schizophrenia on Wotc's part. Far too few DMs go for the kill when a party burns up its resourses and then tries to rest. A party that spelldumps and relies upon buff/fight/rest too often should be faced with rude awakenings and higher CR reinforcments ariving for ther foes.

I simply don't find this to be true. The ability to survive your rest period depends on several strategic concerns:

1. Are you retreating to a secured location preferably unknown to your enemies?

2. Are you maintaining a reserve of power and resources so that, if you are ambushed, you'll be able to survive?

3. Are you maintaining an effective watch cycle?

None of these things have anything to do with the buff/fight/rest cycle or the way in which the buff/fight/rest cycle changed as a result of the 3.5 changes to buff durations as described in my post.

As a DM, you can occasionally discourage blowing all of your resources into the narrow span of time and small number of encounters you can deal with during the shortened duration of the 3.5 buffs by setting up deadlines: If the PCs only have a day to raid the enemy stronghold, they can't afford to ablate the enemy one or two encounters at a time.

But you can't do that every single time: It becomes monotonous. It limits PC choices. And so forth. Plus, that style of play is dangerous: Yeah, you've eliminated the party's ability to strategically rest for their maximum benefit. But you've also eliminated their ability to rest when an encounter goes bad on them and they need to rest.