Worst 3.5 Change

[Psion]

WotC didn't deliberately design the system that way. It's a bug, one they intend to fix.

Oh they didn't? I find that very hard to beleive. Do you have a source from a WotC designer (of the previous version) on this score? I'd be startled if they agreed with your assessment.

 

[Gez]

I voted Archer, but haste and Spell Focus bother me too. And Power Attack is IMHO overkill now.

Otherwise, I'm quite fine with the other listed changes.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Psion

Oh they didn't? I find that very hard to beleive. Do you have a source from a WotC designer (of the previous version) on this score?

You must pay attention, Psion. Do you have a fast internet connection? Download the Mortality Chat with Ed Stark and listen to their take on DR.

Or read the umpteen threads on DR that Andy Collins has responded to.

They tell you what they intended to do, and how it didn't work, and how they intend to fix it.

These game designers were present for the work on 3.0, even if they didn't do most of the writing.

On another note, the Sage (who wrote most of the MM 3.0) also worked on the revisions.

 

[Mercule]

I voted "other", namely the crack-addled weapon familiarity drek. I don't think it'll have any notable impact on game balance or anything, it's just absolutely [stopping my thought now].

A close second would be the Paladin's mount. Granted I haven't seen the books, yet. But if it involves teleporting, summoning, extraplanar/non-planar calling, or anything more magical than being able to whistle and have the mount come, it's a bad idea. Okay, maybe I should have voted the Poke-mount. Honestly, calling this one crack-addled is a grave insult to non-functioning crackheads everywhere.

On the other hand, I'm quite eager to see the new DR rules in full. I've used something reasonably similar since 1E and haven't bothered to update things for 3E yet (with the bypass damage). The 3.5 DR promises to save me a bit of work. As far as _why_ I like it, I think that having DR that any single character/weapon can always bypass is silly. If it never comes into play, then why bother having the mechanic at all.

 

[Psion]

Or read the umpteen threads on DR that Andy Collins has responded to.

They tell you what they intended to do, and how it didn't work, and how they intend to fix it.

These game designers were present for the work on 3.0, even if they didn't do most of the writing.

Which is not insignificant. Tell me what Cook, Tweet, and Williams have to say in the matter. What Andy Collins has to say on the matter is his vision for 3.5, not the intent of 3.0.

Most of the discussion I have heard has been regarding how they really botched DR by making entries like 50/+3. On that note, they are right... what's the point of DR if the DR is so high you will never overcome it? That I'll hand them.

But getting rid of the gradiated plus bonuses was throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

 

[Merlion]

Re: Re: No game does archery right

. I prefer only to have this type of thing come into play for pivotal encounters

And how does the new DR not allow you to do that? Probably less than half of DR creatures are going to have "exotic" DR, and most of them will be the sort one uses for pivotal encounters(Fiends golems and the like).
And several designers have said that they were not happy completely with 3.0 DR. I believe what was cited was whats been mentioned here...most of the time it was irrelevant since PCs could pretty much always bypass the DR of anything they encountered with there usual weapons etc.

 

[Psion]

And how does the new DR not allow you to do that?

Replacement of more gradiated magic bonuses to bypass with a singular "magic" and a menagarie of special cases comes immediately to mind. What are you missing from the prior example?

Probably less than half of DR creatures are going to have "exotic" DR, and most of them will be the sort one uses for pivotal encounters(Fiends golems and the like).

So, now I am restricted from using lesser fiends and elementals as anything but pivotal encounters?

And several designers have said that they were not happy completely with 3.0 DR.

And with good reason... it had a lot of problems. That does not mean that this solution is the "right" one and it is without problems. It solves some problems, but creates others.

I believe what was cited was whats been mentioned here...most of the time it was irrelevant since PCs could pretty much always bypass the DR of anything they encountered with there usual weapons etc.

So by creating level-independant variables, this is solved now? I really think not. Now players will be forced to go for silver, adamantine, what have you, weapons at lower levels. But since there is no longer a strong level dependant quality, they keep them through their career, and you have taken away the option of gradiating their weapons. It seems to me this problem is worse now, not better, by the simple ubiquity of various DR bypass types (and by looking at the conversion table for the FF, I am not at all convinced that they are as rare as you make out. If they were, I wouldn't have much of a problem with it.)

 

[Shade]

I vote that the following be added to the poll:

"Hide: The Hide skill now requires cover or concealment to attempt a Hide check. A torch now provides 20 feet of bright light, and another 20 feet of shadowy light, which gives a creature concealment. A creature in an area of bright light can only hide if it has cover. Additionally, a creature can't hide within the visibility range of a creature with darkvision unless it has cover. Invisible creatures get +20 on their Hide check, +40 when immobile."

Now Hide (which wasn't broken) has been nerfed, and the already overpowered darkvision just got even more powerful. This has to have bumped dwarves to a +1 ECL combined with everything else.

 

[Merlion]

I will say again what I've said before on this subject: When push comes to shove, its all a matter of opnion,taste, and personal experiences.
You dont like the new DR. thats fine. But dont try to say its "bad design" or whatever...because thats purely again a matter of taste. And as such, the designers cant be expected to please everyone.
You say that this solution might not be the right one and that it creates some problems while solving others...but since thats going to be true of anything "~shrug~. Theres no such thing as a perfectly designed RPG, so it all comes down to what each person likes or doesnt like.

 

[James McMurray]

Never said they couldn't. Just pointing out that the fighter is not going to be the only one in melee, and you depend on more than just your fighter for damage.

In my current 3e game, the non-fighters are innefectual against DR 5/+1 creatures unless they have a magic weapon.

Sounds like you said they'd be useless to me. I could spout definitions, but I think that'd be silly. Just let me say that if you make a point that some party members are "ineffectual" against some monsters, and then try to say that you weren't saying they could be useful, you come off looking pretty silly.