Results 61 to 90 of 323
-
2015-09-08, 12:19 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
I'm curious... Did you try crit-substitution and didn't like the experience, or did you reject it for not liking the concept? (if it's the former, I'd like to know what didn't work for you)
I'm asking because I added it to the codex only after I got feedbacks on the idea and cooked it until it felt right and then improved it afterwards.
Btw, there's very little in the codex that addresses crit-substitution, so I'm not sure what's interfering with you just throwing it away.Last edited by nonsi; 2015-09-08 at 12:32 PM.
-
2015-09-08, 04:16 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2011
- Location
- Vancouver Canada
- Gender
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
I rejected it because I enjoy crits for the dramatic moment and fun. Crits and crit failures are usually played up in my group, with the players given some narrative control so long as it adds to the experience.
Has it changed since I commented on it? Note that I wasn't criticizing your system, I just didn't think it was for me.
Btw, there's very little in the codex that addresses crit-substitution, so I'm not sure what's interfering with you just throwing it away.
-
2015-09-08, 09:40 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2013
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Why? It solves 99% of problems with spellcasting.
Hoards:
- You can. You'll just have to keep in mind that if you overreach, you lose control on whatever "excess weight" you're carrying (or they vanish case by case basis).
- Dominator = Spellthief Bard Mage You don't need specific class features to pull this one off. Also, skills don't carry the same limitation as spells. Whoever you manage to manipulate via Bluff/Diplomacy/Intimidate (Sleight of Hand sometimes) can serve as your pawn. Sometimes manipulation is more powerful/effective than direct domination.Originally Posted by Spellcasting Rules, Summoning & Domination
Sharing spells:
- Check again on the Witch's "Familiar" feature.
Fear Stacking:
- Check out the Intimidation Feats. (or did I misunderstand your intention?)
Polymorph specialist:
- Druid
- Witch
- Mage (transmutist)
Telepouncing:
- Soulknife: Breach the Gap
- Monk: Abundant Step / Boundless Reach
What do you expect from a 1st level feat with no prereqs other than Whip prof.? (which a warrior can take at 1st level w/o feat investment).
And how exactly does anything that I suggested so far "shaft" mundanes? The options are next to limitless. Nobody forces anything upon you. And again check out how Whip feats combing with the Crit-Substitution rules.
How did you figure animate dead as a second level spell?! What loophole am I missing here?Originally Posted by Mage, Mage Spellcasting
Umm what?? : baffled: :scratchhead:
High-level characters are heroes of their gameworld. Most royalty shouldn't even taste 10th level. When one starts posing a threat due to personal might rather than strength of office that's the time to bring out the cavalry (adventuring parties assassins) to eliminate the threat.
Also, Nobility ==> Family ==> Vulnerable Relatives. Either you play in an "ecological gameworld" or in a campaign where you play "Brova with superpowers". If it's the former, then your assumption is not mandatory.
Your call to remove ability damage from the equation in your campaign. I'm not gonna suggest it as a houserule for all.
1. Where would you get all those dying small animals to repeatedly kill?
2. About CL abuse: open the "Redefining Magical Items' Creation" spoiler >> take a look inside the "Banned Magical Items" spoiler. This alone kills a lot of power abuse. And in general, using my rules, throw away everything you ever heard in 3.5e about magical gear. "Redefining Magical Items' Creation" is exactly that. There, no CL boosting via gear anymore.
2. You've nerfed that trick, but wish still exists. You need to do something about that.
-
2015-09-09, 10:24 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Maybe if done flawlessly it can, but doing it flawlessly is hard, it takes a lot of time and the probability is very low.
You could exploit undead minions even if you lose control over them and they run amok. And as I said earlier, when domination is exhausted or not an option, the next best thing is manipulation (sometimes even better, because they act on their own volition).
1. Mage: Conjurer; 6th level.
2. Augment Summoning.
The Druid has to work a bit harder (pay the extra feat) for Augment Summoning, but has Greenbound Summoning for compensation and may combine their benefits.
Post #9.
You can emulate Master Transmogrifist and MoMF by creating several feature-emulating spells (5th SL access should suffice) + multiclassing your Druid/Mage/Witch with Warrior/Rogue/Monk. (actually, MoMF doesn't offer anything that's not already within the reach of my Druid except for aberration & ooze forms, but the Blighter gets those instead of the regular Druid, for reasons explained in the Druid's post).
As for the Warshaper (the only example given that doesn't have spellcasting as mandatory prereq), if you give a character Polymorph (or something similar) as SLA, then the PrC's features can all be emulated via feats (if nobody comes up with them, maybe I will some day).
Specifically for the Druid, I'd allow form-blending as a single feat, where a druid could blend from any form available to him. A second feat would be required for Morphic Reach. Another for Manifest Senses. That's about it whatever's left unhandled is abuseable (or uninteresting, for serving nothing beyond stat-augmentations).
I'll take care of that, hopefully soon.
Notice that there's no action specified for those abilities. This means that they're part of whatever action you're already taking, not actions on their own.
I'll specify accordingly.
The difference between mundane activity and spellcasting is that the former simulates RL while the other doesn't.
Nevertheless, notice this:
"Starting at 12th level, a warrior may spend a full round action to completely re-select all of his Combat Adaptations"
That's a start. However, it won't grant you the prereq skill points. This makes me wonder if I should extend the Warrior's Combat Training feature to prereq skill ranks s as well (with a minimum of 1 rank for skills that cannot be used untrained).
AFAIK, Dragon magazine doesn't count as official 3.5e materials. And AFAIK there's no official material that puts Animate Dead as a fullcaster's 2nd level spell.
