Here is a list of what many folks on enworld seem to think are issues with 3.5. From this Thread
here is the list as it stands now
Wizards having nothing to do when they've cast all their spells appropriate to the situation
--People having trouble remembering 1-2-1 (YMMV)
--Statting up NPCs, including skill points too fiddly for DMs statting up monsters/NPS (but not PCs--most players seem to like the customization)
--Grappling
--Turning
--Calculating XP from CR
--AoOs too confusing/too many instances to remember
--Too many iterative attacks, contributing (along with SR, miss chance, crit confirmation, etc.) to too much die-rolling
--Players' turns taking too long to resolve due to multiple die-rolls often being required
--CoDzilla (though only if deliberately and expertly exploited)
--Infinite summoning (A summons B summons C summons...)
--Fighters not keeping up as the party level increases
--Scry-Buff-Teleport-Fly combo repeated ad nauseum, and campaign-breaking spells/magic in general (for some this includes resurrection et al)
--Identify
--XP for crafting
--buffing etc., especially remembering which buffs/effects/modifiers are affecting whom and for how long
--useless skills (use rope, craft [baskets], etc. YMMV)
--familiars and animal companions often crappy but time-consuming if used in combat
--save or die
--suckitude of multi-class spellcasters
--HP can vary too much due to fact that they are rolled (YMMV)
--Spell prep takes too long; spell-list resource management too cumbersome
--Necessity and ubiquity of munchkin magic items (Belt of Strength +3 etc.); inclusion of lots of magic items in the CR math
--DR as a primary focus of most combats past a certain level (golf-bag syndrome)
this thread was started by loseth there and while some has been addressed I though this might be something worth looking at.
I think Wizards had the right idea when they addressed some of these problems but my issue was that they made things too simple and too balanced. So long as these problems are addressed without making every character the same glass of water with different food coloring then awesome.
My take on those things:
Has largely been taken care of, with the school powers. All schools get something appropriate now. Add reserve feats and you're golden
I call that an user problem. It's easy enough to ignore this rule if your players have a hard time with it, but I have a player or two whose grasp of the rules isn't exactly phenomenal, and they don't have a problem with it. There should be some standards you can expect from people.
We already saw great progression there, since skill points are a lot easier now, especially for multiclass characters. I guess Paizo will take a serious shot at the NPC stat-up problem in general, too.
Another part where progress already has been made. And frankly, it's another rule that is very easily ignored.
I agree. It was one of the few occasions where I never really learned the specifics in all detail and had to look at the turning level table every time.
But again, it's something that has been simplified now.
Never had a problem with it. You get the table, you look up things, you do some simple math (with a calculator if necessary)
They may be daunting at first, but I found that if you go and read the rules carefully, it becomes quite easy. Maybe the formulations need (and will get) some improvement.
Iterative attacks: That might be a problem for some, and might be one that can't be taken care of without making 3e no longer 3e.
SR is another couple thing I'd like to see alternative rules for, turning it into a save bonus.
But the miss chance is no problem at all: unless you're 3 year old and have very small hands, you can roll a d10 and 2d10 in one go.
And if you want to take my crit rolls, you'll have to pry them from my cold, dead, hands.
Never had a problem with it. Maybe streamline things a bit, but generally, If I wanted an attack to be over in a second, I'd play Diablo. I think it's not that bad.
Solution: Don't play with jerks.
Solution: Don't play with jerks.
I think alpha's doing a decent job here. I do think that fighters aren't as bad as everyone thinks.
Solution: Don't play with jerks.
Also, make players aware of the G&G rule (Goose and Ganter)
While I agree that some of those spells and combos need to be addressed, I think the number of actual campaign breakers isn't that high.
What about it? Besides, Alpha's attempt is quite nice.
Taken care of.
Never had too many problems with it. Unless you run through the dungeons, round buffs will last one fight and 10minute buffs last a dungeon. Only the minute ones might be a bit tricky, but even then it's not a game breaker.
Some have been taken care of. Other than that, there's no rule forcing you to use skills (or feats, spells, races, classes...) that don't win you a Red Star of Powergaming (just remember that other people might want to use such rules, so don't get rid of them because some people don't want them, especially if it's nothing mandatory. I find this kind of game design extremely annoying)
Already taken care of: They're no longer mandatory.
And, again, not everything is about combat.
Life's not a pony ranch. Especially true for the end part.
But even that has been taken care of, and with excellent compatibility (at least in alpha), as death spells now only do damage (but are still designated as death spells, so you can easily edit the death part back in)
Yeah, they're not always viable. There's already great suggestions for alternative multiclassing rules floating around (and I'm not just saying that because one's from me).
Wrong. HP can vary due to the fact that they might be rolled. No one holds a gun to your head.
In fact, It's been years since I or any of my players rolled for ability scores or HP. 3e does it the right way, by offering choices.
Price for versatility. And I'm sure I'm not the only one who says that without vancian spells, D&D isn't D&D.
And it's not so bad really. I can whip out a spell list in a couple of minutes, and you usually do that only once and then make small adjustments.
Belts of strength aren't munchkin magic items.
I'd still welcome a decent written-down set of changes to implement a game without magic items. From personal experience, I know it's not a lot of work if done right
Alpha already changes some of this.
