3.x things your players try and scam you into allowing


Conversions

1 to 50 of 155 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

3.x has a lot of material, and a lot of good material that is balanced with the pathfinder RPG supplements. Some of it cannot be converted over because it isn't open game, and that's a shame but it doesn't mean it's unusable.

But some of the stuff is just bad for the game and players know it, but it doesn't stop them from trying.

Haste wrote:
The transmuted creature moves and acts more quickly than normal. This extra speed has several effects. On its turn, the subject may take an extra partial action, either before or after its regular action. The subject gains a +4 haste bonus to AC. The subject loses this bonus whenever it would lose a dodge bonus. The subject can jump one and a half times as far as normal. This increase counts as an enhancement bonus. Haste dispels and counters slow.

I've had players that don't seem to understand just how not balanced this idea here is, hell, Mythic Haste only gives you an extra move action.

I've had players try to get this spell brought in as a higher level spell, which I could see justifying it as a 9th level spell with only one target, but the text as is, no way...

What's the craziest stuff your players have tried to get you to allow?


It's been awhile since I cracked any 3.x books, especially any 3.0, so I could be mistaken but isn't that the 3.0 description of haste? I only ask because, if so, it's the version of haste that was already recognized as a bit much and was given a slight nerf in 3.5.

If I am correct, your player has some giant brass balls, trying to pass that one over on you lol

Silver Crusade Contributor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:

3.x has a lot of material, and a lot of good material that is balanced with the pathfinder RPG supplements. Some of it cannot be converted over because it isn't open game, and that's a shame but it doesn't mean it's unusable.

But some of the stuff is just bad for the game and players know it, but it doesn't stop them from trying.

Haste wrote:
The transmuted creature moves and acts more quickly than normal. This extra speed has several effects. On its turn, the subject may take an extra partial action, either before or after its regular action. The subject gains a +4 haste bonus to AC. The subject loses this bonus whenever it would lose a dodge bonus. The subject can jump one and a half times as far as normal. This increase counts as an enhancement bonus. Haste dispels and counters slow.

I've had players that don't seem to understand just how not balanced this idea here is, hell, Mythic Haste only gives you an extra move action.

I've had players try to get this spell brought in as a higher level spell, which I could see justifying it as a 9th level spell with only one target, but the text as is, no way...

What's the craziest stuff your players have tried to get you to allow?

The funniest part? In 3.0's Defenders of the Faith, an armor enhancement was created that gave the wearer a constant haste, the very one you've quoted there. Guess what the cost was:

Not kidding:
+3. Yeah. Now go read that version of haste again. Can you see the funniest part now?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Partial actions were 3e, so yes, this is from 3.0. Generally in 3.x (PF), you take the most recent version of things, so you'd use Pathfinder Haste.

Kalindlara wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

3.x has a lot of material, and a lot of good material that is balanced with the pathfinder RPG supplements. Some of it cannot be converted over because it isn't open game, and that's a shame but it doesn't mean it's unusable.

But some of the stuff is just bad for the game and players know it, but it doesn't stop them from trying.

Haste wrote:
The transmuted creature moves and acts more quickly than normal. This extra speed has several effects. On its turn, the subject may take an extra partial action, either before or after its regular action. The subject gains a +4 haste bonus to AC. The subject loses this bonus whenever it would lose a dodge bonus. The subject can jump one and a half times as far as normal. This increase counts as an enhancement bonus. Haste dispels and counters slow.

I've had players that don't seem to understand just how not balanced this idea here is, hell, Mythic Haste only gives you an extra move action.

I've had players try to get this spell brought in as a higher level spell, which I could see justifying it as a 9th level spell with only one target, but the text as is, no way...

What's the craziest stuff your players have tried to get you to allow?

The funniest part? In 3.0's Defenders of the Faith, an armor enhancement was created that gave the wearer a constant haste, the very one you've quoted there. Guess what the cost was:

** spoiler omitted **

At the same time, the haste bonus to AC from that armor enhancement wouldn't stack with another casting of haste, so you could theoretically lose AC if he took the normal +3 enhancement bonus and then had haste cast on you. But I see what you mean.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:


What's the craziest stuff your players have tried to get you to allow?

Monkey Grip. It was a feat in one of the splat books that allowed you to wield weapons larger than normal or use a two-handed weapon one handed. It was always used so someone could cheese a dual-wielding Greatswords or Great Axes. Ugh.

Not really super-crazy, but it comes up EVERY FREAKING GAME FOR EVERY FREAKING CHARACTER...


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Windquake wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:


What's the craziest stuff your players have tried to get you to allow?

Monkey Grip. It was a feat in one of the splat books that allowed you to wield weapons larger than normal or use a two-handed weapon one handed. It was always used so someone could cheese a dual-wielding Greatswords or Great Axes. Ugh.

Not really super-crazy, but it comes up EVERY FREAKING GAME FOR EVERY FREAKING CHARACTER...

How is doing exactly what the feat intends 'cheese'? Besides, I think it was almost always a DPR loss when it came down to it, the feat was not worth the increase in damage dice and additional -2 penalty.