1. Moot, due to the Dragon magazine note above.
2. I just noticed a very old leftover. I meant to address Persistent Spell feat quite a while ago, but it somehow fell between the cracks. There, I took care of it (see the Modified Feats spoiler, post #8). It doesn't even resemble the official feat of the same name.
I can't support or object to those statements, because I don't know what they mean.
I must be missing something in your pattern of reasoning. They're lower level, so I intend to nerf them to not be as effective (=deadly) as finger of death. Why is that a problem?
Yes, but they have to be dying/stabilized. How do you manage a horde of those?
When my worries in life amount to "how to stop Wish from granting CL boosting", I'll be truly happy. Until then, I have more pressing matters to put my energy into.Last edited by nonsi; 2015-09-09 at 10:28 AM.
-
2015-09-09, 12:34 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2013
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
No, you just don't put broken crap on spell lists. It's much less work than spot checking everything that might be an issue.
You could exploit undead minions even if you lose control over them and they run amok. And as I said earlier, when domination is exhausted or not an option, the next best thing is manipulation (sometimes even better, because they act on their own volition).
1. Mage: Conjurer; 6th level.
Post #9.
You can emulate Master Transmogrifist and MoMF by creating several feature-emulating spells (5th SL access should suffice) + multiclassing your Druid/Mage/Witch with Warrior/Rogue/Monk. (actually, MoMF doesn't offer anything that's not already within the reach of my Druid except for aberration & ooze forms, but the Blighter gets those instead of the regular Druid, for reasons explained in the Druid's post).
As for the Warshaper (the only example given that doesn't have spellcasting as mandatory prereq), if you give a character Polymorph (or something similar) as SLA, then the PrC's features can all be emulated via feats (if nobody comes up with them, maybe I will some day).
Specifically for the Druid, I'd allow form-blending as a single feat, where a druid could blend from any form available to him. A second feat would be required for Morphic Reach. Another for Manifest Senses. That's about it whatever's left unhandled is abuseable (or uninteresting, for serving nothing beyond stat-augmentations).
I'll take care of that, hopefully soon.
The difference between mundane activity and spellcasting is that the former simulates RL while the other doesn't.
AFAIK, Dragon magazine doesn't count as official 3.5e materials. And AFAIK there's no official material that puts Animate Dead as a fullcaster's 2nd level spell.
I can't support or object to those statements, because I don't know what they mean.
I must be missing something in your pattern of reasoning. They're lower level, so I intend to nerf them to not be as effective (=deadly) as finger of death. Why is that a problem?
Yes, but they have to be dying/stabilized. How do you manage a horde of those?
When my worries in life amount to "how to stop Wish from granting CL boosting", I'll be truly happy. Until then, I have more pressing matters to put my energy into.
-
2015-09-09, 05:28 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Too much work, too little gain. Not gonna happen. Let's move on.
You stand by the door at the other side of the big room, bringing in the 2nd wave and splitting, shutting the door behind you.
I can describe dozens of different scenarios where this could be viable.
Not if you motivate them properly then they'll work diligently to execute your agenda. It's all a question of how convincing your arguments + skill rolls + RP (+ maybe deception spells) are.
This is not a char-op discussion. You asked for theme and options. There's always something better than solution X that doesn't mean that solution X doesn't work or is not viable.
1. As if casters need help.
2. I don't remember noncasters ever having all the proposed options using the official rules.
You kind'a skipped the "Nevertheless " part and more importantly, you didn't express an opinion regarding my proposal for the Warrior.
1. Says who? Counts for what? Where is that written?
2. Nowhere in my codex do I claim to support nonofficial 3.5e materials from any source whatsoever.
When I say "fullcaster", I categorically refer to a class with 9th level spells. No exceptions.
I don't subscribe to that perspective, and neither does anyone I ever played with.
1. There's more power potential from behind the scenes, when you're not in the spotlight.
2. Kingdoms are not run by rulers that go on adventures.
I noticed that you said "Then why are you nerfing spells that kill fools? ray of stupidity kills people (or rather, animals) just as hard as finger of death, but it is lower level and doesn't get nerfs".
1. Low-level spells do ability damage.
2. You say (rightfully so) that this makes them deadly to low-Int (or in general, low-ability) opponents.
3. I agree and suggest preventing them from becoming lethal.
4. You resent.
5. Me confused.
Then I noticed that earlier you said "It also makes everything short of Constitution damage, maybe Strength damage, and maybe damage to casting scores irrelevant. Better to just not put it on people's spell lists."
So either they don't matter or they're too much. Which is it?
Good luck orchestrating that one on a regular basis while adventuring.
Fair enough.
Wish spell does not allow instant creation of magic items. That one always takes time and the usual chances for success/failure.
Only deities can do that through means that the rules don't specify.
-
2015-09-09, 08:15 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2013
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
So having to go through every single spell to spot check it for power level issues is less work than whitelisting spells that do what you want? I don't understand that position at all.
You stand by the door at the other side of the big room, bringing in the 2nd wave and splitting, shutting the door behind you.
I can describe dozens of different scenarios where this could be viable.
This is not a char-op discussion. You asked for theme and options. There's always something better than solution X that doesn't mean that solution X doesn't work or is not viable.
1. As if casters need help.
2. I don't remember noncasters ever having all the proposed options using the official rules.
You kind'a skipped the "Nevertheless " part and more importantly, you didn't express an opinion regarding my proposal for the Warrior.
1. Says who? Counts for what? Where is that written?
2. Nowhere in my codex do I claim to support nonofficial 3.5e materials from any source whatsoever.
When I say "fullcaster", I categorically refer to a class with 9th level spells. No exceptions.
