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


log in or register to remove this ad

1) Pokemounts
2) Square bases (I thought I was alone on this, but it's nice to see at last someone else agrees.)
3) Concealment
4) School rearrangements and specialist wizards
5) Weapon sizes (something needed done, not that...)
6) Some feat changes (power attack, deflect arrows, spell focus/ISF)
7) (Not a change, just a "failed to fix it" thing) why not bonus feats instead of combat styles? Combat styles/virtual feats are clunky.
 

dead said:
I've noticed the Scrying rules have changed.

How's that working out for people?

It looks like an improvement. Far less chance for PCs to scry the BBEG if he gets a Will save!

Much better. The scry skill was bad mechanically; nobody would take it before they could cast scry, cause duh, but then when you got the scry spells, you had to dump a lot of skill points into it to be at all good at the spell. It was also odd conceptually, because other spells don't have associated skills, you don't even need to make ranged touch attacks to target fireballs on a precise point in space. Will saves with adjustments for familiarity are just better.
 


dead said:
I've noticed the Scrying rules have changed.

How's that working out for people?

It looks like an improvement. Far less chance for PCs to scry the BBEG if he gets a Will save!

Some think it's now too hard.

I'm not sure I could make that assessment, but I do know this: it screwed up some mechanics in third party books that were hanging on those mechanics. That I happen to be using. I kept the old scrying rules in my Second World game.
 

The absolute nerfing of buff spells. Something needed to be done to stop the perma-buffs, but they went too far.

Uniformity of space. Nagas have to squeeze down halls? This is probably my biggest beef.

Polymorph's nerfing. I don't even get the form's ex abilites unless they're an attack? WTF?!

Darkness creating light. Granted, the old one was a game-staller and made well run Baatezu into a certain TPK, but this is ridiculous.

Pokemounts are kind of silly, but don't worry me too much.



And some responses to criticisms here:

I'm still trying to work out how anyone could NOT like the new Ranger.

I'm 100% with Mouseferatu on the weapon size thing here. The old chart struck me as silly, why would small races not make Polearms (the ultimate defensive tool) and Quarterstaffs that they could use? And did anyone stop to think about the fact that the grips on a larger weapon would be made for the massive hands of an Ogre or his ilk? The weapon sizes are excellent.

JRR, what is wrong with Animal Companions now? They're no longer as disposable, and the encounter stopper that was "Animal Friendship" is gone.

Unlearning spells is a good thing purely for utility.

And anyone who dislikes sorcerors musn't have ever seen a well built one in action, with their bottomless clip.
 

The spiked chain. IME, this thing is just a game killer. Once you have a spiked chain fighter on the loose, any other melee specialists are hosed. To keep the chain fighter challenged, you have to take a ton of care to sculpt opponents to threaten him. Otherwise, the game gets dumb.

The chain had a perfect storm of changes that all made it better - Power Attack 2/1 damage, the change to Improved Disarm, the change to Improved Trip, and the new rules for reach for Large and bigger creatures all make it too good. The annoying thing is I can see how, on their own, those changes make sense, but combined into the spiked chain it's too much.

On the plus side, it illustrates why game balance is important - if there's one really good option, it's hard to have a fun game that challenges the unbalanced character without making everyone else irrelevent or bored.

I can see why they did the weapon size rules, but they're too unwieldy IMO. I don't really like the entire move to make monsters more playable as PCs. I'd rather just have new PC races designed to evoke the feel of a monster, rather than duplicate its stats.

OTOH, I like a number of the changes. I like the changes to the paladin's mount (it actually makes it useful), and the DR rules are interesting.

Pet Peeve: I still think Moradin should have War as one of his domains. I have to chuckle with every warhammer toting dwarf that comes out in the D&D minis game. Those dudes aren't proficient unless they wasted a feat on Martial Weapon Proficiency.
 

Improvements to weapons' crit ranges not stacking.

The Vorpal Falchion Weapon Master who crits on a 10+ (or "&^%$! I need me some Heavy Fortification armor!") was fixed when Vorpal was cut down to a natural 20. I cursed the change the first time I rolled what would've been a crit threat under the 3.0 rules (with a keen bastard sword! That wasn't even Vorpal! Sigh...).

Brad
 

Just about everything I like/dislike has been thoroughly analyzed in one thread or another. But I especially dislike the damage reduction rules because they result in a sort of golfbag syndrome a truly effective fighter usually employs. I just like the flavor of a single, trusty, magically enhanced longsword I guess. One other major (well, minor) change I despise but no one else seems to care about happened to the gelatinous cube. Gelatinous cubes are 15 feet on a side in 3.5. Why? Who builds dungeon corridors fifteen feet wide and tall anyway? *shrugs* I like most of the changes, though I think too much was changed for an "update," but that has been beaten to death by now. The stuff I don't care for isn't too difficult to house rule.
 

cignus_pfaccari said:
Improvements to weapons' crit ranges not stacking.

That one could have been done better... by letting it stack but NEVER allowing an effect to multiply. Always just a +1 threat range.
 

Remove ads

Top