|
Well, I admit I don't have every situation that provokes an AoO memorized, but that is what my DM screen is for!
For me it is probably the nerfed spell durations. I hate those, but it is easier to keep using the 4 3.5 PHBs my group has than the 1 3.0 PHB.
But if you meant "confusing", I would say Concentration checks. I never know when to call for those things outside of combat.
As the post title says. For me, that's OoAs. Grapple's is (clumsy) child's play to arbitrate in comparison.
A style thing maybe? I mean I know of a lot of groups that have complained about them and Shamus in his Lord of the Rings RPG parody makes a joke about them. However we really never had any trouble with them at my table. I mean the last big mistake I recall making with them was being called to account when a bad guy sheathed a weapon (I assumed that taking a move to sheath a weapon did not provoke AoO, I was wrong).
It seems to me that AoO are extraordinarily mechanical. You take actions one at a time in a specific order - every action might or might not provoke an attack according to a table. Look on table to see if action provokes an AoO. The answer is either yes or no.
I get the impression that most people that have problems with AoO are looking at the round in a more holistic manner instead of a sequential mechanical manner in which every action be accounted for and completed before the next action is begun.
I absolutely love 3.5, but the layout of the PHB and the new official rules being added in the splatbooks really messed up my casual gaming sense of the rules.
Thank Torm for the Rules Compendium!
Grapple, of course, and even more Bull rush/Overrun, since these come into play so seldom.
Turning checks are also a bit needlessly complicated.
I'll second (third?) grappling. It's hard to figure out and very overpowered for whichever side outnumbers the other and big creatures.
Not sure if this counts as a "rule" or not, but I seriously have a problem with the vampire's LA jumping from a +4 creature to a +8 creature. Sure they have powerful abilities, but they have SIGNIFICANT weaknesses as well. The loss of EIGHT LEVELS of hit die and caster levels pretty much cripples the vampires eligibility as a player character, at least in my opinion.
|
Our group went back to 2ed because we hated the multi-classing mechanic. We've be trying (unsuccesfully) to come up with a hybrid system ever since.I never played 2E. How'd the multi-class system work?
prior to 3.0, each class had their own experience track...ie how many points you needed to rise a level. When you multiclassed, you gained everything from both classes....except you halved (or divided into 3rds) your hit points rolled....and had to divide your experience gained among the classes you multi classed into.
so it wouldnt be unusual to see something like an Elven 5th Fighter/6th Thief/4th Wizard
There were only certain racial and class combinations...
for instance only a Half Elf could be a Wizard/Cleric
and only a Half Orc could be a Cleric/Thief
Humans couldnt multi-class, but they could dual class...
to get a second class you had to first have at least a 17 in the pre-req...then start progressing in the new class...putting experience into each level and not using any abilities or spells from the previous class until you matched its level...and you wouldnt gain another hit dice until you exceeded it.
It was interesting and made it costly to change...but fun...also made a multi class not as powerful as a straight class but more versatile.
Spellcaster requirements for Craft (alchemy). :P
I can't think of any others that tweak my noodle, though I'm finding that I still have a lot of 3.0isms stuck in my brain.
|
|
I agree with the Concentration checks, Turning checks, and Alchemy skill. All are needlessly complicated or just silly.
Turning checks get complicated fast, plus all you normally do is simply make the undead run away(unless you roll so high you outright destroy it).
Alchemy only being available to spellcasters doesn't make sense, unless you're talking about the alchemical mixtures which have actual magical effects.
Concentration checks are both needless and silly. If my character is walking across the top of a narrow wall, and is suddenly hit by a thrown rock, I have to roll a check based on the Concentration skill instead of rolling a new Balance check? I have no problem with this being refered to as a Concentration check, as long as it is still based on the actual skill that's being used.
|
prior to 3.0, each class had their own experience track...ie how many points you needed to rise a level. When you multiclassed, you gained everything from both classes....except you halved (or divided into 3rds) your hit points rolled....and had to divide your experience gained among the classes you multi classed into.