I don't subscribe to that perspective, and neither does anyone I ever played with.
1. There's more power potential from behind the scenes, when you're not in the spotlight.
2. Kingdoms are not run by rulers that go on adventures.
I noticed that you said "Then why are you nerfing spells that kill fools? ray of stupidity kills people (or rather, animals) just as hard as finger of death, but it is lower level and doesn't get nerfs".
1. Low-level spells do ability damage.
2. You say (rightfully so) that this makes them deadly to low-Int (or in general, low-ability) opponents.
3. I agree and suggest preventing them from becoming lethal.
4. You resent.
5. Me confused.
Good luck orchestrating that one on a regular basis while adventuring.
Fair enough.
Wish spell does not allow instant creation of magic items. That one always takes time and the usual chances for success/failure.
Only deities can do that through means that the rules don't specify.
-
2015-09-10, 01:56 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
The only spells I know of that are so CL-broken are blasphemy and its counterparts. That doesn't seem to me like a lot to handle.
Anyway, I heard you, so Spellpower Mage feature has been rewritten to prevent CL abuse. ATM, off the top of my head, I can't remember any means of bumping CL other than via the modified CArc Cooperative Spell feat (see the "Spell Cabal" spoiler in post #4).
No, you wander around with a pack of controlled undead, then you bring in the 2nd wave, then vanish and let them wreak havoc.
1. There's no game in the world where all options are equal all the time. The situation changes constantly. That's the whole point of the game strategy in design and in-game tactics.
2. I don't see how CL affects glitterdust and web in any way. Even the former lasts for the entire encounter by 6th level without any strategy.
3. The angle of "either you made everything perfect or you've utterly failed" is nonproductive.
I dont know of any Sublime Chord feature that's associated with fear. I'm assuming you refer to the War-Chanter's "Inspire Awe" feature (and it's not stacking, but rather a more devastating effect depending on HD diff), which the codex' Bard comes with built-in. Actually, my proposal is closer in spirit to stacking than the War-Chanter's "Inspire Awe".
I also see nothing in the DN's features regarding stacking fear effects.
Zhentarim Soldier (CoV web-enhancement) is a deception. The whole point of substitution levels is to trade something. The Zhentarim Soldier conveniently trades nothing. To make bast use of this option, you need Imperious Command feat and Fearsome Armor (DotU).
Putting that note aside, since I didn't ban Imperious Command, all options are on the table and a lot more.
According to that, D&D is bad design.
Explanation: 3.5e models RL beautifully as far as feats, skills, skill-tricks and conditions go. To date I haven't found or come up with anything that comes even close. Why would they bother if not to make the game atmosphere feel as real as possible? You can always draw from other, less realistic games, if you don't like that aspect of 3.5e. For me that's the beauty and allure of the game.
In the context of my overhaul codex, "Official" = [3.Xe materials that carry the "Wizards of the Coast" trademark].
Web enhancement materials are evaluated on a case-by-case basis and are addressed explicitly in the codex when relevant.
No SL cheese (such as Animate Dead at 2nd SL).
Is that so?
How many rulers of nations in the history of the world were among the most devastating opponents of their time one-on-one? Genghis Khan, Attila the Hun, King David, Charlemagne, a handful of early days' China conquerors (and a few more here and there that currently don't come to mind). The overwhelming majority were not.
My codex doesn't address economy/kingdom management/mass battle minigames etc. To date I don't have suggestions for improvements on those angles (but if you have any, bring them on).
I see nothing disproportionate about going out of your way for some situational HP and +2 to Str, just poor strategy. I assume you'd usually lose the HP race to damage for not putting your resources where it counts.
Anyway, rethinking that spell makes me realize that it probably needs some constraint regarding one's HP source, but this one seems like no biggie to me.
What is this Wish Economy type fix you're talking about?Last edited by nonsi; 2015-09-10 at 03:33 AM.
-
2015-09-10, 07:19 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2013
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Except CL boosting isn't the only part of casting that is overpowered. Look at the list of spells you've changed. Look at all the ancillary changes. Think about all the other spells you need to change.
No, you wander around with a pack of controlled undead, then you bring in the 2nd wave, then vanish and let them wreak havoc.
1. There's no game in the world where all options are equal all the time. The situation changes constantly. That's the whole point of the game strategy in design and in-game tactics.
2. I don't see how CL affects glitterdust and web in any way. Even the former lasts for the entire encounter by 6th level without any strategy.
3. The angle of "either you made everything perfect or you've utterly failed" is nonproductive.
I dont know of any Sublime Chord feature that's associated with fear. I'm assuming you refer to the War-Chanter's "Inspire Awe" feature (and it's not stacking, but rather a more devastating effect depending on HD diff), which the codex' Bard comes with built-in. Actually, my proposal is closer in spirit to stacking than the War-Chanter's "Inspire Awe".
I also see nothing in the DN's features regarding stacking fear effects.
Zhentarim Soldier (CoV web-enhancement) is a deception. The whole point of substitution levels is to trade something. The Zhentarim Soldier conveniently trades nothing. To make bast use of this option, you need Imperious Command feat and Fearsome Armor (DotU).
According to that, D&D is bad design.
No SL cheese (such as Animate Dead at 2nd SL).
Is that so?
How many rulers of nations in the history of the world were among the most devastating opponents of their time one-on-one? Genghis Khan, Attila the Hun, King David, Charlemagne, a handful of early days' China conquerors (and a few more here and there that currently don't come to mind). The overwhelming majority were not.