I never had too much of a problem with this. Since the numbers aren't that high, fights don't become impossible if you can't get around DR. Some things can be added with magic (permanent or with spells), and with a couple of backup weapons (hardly a whole golf bag), you can be prepared for many cases.
--Calculating XP from CR
You know, I've seen this complaint over and over during the life span of 3.0 / 3.5 and I'm a lazy DM - I just don't use XP. I throw out encounters, decide when a good time to level up would be and passout the level. If people needed xp for something I gave them xp based on how far long they should be to their next level but that was rare since I house ruled no-xp for magic item creation and most spells anyway.
--Players' turns taking too long to resolve due to multiple die-rolls often being required
I've seen this too. Experienced players have no problem but casual players still trying to figure out their one die roll really struggle with a quick series or batch rolls. Therefore I often handle the basic rolls for some of these players and let them roll damage and such. It improves the flow of the game and they're happier with it. My wife, she who loves barbarians, is a prime example of this player and I often have her roll the big attack while I'm resolving the lower chance ones.
--Fighters not keeping up as the party level increases
I've not seen this problem personally but curious about it as I enjoy playing fighters on the rare times I'm not GMing.
--familiars and animal companions often crappy but time-consuming if used in combat
true but I like familiars as spies anyway
--suckitude of multi-class spellcasters
This is a long time annoyance of mine. Some houseruling has helped but we need a more creative solution.
--HP can vary too much due to fact that they are rolled (YMMV)
I've always houseruled a normalization that is half the hit die. For example a barbarian always gets at least 6 points if they roll low or a wizard always gets at least 2 (now would be 3 with Pathfinder). Its helped some.
--Spell prep takes too long; spell-list resource management too cumbersome
Necessary evil of playing a wizard?
I like the list as areas for improvement. I also think PfPRG is working most of these. I am surprised it does not mention high level play, but I assume each of these things gets worse at high level.
|
Now, I happen to disagree with everything on the list, so I won't break it down (heck, I even ENJOY some of the things on the list).
But to address one major point that is mentioned a few times:
Since when is rolling more dice a problem for a game that was built on rolling dice?
On one hand they want to get rid of "save-or-die", usually solved by introducing more dice rolls as a safeguard (witness the mindflayer's 4th Edition brain-eating), but on the other hand people seem to think that rolling one d20 and adding caster level is too much for SR. Huh?
|
Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure that summoned creatures can't summon others.I believe you are correct, a summoned Balor cannot summon other Tanar'ri. To be fair, I believe this rule is only mentioned in the Monster Manual.
The issue is that conjuration [summoning] spells do have this limitation, conjuration [calling] spells do not - the biggest offender here being gate. Also, if you happen to run across a fiend that wasn't summoned - i.e., you're on another plane, or the fiend in question wandered to the Material of its own free will - those restrictions don't apply either.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure that summoned creatures can't summon others.
According to the SRD (under the description of the Conjuration [Summoning] subschool), a summoned creature can't use any "innate" summoning ability.
EDIT: I see (upon clarification) that the complaint is about Conjuration (Calling) spells (which I agree are poorly thought out).
|
There are only a few items on that list I see real problems with and those are all being dealt with. The rest are house rule issues. No game will resolve every little preference. If they remove Use Rope, someone will have to House Rule in Use Rope.
Save or die... what is the problem? You are in combat. People are trying to kill you. If you don't like it stay home on the farm. Ever watch Blackhawk Down (based on real events)? Remember those guys in the truck who took headshots and were just dead. That is save or die. The real soldiers didn't get to roll dice to see if they lived. They were just alive and in combat then they were just dead. Is it not Heroic enough for you? Then House Rule it... or stay on the farm.
What is 121?
some things on the list I do not see as an issue. Alot Pathfinder seems to be making roads into fixing if it has not already done so. I just thought this list might be interesting to see.
Necessity and ubiquity of munchkin magic items (Belt of Strength +3 etc.); inclusion of lots of magic items in the CR math
Out of everything on the list, this is the only one that really bothered me. I hate it that attribute-boosting items are more or less required, and that cloaks of resistance and rings of protection are default assumptions for all PCs and NPCs. I'd rather remove all "magic shoppes," cut the number of magic items given out in adventures by 9/10, and include (or upgrade) the inherent leveling bonuses for stats, AC, saves. Alas, such a move would break the back-compatibility that PFRPG strives for, so it is not to be.
|
Priority 1 -- Need To Fix
--Identify (too pricey)
--save or die
--suckitude of multi-class spellcasters
--DR as a primary focus of most combats past a certain level (golf-bag syndrome)
--Scry-Buff-Teleport-Fly combo repeated ad nauseum, and campaign-breaking spells/magic in general (for some this includes resurrection et al)
Priority 2 -- Could Be Improved
--Pure spellcasters having nothing to do when they've cast all their spells appropriate to the situation
--Statting up NPCs, including skill points too fiddly for DMs statting up monsters/NPS (but not PCs--most players seem to like the customization)
--buffing etc., especially remembering which buffs/effects/modifiers are affecting whom and for how long
--Too many iterative attacks, contributing (along with SR, miss chance, crit confirmation, etc.) to too much die-rolling
--Players' turns taking too long to resolve due to multiple die-rolls often being required
--Fighters not keeping up as the party level increases
--familiars and animal companions often crappy but time-consuming if used in combat
--XP for crafting
--Necessity and ubiquity of munchkin magic items (Belt of Strength +3 etc.); inclusion of lots of magic items in the CR math
Priority 3 - Meh
--AoOs too confusing/too many instances to remember
--Grappling
--Turning
--Calculating XP from CR
--Spell prep takes too long; spell-list resource management too cumbersome
--HP can vary too much due to fact that they are rolled (YMMV)
--useless skills (use rope, craft [baskets], etc. YMMV)
--People having trouble remembering 1-2-1 (YMMV)
Working As Designed / Not A Bug
--Infinite summoning (A summons B summons C summons...)