<snikt>
Oh! I should have mentioned I did play 1E. So 2E carried that over? Or were there changes? I remember reading somewhere about "kits" in 2E.
|
|
Oh! I should have mentioned I did play 1E. So 2E carried that over? Or were there changes? I remember reading somewhere about "kits" in 2E.
prior to 3.0, each class had their own experience track...ie how many points you needed to rise a level. When you multiclassed, you gained everything from both classes....except you halved (or divided into 3rds) your hit points rolled....and had to divide your experience gained among the classes you multi classed into.
<snikt>
Kits, simply put, were 2E's version of Prestige Classes, but more like seperate paths a member of a particular class could specialize in. For example, Bards could could become Swashbucklers, if I remember correctly.
Not sure if this counts as a "rule" or not, but I seriously have a problem with the vampire's LA jumping from a +4 creature to a +8 creature. Sure they have powerful abilities, but they have SIGNIFICANT weaknesses as well. The loss of EIGHT LEVELS of hit die and caster levels pretty much cripples the vampires eligibility as a player character, at least in my opinion.
I think thats the idea.
Concentration checks are both needless and silly. If my character is walking across the top of a narrow wall, and is suddenly hit by a thrown rock, I have to roll a check based on the Concentration skill instead of rolling a new Balance check?
PHB, page 67: "If you take damage while balancing, you must make another Balance check against the same DC to remain standing."
Our group went back to 2ed because we hated the multi-classing mechanic. We've be trying (unsuccesfully) to come up with a hybrid system ever since.I never played 2E. How'd the multi-class system work?
Not an exact match but it'll give you the correct feel I hope.
Multi-classing was a lot like having a Gestalt character except that you had to pay the full XP for both classes. So you get the best of both classes but your falling behind in levels compared to the straight classes - but, because you need more XP at higher levels your not falling behind that fast. You could keep adding classes as well though there were probably restrictions that I have forgotten, I occasionally saw a character that was essentially a gestalt of three different classes.
If you had two classes you'd be about two levels back when the PCs made 5th and you'd fall around 3 levels back by the time they made 10th as I recall.
made a multi class not as powerful as a straight class but more versatile.The problem with the 1st/2nd Edition XP tables and "doubling" progressing was that there was a bias towards multi-class characters.
Basically, by reducing your first class by one level you could pick up a second class.
So if it costs you XX experience points to become a Level YY Fighter, for XX/2 you could be a Level YY-1 Fighter and then spend your other XX/2 XP to become a Level YY-1 Anything Else.
Basically, you almost never saw straight-classed non-humans. Also, most people threw out the racial limitations and level limits, meaning there was now no restrictions.
Made for a lot of self-healing Fighter/Clerics or casting-while-hiding Wizard/Rogues.
I like the new mechanics ... I like them a lot.
FWIW,
Rez
I did not find it as powerful as you seem to have. Note that a Mystic Thuerge or Eldritch Knight are both basically multi-class characters very similar to some of the 2nd edition material. In some ways they are better since your not obvously short on hps compared to your straight class compatriots. You can still only swing your sword or cast a healing spell in the round even if you are a cleric/fighter. You can't do both.
Kits, simply put, were 2E's version of Prestige Classes, but more like seperate paths a member of a particular class could specialize in. For example, Bards could could become Swashbucklers, if I remember correctly.Oh! I should have mentioned I did play 1E. So 2E carried that over? Or were there changes? I remember reading somewhere about "kits" in 2E.
prior to 3.0, each class had their own experience track...ie how many points you needed to rise a level. When you multiclassed, you gained everything from both classes....except you halved (or divided into 3rds) your hit points rolled....and had to divide your experience gained among the classes you multi classed into.
<snikt>
Similar but I found them far more useful. A kit usually started you with something at first level. The thing is it was dead easy to make homebrew specific Kits. Northern Clan warriors are a kit that players from that area get - and it gives X,Y and Z. You could design all sorts of interesting kits for your world and this motivated players to choose Kits associated with different parts of the campaign world and gave one a place to start with the role playing.
|
|
Concentration checks are both needless and silly. If my character is walking across the top of a narrow wall, and is suddenly hit by a thrown rock, I have to roll a check based on the Concentration skill instead of rolling a new Balance check?PHB, page 67: "If you take damage while balancing, you must make another Balance check against the same DC to remain standing."