I see nothing disproportionate about going out of your way for some situational HP and +2 to Str, just poor strategy. I assume you'd usually lose the HP race to damage for not putting your resources where it counts.
Anyway, rethinking that spell makes me realize that it probably needs some constraint regarding one's HP source, but this one seems like no biggie to me.
What is this Wish Economy type fix you're talking about?
-
2015-09-10, 09:30 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Ok, pick the ten that poke your eye the most (if we're gonna start, we have to start somewhere).
Ditto.
The difference is that you get your allotted quota and then some and it requires strategy and you can't add your weight without being exposed to "friendly fire". It doesn't let you maximize summoning + controlled undead + domination out the wazoo. You overreach to free your hands to get busy somewhere else, not because it's convenient, and you can overreach only so far.
You said it "as possible".
Given the time and inspiration on my hands, that's the best result I came up with (with a lot of feedbacks over a great period of time). It's not perfect (probably never will be), but it's the best I have so far.
That is exactly why I've been trying for so long to find a formula to get rid of PrCs the need for game-mastery from here to infinity. It so happens that not only did I manage to get rid of them, but I find the end result even better (you don't agree, but that's ok).
Yes for a specific class with a specific build and a specific set of items. With the codex it's now an open market (in the sense that many classes allow specialization in intimidation it's just so happens that it's easier for the Warrior than any other class).
Look at my Warrior or Rogue for a minute the most mundane of my proposed classes. Do they look like easy prey to you? Do they look like they lack options?
Sure, you can always say that spellcasters have more options, but they can do things that the other classes can't do just as well.
As I said I have neither the time nor the inclination to get myself involved in fixing and re-positioning all spells.
According to that assumption, the world of mortals is ruled by pit fiends, balors and solars (each of which can singlehandedly decimate a nation without even breaking a sweat).
Ok, I believe that CL bumps are no longer an issue.
I prefer a game where the characters can't and don't need to rely on having the option to pluck magical items out of thin air.
-
2015-09-11, 03:06 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
.
@Brova: Regarding the decision to eliminate PrCs from the equation.......
First we have the big 5 that stand on their own: Planar Shepherd, Dweomerkeeper, Incantatrix, IotSfV, Earth Dreamer.
Now take a look at the following combos you can build using the official materials:
- Wizard 10 / Ur-Priest 2 / Mystic Theurge 8
- Cleric 5 / Divine Oracle 2 / PrC Paladin 3 / Radiant Servant of Pelor 10
- Rogue 2 / Bard 6 / Mindbender 1 / Ur-Priest 1 / Sublime Chord 1 / Fochlucan Lyrist 9
- Bard 4 / Druid 3 / Arcane Hierophant 3 / Sublime Chord 1 / Arcane Hierophant 7 / Mystic Theurge 2
- Wizard 6 / Fighter 1 / Spellsword 1 / Abjurant Champion 5 / Knight Phantom 7
- Paladin 2 / Sorcerer 4 / Spellsword 1 / Abjurant Champion 5 / Sacred Exorcist 8
- Warlock 6 / Mindbender 1 / Ur-Priest 2 / Eldritch Disciple 8 / Hellfire Warlock 3
Took me less than 30min to find those combos. Those are just the obvious ones. If you try real hard, you can get to Pun Pun and other some such.
With hundreds of classes, nobody really knows all the paths to abuse, and you certainly can't write a system that's immune to abuse.
If there are no PrCs, then not only do I not open the door for abuse there is no door to open.
Assuming you have all the required rules to fill the gap left by the absence of PrCs, then feats/races/spells/skilltricks/templates can easily fill whatever character-concept gaps you encounter.
-
2015-09-11, 12:40 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2013
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
I'm not actually going to comment on the spells you've changed, because that would involve reading the entire codex and a bunch of ancillary materials. I'm going to comment on all the spells that need to be changed.
1. shapechange needs to be simpler. Even simpler than the PF version that "just" points you to five different spells rather than "every monster ever, including ones that don't exist yet".
2. gate cannot allow you to do the "free vacation, no save" trick.
3. ice assassin can't exist.
4. planar binding requires limits (no, you can't have infinity demons) and standards (though they're somewhat closer than 12 HD Undead, 12 HD Outsiders are not created equal).
5. simulacrum needs definitions (the hell is "half power") and limits.
6. wish can't allow you to make magic items at all.
7. genesis can't let you set traits, at least not all traits.
8. Spells based off of/similar to the above (planar ally, dragon ally, spirit binding) need fixing.
9. Anything with unlimited CL scaling needs to be at least looked at, particularly if it scales to "you die" at any point.
10. shadow evocation and any other spell that lets you ignore spell costs other than level is broken.
Now, it's possible you've fixed some of those, but at lot of them are broad, and that's a fairly small fraction. Also, spot nerfing is not going to work.
The difference is that you get your allotted quota and then some and it requires strategy and you can't add your weight without being exposed to "friendly fire". It doesn't let you maximize summoning + controlled undead + domination out the wazoo. You overreach to free your hands to get busy somewhere else, not because it's convenient, and you can overreach only so far.
That is exactly why I've been trying for so long to find a formula to get rid of PrCs the need for game-mastery from here to infinity. It so happens that not only did I manage to get rid of them, but I find the end result even better (you don't agree, but that's ok).
Yes for a specific class with a specific build and a specific set of items. With the codex it's now an open market (in the sense that many classes allow specialization in intimidation it's just so happens that it's easier for the Warrior than any other class).
Look at my Warrior or Rogue for a minute the most mundane of my proposed classes. Do they look like easy prey to you? Do they look like they lack options?
According to that assumption, the world of mortals is ruled by pit fiends, balors and solars (each of which can singlehandedly decimate a nation without even breaking a sweat).