(This was actually a problem in 1980 AD&D; 3.X fixed this)
What is CoDzilla?
What is CoDzilla?
I think that's when the Cleric or Druid overshadows all the melee guys, in addition to being a full spellcaster with more spells than the wizard and higher-level spells than the sorcerer.
Cleric or Druid (god)zilla.
It basically is a souped up cleric or druid that can pretty much completely destroy anything a DM would care to throw at it. However requires a LOT of power-gaming and a handful of feats which when used in combination prove rather broken.
Most of it can be avoided or stopped by an experienced DM though.
I should've italicized 'summoned' probably. I knew called and gated creatures didn't have this limitation. Even then, the creatures they summon couldn't call anymore.
Technically, as a 20th lvl caster, a Solar could have the spell Gate memorized, and cast it themselves. A Planetar can do the same thing, actually...
-Steve
|
|
I should've italicized 'summoned' probably. I knew called and gated creatures didn't have this limitation. Even then, the creatures they summon couldn't call anymore.Technically, as a 20th lvl caster, a Solar could have the spell Gate memorized, and cast it themselves. A Planetar can do the same thing, actually...
-Steve
Aw....I love Celestial Cascades...
Actually, there was this one Story Hour post back on EnWorld were the author described this phenomenon happening in his game. Some of you might remember..it was the one where the succubi was redeemed by the paladin...
..come to think of it, we need to track this GM down. He KNEW how to run a high-level game!
I should've italicized 'summoned' probably. I knew called and gated creatures didn't have this limitation. Even then, the creatures they summon couldn't call anymore.Technically, as a 20th lvl caster, a Solar could have the spell Gate memorized, and cast it themselves. A Planetar can do the same thing, actually...
-Steve
Aw....I love Celestial Cascades...
Actually, there was this one Story Hour post back on EnWorld were the author described this phenomenon happening in his game. Some of you might remember..it was the one where the succubi was redeemed by the paladin...
..come to think of it, we need to track this GM down. He KNEW how to run a high-level game!
Sepulchrave. Lady Despina's Virtue story hour, also known as Tales of Wyre. It's posted by Cheiromancer. One of the best stories I've ever read, bar none. And it's not a he. I'm pretty sure it's a she.
The description of cascades in that story are great. I love the concept, and the discussions in the fic about their historical occurances. However, even in that game Sepul felt the need to restrict summoning, though granted it was done in a great, in-story way.
-Steve
Here is a list of what many folks on enworld seem to think are issues with 3.5. From this Thread
here is the list as it stands now
Wizards having nothing to do when they've cast all their spells appropriate to the situation
It's not really the system's problem if the player thinks the wizard has nothing particularly "wizardly" to do once he's shot his wad. Fire the darn crossbow and like it! They don't have to be farting out magic constantly.
--Too many iterative attacks, contributing (along with SR, miss chance, crit confirmation, etc.) to too much die-rolling
I will agree with this a little bit, not because I think there's too much dice rolling or that the fighter-types are getting too many attacks. Rather, I think the non-fighter classes are getting too many attacks. It used to be the prerogative of the fighter types to get multiple attacks, nobody else got squat. I think it would be fine to step things back a bit for non-fighters, if there was a really elegant way to do it. Darn that BAB, being so simple to use and conceptually tight!
--Players' turns taking too long to resolve due to multiple die-rolls often being required
I don't think 4e looks like it's reducing this very much, quite frankly.
--buffing etc., especially remembering which buffs/effects/modifiers are affecting whom and for how long
There are, I believe, simply too many blasted buff spells, which I see as the primary cause of the 15 minute day. Everyone blows their spells like a drunk barbarian in a whorehouse spends his money buffing up for every fight. Cut the number of buffs and, lo and behold, the casters have more spells they can cast in other situations.
--HP can vary too much due to fact that they are rolled (YMMV)
meh. 20 levels is plenty of time to see regression to the mean
--Necessity and ubiquity of munchkin magic items (Belt of Strength +3 etc.); inclusion of lots of magic items in the CR math
Not a single one of which has ever been "necessary". Oh, sure, they're nice and all that. But necessary? Puh-leeze. 3e was fantastic the way it made characters with moderate stats credible because they got into decent bonuses fairly early. AND moderate stat characters could get those stat buffing items to compete with the big boys who rolled better in character generation.
Cleric or Druid (god)zilla.
It basically is a souped up cleric or druid that can pretty much completely destroy anything a DM would care to throw at it. However requires a LOT of power-gaming and a handful of feats which when used in combination prove rather broken.
