Worst 3.5 Change
- Thread starter Hardhead
- Start date
Morgenstern
First Post
I'm sorry, the Poke-paladins are just dumb. You've got this guy, see, and he's already, like, grossly pigeon-holed by this alignment restriction, see, and then you've got this weird "And don't come back!" clause which was the first thing FR negated, you understand, and then all of a sudden, "Well we'll make it all up to you by, uh, I dunno, letting you mount go *poof* when it's not convienient - oh, and here, have some more smite"...
Guys, the mount is smarter than some of the players I know. It can take care of itself. Hell, at higher levels, it's more dangerous to spell casters than the the rider. Dealing with the fact that you were a -mounted warrior- was about THE most significant difference from just playing a fighter (or cleric) the Paladin had. It was, to me, the point, since there is no cavalier-type base class. You know, the ancient quadry - lotsa feats or a magical mount?
If that's their idea of making a paladin a more useful tool for creating my own campaign (here, have a bunch of arbitrary, psuedo-Cristian crusader limitations built into the canon), or even reflecting their abilites in their own most popular setting (where you can multiclass and come back), then I don't really need the help as embodied in 3.5.
I'm nearly as annoyed with the far reaching (sarcasm) fixes to the Sorcerer. "Hey 'Turret', we noticed that your primary stat was Cha, but we didn't think you'd actually want skills that are driven by it. Eh, have bluff. Oh, and while you're melting your brain trying to figure out what 1 spell is the best for you this level and looking at the Wizard who can learn them ALL, we thought we'd pat you on the head and let you swap spells as you get older. Well, one. Every other level. A little one. Maybe." I mean sure, they're nice fixes, but geeze, sorcerers pay a heavy, heavy premium for their casting on the fly. Would Eschew Materials, or maybe the ability to have higher level slots used for lower level spells still count as that level really have triggered a mass exodus of arcane casters players from Wizard to Sorcerer? If I blow a 4th levle slot on sleep, I'd like to at least have the satisfaction of knowing it'll probably work. Little things would go a long way towards separating the feel of these two classes even if they share the same spell list.
And the really sad thing is I like some of the changes - a LOT.
Nerfed archers? Whatever- pretend the bonuses should have ALWAYS have benn 'named' bonuses, and you'll realize that stacking restrictions have been around for quite some time now.
I like the improvements to the Bard, Barb, Druid, AND Ranger. I'm sorry, but its the cleric spells like Divine Power that bugged me. "Look, I'm a full blown Fighter now *pats wizard on the head* and in a few levels you'll get Tenser's Transformation which will make you almost a good at fighting as I am even without spells..." Clerics are the CLEAR avenue for casual powergaming. Anything that leaves them in the relative dust is fine with me. Again personal prefence, but I'd give them ONE domain at 1st level, an let them gain more as they advance- so that it's less of a no-brainer to cherry pick clerical PrC levels. You know, the oodles of classs that give full spell progression and nifty abilities at no cost? If there was a downside, then there'd be a tradeoff. The "Every good-aligned cleric born is automatically a healer" is also a bit irksome. The spells are on the spell list. Take the healing domain if you want to be a healer!
*pant, pant* Anyway, I'm sure there's a lot to like, but If I ever publish a campaign, there's gonna be about 7 pages near the front having to explain the local ruleset as envisioned by the author, so the game supports that setting, rather than the 'implied setting' that 3.5 has introduced, 'cause I'm not interested in their implied setting nearly as much as I was in 3.0.
Poke-paladins. *snort*
Guys, the mount is smarter than some of the players I know. It can take care of itself. Hell, at higher levels, it's more dangerous to spell casters than the the rider. Dealing with the fact that you were a -mounted warrior- was about THE most significant difference from just playing a fighter (or cleric) the Paladin had. It was, to me, the point, since there is no cavalier-type base class. You know, the ancient quadry - lotsa feats or a magical mount?
If that's their idea of making a paladin a more useful tool for creating my own campaign (here, have a bunch of arbitrary, psuedo-Cristian crusader limitations built into the canon), or even reflecting their abilites in their own most popular setting (where you can multiclass and come back), then I don't really need the help as embodied in 3.5.