EDIT: Thinking back, I don't think that Monkey Grip allowed a two-handed medium weapon to be wielded one-handed by a medium creature. They did that in NWN2 because of lack of sizing, but in D&D it was just one-handed large weapons one-handed for a medium creature.


I can't remember if coup de grace worked differently in 3.0/3.5, because my players continually insist that you can't coup de grace a helpless opponent who is adjacent to an ally.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Xexyz wrote:
I can't remember if coup de grace worked differently in 3.0/3.5, because my players continually insist that you can't coup de grace a helpless opponent who is adjacent to an ally.

I am pretty sure this was never the case, however I do believe it provokes. Thats about it. I think most people just dont like the idea of not being able to intervene in that situation.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

The problem is it's all subjective. What's bad and broken for one table is good and not broken at another. My table we allow 3.5. material. Both players and Dms use it. As well both sides research the material first.

I'm also tired of DMs acting as if players want to pull a fast one them at every opprtunity. Some do but they are rare. Their is no super secret anti-DM player organization bent on ruining the fun for DMs. In the case of the OP I don't think the player was trying to pull a fast one. They might have simply thought what they wanted to take was not that powerful or broken. Again depending on the person.

I once had a fellow gamer on another forum attempt to convince me that DR/2 was gamebreaking and overpowered. Maybe at levels 1-5. After that it's anything but. With Paizo it's the opposite so many situational underpowered options. That are simply not worth the paper they are printed on imo. I would require a minimum six figure payment to take as a player. Craft Ooze is a good example imo.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
memorax wrote:
[There] is no super secret anti-DM player organization bent on ruining the fun for DMs.

I do believe this statement is false.

As for the players intent, they clearly knew what the power rating was in this particular instance.

My experience is that players are always asking for leeway on doing things like bypassing prerequisites, having some broken item, or playing some crazy template race without taking the level adjustments.

Naturally, table variance ensues, but for the most part I have yet to see players who don't try and get away with something.

RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Xethik wrote:


Kalindlara wrote:


The funniest part? In 3.0's Defenders of the Faith, an armor enhancement was created that gave the wearer a constant haste, the very one you've quoted there. Guess what the cost was:
** spoiler omitted **
At the same time, the haste bonus to AC from that armor enhancement wouldn't stack with another casting of haste, so you could theoretically lose AC if he took the normal +3 enhancement bonus and then had haste cast on you. But I see what you mean.

But the Haste enhancement for armor being +3 doesn't mean you get +3 to your AC if you have it. It means that you pay for it as if adding +3 to the enhancement bonus. So you could either:

A:
Buy +4 armor for the cost of +4 Armor and get +4 to AC (enhancement bonus),

or
B:
But +1 Armor of Haste for the cost of +4 armor and get +5 to AC (+1 enhancement and +4 haste bonus) PLUS an additional "partial action" on your turn, PLUS jump distance (whatever that's worth).


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Christopher Dudley wrote:
Xethik wrote:


Kalindlara wrote:


The funniest part? In 3.0's Defenders of the Faith, an armor enhancement was created that gave the wearer a constant haste, the very one you've quoted there. Guess what the cost was:
** spoiler omitted **
At the same time, the haste bonus to AC from that armor enhancement wouldn't stack with another casting of haste, so you could theoretically lose AC if he took the normal +3 enhancement bonus and then had haste cast on you. But I see what you mean.

But the Haste enhancement for armor being +3 doesn't mean you get +3 to your AC if you have it. It means that you pay for it as if adding +3 to the enhancement bonus. So you could either:

** spoiler omitted **
or
** spoiler omitted **

Sorry, I think I mistyped. You could theoretically lose AC compared to if you took the normal +3 enhancement bonus (+4 total) and then had haste cast on you.

If you ALWAYS have Haste up anyways from a friendly caster (or yourself), the Haste armor enhancement is waste.

RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

Xethik wrote:


Sorry, I think I mistyped. You could theoretically lose AC compared to if you took the normal +3 enhancement bonus (+4 total) and then had haste cast on you.

If you ALWAYS have Haste up anyways from a friendly caster (or yourself), the Haste armor enhancement is waste.

Oh, sorry, I misparsed your statement. You're right.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:


I do believe this statement is false.

I hope your being sarcastic or joking. If this is what you truly beleive. I have a bridge or two for sale.

master_marshmallow wrote:


As for the players intent, they clearly knew what the power rating was in this particular instance.

Possibly. Without knowing the level of gaming experience or system mastery. Your assuming way too much.

master_marshmallow wrote:


My experience is that players are always asking for leeway on doing things like bypassing prerequisites, having some broken item, or playing some crazy template race without taking the level adjustments.

Gee players acting like normal players. Color me very shocked.

You think my players don't ask too use something new like a feat or archtype in a new or older book. As a player I do the same. Unless the DM allows only core. Players will ask to use non-core material. I see your point but not every player is out to screw the DM. My players if they would take a templated race with a level adjustment don't attempt to get around it. It's part of being a DM. Don't want to deal with that kind of stuff. Then don't run games. Being on both sides of the screen your not going to get much sympathy from me.

master_marshmallow wrote:


Naturally, table variance ensues, but for the most part I have yet to see players who don't try and get away with something.