Well, the point of "CoDzilla" is that (in 3.5) a cleric buffed with Divine Power or a wild shaped druid are almost as good as (or better than) a fighter of the same level...and they have full spellcasting on the side, to boot.
In Pathfinder, Divine Power and Wild Shape got nerfed (particularly the latter) so it's a step in the right direction.
Hmmm, personally I'd like to see them adjust critical hits so that you don't need to roll for confirmation. That was an aspect of 3rd my group never took on. A crit was a crit none of this confirmation B.S. If people are worried about it becoming too deadly adjust it some. Maybe nix the x3 and x4 crits and adjust it some but it always seemed a touch pointless to have confirmed crits. Or perhaps make a natural twenty an auto-crit and anything below that in the crit range require that silly rule. :-P
As for CoDzilla's and the like. I think 3.5 handled that just fine with the reduction in duration pretty much ensuring that it couldn't be overly abused. That and only third of the encounters I ran gave the cleric time to get a good buff chain up. The few times I played one I was lucky if I had enough time to cast Prayer and Divine Power before the fight started.
Personally I'd like to see Divine Power return to normal. Go ahead and let it no longer stack with Divine Favor, makes sense as it seems like it's more of an upgrade anyway. But again, that's just me, the joy of being a GM is that I have the almighty power of house rule!
|
|
--suckitude of multi-class spellcasters
.
I never understood this one..
Why do people think that multiclass Spellcasters need to be more powerful?
The thing about multi classing is you get more versatilty by sacrificing class power... that is what multi classing does..
why should a level 5 fighter/level 5 Wizard be as powerful as a level 10 Wizard?... It should have exactly the power as a Level 5 fighter has and Level 5 Wizard has with the extra abilities of mixing the 2 classes....
I will never think this is a Problem.
|
Wizards having nothing to do when they've cast all their spells appropriate to the situation
The invention of the Warlock really hammered this one home, but Reserve Feats seem to fixed it pretty neatly. In PRPG, free Cantrips and some of the Specialist options do likewise. Monte's Book of Experimental Might has some *awesome* suggestions for how to tweak this...
-People having trouble remembering 1-2-1 (YMMV)
-Statting up NPCs, including skill points too fiddly for DMs statting up monsters/NPS (but not PCs--most players seem to like the customization)
-Grappling
Meh. I got Ds in math, but I can remember the difference between 1 and 2. Unless they mean those people that 'forget' to count any number that penalizes them and 'accidentally' add their pluses to hit twice each...
-Turning
A little too all or nothing, for my tastes. I'm not a big fan of a power that completely trivializes one type of encounter.
-Calculating XP from CR
I just hand out levels as needed. I'm a bad, lazy DM.
-AoOs too confusing/too many instances to remember
More meh. Star Fleet Battles ECM/ECCM rules might qualify as 'too confusing.' AoOs are simple and fairly neat solutions to allow non-casters a modicum of battlefield control. I'm not sure I'd go so far as to use the word 'elegant,' but they are definitely neat, from a tactical standpoint.
-Too many iterative attacks, contributing (along with SR, miss chance, crit confirmation, etc.) to too much die-rolling
-Players' turns taking too long to resolve due to multiple die-rolls often being required
This can be an issue. I kinda like the idea of allowing bigger single attacks in place of multiple attacks in a round, at least as an option, if not as the standard.
-CoDzilla (though only if deliberately and expertly exploited)
Abusing Nightsticks, Persistant Spell, Divine Metamagic and / or three different buffing spells that probably shouldn't stack, and yeah, you can *make* a mountain out of a molehill. I prefer not having to violate the spirit of six different items/spells/feats to make a build, but hey, it's certainly a neat bit of unintended synergy, and I commend the CharOp guys for finding this stuff so that we can prepare the appropriate response if any of our players stumble upon it.
That response being, 'Hell no!,' accompanied by a barrage of dice.
-Infinite summoning (A summons B summons C summons...)
Calling spells should follow the same guidelines as Summoning spells. No more Candle of Invocation / free Wish infinity-loop.
In a perfect game-world, there wouldn't be any monsters with powers not balanced for the PCs to have at those summoning levels anyway, since PCs in a magical world can not only summon / call such creatures, but they may be able to charm / dominate / possess them, control them as familiars or cohorts or companions or just flat out *turn into them.*
But, this being an imperfect world, they seem to have decided to continue creating monsters with abilities that nobody in their right mind would allow a PC to have, and then nerfed Summoning spells and abilities, Enchantment spells, the Leadership Feat, Wild Shape, Polymorph spells, 'powerful races,' etc.
While they trim branches furiously, the root of the problem is still thriving... Where will it poke up next?
-Fighters not keeping up as the party level increases
Agreed. I'm not convinced that this has been fixed in PRPG or 4E, for that matter.
-Scry-Buff-Teleport-Fly combo repeated ad nauseum, and campaign-breaking spells/magic in general (for some this includes resurrection et al)
Never seen this, but I imagine it must take some effort to decide what levels of magic you want available in your game and plan accordingly...