I'm nearly as annoyed with the far reaching (sarcasm) fixes to the Sorcerer. "Hey 'Turret', we noticed that your primary stat was Cha, but we didn't think you'd actually want skills that are driven by it. Eh, have bluff. Oh, and while you're melting your brain trying to figure out what 1 spell is the best for you this level and looking at the Wizard who can learn them ALL, we thought we'd pat you on the head and let you swap spells as you get older. Well, one. Every other level. A little one. Maybe." I mean sure, they're nice fixes, but geeze, sorcerers pay a heavy, heavy premium for their casting on the fly. Would Eschew Materials, or maybe the ability to have higher level slots used for lower level spells still count as that level really have triggered a mass exodus of arcane casters players from Wizard to Sorcerer? If I blow a 4th levle slot on sleep, I'd like to at least have the satisfaction of knowing it'll probably work. Little things would go a long way towards separating the feel of these two classes even if they share the same spell list.
And the really sad thing is I like some of the changes - a LOT.
Nerfed archers? Whatever- pretend the bonuses should have ALWAYS have benn 'named' bonuses, and you'll realize that stacking restrictions have been around for quite some time now.
I like the improvements to the Bard, Barb, Druid, AND Ranger. I'm sorry, but its the cleric spells like Divine Power that bugged me. "Look, I'm a full blown Fighter now *pats wizard on the head* and in a few levels you'll get Tenser's Transformation which will make you almost a good at fighting as I am even without spells..." Clerics are the CLEAR avenue for casual powergaming. Anything that leaves them in the relative dust is fine with me. Again personal prefence, but I'd give them ONE domain at 1st level, an let them gain more as they advance- so that it's less of a no-brainer to cherry pick clerical PrC levels. You know, the oodles of classs that give full spell progression and nifty abilities at no cost? If there was a downside, then there'd be a tradeoff. The "Every good-aligned cleric born is automatically a healer" is also a bit irksome. The spells are on the spell list. Take the healing domain if you want to be a healer!
*pant, pant* Anyway, I'm sure there's a lot to like, but If I ever publish a campaign, there's gonna be about 7 pages near the front having to explain the local ruleset as envisioned by the author, so the game supports that setting, rather than the 'implied setting' that 3.5 has introduced, 'cause I'm not interested in their implied setting nearly as much as I was in 3.0.
Poke-paladins. *snort*
Last edited:
Storm Raven
First Post
Merlion said:
There already is a "material" spell: major creation. As a 5th level spell it is expensive, but you can make mithral or admantine with it.
Bull.
The plural of ninja is ninja. You see, it's Japanese not Latin. 2 VERY different languages.
jedi is an invented word AFAIK, so singular and plural can be anything Lucas wants. BTW, if it were Latin the singular would probably be "jedum", not "jedium" because the latter's plural should be "jedii".
aasimar could be invented or taken from mith, I don't know. Still it's not Latin. And if it were it's plural would problably be something like "aasimares".
Don't know why you assumed every strange word in the MM is Latin.
I think you should be more careful before telling someone he's an idiot so lightly...
Psion
Adventurer
EtherHulkRending said:
Which is great, if that flavor is what you are looking for.
The problem is, if you don't want to run an adventure where you figure out that the fabled wendigo is really a werewolf and the players have to roleplay with the blacksmith to get silver weapons, it's intrusive.
To speak of a similar example in 3e, I had a quasit that was spying for a villain group in my first 3e campaign. The partry managed to capture the thing, but they couldn't KILL it because it regenerates except for against holy weapons. This sidetracked the whole adventure as the party wasn't about to let this thing go.
The new DR makes this all the more universal. I can't pick a DR monster out of the book and just use it without either 1) making up a side trek so the players can fight it, and/or 2) nixing the DR of it. And if I do (2) once, I might as well do it for the whole game.
Psion said:
I tried a creature with DR 15/- against two Level 14 PCs and it was no problem for them to kill the creature, despite ac 30 (iirc) and 116 or so hit points. Since DR 15 is about the highest you go I really don't see a problem with DR even if you cannot bypass it - regeneration though is another point.
Psion said:
I see you are new here, so you can be forgiven.
Unless hong is being trollish and nasty (which happens at times), if you read something really baffling and bizarre, assume aor two.
Aw ok. My fault.
You've been here quite longer than me so I think you know other users better
I assumed the tone of that post to be rude actually.
If it was not I apologize.