I prefer a game where the characters can't and don't need to rely on having the option to pluck magical items out of thin air.
Also any fast progression class. 9 levels of casting in 10 levels is dumb, especially with theurges.
- Rogue 2 / Bard 6 / Mindbender 1 / Ur-Priest 1 / Sublime Chord 1 / Fochlucan Lyrist 9
- Bard 4 / Druid 3 / Arcane Hierophant 3 / Sublime Chord 1 / Arcane Hierophant 7 / Mystic Theurge 2
- Warlock 6 / Mindbender 1 / Ur-Priest 2 / Eldritch Disciple 8 / Hellfire Warlock 3
- Wizard 10 / Ur-Priest 2 / Mystic Theurge 8
- Cleric 5 / Divine Oracle 2 / PrC Paladin 3 / Radiant Servant of Pelor 10
- Wizard 6 / Fighter 1 / Spellsword 1 / Abjurant Champion 5 / Knight Phantom 7
- Paladin 2 / Sorcerer 4 / Spellsword 1 / Abjurant Champion 5 / Sacred Exorcist 8
With hundreds of classes, nobody really knows all the paths to abuse, and you certainly can't write a system that's immune to abuse.
-
2015-09-11, 07:43 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2015
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
One priest using consumptive field and a bag of 400 stabilized unconscious toads will get +800 strength(due to untyped bonuses stacking) and mostly defeat any fighter(even by using a thrown weapon since they have crazy strength) and with each attack one shot someone and it is even worse if he can use a phantom steed(possibly with a scroll he can use in the beginning of his work day) to get to proximity of its opponents and follow with a full round attack killing three opponents.
Last edited by noob; 2015-09-11 at 07:56 PM.
-
2015-09-12, 03:05 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Last edited by nonsi; 2015-09-12 at 03:58 AM.
-
2015-09-12, 03:42 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
A single spoiler for individually modified spells: "Spell Tweaks". Everything else regarding spell changes is packed right above it in a nice and tidy way within post #4.
1. Already taken care of.
2. Ditto.
3. Agreed.
4. What is "infinity demon"? And why do I care that 12HD outsiders are not created equal?
5. I'll think about what to do with that one. I'm not a fan of Clone either.
6. That's exactly my approach (but notice that this doesn't reconcile with what you wrote at the end regarding wish).
7. As far as I'm concerned, it can and should be nixed altogether. The game can do just fine without 17th level mages being able to create realities.
8. I'm all for removing anything that summons dragons or spells that allow you to transform into a dragon. They're not planar monsters no reason to allow that. Spirit Binding could be initially handled by equalizing HD to Planar Binding. Further than that, what did you have in mind specifically regarding Planar Binding?
9. AFAIK, most of them don't require special attention. If you know of a specific one that's problematic I'm listening.
10. I don't see anything in Shadow Evocation that lets you ignore spell costs. But for 20% efficiency, I wouldn't worry too much about replication effects from the least potent spell school.
Where did you see that?
You have only so many creatures under your control. Attempting to control/summon more creatures first breaks your control over currently dominated creatures (caster's choice which ones). That's the limiting factor.
Just because I don't currently have a solution for Green Star Adept (and maybe a handful of PrCs I'm probably not even familiar with) doesn't mean that I need PrCs as a work tool.
Sure, you have to put some effort learning some new stuff, but the gain is dealing with 15 classes rather than over 1000.
"More complex" is definitely not an appropriate title.
What, you mean the part of increasing casting time of spells that force conditions? That was intentional to narrow down spellcasters owning the game.
Other than that, me adding some feats doesn't remove anything from the options on the table.
That's your opinion. Many think that SA is weak and that the Rogue depends too much on UMD to count for something. Also, most special abilities are weak and uninteresting, and the Rogue gets only 4 of them over 20 levels. Oh, and let's not forget the "awesome" Trap Sense class ability.
No, the core Rogue really amounts to skills and SA. That's not enough to define a class in my book (double meaning).
Those "small numeric bonuses" (with everything that comes along with them) replace the Weapon Focus line altogether (and a heluvalot more) and replace the Warblade's entire repertoire of unique class features (except Stance Mastery, which is not relevant) using but two Warrior class features (levels 3 & 5) that do more than just that. (and that's about 10% of what the Warrior class has in its toolbox)
They once culminated at +7, but after discussing it (don't remember exactly where ATM), the conclusion was that it was a bit too much, so I reduced them.
AFAIK, the only thing I can think of that martial adepts have a noticeable advantage over my Warrior are those handful of 9th level maneuvers that deal 100HP damage. Anything else that the Warrior class doesn't provide on its own can be replicated via multiclassing or SLAs (or has equally potent alternatives).
Exactly that they can get what they want without putting themselves in the spotlight and get their hands busy running a country.
That's not necessarily true. IIRC, because of high BAB requirement and low spell output, Divine Crusader (CDiv) is not susceptible to the same abuse as Ur-Priest. (but that's sidetracking from our discussion)
Yes, the 2nd one is probably ok as presented, but could be abused if you import Green Whisperer (Dragon #311, p.69).
I'm not sure I entirely agree about the Warlock build. Full casting + empowered blasting + PrC-Features are far from trivial.
A single spellcasting level progression delay for Uncanny Dodge, Evasion, immunity to fear & disease, buffed-up saves, empowered healing and turning, and some other benefits seem more than a fair deal to me.
1. I wouldn't use the brokenness of Leadership as an argument. Most DMs ban it outright (never played in a group where cohort wasn't banned).