-Identify
Which problem? That it costs more than some items are worth? That it takes so freaking long? That it exists at all and people don't do the 'put the ring on and then stick my hand in a campfire, jump up and down, put my head underwater...' dance to figure out what an item does?
-XP for crafting
Definitely agree there. I hate XP for crafting. Not so much that I'd go the 4E route and *totally get rid of it,* though...
-buffing etc., especially remembering which buffs/effects/modifiers are affecting whom and for how long
Less a problem with buffs, IMO, than a problem with buff *durations.* If every 'buffing spell' lasted 'one combat' or something, I'd be happier with them myself.
-useless skills (use rope, craft [baskets], etc. YMMV)
One man's trash is another man's treasure. *I* have no use for Use Rope, and would fold it into other skills, like Climb or whatever, *but if other people want it, leave it in!*
-familiars and animal companions often crappy but time-consuming if used in combat
Ranger Companions are lame beyond lame. Most Familiars are squishy bags of XP debt for the Wizard. Blowing a precious Feat makes an 'Improved' or 'Draconic' Familiar just useful enough to *guarantee* that you'll get it killed doing something you never would have expected Poopsie the Toad to do...
So yeah, kinda agree with this. Druid Companions, on the other hand, regularly out-perform Fighters. Sad, sad Fighters.
-save or die
Opinions vary. I like turning the *real* save or dies (Slay Living, Finger of Death) into 'save or dying.' Drop to -1 and die within a few rounds, if not saved by a buddy.
-suckitude of multi-class spellcasters
Instead of a dozen PrCs or some special feats to make them less sucktacular, I wonder if spell DCs should be based more on character level and less on spell level. If a 5th level Cleric / 5th level Wizard counted as a 10th level 'caster' for calculating spell DCs, he might be a little less hapless compared to a 10th level Wizard.
-HP can vary too much due to fact that they are rolled (YMMV)
Rolled hp has been an option for us since 1st edition. Take half, round up *or* roll, as you wish.
-Spell prep takes too long; spell-list resource management too cumbersome
Which is why Pelor made the Sorcerer and the Warlock. Those who want plug-n-play can have plug-n-play. Those who *like* resource management, and the tactical and strategic nature of acquiring, preparing and managing spells throughout their career should *also* still be allowed to play D&D and not be shoved unceremoniously out the door.
Although I'll concede that spontaneous divine casters are way, way overdue, and not that Favored Soul garba-hey, *real* spontaneous Clerics and Druids!
For that matter, *non* spontaneous Bards, with little sheafs of spell pages that they study, would also be neat. Prepared or Spontaneous should be an option that *any* spellcaster makes at 1st level.
-Necessity and ubiquity of munchkin magic items (Belt of Strength +3 etc.); inclusion of lots of magic items in the CR math
Items in CR, I don't mind. Necessity of stat-boosters I do mind (although I sure don't think of a Belt of Strength as munchkin).
The whole 'necessity' thing? Stems, IMO, from classes and feats that require 19's in stats. Prerequisite inflation, leads to stat inflation, which leads to gear inflation, which leads to anger... No wait. *Fear* leads to anger...
-DR as a primary focus of most combats past a certain level (golf-bag syndrome)
Yeah, thanks to 3.5 for giving us that problem by 'fixing' DR.
I stuck with 3.0 DR. The Fighter needs a +X sword, not a collection of swords; magic, silver, cold iron, good, chaotic, adamantine, lawful, evil, blessed, jade, crystal, etc...
People having trouble remembering 1-2-1
A minor annoyance to the DM (me), but I'm watching the movement in any case for AoO, so I'll correct if there's a mistake. 1-1-1 is friendlier, but in the end I'd prefer hexes.
--Statting up NPCs, including skill points too fiddly for DMs statting up monsters/NPS (but not PCs--most players seem to like the customization)
But I *like* fiddling with my NPCs! No wait, that sounded odd... :)
--Grappling
Pathfinder fixes this.
--Turning
I have used Unearthed Arcana variant (static turn DC vs. check), but Pathfinder remake of the ability is way better.
--Calculating XP from CR
Never been a problem and I use the FR variant (individual XP).
--AoOs too confusing/too many instances to remember
I agree that there's perhaps too many different actions that provoke AoO. The list needs to be trimmed down a bit.
--Too many iterative attacks, contributing (along with SR, miss chance, crit confirmation, etc.) to too much die-rolling
Concealment miss chance is a bit annoying, but you can pry iterative attacks from my cold dead fingers! :)
--Players' turns taking too long to resolve due to multiple die-rolls often being required
Indecisiveness makes turns long. Not knowing the math makes turns longer. Teach your players to calculate the effects of buffs and feats while others are taking their turn. Easier than ThAC0! (Which was simplicity in itself, btw. I'll never understand why some people had difficulties with it.)
--CoDzilla (though only if deliberately and expertly exploited)
This I agree with. The problem with divine casters is that they know all spells for their class automatically, even from splatbooks the DM decides to add to the campaign later. The amount of available combos is staggering. Divine casters really need "spells known" tables.
--Infinite summoning (A summons B summons C summons...)
This needs to be addressed although it's rarely a problem with reasonable players. Calling needs to be difficult and time-consuming. Gate needs to be split into two: the portal spell to other planes and the uber conjuration ritual.