I suppose i have been lucky then. Beyond a few exceptions most players I Dm for have been honest. It also helps to take a look at their sheets.

Saying players main goal is to screw the DM is not only unfair. It's untrue most of the time imo.

RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I had a game that had started as 3.5 then became PF, and one of the original PCs was a Warlock. Dispel Magic (that does damage) at will was kind of a pain, but it was already kind of a pain in 3.5.


Christopher Dudley wrote:
Xethik wrote:


Kalindlara wrote:


The funniest part? In 3.0's Defenders of the Faith, an armor enhancement was created that gave the wearer a constant haste, the very one you've quoted there. Guess what the cost was:
** spoiler omitted **
At the same time, the haste bonus to AC from that armor enhancement wouldn't stack with another casting of haste, so you could theoretically lose AC if he took the normal +3 enhancement bonus and then had haste cast on you. But I see what you mean.

But the Haste enhancement for armor being +3 doesn't mean you get +3 to your AC if you have it. It means that you pay for it as if adding +3 to the enhancement bonus. So you could either:

** spoiler omitted **
or
** spoiler omitted **

i would say jump distance is worth quite a bit


3 people marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:
memorax wrote:
[There] is no super secret anti-DM player organization bent on ruining the fun for DMs.
I do believe this statement is false.

Shhhh! The first rule of Anti-DM Club is that you don't talk about Anti-DM Club.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Kind of a reversal of the question, but I always try to coax one of my DMs to allow the Tome of Battle. At this point it's just me ribbing him, but it's hilarious to listen to him go on about how much he doesn't like the, and I'm quoting him here, "book of weeaboo fightan-magic".

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

That Speed enhancement was later shifted to a cost of +7, making it effectively an epic enhancement before its time.

yeah, oops.

Dispel at will that does damage actually makes dispel a viable tactic. The damage it does is nothing, and it doesn't always work, so Shattering Dispel is actually useful in combat.

Of COURSE Monkey Grip was used for huge TWF cheese. It's what the feat was designed for.

For real abuse you have to get things like the Locate City Bomb and shapechanging cheese stacked with all sorts of other rules abuse. I think there was a land speed record of circling the world...

==Aelryinth


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Crazy stuff my GM has shown me:

-Belt of Battle. 3 charges/day, use all three to trade your swift action for a full action (or lesser to just pick up a move or standard, but seriously, extra full attack).

-Arcane Thesis. Blasting on Awesome Mode.

-The Incantrix. It took me a bit to figure out how good the 3rd-level ability was, but then... applying metamagic after something has been cast can get nasty, especially since it meant you didn't need the higher-level spell slot. Bonus points for 3.5's Persistent Spell, which gave a spell a 24 hour duration.

-Abjurant Champion. Full-BAB, full-casting five level prestige class with awesome abilities (+level to AC granted by any Abjuration spell, autoextend Abjuration, autoquicken Abjuration, and the 5th level ability, treat your BAB as your caster level if you like. Pretty sure I'm forgetting one too).

-Master Spellthief. All your caster levels are of the level of your highest caster level. Keep in mind we play gestalt.

-Knowledge Devotion: As a free action, for each type of creature you face in combat you make a knowledge check. You get a bonus to hit/damage based on how high your check was-- minimum +1, maximum +5.

-Heroic Surge: Gain a free extra standard action. Works 1/day, +1 for every four character levels.

Crazy Stuff I found that my GM let me have:

-Arcane Fusion. 5th level spell, Sorcerer only. Upon casting, you get to cast a 1st level and a 4th level spell without burning their spell slots. Double the action economy, double the fun.

-Twin Spell: Casting a spell twice for +4 seems relatively fair... except, Spell Perfection is a thing over here in PF.

Crazy Stuff I found that my GM shot down:

-Greater Arcane Fusion: Like the standard version, but it's 8th level and you get a 4th and 7th level spell out of it.

-Frostfell: 9th level spell that auto-kills everything that fails the save and does 20D6 to everything that makes it. That damage can't be healed in the cold barring a DC25 caster level check, and Frostfell also makes the area really, really cold.

-Luck of Heroes: +1 Luck bonus to AC and all saves. Honestly I think this one's fine and I'm working on building a case before I present it to him, so we'll see how it goes.

-Wings of Flurry: 4th level AoE blast spell centered on the caster, deals Force damage, Reflex for half and to avoid being knocked dazed. 1D6 per caster level with no damage dice cap. I'd theoried it up to something like 38D6 without trying all that hard.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Nature's Avatar: +1 th/dmg for every 2 druid levels. Personal buff spell, meaning you can share it with your animal companion.

Twin Spell, Repeat Spell, Born of the Three Thunders, Admixture, Empower, and Split Ray were all how you got mega damage in 3.5 with blaster spells. Combine with Arcane Thesis for metamagic efficiency, metamagic spell, and practical metamagic to reduce meta costs and yes, that Magic Missile is indeed going to do a thousand points of damage.