Okay, so Balance wasn't the best of examples, but...
You must make a Concentration check whenever you might potentially be distracted (by taking damage, by harsh weather, and so on) while engaged in some action that requires your full attention. Such actions include casting a spell, concentrating on an active spell, directing a spell, using a spell-like ability, or using a skill that would provoke an attack of opportunity.
So, replace "walking across a narrow wall" with "picking a lock".
|
|
Oh! I should have mentioned I did play 1E. So 2E carried that over? Or were there changes? I remember reading somewhere about "kits" in 2E.
prior to 3.0, each class had their own experience track...ie how many points you needed to rise a level. When you multiclassed, you gained everything from both classes....except you halved (or divided into 3rds) your hit points rolled....and had to divide your experience gained among the classes you multi classed into.
<snikt>
Some folks might equate Kits with 3rd Ed PRC's....Though they weren't really. At First level you had a choice to take a KIT...consider it a specialist path. You sacrificed a few things of the Core class to gain a few other things that better defined the character for you...
Did you ever play Baldurs Gate: Shadows of Amn? It has several Kits in it.
Consider Kits like Class Variants.
|
|
Up till now, I'd have said nothing, really. I'm not a big complainer and try to find the best. Having said that however :-) and playing Pathfinder RPG, I have found out that I cannot go back to 3.5 Turning Undead or any of the Combat Maneuvers without CMB. So I guess those are there for me.
-DM Jeff
Up till now, I'd have said nothing, really. I'm not a big complainer and try to find the best. Having said that however :-) and playing Pathfinder RPG, I have found out that I cannot go back to 3.5 Turning Undead or any of the Combat Maneuvers without CMB. So I guess those are there for me.
-DM Jeff
Ack, for give my ignorance but what is the CMB? Complete...something?
Ack, for give my ignorance but what is the CMB? Complete...something?
Combat Maneuver Bonus. It's a mechanism to handle various things like grappling, tripping, etc - it's detailed in the Pathfinder RPG Alpha 3 rules.
None. I've homebrewed them all away. :-)
Not sure if this counts as a "rule" or not, but I seriously have a problem with the vampire's LA jumping from a +4 creature to a +8 creature. Sure they have powerful abilities, but they have SIGNIFICANT weaknesses as well. The loss of EIGHT LEVELS of hit die and caster levels pretty much cripples the vampires eligibility as a player character, at least in my opinion.I think thats the idea.
I do not think it was the idea to weaken the vampire so that players could not use them as effectively. It weakens the creature not just as a player character, but all around. A first level vampire sorcerer (NPC or PC, doesn't matter at all) has an ECL of 9, but ONE D12 hit points.
That is ridiculous. Any ninth level human, elf, dwarf, etc. player character of ANY class worth his salt would have very little to fear.I say all this because I speak from experience. I played as a vampire in a party with a lich, minotaur, alu-fiend and ogre. When I was a +4 creature my abilities and performance were comparable to the rest of the party. When it jumped to +8, the difference was pathetic. I was being outshined in EVERY aspect of combat with disturbing regularity, and my character became good for nothing more than being reduced to gaseous form once per session because of my lack of HP.
For that reason, vampires are houseruled as +4 creatures at my table on the rare occasion when we encounter one (we've met maybe two in eight years of D&D).
So, replace "walking across a narrow wall" with "picking a lock".
Well, this may be one of those "YMMV" things, but Concentration seems to me like the appropriate skill to be used in that situation. The lock isn't any harder to pick because you got hit with a rock; it's just harder for you to keep your attention focused on the job of picking it.
In contrast, taking damage while balancing would actually throw your balance off, so having to make another Balance check seems reasonable.
|
|
Some quibbles (mostly beastie-related);
1) Vermin being mindless. Bugs are trainable and have (tiny little mechanistic) brains. Making them mindless only means that everything that needs to affect Vermin, for whatever reason, such as Drow training riding spiders or Spider Domain clerics rebuking them or whatEVER, needs to have an exception for this stupid 'rule.' Oh, your Child of Ash Druid wants to be able to use a buff on his Vermin Companion? Oops, it's a morale bonus, tough patooties Druid-boy. The Bard in the party sings a motivating song? The bugs have all gone deaf, apparently.