--Fighters not keeping up as the party level increases
My single high level melee player plays a fighter/barbarian/battlerager and he's a melee monster punishing anything that stays close to get a full attack. However, pure fighters need help. More and better feats is my answer. Especially feat chains that end up in good and useful feats and not "Great" Cleaves.
--Scry-Buff-Teleport-Fly combo repeated ad nauseum, and campaign-breaking spells/magic in general (for some this includes resurrection et al)
Scrying is too easy and reliable. Overall, there's a lot of spells that still need work although Pathfinder addresses many issues in A3. I remember Monte Cook saying something along the lines that spells 3.0 PHB were a bit of rush job and it still shows.
--Identify
Identify should be Knowledge Arcana check.
--XP for crafting
Pathfinder fixes it well although I never had issues with this. I thought it to be a neat way to make PCs think twice about the really expensive items and spells even if they had the gold to make them.
--buffing etc., especially remembering which buffs/effects/modifiers are affecting whom and for how long
Some are problematic, some are not. It's more of an issue with individual spells (like heroes feast), unnamed bonuses and spell durations which need to be reconsidered. This also relates to divine casters knowing ALL spells and combos.
--useless skills (use rope, craft [baskets], etc. YMMV)
Pathfinder will fix this.
--familiars and animal companions often crappy but time-consuming if used in combat
Pathfinder fixes.
--save or die
Pathfinder... :D
--suckitude of multi-class spellcasters
I never considered this to be a huge problem. You trade big spells into a plethora of small spells. It's a choice and nowadays you can alleviate CL problems with feats like Practiced Spellcaster and multiple Prestige Classes.
--HP can vary too much due to fact that they are rolled (YMMV)
Give everybody max die result, if it's a problem. No variation (yay!) and longer combats too.
--Spell prep takes too long; spell-list resource management too cumbersome
Again those all-knowing divine casters and their exponential options!
--Necessity and ubiquity of munchkin magic items (Belt of Strength +3 etc.);
Munchkin = rule breaking and true here too. There is a reason why all stat increasing items and spells are in even numbers*. However, this should be spelled out in DMG.
* +1 CON item would make only 50% of people healthier in game, which is strange. What about wishes and level increases you say!? Special cases and 5 + 5 = 10 ;)
inclusion of lots of magic items in the CR math
Not a problem when the DM knows this. CR is a guideline, not a numeric promise of a balanced and exciting fight. It's a DM tool that he should learn to use.
--DR as a primary focus of most combats past a certain level (golf-bag syndrome)
If you lack a correct weapon, be creative and use that Power Attack. 3.5 DR numbers are low and easy to plow through.
My 2 cents...
|
|
Here is a list of what many folks on enworld seem to think are issues with 3.5. From this Thread
here is the list as it stands now
Wizards having nothing to do when they've cast all their spells appropriate to the situation
It's not really the system's problem if the player thinks the wizard has nothing particularly "wizardly" to do once he's shot his wad. Fire the darn crossbow and like it! They don't have to be farting out magic constantly.
--Too many iterative attacks, contributing (along with SR, miss chance, crit confirmation, etc.) to too much die-rollingI will agree with this a little bit, not because I think there's too much dice rolling or that the fighter-types are getting too many attacks. Rather, I think the non-fighter classes are getting too many attacks. It used to be the prerogative of the fighter types to get multiple attacks, nobody else got squat. I think it would be fine to step things back a bit for non-fighters, if there was a really elegant way to do it. Darn that BAB, being so simple to use and conceptually tight!
--Players' turns taking too long to resolve due to multiple die-rolls often being required
I don't think 4e looks like it's reducing this very much, quite frankly.
--buffing etc., especially remembering which buffs/effects/modifiers are affecting whom and for how longThere are, I believe, simply too many blasted buff spells, which I see as the primary cause of the 15 minute day. Everyone blows their spells like a drunk barbarian in a whorehouse spends his money buffing up for every fight. Cut the number of buffs and, lo and behold, the casters have more spells they can cast in other situations.
meh. 20 levels is plenty of time...
--HP can vary too much due to fact that they are rolled (YMMV)
Gotta agree with everything here. If the casters are power gamers who want to throw everything they have in the first fight then they deserve to sit on the sideline the rest of the day... part of being a caster is POWER and allocation. Buffs are no big deal either. I play the cleric. A buff or two per fight at most. Most held in reserve for the BBEG which we never seem to know is going to appear.
Dice rolling is what RPGs are about. Don't like dice rolling? Play WOW. I also play a 23rd lvl fighter and my dice rolling is faster than those darn casters who take WAAAAAAY too long for spells-the first hour of the session is just for picking spells- and each round they pick the best spell they have and we have so many saves and resistances to resolve and condition modifiers to add. I just roll a few d20s and some damage dice and I am done- one toss all done- what is so difficult about that.
So, why punish the rest of us who "know" how to play just because a few power gamers mess things up for others.
wow could this post be any longer????????? sorry about that
A very interesting list.
Of course, none of those have ever affected me our my group in any meaningful way (and a bunch of those are good things, not bad), so I can only shrug confusedly.
I'm glad I don't know or have anything to do with people who find those troublesome in their games.