Arcane Thesis is actually a great metamagic feat, but should be restricted to one spell per caster.

Knowledge Devotion required a LOT of knowledge skill ranks to use successfully. But still, VERY nice feat.

Abusing +Caster level stacking from accelerated PrC's that got you to 9th level casting for the Theurge classes. Ur-Priest and Sublime Chord combined with Mystic Theurge and the Arcane Heirophant for 9th level spells and more in two classes...and it could get MUCH worse.

Battle Metamagic (or something): If you cast a spell twice in a row, you ignored the metamagic cost of one of the feats on the second casting. Meaning you could get off your Twinned Quickened Empowered Admixtured Empowered and Twinned Admixtured Empowered Split spell off for much lower spell levels by casting it more then once.

Yeah, there were tons of stuff. The Abjurant Champion, the Incantatrix, the original Red Wizard, and the Shadowcrafting mage with illusions more real then reality were all horribly overpowered.

==Aelryinth


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
Monkey Grip. It was a feat in one of the splat books that allowed you to wield weapons larger than normal or use a two-handed weapon one handed. It was always used so someone could cheese a dual-wielding Greatswords or Great Axes. Ugh.

...In a biweekly 3.5 game I play I'm playing a Goliath Favored Soul that's using Monkey Grip to wield a Huge sized Great Axe for 4d6+lotslots damage.

Should I see myself out?

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd also like to point out on Twin Spell: It was indeed one of the best spells to take as Metamagic, right after Quicken Spell, and after Empower if you were a blaster.

But: Persistent spell does almost the same thing in PF. Persistent spell forces two rolls for saves...which is exactly what Twin Spell would do with a non-damage spell, since you can't change the target of a Twinned Spell.
The only thing not having Twinned Spell did is cut down on the amount of higher level blaster damage.

the absolute best damage feat was Split Ray, because it had a +2 modifier to double your Ray damage. Combine with Spellwarp sniper to convert any damage spell into a ray, and you could get nice damage numbers out of that. Add in Empower, and then Chain spell to hit multiple targets, and you had a room clearer of a spell.

==Aelryinth

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Inlaa wrote:
Quote:
Monkey Grip. It was a feat in one of the splat books that allowed you to wield weapons larger than normal or use a two-handed weapon one handed. It was always used so someone could cheese a dual-wielding Greatswords or Great Axes. Ugh.

...In a biweekly 3.5 game I play I'm playing a Goliath Favored Soul that's using Monkey Grip to wield a Huge sized Great Axe for 4d6+lotslots damage.

Should I see myself out?

What, you're not using the Strongarm bracers that allow you to wield a weapon another size larger?

And why are you using a greataxe instead of a Minotaur's Greathammer? You can't stack Greater Mighty Wallop onto an axe!!!

:)

==Aelryinth


7 people marked this as a favorite.

My stepdaughter always tries to convince me to let her use shocking grasp as a defibrilator, or to use it on water to shock everything touching the water.

Silver Crusade Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I had an NPC cleric built around Knowledge Devotion. Of course, it was mostly to make up for her 12 Strength. :)


I currently have a monk/alchemist in a game using Kung Fu Genius.


Aelryinth wrote:
Inlaa wrote:
Quote:
Monkey Grip. It was a feat in one of the splat books that allowed you to wield weapons larger than normal or use a two-handed weapon one handed. It was always used so someone could cheese a dual-wielding Greatswords or Great Axes. Ugh.

...In a biweekly 3.5 game I play I'm playing a Goliath Favored Soul that's using Monkey Grip to wield a Huge sized Great Axe for 4d6+lotslots damage.

Should I see myself out?

What, you're not using the Strongarm bracers that allow you to wield a weapon another size larger?

And why are you using a greataxe instead of a Minotaur's Greathammer? You can't stack Greater Mighty Wallop onto an axe!!!

:)

==Aelryinth

I limited myself because the other players are all pretty awful at making characters. (Read: a 3.5 pure bard focused around sword + board, a rogue that uses a shortbow with a strength of about 8 or 10, a werewolf beguiler that just plain has a HORRIBLE build and is using 3PP that are somehow gimping them even further ("I make a bite attack and then a reflex save and if I fail my reflex save I can't use my bite attack for the rest of the day"), a psionicist whose player JUST STARTED playing any form of tabletop RPGs, and a DM that doesn't understand how to balance fights with parties at all yet (read: level 4 party facing a CR 16 encounter as the opening scene... with most of the players being absolutely, 100% new to the game). The only competent player, to be honest, is the Wizard, and he sacrifices viability of characters for roleplay value, so we're looking at a wizard that mostly casts Color Spray before turning on Invisibility and running away because his character is a coward.

Yes, I basically do everything in this group, including disarm the traps by throwing really big rocks at them. The rogue's player is too scared of dying to traps to actually try disarming them.

I'm sticking with this game out of respect for the DM as a person, but I have low hopes for the game itself.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Paladin of Baha-who? wrote:
My stepdaughter always tries to convince me to let her use shocking grasp as a defibrilator, or to use it on water to shock everything touching the water.

