D&D 3E/3.5 Which 3.5 spells aren't improvements

[Liquidsabre]

Ray of Enfeeblement: Have given it a Fortitude half save, and clarified that the effects of multiple rays don't stack. Otherwise way too powerful for a 1st-level spell.

No need for that house rule man. Ray of Enfeeblement doesn't stack with itself. If used multiple times on the same target only the best penalty works.

edit- you mention "clarified" here and not a house rule, but why the need for clarification?

 

[Eldragon]

I really miss the tactics involved with the 3.0 shield spell. The spell caster was quite protected when he/she stayed well out of combat, but always had to worry about a fighter stepping past the shield. The shield faceing was only an issue of the players did not use Minis, but since 3.5 increased the emphasis on the use of Minis, I find the change extra surprising. Sorcs, with thier limited choices in spells known, could take Shield and Not Mage armor at their early levels, and make an effort to stay out of combat. I seriously doubt anyone would do that with the 3.5 rules shield.

In 3.5, shield is only used to augment Mage Armor, for that extra last minute boost in AC. But no one uses it instead of Mage Armor.

IMHO, when spell A is only used in conjunction with spell B, something may be wrong with the design of spell A.

 

[Scion]

36k gp is never chump change. Well, maybe at epic levels, but I've never played that far.

18k if you make it yourself And by the time you are throwing around 8th level spells like that 36k isnt a huge deal, at that point you are contemplating when to get the +5 tome.

Besides, the item was much harder to dispel, granted a consitant bonus, had all of the other bonuses that the spells have, and granted bonus spell slots. The extra spell slots make the item worth its weight in gold and then some!

Besides, even multiply empowered (and I never saw a problem with this, still dont) say up to 8th level (2+2+2+2 = *2.5) means that when you roll that d4 you have a good chance of 'not being as good as the item'. So, basically, it was a completely wasted spell slot. yey.

anyway though, people have their opinions on both sides of the fence. I have never seen any problem whatsoever with the old ones. Not in all of my gaming time with 3.0. Not even a little problem. But obviously others have seen it to be a problem, although I have no idea why. doesnt matter though, some random guys houserules have won in 3.5. Some changes are good, some are not. I will say this though, in 3.0 my houserules were almost nonexistant, moving to 3.5 my houserules jump up to several pages just to get it back to a playable point. I think that sucks, but not much I can do about it

 

[PaulGreystoke]

In 3.5, shield is only used to augment Mage Armor, for that extra last minute boost in AC. But no one uses it instead of Mage Armor.

Except for casters with Bracers of Armor, or casters who wear armor, or casters who want to improve their AC vs. incorporeal attacks.

IMHO, when spell A is only used in conjunction with spell B, something may be wrong with the design of spell A.

Agreed, but Shield has benefits (like the protection from Magic Missiles) that makes it a better choice than Mage Armor in some circumstances. YMMV. *shrug*

 

[Eldragon]

Except for casters with Bracers of Armor, or casters who wear armor, or casters who want to improve their AC vs. incorporeal attacks.


Agreed, but Shield has benefits (like the protection from Magic Missiles) that makes it a better choice than Mage Armor in some circumstances. YMMV. *shrug*

Well, Casters who wear armor or have bracers of armor are just using an item that gives the same benifits of the spell Mage Armor. In fact, you need to cast Mage Armor when creating Bracers of Armor. Caster's who wear armor are fairly rare. With the exception of the PrCs that let the caster ignore arcane spell failure.

Protection from magic missiles is a nice benefit, and so is added armor against incorporeal attacks, but I dont think those benefits are worth taking the new Sheild instead of Mage Armor.