Problems with damage reduction in 3.5 system? Align weapon is a good spell to waste a low level spell slot on and how much effort exactly does it take to make a spell that temporarily changes weapon's material (if there isn't any, I'm too lazy to look at the moment)?
So much for the golf bag syndrome for me...
And I can always make an entchantment for weapons that would allow a change of material... once mabe three times a day.
|
|
Necessity and ubiquity of munchkin magic items (Belt of Strength +3 etc.); inclusion of lots of magic items in the CR math
Out of everything on the list, this is the only one that really bothered me. I hate it that attribute-boosting items are more or less required, and that cloaks of resistance and rings of protection are default assumptions for all PCs and NPCs. I'd rather remove all "magic shoppes," cut the number of magic items given out in adventures by 9/10, and include (or upgrade) the inherent leveling bonuses for stats, AC, saves. Alas, such a move would break the back-compatibility that PFRPG strives for, so it is not to be.
Its scary Kirth, how much your ideals and mine are congruent on most threads I bother reading.
Whether it's newly formatted combat movement, fighter talents, as well as my feelings for magic items exactly as you expressed them above (specifically in regards to the assumed Rings of Prot, Necklace Nat Armor, and Cloaks of Resist)
When I am finished, I'm going to have to share with you my copy of the PHB variant that I've been designing for my 3.5 campaigns - which ALSO includes a removal of these items, along with most of the stat enhancement items - and instead, replacing the need for those in other ways: specifically character class contributions to a party. My paladin variant that you liked, is an example for what to look forward to. Many of his abilities were for the benefit of the party.
Robert
When I am finished, I'm going to have to share with you my copy of the PHB variant that I've been designing for my 3.5 campaigns
I'd appreciate that very much. If I ever get the details hammered out, I'm working on a "classless" (skill-based advancement) 3.5/PF, in which feat and class feature chains are replaced by skills (inctead of taking Mounted Combat, Ride-By Attack, and Spirited Charge, for example, you'd simply add more ranks to your Mounted Combat skill, which has Ride and HTH Combat skills at equal ranks as prerequisites). Hopefully in a year or so, I'll be ready for an Alpha playtest of my own...
Is that actually true? Are the NPC's in the Pathfinder modules generally written that way? Because the ones in Living Arcanis certainly are not.
Out of everything on the list, this is the only one that really bothered me. I hate it that attribute-boosting items are more or less required, and that cloaks of resistance and rings of protection are default assumptions for all PCs and NPCs.
They're not on all NPCs by a longshot in the Pathfinder modules. Are they fairly common? Yes. But there are good reasons for them.
For one thing, their effects are static and easy to put in the stat block without the DM having to do anything or even really remember they are there before the PCs loot the body. As a DM who uses a lot of pregen modules, this makes my life easier.
For another thing, they're pretty cheap, particularly at the most common +1 level, so it's not like they're breaking the game or anything by concentrating too much of the NPC's expected treasure into a single item.
|
|
I'm working on a "classless" (skill-based advancement) 3.5/PF, in which feat and class feature chains are replaced by skills (inctead of taking Mounted Combat, Ride-By Attack, and Spirited Charge, for example, you'd simply add more ranks to your Mounted Combat skill, which has Ride and HTH Combat skills at equal ranks as prerequisites).
That sounds pretty darn amazing. Quite a few Feats, IMO, are things that anyone with X ranks in a skill should probably be able to do anyway...
I haven't gone nearly that far, conceptually, but I have seriously considered taking just about every PrC class feature and turning it into a Feat or Feat Chain (or Alternate Class Feature) that the Core classes can take. But it occured to me that I was just turning D&D into True20 with it's open and modular Warrior, Expert and Adept 'classes.'
Is that actually true? Are the NPC's in the Pathfinder modules generally written that way? Because the ones in Living Arcanis certainly are not.
For the most part, yes. It was even more true in most of the Dungeon adventures, IIRC. (If I'd intended to comment on Arcanis NPCs I'd probably do so on the Arcanis boards, if there are any. However, as it is I'm totally unfamiliar with Arcanis -- maybe you can clue me in on a great opportunity I'm missing?)
I haven't gone nearly that far, conceptually, but I have seriously considered taking just about every PrC class feature and turning it into a Feat or Feat Chain (or Alternate Class Feature) that the Core classes can take. But it occured to me that I was just turning D&D into True20 with it's open and modular Warrior, Expert and Adept 'classes.'
Yeah, I got to looking at comments about that sort of thing (some of them yours, IIRC), and at the full list of class-features-as-feats that Erian_7 put together, and it occurred to me how much more I liked the skill-based level progression in Victory Games "James Bond" rules... If I ever finish the rules, I'll post a thread offering a PDF to anyone here interested in playtesting. I'll also hasten to add that my "hybrid" system is intended to complement Pathfinder, not compete with it.
|
|
Is that actually true? Are the NPC's in the Pathfinder modules generally written that way? Because the ones in Living Arcanis certainly are not.Necessity and ubiquity of munchkin magic items (Belt of Strength +3 etc.); inclusion of lots of magic items in the CR math
Out of everything on the list, this is the only one that really bothered me. I hate it that attribute-boosting items are more or less required, and that cloaks of resistance and rings of protection are default assumptions for all PCs and NPCs.