I vaguely recall that AD&D had a rule that when a lightning bolt hit water it would transform from a line into a sphere (like fireball). I may be remembering it wrong.

As for using shocking grasp as a defibrillator, that totally works. Remember, the purpose of a defibrillator is to stop someone's heart and hope their body can start it back up again. You use it for arrhythmia, not death. Presumably if you do enough lethal damage to someone you stop their heart.

RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

Inlaa wrote:
Quote:
Monkey Grip. It was a feat in one of the splat books that allowed you to wield weapons larger than normal or use a two-handed weapon one handed. It was always used so someone could cheese a dual-wielding Greatswords or Great Axes. Ugh.

...In a biweekly 3.5 game I play I'm playing a Goliath Favored Soul that's using Monkey Grip to wield a Huge sized Great Axe for 4d6+lotslots damage.

Should I see myself out?

I tried that and ISTR it not being possible. Something about them not stacking because both the Goliath racial power and Monkey Grip said the same thing, which was that you can wield a weapon "one size category larger than yourself." But I don't have the book here, and it was a full decade ago.

Liberty's Edge

So once upon a time, someone in our group ran Curse of the Crimson Throne. This was before Pathfinder, so we had the run of the Third Edition books.

My friends dared me to make a Tome of Battle character with Monkey Grip and Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Mercurial Greatswords).

A mercurial greatsword, just in case you don't have the Arms and Equipment Guide (which actually was a Third Edition book and not a 3.5e book lumped into "Third Edition" because I call everything from 2000-2008 Third Edition) is a sword that does 2d6 slashing damage and does quadruple damage on a critical hit (natural 20s only.)

This same DM allowed me to prestige class into Holy Liberator from Complete Divine, except I got to swap out the spell progression for martial maneuver progression.

I called this character "Kyle Surlent, Destroyer of Campaign" because nothing was a challenge for him. He never failed a single saving throw (save for natural 1s), he had two different kinds of smite (which we nerfed a bit when we really did convert to Pathfinder, sadly, but most of the damage was already done), and when we got to Ileosa at the end of Book Six, we were supposed to have a big, badass battle, and I was planning on using Greater Crusader's Strike (does +6d8 damage, but for every 1 Con drain you voluntarily give yourself when you use this power, you gain +1 to hit and +2d8 damage) when my maneuvers ran dry. That way, if I didn't kill Ileosa, I'd at least go out in a blaze of glory. (My friends had to talk me out of going from 16 to 1 Con; I lied to them and said I'd "only" go down to 8 Con.)

The first attack roll of the end guy was a natural 20, and the resulting critical hit + Smite Evil + Crusader's Strike (+8d6 damage, and that's it) + Power Attack + stance whose name eludes me that lets me reroll max result damage dice brought Ileosa from full health to "would be instantly killed, but she can only be killed by the Blade of McGuffinitude" in six seconds flat. (The barbarian just levitated up to her unconscious carcass and shoved the blade into the massive wound, then raged and went after Ileosa's guards.)

I have since promised this friend that I would remake this character to not rely on WotC-produced books, so I guess he's a warpriest now.


Okay, here comes the Monkey Grip rant.*Deep breathe*

First let's understand what MG did actually do.

In 3rd edition, there wasn't weapon sizes like there is in 3.5 and PF. There was no halfling longsword, all weapons were sized for medium creatures and halflings had to be satisfied with a shortsword (no penalty for using them though). What 3rd edition MG let you do then is to choice 1 specific weapon that was two-handed and use it as a one-handed weapon in ONLY your on-hand. The feat did not allow you to use a two-handed weapon one handed in your off-hand, so no double-wielding greatswords. Oh yeah, and you took a -2 penalty when doing this, this penalty plus the burn of a feat made this more than balanced.

In 3.5 edition, due to the changes in weapon sizing (now all creature sizes had special versions of the weapons made for them), MG changed. Now MG allowed you to wield weapons sized for a creature one size category larger than you with the same effort, as long as you wielded it ONLY in your on-hand or two-handed. Again, just like in 3rd edition, MG does not work for your off-hand only. So again, no double wielding large longswords (~greatswords). And again there was the -2 penalty, though you didn't take the size penalty as well thankfully.

Goliaths do not benefit from the use of MG, sorry Inlaa as per the RAW you are doing it wrong. Both the feat and the goliaths special ability allow you to wield a weapon sized for a creature one size category larger than YOU. The fact is goliaths are still medium, so both allow you to wield large two-handed weapons two-handed, but even together, they do not allow you to wield huge two-handed weapons since they overlap and do not stack. Obviously the oversized build features is the better option, but doesn't work with MG I'm sorry to say.

This is much of the problem with too many things from 3rd/3.5 that are complained about as being unbalanced. GMs didn't actually understand how they worked and so they complained they were broken, when in fact they were fine if used correctly. 3.5 spiked chain, Improved Trip, and Combat Reflexes was another common example. Some GMs thought you could retrip someone that was trying to stand up, problem is you can't trip a prone target and the attack occurs before the action that draws the AoO (in this cases the act of standing).