2) Templates, LA and racial HD. What a disaster. This is a fantasy game where magic can turn someone into a monster, summon a monster to serve the party, charm a monster and make it work for the party, a cleric can command undead, elementals, plants, scalykind, etc. Even the Leadership feat can result in a beastie becoming a player Cohort, not to mention Animal Companions and Familiars and the plain old, 'Can I play a Bugbear' corner-case. Templates, LA and racial HD just utterly bork up the game when any of these situations happen (and if these situations never occur, you might as well be playing Iron Heroes, because you sure aren't using magic in your setting), and, in a game with so many magical and mundane ways in which a player might get ahold of (or become) a monster, the numbers need to be transparent and interchangeable. This isn't an MMO, where monsters need to have four to ten times the hit points of a player character of equal level 'just because!'
3) Evil mindless undead. Make 'em evil, life-hating and Int 2 or make 'em neutral and mindless. Pick only one, 'cause rocks and twigs can't pick an ethical or moral philosophy. Excuse me while I go argue existentialism with this candlestick...
4) Damage Reduction / X. I hate the notion that a Fighter needs to carry adamantine, silver, cold iron, bludgeoning, piercing, slashing, good, evil, lawful, chaotic, magical, jade and / or crystal weapons to overcome various DRs.
5) Regeneration. The mechanic of converting lethal to nonlethal damage in 3.0 never really grabbed me. I think I preferred the 1st and 2nd edition variant that is now Fast Healing better.
6) Lame monsters. I don't care how 'classic' it is, the Beholder is sillier than the darn Flumph. When the gun-toting space hippopotamus-people in military garb describe your race as 'funny-looking' and 'hard to take seriously,' you know you have a PR problem...
7) Sorcerers get the hose. Spontaneous casting has it's own built-in limitations, and is not in-and-of-itself superior to Prepared casting. The Sorcerer should gain access to spells at the same levels as Wizards *and* should get Bonus Feats (which it can blow on bloodline stuff or metamagics or whatever). But that would just highlight that the Sorcerer doesn't even deserve to be it's own class. It's not a class, it's a *casting style* that any Wizard, Bard, Cleric or Druid should be able to choose in place of Prepared casting at 1st level. More spells per day, flexibility in choosing them on the spot, *much* smaller spell list. Bang. One core class easily merged, and other spellcasting classes suddenly gaining exciting new options (Prepared Bards! Spontaneous Druids!).
Wow, Set. Most other things I recall you posting, I've agreed with you. I always thought you were My Kind Of Guy (TM).
But I disagree (in some cases, pretty strongly) with every single thing you just said, except #3.
|
|
So, replace "walking across a narrow wall" with "picking a lock".Well, this may be one of those "YMMV" things, but Concentration seems to me like the appropriate skill to be used in that situation. The lock isn't any harder to pick because you got hit with a rock; it's just harder for you to keep your attention focused on the job of picking it.
In contrast, taking damage while balancing would actually throw your balance off, so having to make another Balance check seems reasonable.
Okay, let's take the damage aspect out of the picture. My character is trying to pick a lock in a howlingly windy hailstorm with a barbarian behind him continuously poking him in the back shouting "Hurry up!" over and over.
Some quibbles (mostly beastie-related);
6) Lame monsters. I don't care how 'classic' it is, the Beholder is sillier than the darn Flumph. When the gun-toting space hippopotamus-people in military garb describe your race as 'funny-looking' and 'hard to take seriously,' you know you have a PR problem...
Awesome Spelljammer reference, you win the thread! :P
Turning checks get complicated fast, plus all you normally do is simply make the undead run away(unless you roll so high you outright destroy it).
The worst thing about Turning Checks is they DON'T affect whether or not you bamf the undead (as far as I'm aware!) They just affect how many/how strong the undead you turn can be, but even if you only get one beastie, if he is 1/2 your level, poof he vanishes. Bad mechanic! Make more sense!
Grappling is always a headache, and I feel sorry for my Thursday night DM who has to deal with a grapple oriented Monk/Wizard.
Some other things are borked too, but those too are some of my biggest pet peaves with the system.