Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Herzog" data-source="post: 3257691" data-attributes="member: 25696">-Spell-specialization.In earlier editions, I (as DM) would look with awe and wonder at all the tricks my players could wrench out of their spells. With 3.x, all effects formerly wrapped into (for instance) 'light' now are spread over 3 or 4 different spells. Some (like darkness) at rediculous high levels. I like my players to get creative. 3.x spells ruined that for them.-Front-loading.I encountered this term here on the boards, and while it hadn't bothered me up to then, I recognized it immediately, and found that that was exactly what had been bothering me about some of the classes and PrC's. Class benefits should be gained progressively. Worst of all is, of course, the 4x skillpoints at first level, which makes everyone who is planning to take a level of rogue to take that at first level. Better would be to have every character get 3x4 skillpoints at character creation, and only after that start with class-based skillpoints.-Balancing mechanics with (fluff) requirements.Some of the PrC's are just too good. The game designers recognized it (in some cases at least) but instead of trimming down the PrC, they added requirements. Sometimes these are reasonable (they fit the PrC, like requiring ranks in craft skills for a PrC that specializes in crafting), sometimes they are silly (same PrC, requires crafting feats AND use magic device... Why would I take use magic device as a wizard? why do I NEED it other than for balance?) and sometimes they have nothing to do with the mechanics at all. (requiring to 'slay a dragon singlehandedly', 'lost a level to an undead creature', 'be recognized by secret organization as potential candidate') This last requirement not only is silly (if I want to provide access to the PrC as DM, I will grant the player in question the oppertunity to meet this requirement, if not, the PrC is simply off-limits) but also provides me, as DM, with the requirement to fit this fluff in my campaignworld!Bottom line: if the PrC is too powerfull, trim it down!And, of course, grappling. It's not that it is too complicated. It's not that it illogical. It's simply not written down very well. Too much text for something that could have been written down in 1 paragraph (quarter to half a page?) and 1 table.The only thing you need to know is:1. What can I do each round, depending on my current grapple status, and how much time does that take.2. What are the bonusses and penalties to my attack, damage, AC, etc. depending on my current grapple status.3. How do above mentioned facts change when more people enter the grapple.4. How do above mentioned facts change depending on size, BAB, armor, etc.Last but not least, my undying pet-peave about 3.x:There's too much (core) classes, and too little information about how too change them to your own liking without breaking balance too much. One example in the DMG just doesn't cut it. I guess with the introduction of skillpoints and feats I expected the classes to lean more to customization as well. Oh well. Guess I have to play GURPS again.... or wait for 4e.Herzog</blockquote>

Verification