Its kind of an unwritten rule - sort of an 'arms race' if you will. Everything scales. Those items specifically. If one side gets more powerful then the other side needs to! Easiest way - buy specific D20 modified options of the character. Nat Armor amulet, Resistance saving throw cloaks, and deflections AC rings.
Robert
|
|
-save or die
Opinions vary. I like turning the *real* save or dies (Slay Living, Finger of Death) into 'save or dying.' Drop to -1 and die within a few rounds, if not saved by a buddy.
THAT I can live with. No problem with that one.
For spell durations I am thinking of stealing from 4E (yeah I know!) and spell durations become daily, or encounter.
|
|
-save or die
Opinions vary. I like turning the *real* save or dies (Slay Living, Finger of Death) into 'save or dying.' Drop to -1 and die within a few rounds, if not saved by a buddy.
THAT I can live with. No problem with that one.
For spell durations I am thinking of stealing from 4E (yeah I know!) and spell durations become daily, or encounter.
The only problem with doing that is if you dont adopt the "per encounter" mentality of the powers.
otherwise your vancian spell-based wizards/clerics that are used to going through two possible encounters - maybe even three with the casting of one spell, can now only allow that spell to end at the end of the 5 round (30 second) combat - not the 5 minutes it would have lasted.
I like your idea - just pointing out a potential pitfall with the change - which could be avoided with more changes of course.
Robert
|
|
-save or die
Opinions vary. I like turning the *real* save or dies (Slay Living, Finger of Death) into 'save or dying.' Drop to -1 and die within a few rounds, if not saved by a buddy.
THAT I can live with. No problem with that one.
For spell durations I am thinking of stealing from 4E (yeah I know!) and spell durations become daily, or encounter.
The only problem with doing that is if you dont adopt the "per encounter" mentality of the powers.
otherwise your vancian spell-based wizards/clerics that are used to going through two possible encounters - maybe even three with the casting of one spell, can now only allow that spell to end at the end of the 5 round (30 second) combat - not the 5 minutes it would have lasted.
I like your idea - just pointing out a potential pitfall with the change - which could be avoided with more changes of course.
Robert
I sort of thought of that problem and considered a "dungeon level" duration also but figured we'd play and see what we like. The dungeon level idea could be almost too much depending upon the dungeon. Imagine playing in The World's Largest Dungeon with that rule!
Maybe encounter minimum... I don't like the buff spells that went from hours to minutes per level because now you actually have to track your time. An easy way to deal with them would be nice.
And this is not something I can imagine for PfRPG, as it departs too much from backward copmatible. It's a definite House Rule solution.
|
|
Problems with slow combats?
Encourage players to move things along with real-time spell durations
So, if a spell lasts 1 minute, hurry up and finish the combat, because the egg timer is counting!
Just kidding
BRILLIANT!
And of course if the DM wants the spell to end, he can just filibuster on his turn.... ;-)
Robert
|
|
"hybrid" system is intended to complement Pathfinder, not compete with it.
Thats exactly my mentality.
As you suggested, getting rid of those mundance magic items that just need to be scaled (ring of prot, Nat armor amulet, cloak of resist), my design focuses on party cohesion by the characters to fill in where these fall short.
Magic items will be more geared towards things that when activated provide a bonus as a swift action - so someone could have an amulet that activates as "Barkskin" as a swift action that round - but since you only get one swift action a round - it limits the amount of stagnant and/or constant type buffs.
Meanwhile the character options include things like: the fighter can provide combat knowledge against certain enemies providing bonues to AC and/or to attacks/damage by revealing that info to the party. Rogues can use their sneak attack to find weaknesses and afford that knowledge to the party. Wizards can use Know Arcana to know the strengths of certain abilities of creatures and provid bonuses to saves, or use that knowledge to identify an enemy spellcaster and identify his "teachings" and provide bonuses to saves, Clerics the same against other divine casters using know Religion. Paladins (as you saw in my write-up) provide aura to help partys, bards use their songs to better effectiveness etc.
Bottom line - i want to remove the magic item dependancy and replace it with character contributions to the group. The good news - I'm getting there. I have alot of work down on my project already. The paladin is rewritten, the combat movment was redone, the fighter talents are well on their way (although I'm having some trouble with writers block on the archery based talents...) and Kirth, another of your pet-peeves is the magical weapons and the PLUS not being worth the cost compare to special abilites. I think you'll like my reword on that, too.
Robert
Bottom line - i want to remove the magic item dependancy and replace it with character contributions to the group.
I'm surprisingly indifferent to group mechanics, but that's because some of the best campaigns I've ever played in or run have had a total of two PCs (sort of simulating the Lethal Weapon type "buddy" feel). Still, your ideas are ususally (actually, almost always) good; I look forward to seeing the things you've come up with.
another of your pet-peeves is the magical weapons and the PLUS not being worth the cost compare to special abilites.
That's certainly no secret! So far we've stuck with a hybrid DR-bypass deal, but the more I think about it, the more I'm starting to prefer a cumulative damage bonus (+1: +1 dmg, +2: +3 dmg, +3: +6 dmg, +4: +10 dmg, and +5 weapons give a +15 bonus on damage). This would supercede the DR-bypass and hardness-bypass ideas nicely.