What changes from 3.0 to 3.5 should *not* have been made?

[Zweischneid]

Does anyone want to explain how you know what DR a 3.0 creature had without metagaming?

It's pretty easy to say you need silver to kill a werewolf, but who can really say "you need a class III weapon to kill a balor?"

Well, it's easy to spin folktales or ancient wizard archieves on the power of silver, or even things like the "moon godess own metal", etc.., etc...

Using a "class III" weapon ingame is mixing OOC Mechanics with IC Gaming, i.e. Metagaming and one of the fastest and surest ways to destroy suspension of disbelieve.

 

[dead]

This news knocked me off my seat, but I'm not suprised WotC did it.

In fact, this is what I call the Culture of Balance and it is prevalent in 3E (and off-the-scale in 3.5 by the sounds of it). In other words, WotC would rather serve the "balance of the game" rather than honour tradition.

Since time immemorial, gnomes have supposed to be quite handy at Illusion magic. Thus, it made perfect sense to make the Illusionist the gnome's favoured class. Sure, this is quiet a specific favoured class but so what? . . . think of the D&D flavour!

Now, out-of-the-blue, gnomes the Oerth over are talanted troubadours, bountiful bards, and trusty tenors!

Is there no respect for tradition anymore? Or is it just balance, balance, balance all the way and the *flavour* that D&D is built upon is warped and twisted on a whim?

OK. OK.

Those big nosed gully snots can play the mandolin and flute if they wanna.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I always wonder if there is some ingame possiblity to determine the + of the weapon - and I think there must be.
Most Magic Weapon Crafter seem to charge 8.000+ for a +2 weapon, and if someone would compare the weapons abilities, he would find them similar powerful. The magic aura is similar, and identify will identify two +2 Longswords from two different crafters as having the same abilities.

So there definitely is a way to determine the "Plus" of a weapon. Maybe it is not as easy for a fighter as it is for a wizard, but maybe not - after all, most fighters can probably also determine the difference between an average sword and a well-balanced and crafted (MW) sword, so maybe with some time, they would also feel the differences between the magic abilities.

The interesting question is how they call it "ingame" - Do they call it simply +3, or Class III? A 3rd grade magic weapon? Maybe the even base it on the caster: "This weapon was one of the best of the mage - and he was at least in the 9th circle of magic (or maybe the 4th, referencing to spell and not caster levels?)

 

[shilsen]

The one change I destest is the new druid's animal companions.

Don't know why. Just rubbed me the wrong way

Any particular reason? I think the mechanics are quite well-handled, and have no problems with the flavor. Different strokes.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

That whizzing sound you hear is the point sailing over your head.

"Silver" is something the characters (not players, characters) can reasonably refer to. "+3 sword" is not. Period. Who they ask is utterly beside the point.

Please there's 5 levels of enhancements. To assume that in game they don't have terms for that and its just an out of game mechanic is compeltely unreasonable. I mean cuase here in the real world we just have guns right, we don't have anything like claibers or any other way to judge the power of a gun, why would people in a fantasy world have ways to judge the power of their weapons.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

Then what's the point of 'damage reduction' in this case if a level 9 wizard can bypass a Balor's DR with a simple casting of a spell? It ceases to be damage reduction at that point...

Actually if a wizard uses a spell to bypass a balor's damage reduction that's a character using their class abilities to overcome a challenge.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

Ghaele (celestial, 25), Planetar (celestial, 30), Solar (celestial, 35), Succubus (demon, 20), Bebilith (demon, 30), Vrock (demon, 20), Hezrou (demon, 20), Glabrexu (demon, 20), Nalfeshnee (demon, 20), Marilith (demon, 20), Balor (demon, 30), Kyton (devil, 20), Hellcat (devil, 20), Cornugon (devil, 20), Gelugon (devil, 20), Pit fiend (devil, 25), Wyrm dragons (20), Clay golem (20), Stone golem (30), Iron golem (50), Night hag (20), Nightshades (25), Rakshasa (20), Noble salamander (20), Death slaad (20), and Tarrasque (25) - and those are just the ones from the MM. Having just looked through the list, it seems 15-20 are the most common DR values, as opposed to 5-10 in 3.5. There are almost no monsters with DR 5 or 10.

So 26 specific creatures, and lets see angles, demons/devils, that badest of the bad dragons, golems, night hags, nightshades, rakshasha(which surprises me but hey), noble salamander, death slaad, and the tarrasque. So 10 things again zippy. So I fogot some, there are a few more creatures that have above DR 15 in 3e, so against these creatures be prepared or be prepared to run. The problem wasn't that big before and even if you found it to be a big problem the 3.5 revision should of just dropped the DR instead of making all these special materials rules. Or if they were to add in these special materials rules they should be as an option for those who don't have the magical weapon of the right power.

And hey I really think some of these DR shouldn't of been dropped like the golems. Heck the wizards just shuffle there feat and say well hopefully those fighter types can do something when they bump into golems, because they sure as heck can't do much of anything against them if thery don't ahve the couple specific spells needed prepared. So why should the fighters get an easy pass if they don't have the right gear.

 

[Staffan]

So 26 specific creatures

Well, 37 to be precise. I compressed 10 dragons and 3 nightshades into one entry each. That's a significant portion of CR 10+ monsters.

even if you found it to be a big problem the 3.5 revision should of just dropped the DR instead of making all these special materials rules.

But I like the material rules. I like the golfbag thingy - I'm a big proponent of fighters being the types who prepare for different situations with all their feats. Glaive for dealing with creatures with reach, warhammer for bashing skeletons, longbow for shooting flying things or things far away. And now, a holy cold iron weapon for dealing with demons, and a holy silver weapon for dealing with devils (you can probably hold off on the holy thing until mid-levels or so). Perhaps make the warhammer adamantine, for dealing with golems.

 

[Pants]

Actually if a wizard uses a spell to bypass a balor's damage reduction that's a character using their class abilities to overcome a challenge.

True, but when a level 9 PC can completely ignore the defenses of a CR 18 creature with a 3rd level spell, it ceases to be damage reduction and becomes a nuissance.

There aren't any spells (Core) that reduce (or remove) a creature's SR, reduce its resistance to energy, or remove its immunities.

Heck the wizards just shuffle there feat and say well hopefully those fighter types can do something when they bump into golems, because they sure as heck can't do much of anything against them if thery don't ahve the couple specific spells needed prepared. So why should the fighters get an easy pass if they don't have the right gear.

Actually, golems can be damaged with Conjuration spells or any other spell that doesn't allow SR. So, those wizards can do something against golems.

 

[Testament]

Dangnabbit, the golfbag thing is a non-issue! You need an Adamantine weapon and a Cold Iron weapon. That and a jar of silversheen. Problem solved.

The new DR rules are manifestly superior. The thresholds aren't so enormous, and they make more sense in my opinion. Only a holy weapon can harm the fiends, and the higher end ones need materials as well. Its harder to bust their DR, but not a certain death if you can't. Just one tough match.