Monkey Grip & Mercurial Greatsword were both originally from Sword & Fist, the first of thelline of class companion type books that came out in the early days of 3.0. Sword & Fist was basically the martial guidebook. It had a number of new (and sometimes powerful) feats in it, aimed at fighters, barbarians, rangers, and monks.

Monkey Grip wasn't the best feat in the book, as far as power. That, in my experience, was Knockdown. It allowed you to make a free trip attempt anytime you did 10 or more damage with an attack. Combine that with the improved trip feat that gave you a free attack when you tripped someone, and it meant a Greatsword wielder could hit, trip, and hit. Add in Cleave (and later Great Cleave), and a Fighter was capable of ridiculous damage.

Silver Crusade Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also, the 2d6 version of the mercurial greatsword is from the Arms & Equipment Guide. The original S&F version had 2d8 base damage on top of the x4 crit and such. I seem to recall having rules from Magic of Faerun for making them out of reinforced gold, which put them up to 4d6 each. Then we brought TWF and Monkey Grip into it.

S&F also gave us the original bladed gauntlet, with its 17-20 critical range. This was back in 3.0, when Improved Critical and keen stacked. I think we then used the Weapon Master prestige class to increase the threat range by 2, for a 7-20 crit range. And then we made it vorpal.

...I can't believe I remembered all that. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My roommate tried to let me let him play an artificer EVERY FREAKING TIME I suggest a pathfinder campaign. He staunchly refuses to look at it as anything but an extension of 3e.


Quote:
Goliaths do not benefit from the use of MG, sorry Inlaa as per the RAW you are doing it wrong. Both the feat and the goliaths special ability allow you to wield a weapon sized for a creature one size category larger than YOU. The fact is goliaths are still medium, so both allow you to wield large two-handed weapons two-handed, but even together, they do not allow you to wield huge two-handed weapons since they overlap and do not stack. Obviously the oversized build features is the better option, but doesn't work with MG I'm sorry to say.

Eh. Easy enough of a fix for me to remove the feat and put something else in its place. It also makes my character look less absurd, and 2 less attack penalty means a 10% greater chance of hitting things (which is more important than a somewhat higher damage die when you have a +17 damage attack or so).

Interesting, though. Yeah, looking at them, they both say the same thing - thanks for pointing that out.

And yeah, 3.5 is just... a really messed up system. I built this character this way because, as said, I was told "oh, most everyone that'll be playing is experienced with D&D." They aren't.

Quote:
This is much of the problem with too many things from 3rd/3.5 that are complained about as being unbalanced. GMs didn't actually understand how they worked and so they complained they were broken, when in fact they were fine if used correctly.

The things that are ACTUALLY balanced all concern magic.

Hi, I'm a Warlock. I can make any magic item in the game that I want, and I can use essentially any magic item in the game that I want. Hi, I'm a Cleric; a one level dip into me means you can use almost all Arcane and Divine scrolls and wands (thank you Magic Domain). Hi, I'm a Sevenfold Veil or whatever mage, or I'm an Archmage, or... y'know... the various means of breaking the game...

Martial stuff usually dealt with people misunderstanding things, yeah - as you just demonstrated. I've actually gotten onto people about the trip maneuvers stuff. "It doesn't work the way you think it does," etc, with the spiked chain builds (though they were still good).

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I keep trying to get a DM to let me play a Magic of Incarnum character but so far no luck.

Liberty's Edge

Darigaaz the Igniter wrote:
My roommate tried to let me let him play an artificer EVERY FREAKING TIME I suggest a pathfinder campaign. He staunchly refuses to look at it as anything but an extension of 3e.

To be fair the core is pretty much a extension of 3E. Their nothing really in the core that makes it stand out in a major way from 3E imo.

While their is some unbalanced material in 3.5. There is some that is. Too often as some others have said. It's either a lack of understanding. Or were never that broken. I'm in a game with a good DM. He refuses to allow 3.5. material. I kind of respect but at the same time he has never read any 3.5. material. Someone told him that the 3,.5 material was broken and unbalanced. Which one should never take as the gospel truth imo. I once had a fellow gamer insist that DR/2 was not just broken and unbalanced it was game breaking.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Inlaa wrote:
Quote:
Goliaths do not benefit from the use of MG, sorry Inlaa as per the RAW you are doing it wrong. Both the feat and the goliaths special ability allow you to wield a weapon sized for a creature one size category larger than YOU. The fact is goliaths are still medium, so both allow you to wield large two-handed weapons two-handed, but even together, they do not allow you to wield huge two-handed weapons since they overlap and do not stack. Obviously the oversized build features is the better option, but doesn't work with MG I'm sorry to say.

Eh. Easy enough of a fix for me to remove the feat and put something else in its place. It also makes my character look less absurd, and 2 less attack penalty means a 10% greater chance of hitting things (which is more important than a somewhat higher damage die when you have a +17 damage attack or so).

Interesting, though. Yeah, looking at them, they both say the same thing - thanks for pointing that out.

And yeah, 3.5 is just... a really messed up system. I built this character this way because, as said, I was told "oh, most everyone that'll be playing is experienced with D&D." They aren't.