2. Wiz 18 / Fighter 17 + goodies seems way better than Wiz 20 to me. For each bonus feat you lose, you at least gain one PrC feature.
I'm not planning anything I dropped PrCs, remember?
Notice that Mindbender (a single level) is there just to speed up your way into Ur-Priest (and now I'm aware of another standalone broken PrC: Hathran).
Anyway, it's not just the power abuse issue. It's the ability to easily find your options for creating a character concept and if it doesn't exist (something that's also easy to notice), you can easily add it without busting your head about how PrC [X] interacts with every other class out there.
Currently, the only thing that I have no answer for is slowly drifting into another creature type. I'm sure it'll come to me sometime soon. And if it doesn't, I'll live in peace without GSA (I'm perfectly ok with keeping constructs something that's only manufactured plant-based creatures overlap in most resistances/immunities anyway).
Bottom line is that I've axed PrCs for good and I'm not looking back.
-
2015-09-21, 01:13 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Reserved
Reserved..
Last edited by nonsi; 2020-04-15 at 02:48 AM.
-
2015-09-30, 04:26 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Reserved
Reserved..
Last edited by nonsi; 2020-04-15 at 02:48 AM.
-
2015-11-13, 10:03 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Reserved
Reserved..
Last edited by nonsi; 2020-04-15 at 02:53 AM.
-
2015-11-16, 07:07 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2015
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
I am amazed. This is a marvellous piece of work. I really love your approach. Reading through this thread makes me angry of selling all my 3.5 stuff some months ago (and buying all the pathfinder equipment). I think I will incorporate a lot of these rules in my current project! Thank you a lot!
My current project is working on a complete core rule set for the DARK SUN Campaign setting. At the moment I work on taking a lot of the 3.5 dark sun material to the pathfinder rules . After reading your thread, it seems that the project have changed: I want to compile a complete core rule set (including psionics) and monstrous compendium for DARK SUN, based on the rules I found here (and marrying them with what I consider to be worthy in Pathfinder, like part of the skill system and the combat manoeuvres).
Some technical things I did not understand fully, when reading it:
1. Racial Hit Points: In your rules, a character has racial hit points/a racial hit dice. Is this a real HD? E.g. if I have a dwarf 3rd level warrior, are the effective HD for a sleep spell 4?
2. Is there a way for mages to have familiars?
3. Can double weapons used for two-weapon fighting? There is a feat that seems to suggest otherwise, I have noted?
4. You speak of a racial maximum for abilities. How they are determined?
5. Your rules state that it is not possible to summon a creature of CR>CL+3. Am I right that it follows from that that you cannot summon creatures throughout CL 1-3?
6. Why is Weapon Focus an omitted feat? Yes, the Warrior has compensation for that, but what about the other classes? The reason for omitting stuff like weapon specialization was that it is anyway linked to the Fighter class, but that is not the case for Weapon Focus.
Some general questions about your aims:
A.) You wrote that your system needs less bookkeeping. After reading through a lot of your rules, I am not sure how this is achieved?
B.) Cutting the christmas tree. I love cutting the christmas tree. Part of it is compensation for save boosting gear. How is this achieved in your rules?
An two further questions:
I.) AoO: I was surprised by your change of the AoO rules. One of your aims is that a warrior does not simply attack. The original AoO rules managed at least a little bit to achieve that. Why did you change it? It was part of the fun, that you could not simply attack a larger creature, but had to manoeuvre your way to it.
II.) Critical Hits: You aim at speeding up the system. Do your rules not slow it down when it comes to crit hits? You always need to calculate the exact margin of your hits in order to determine damage. Compared to the original rules, the crit hits merely slowed down the game in 5 to 10% of all possible situations.
Thank you for your answers in advance. And again thank you for your work. It is really fantastic and I already enjoy working with it!
-
2015-11-16, 12:54 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2015
- Location
- Eberron
- Gender
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Indeed very very interesting and lots and lots of stuff that I will want to use directly in my 3.5 games.... awesome! !!
Regarding rope trick... what if it were a level 6 spell?
Regarding invocations. .. what if a wizard and/or sorcerer gets the option to use a feat to gain an invocation? Could also allow for eldritch blast ... advancing the blast with each time the blast feat is taken....
All blast damage and increases as well as invocations is restricted to minimum the levels the warlock could have gained them??
Maybe requires one or more heritage feats ?
-
2015-11-16, 06:47 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Glad to help and to know this project will be put to good use.
I can understand the motivation behind the PF skill condensation. Me being a sucker for realism, I preferred to expand rather than condense - and compensate with a bit more skill points (and quite a few more to begin with).
As for Psionics - I find that redundant, because theme-wise, a mage who focuses on illusions, enchantments and transmutation (maybe also divination) is, in effect, a psionically inclined character - especially if Silent Spell and Still Spell feats are involved (if you feel like it, you could create a homebrew feat that has both as prereqs and grants both effects for 1 SL modifier). I just don't see psionics as something that's required within the rules to tell a story that I could already tell with arcane spellcasting.
In D&D in general and 3e in particular, one of the most prominent absolutes is HD. I see no reason to change that. So yes, a 3rd level humanoid warrior is at the very least a 4-HD character (augment the spell if you find it appropriate).
This codex is as loyal to historical folklore as it is to D&D legacy.
In the middle ages they tagged girls w/ pets as witches - goats and black cats in particular.
You can take things anywhere you want, but my view of things is that a familiar is part of a witch's essence, not an adopted animal. I find it a desired result that the Witch has something that other classes don't...... and a witch could be very much arcane-inclined, just not the top-of-the-food-chain arcane. She has other goodies to compensate.
No. TFW and DWF are completely different.
