Why doesn't 3.5 make SENSE?

[Noumenon]

Learning D&D 3.5 just makes me mad sometimes. It doesn't make any sense. 9th-level Shapechange gives you +28 to AC, SR 32 and myriad other benefits. 8th-level Shield of Law gives you +4 to AC and SR 25 conditionally. Why would anyone build a system like that?

Was it a committee design, where one person thought "+1 to attack when the moon is full" was a fun spell and another thought "immunity to magic and a pony"? Did someone sneak into one person's carefully crafted spreadsheet game of to-hits, AC, and saves and add a spell that said "Do anything you can imagine"? Did they write spells based on "things it would be cool to do with magic" instead of "things it would be possible to do in a game"? I cannot see why you would write a spell that would make you pull out a whole new character sheet every single turn unless you had no idea that the game included other players and a DM.

I just hate that this game, so full of math and logic and flavor that is totally on my wavelength, is based on thought patterns I can't even understand. What was wrong with these people?

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

In before lock!

I just hate that this game, so full of math and logic and flavor that is totally on my wavelength, is based on thought patterns I can't even understand. What was wrong with these people?

Mostly it's that the designers took a bunch of ideas from older editions, plus a bunch of ideas they came up with themselves, and then wrote them down without bothering to line all those ideas up and compare what they actually do rules-wise.

In other words, they're creativity-focussed humans.

 

[Crothian]

Go play something else. It doesn't bother me what you play. In fact, I think I'd perfer it!

 

[Alzrius]

In before the lock.

Why don't troll threads make SENSE?

 

[pawsplay]

First of all, you have left off all the benefits of shield of law. Possibily slowing a chaotic creature who attacks you and blocking all mental influence are nice qualities. Also, it grants a resistance bonus to saves. Second, shield of law grants a +4 deflect bonus, which stacks with natural armor. Might as well do both. Third, most non-magical equipment will become non-functional. Fourth, shield of law affects up to 18 creatures at CL 18.

So, although the spells are maybe not balanced great against each other, it is not as bad as you are making it sound.

 

[Noumenon]

I'm not a troll, I'm in a deep love-hate relationship with the game. I delve down to the littlest minutiae of Beholder saving throws and hit dice, and then I find that the big over-arching concepts don't fit together with that at all. I've been playing for a year and a half and I intend to continue -- it's my first high-level adventure coming up. But I can't play the game when it wasn't designed as a game, that is, with spells that were supposed to be cast by DMs and not fictional wizards in books.

 

[kinem]

Actually, it was due to the time crunch when they were putting out 3.5. WotC designers looked at some spells, decided they needed some adjustments, and didn't think through the implications or even consider playtesting them. Pathfinder fixes many of these issues.

 

[Noumenon]

First of all, you have left off all the benefits of shield of law.

Well, that's embarrassing. Maybe I deserve to be locked for not reading the spell I was supposedly ranting about! I just read the short description scanning for some kind of example. I was also thinking of that 9th level druid spell whose effect is "Round 1: 'A storm cloud.' Round 2: '1d6 damage," but I guess that one has some other effects too.

 

[pawsplay]

I'm not a troll, I'm in a deep love-hate relationship with the game. I delve down to the littlest minutiae of Beholder saving throws and hit dice, and then I find that the big over-arching concepts don't fit together with that at all. I've been playing for a year and a half and I intend to continue -- it's my first high-level adventure coming up. But I can't play the game when it wasn't designed as a game, that is, with spells that were supposed to be cast by DMs and not fictional wizards in books.

What do you want it to do? Every game has to deal with conditional abilities, or multiple-target versus single-target abilities, and so forth, in a different fashion. For the most part, D&D doesn't cut you much of a "cost break" for conditional abilities, and it charges dearly for affecting multiple targets at once. In that sense, shapechange v. shield of law is quite consistent with other aspects of the game.

 

[Umbran]

I just hate that this game, so full of math and logic and flavor that is totally on my wavelength, is based on thought patterns I can't even understand. What was wrong with these people?

Very simple - If you hate it, don't play it.

Mind you, in your comparison, you're leaving out several effects of Shield of Law - not everything is about the AC and SR.