Quote:
This is much of the problem with too many things from 3rd/3.5 that are complained about as being unbalanced. GMs didn't actually understand how they worked and so they complained they were broken, when in fact they were fine if used correctly.

The things that are ACTUALLY balanced all concern magic.

Hi, I'm a Warlock. I can make any magic item in the game that I want, and I can use essentially any magic item in the game that I want. Hi, I'm a Cleric; a one level dip into me means you can use almost all Arcane and Divine scrolls and wands (thank you Magic Domain). Hi, I'm a Sevenfold Veil or whatever mage, or I'm an Archmage, or... y'know... the various means of breaking the game...

Martial stuff usually dealt with people misunderstanding things, yeah - as you just demonstrated. I've actually gotten onto people about the trip maneuvers...

INlaa, just replace it with Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Heavy Large Greatsword) and you get the exact same effect, with, I believe, no penalty to hit.

You can make it out of Alchemical Gold or Alchemical Platinum, either works. Which does mean it can't be adamantium without the GM handwaving stuff about depleted uranium slugs or something!

==Aelryinth

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Coridan wrote:
I keep trying to get a DM to let me play a Magic of Incarnum character but so far no luck.

Incarnum is pretty cool. It's like having Power Armor made out of your soul, just plug your soul into what you want boosted.

The INcarnum Mage prestige class can break pretty easily. Depending on how you interpret it, you can have your Incarnum pay metamagic costs for you as you cast spells. If you're a blaster and have 4 points of Incarnum free, that means you could Twin Spell or Quicken Spell every round.

==Aelryinth


...I meant to say "actually unbalanced," not "actually balanced," by the way. Whoops.


Inlaa wrote:
...I meant to say "actually unbalanced," not "actually balanced," by the way. Whoops.

I, at least, understood. EDITed for clarity

...

You know, I think, as a GM, I'm going to introduce a variant of the 3.0-cum-PF haste effects gestalted together and see what the anarchy is. It sounds... lovely. >:)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Knowledge Devotion:
KNOWLEDGE DEVOTION [DOMAIN]
You can use your knowledge to exploit your foes' weaknesses and overcome their strengths.
Prerequisite: Knowledge (any) 5 ranks.
Benefit: Upon selecting this feat, you immediately add one Knowledge skill of your choice to your list of class skills. Thereafter, you treat that skill as a class skill, regardless of which class you are advancing in. Whenever you fight a creature, you can make a Knowledge check based on its type, as described on page 78 of the Player's Handbook, provided that you have at least one rank in the appropriate Knowledge skill.
You then receive an insight bonus on attack rolls and damage rolls against that creature type for the remainder of the combat. The amount of the bonus depends on your Knowledge check result, as given on the following table.
Check -- Bonus
Result -- Granted
15 or below -- +1
16-25 -- +2
26-30 -- +3
31-35 -- +4
36 or higher -- +5
You can make only one Knowledge check per creature type per combat. If you fight creatures of multiple types during the same combat, you can make one Knowledge check per type, thereby possibly gaining different bonuses against different opponents.
Alhandra's Knowledge (arcana) check grants her a +3 insight bonus on attack rolls and damage rolls against the black dragon. Later, a half-dragon enters the fray. Alhandra cannot make another check since she has already checked for the dragon type this combat, but she can apply the +3 insight bonus to her attack rolls and damage rolls against the half-dragon as well.
This benefit is an extraordinary ability.

kestral287 wrote:
-Knowledge Devotion: As a free action, for each type of creature you face in combat you make a knowledge check. You get a bonus to hit/damage based on how high your check was-- minimum +1, maximum +5.
Aelryinth wrote:
Knowledge Devotion required a LOT of knowledge skill ranks to use successfully. But still, VERY nice feat.
Kalindlara wrote:
I had an NPC cleric built around Knowledge Devotion. Of course, it was mostly to make up for her 12 Strength. :)

I had a character with this. Creatures were lumped into 7 knowledge categories. So you needed ranks in 7 knowledges to cover things. DC 36 to get +5.

I used some magic to boost stuff:
Wieldskill: +10 competence on a skill
Fleeting Fortune: +5 luck on a check
Divine Insight: 1/day +15 Insight on a check
Share Talents: +2 untyped all shared skills w/target
Ray of Hope: +2 morale skills
Focusing Chant: +1 circumstance skills
I also was a member of a particular group, and got +2 to two knowledges.

On average, I hit +3.45/+3.75 (average) from a standing start. If wieldskill as in play, +4.65/+4.75. If I spent a swift, and kicked in the fleeting fortune, I got +4.20/+4.40 (+4.90/+4.90). We played with exploding crits: roll a 1, subtract 10 from the result, roll 20, add instead. Without that rule, wieldskill gets +4.75/+4.85 and both get +5/+5. Likewise, if wieldskill was on the wrong knowledge, rather than swift for favor, I would swift the 1/day divine insight if needed for that max.

Ah, the joy of stacking. Since most fights were against the same type of creature, it was worth spending the move action to redirect the wieldskill spell.