Take a long stick and take 2 short sticks. You move entirely different with them. One's maneuvers are not a subset of the other's. The end result is that you gain more attacks, but that's all they have in common.
18 +/- racial modifier (e.g. +2 Con for Dwarf, -2 Str for Halfling etc.)
CR <= CL 3 to be exact.
Maybe it would be ok to make it CR <= CL 2. That way you could summon things with 2nd level spells.
Actually, if you look at the warrior class, and go to the writer's note for Combat Edge feature, it states: "This feature comes instead of all Weapon Focus tree feats (except for Weapon Focus itself)."
Guess it should be clearer in the Feats section itself.
1. PrC strategy is blown out the window that alone is at least 50% of what 3e players spend time and effort on.
2. Mitigating the Christmas tree problem (see below) is at least another 20%.
3. The Combat Rules & General Rules sections cover a lot of things that all D&D incarnations have neglected. Now you don't have to improvise anymore.
4. Each class (and as a result each character) is a lot more capable in solving problems or at least addressing them. This is an extension of #3.
5. The classes were written with the primary goal of being as balanced as possible. I've found a formula that even multiclassing maintains this balance, so you can save all the energy that would be put into character optimization in other systems. Now all you need to do is build your character according to your character-vision, knowing that you'll have a blast. You could mess up a character build if that's your intention, but it will require some effort, so you're quite safe on that angle.
6. The skill system now gives you a far better coverage of thing you could do (or at least attempt to do).
7. Thanks to the "Spoilers" option in each post (upper-right corner), this page serves both as an organized summary and a complete document you can search text through.
8. All the alternative rules you were always looking for are already here. Take what you want and discard what you don't want.
9. You can play just about any character concept that you'd conjure to mind using this document alone w/o the need to go looking anywhere else.
. . .
There's more, but those are the big ones.
1. See #4 and #5 above.
2. In these rules, it's physically harder to amass magical gear.
1. I had enough experience with AoOs to know that as written they choke down the game flow. You move you get wacked, and there's usually not much you can do about it, no matter how smart or a good tactician/strategist you are.
2. Combat Reflexes, just like PA, is a "wouldn't leave home without it" tool. In a game where feats are so essential to defining your character, making 2 of them a must have means that you've effectively robbed your melee dude of 2 feats. That's why both are now incorporated into the rules.
It's actually really easy:
Short answer: 18 12 2 = 4. There, you're done.
Long answer:
1. You need 12 to hit.
2. You rolled a modified result of 18.
3. You have BAB +4.
Result: your score grants you +6HP to damage, but your BAB means that you only get to benefit from +4HP to damage.
It keeps the numbers small at lower levels. This is good for 2 reasons: easy calculations and preventing power abuse.
As levels go up, you become a more powerful combatant while the other characters become more powerful in other ways and you become ever more practiced in calculations.
Feel free to ask whenever you feel like it and for whatever reason.Last edited by nonsi; 2015-11-17 at 01:07 AM.
-
2015-11-16, 06:48 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
-
2015-11-17, 05:05 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Although I am only familiar with Pathfinder, I can appreciate the effort that went into this. It looks really incredible. I have a question to you, the creator. I'm currently working on a d20 system similar to and based off of pathfinder. One of the ideas was to remove general BAB and instead focus on putting in class features and feats for weapon classes and attack types. The idea was that if a player wants to play an astute scholar who has never wielded a weapon, he should not somehow become better at fighting over time. Also, if you are a sword master, that doesn't make you a spear master. In general the idea is to get rid of the stats that keep scaling upwards without the players input, like saves, BAB, CMD, CMB and make it so that they are gained in some way only if the player chooses to invest in them. I'm curious what are your thoughts on this. Also, your strain based spell system looks VERY appealing.
Last edited by antymattar; 2015-11-17 at 06:15 AM.
-
2015-11-17, 06:54 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2015
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Generally, I totally agree. I couldn't see the point when TSR initially released psionics. However, that changed completelly with the DARK SUN campaign setting. There they are so intrinically interwoven with the history and society of the world that they are absolutelly necessary. For any other campaing setting I would not give a *** for psionics.
This seems to affect a lot of spells and effects that are dependent on target's HD. However, because I will compile a complete new Player's Handbook/Monstrous Compendium that can be solved easily :-)
That sounds reasonable. In the DARK SUN setting, however, there is no space for witches, but familiars do also not fit a DARK SUN Mage, so there is no problem at all. I was merely interested.
So, what are the rules for DWF without the feat? Is it simply not possible? Or have I missed something (in that case sorry for asking the obvious)?
That makes Summonig Monster I quite superflous. However, that spell gave me headache anyway (because in DS setting I do not like summoning anything that is not 100% an inner planes outsider). Hence, dropping that spell I like quite a lot!
Ah, so I misread it in the feat sections. Because it is listed there as omitted feat, I thought the entire Weapon Focus tree is entirely gone. If I understand you correctly now, none of them are gone only the prereqs have changed. Does that mean that a Fighter can have Combat Edge and the entire Weapon Focus tree?
I can see that. But how does it compensate for save bonuses of magical gear. If you take a 12 lvl wizard. considering normal rules, he has something like a +3 bonus on all saves due to magical gear. I cannot see how your mage has any compensation for those +3.
Ok, I will give it a try.
And this one as well :-)
-
2015-11-17, 07:27 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2015
- Location
- Eberron
- Gender
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Hm.. if each bab increase is tied to a single weapon type
Then it could be gained by spending a feat.
Likewise the ability to cast a spell could be a feat that allows you to cast a specific spell once per day
This should of course be limited on what spell level you can select... limited by your class level and possibly by other things like wisdom score and the number of existing spells you can cast and their levels
-
2015-11-17, 01:54 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Why not actually?
Haven't given it much thought to be honest. I guess you could choose to use the backside (unproficient) instead of the front side (not that I see much point in doing this).
The intent was (and is) that:
1. Weapon Focus lingers.
2. The other feats in that tree are eliminated.
3. Combat Edge supersedes Weapon Focus. Given Ever Vigilant practically doubles the bonuses of Combat Edge about 1/2 the time, and given that if they exist (and stack) they'll be practically an unfair must-have, they have to go.
1. There's ability-score redundancy where saving throws are involved.
2. You get an ability increase at x4 the rate in core (+1 per character level).
3. Great Fortitude/Iron Will/Lightning Reflexes are much better in these rules.
4. Each class is packed with abilities that further compensate for a lot, including inner resistances and immunities.
-
2015-11-17, 01:56 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Short answer: I'm not for it.
Don't have the time to explain right now. Stay tuned . . .
[EDIT] . . .
My first days in D&D started with the red BECMI boxed set. I participated in a total of 4 groups under those rules, all the way to level 32.
Later on I took part in 2 AD&D groups one under 1e rules and another under 2e rules.
Starting at the early 2Ks, I played in one group under 3e rules and three more groups under 3.5e rules.
One thing was consistent throughout all this time we all felt that the characters didn't feel versatile or capable enough. We never min-maxed, but rather played in the average power levels intended by the designers (except maybe in our 3rd BECMI group, where there was a lot of damage output, but that didn't matter much for versatility). Yes, in 3.5 you can potentially become hellishly powerful if you're a full-scale prepared caster, but that's also your weak point - you have to guess-choose your spells.
What you're suggesting is to narrow down character-versatility significantly and the ones who'll by far get hurt more than others are the melee classes as if they're not shafted enough. Now you'll have to multiply their class resources 6-fold just to make them keep up.
Your suggestion also defies common sense.
BAB, saves, AC etc. are abstractions that sum up a character's overall battlefield practice:
- How to position yourself on the battlefield
- Where and when to strike and at what angle
- Anticipation
- Patience
- Stamina
- Resolve
and many other parameters.
I could train from here to the afterlife with a single weapon it wouldn't count as much as someone who's been on the battlefield for several years doing melee combat. Even if that someone took my fav. Weapon for the first time, chances are he'll still tear me a new one if we go one-on-one (and I know a thing or two about self-defense, w/ background in 4 different fields of martial arts including training my son on his way to an early teen Shotokan European gold medal and one step from black belt).Last edited by nonsi; 2015-11-17 at 11:20 PM.
-
2015-11-18, 04:43 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2015
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
The short answer would be that a witch is medieval archetype, whereas the DARK SUN campaign setting is about ancient times. But that is an abstract argument. To give it more content: Let us consider two witch types. 1. The wise woman living outside society, but helping small communities with their wisdom about nature and her magical abilities. This archetype would work in the DARK SUN campaign setting, but it is already completely covered by the DARK SUN druid. 2. The witch who has her powers because a pact/relation/heritage to some eldritch powers. This witch either presupposes a certain medieval like good vs. evil or light vs. dark dualism incorporated by demon like creatures where her power comes from - which does simply not exist in the DARK SUN campaign setting (there is something like this dualism in DARK SUN, the defiler vs. preserver dualism, but this one is already otherwise covered). On the other hand a witch could have something like a fey background. Again this does not exist on Athas (the world of the DARK SUN campaign setting). In fact, it breaks down quite close to the medieval vs. ancient distinction I started with: demons (in a non-ancient meaning of the word), feys, the battle between light and darkness are themes that are strong in a medieval or pseudo-medieval setting. The medieval fantasy gets its medieval part (or believes to get it, historical details are better neglected) from paradigmatic medieval (or early modern) areas like the British Isles, the Kingdom of France and the Holy Roman Empire of Germany (quite a contradiction in it self). Their mood is heavily influenced by northern folklore (celtic and norse myths) and the christian ethics, aesthetics and dualism. The DARK SUN campaign setting on the other hand is exactly not that. It is non-nothern and pre-christian (at least in many aspects; of course northern and christian influence leaks in on every corner, because it was written in a culture of exactly that tradition). And this is the reason why I think that there is no room for witches on Athas (like there is not room for knights or priests in the medieval sense).
Two further questions:
1. Do you still use NPC classes like the original warrior?
2. If all player races have one racial Hit Dice they also get their Con bonus for that? And since you work with fractional BAB and saves, shouldn't the player races also have them?Last edited by armloc; 2015-11-18 at 06:40 AM. Reason: Further question
-
2015-11-18, 11:49 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Ok, I see your point with the Witch.
NPC classes - I don't see any reason to use them. If you really feel that you couldn't do w/o NPC classes, I'd suggest using Unearthed Arcana's generic classes for that. The Commoner class - probably 3e's least justified explanation for how things work.
PC racial HD - they're necessary to explain how come humanoids live and breath w/o having class levels. I see no reason why a humanoid's racial HD contribution to Base Attack Bonus would be anything above absolute zero. The common folk don't practice combat in any way. This also simplifies calculations (and a 1st level mage having the same BAB as a 1st level warrior just doesn't feel right).
-
2015-11-19, 02:32 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2015
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Another question: Do monsters also get the Dodge Armor Progression. They get the redefined Save modifiers, shouldn't they also get the Dodge Armor Progression? And the line of reasoning for Dodge Armor Progression also applies to them. On the other hand, this would really make some monsters broken...