All those effects also bumped other things, so I had to keep track of what bonuses were being handed out by others, since I often did not benefit. We also had an Archivist in the party to aid in the hit or damage department. As I as a Duskblade, it made me a great gish.

/cevah


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Knowledge Devo was still fantastic without major buffing from spells and items. +2 to hit and damage for one feat is pretty solid (I think I rocked around a +15 at level 8), everything considered. Also great domain swap for Cleric dips.

Overpowered? Probably. But not game-breaking in my games.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

In Pathfinder, Knowledge Devotion honestly makes a lot of full martials obsolete. Why would I want to use a Fighter when I can get an Investigator/Alchemist/Magus, throw some skill points where we know I'm going to anyway, and come level three (keep in mind a straight conversion would drop the number of ranks required), Knowledge Devotion more than makes up for the difference in BAB/Str. For one feat to do that is... pretty damn good.

I've got a character taking it when she hits level 5. With no special optimization toward it beyond "She's an Int-based character", she has a +14 in the useful Knowledge skills (save Nature, which is only a +12). Now, her Int is above the norm, but wealth is below so that more-or-less washes out.

So, come level 5 when she gets another point in each of those skills, she's a 3/4ths BAB character who's hitting +2 to hit/damage consistently against anything that doesn't require Nature, and will still get that against Nature-based targets 90% of the time. For Arcana/Dungeoneering/Planes/Religion, it's a 50% chance for a +2, a 25% for a +3, and a 25% chance for a +4.

That's waaaay beyond any +attack/damage feat in Pathfinder. At the minimum it brings her to-hit up to par with a full-BAB character and functions as Weapon Specialization. At best it's the BAB difference plus Weapon Focus & Greater plus Weapon Specialization & Greater. And it still has room to grow.

Kind of a subtle thing but when you start thinking about the feats martials normally take to upgrade damage, it's nasty.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Coridan wrote:
I keep trying to get a DM to let me play a Magic of Incarnum character but so far no luck.

Take a look at Akashic Mysteries by Dreamscarred Press, it's a PF conversion of MoI.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
kestral287 wrote:

In Pathfinder, Knowledge Devotion honestly makes a lot of full martials obsolete. Why would I want to use a Fighter when I can get an Investigator/Alchemist/Magus, throw some skill points where we know I'm going to anyway, and come level three (keep in mind a straight conversion would drop the number of ranks required), Knowledge Devotion more than makes up for the difference in BAB/Str. For one feat to do that is... pretty damn good.

I've got a character taking it when she hits level 5. With no special optimization toward it beyond "She's an Int-based character", she has a +14 in the useful Knowledge skills (save Nature, which is only a +12). Now, her Int is above the norm, but wealth is below so that more-or-less washes out.

So, come level 5 when she gets another point in each of those skills, she's a 3/4ths BAB character who's hitting +2 to hit/damage consistently against anything that doesn't require Nature, and will still get that against Nature-based targets 90% of the time. For Arcana/Dungeoneering/Planes/Religion, it's a 50% chance for a +2, a 25% for a +3, and a 25% chance for a +4.

That's waaaay beyond any +attack/damage feat in Pathfinder. At the minimum it brings her to-hit up to par with a full-BAB character and functions as Weapon Specialization. At best it's the BAB difference plus Weapon Focus & Greater plus Weapon Specialization & Greater. And it still has room to grow.

Kind of a subtle thing but when you start thinking about the feats martials normally take to upgrade damage, it's nasty.

Oh to clarify I meant game-breaking in terms of some of the other 3.5 stuff out there. I definitely would not allow it in my Pathfinder games. I think there was enough other stuff that made Fighters (and pure martials) obsoleted to gishes.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
kestral287 wrote:
-The Incantrix. It took me a bit to figure out how good the 3rd-level ability was, but then... applying metamagic after something has been cast can get nasty, especially since it meant you didn't need the higher-level spell slot. Bonus points for 3.5's Persistent Spell, which gave a spell a 24 hour duration.

Incantatrix was even more broken in 3.0. First spellcasters had 3.0 haste as discussed previously. Now add in a class feature that subtracts from each metamagic applied, and the fact that in 3.0 you could apply the same metamagic multiple times to one spell. Empowered five times for +5 levels? Yes please.

Also in 3.0 the stat boosters like bull's strength were variable, +2-5, so they could be empowered. I once had this exchange in a high level one-shot I ran:

"Hey, does your archer want a cat's grace?"

"Nah, I've got a +6 item."

"That's cute." *rolls a d4* "Here, have a +18 Dex."


Windquake wrote:


Monkey Grip. It was a feat in one of the splat books that allowed you to wield weapons larger than normal or use a two-handed weapon one handed. It was always used so someone could cheese a dual-wielding Greatswords or Great Axes. Ugh.

So... basically a Weapon Specialization (+2 damage on average)? If you forget all the restrictions and penalties, that is.

This is not crazy, this is not overpowered, and considering that Monkey Grip did in fact feature a -2 penalty, taking it was and is nerfing your character for the sake of pure flavor.

1 to 50 of 155 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Conversions / 3.x things your players try and scam you into allowing All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.