Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

/vt/ is now archived.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 291 KB, 801x605, 1369092801245.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
28758993 No.28758993 [DELETED]  [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

How to fix DnD 3.5

Ban the munchkin powergamer from playing fighters.

90% of my adventures go like this:
Chill dude choses fighter or cleric and chills, roleplaying and having fun
RP-fag choses rogue or something
Munchkin choses wizard
Chill dude nr 2 choses cleric or fighter

Nobody except munchkin can be assed to play wizard, but you need wizard to survive difficult adventures. Chill dudes and roleplayer dude do not give two shits about balance and who is "winning" in the fights


All my problems, EVER, come from the following: Munchkin wants to play fighter or rogue, complains that they suck.

Am I the only one?

>> No.28759043

> All my problems, EVER, come from the following: Munchkin
fify

>> No.28759098

>>28759043
But I am correct, am I not?
Whopedy-do, you managed to break a system meant for other things in two with your retarded build ignoring common sense & fluff.
Meanwhile the regular, normal folk who do not read the whole 3.5 material each day, play and have fun with any fucking class in the book.

From my experience, munchkins suck at surviving too. They always take the stupid chances and die, while Chill dude nr.1 can play a fucking expert to lvl 8 without even getting to negatives.

Example:
>Chill dude nr.1 plays rogue, choses to go for spring attack, never buys two weapon fighting
>Munchkin throws a fit over the "non-optimal" build
>Chill dude plays awsome rogue that not only survives but sneak attacks every fucking round because spring attack takes him into safety
>now spring-attack rogues are the standard in our groups
>Munchkin comes 2 months later with a spring attack rogue and pretends he made up the strategy

>> No.28759190

>>28758993
>All my problems, EVER, come from the following: someone play fighter
FIFY

>> No.28759202

>>28758993
>All my problems, EVER, come from the following: We played D&D

Accuracy improved

>> No.28759213

>>28758993
That's like putting a bandaid on the gunshot wound that is D&D.

>> No.28759214

>>28759190
This.
In my games there is ONLY two house rules.
one, no fighters allowed, they're an NPC class, it's high magic so why you, the hero is playing a mentally handicapped retard that cannot into magic or at very least shiving people and having all the skills?
Two, nat 20 is ALWAYS success and nat 1 is, also ALWAYS a fail.

>> No.28759240

>>28758993
The way you fix D&D 3.5 is rigidly enforcing material component rules and forcing spellcasters to make some kind of skill or ability check to actually cast spells, in the same way as any skill or combat ability.

>> No.28759242

>>28758993
Why not play anima instead?
Your munchkin will have a boner over all that's human.
Fluffy dudes will be happy since anima has fuckloads of fluffy traits/Advantages/etc... that have impact in the game, also most powers are up to you about how to fluff them.

Just ban creation magic and use the magic rules from the DM screen. Also ban psy if you aren't sure.

>> No.28759254

>>28759242
Because Anima is a hilariously broken system.

>> No.28759271

>>28759214
>one, no fighters allowed, they're an NPC class, it's high magic so why you, the hero is playing a mentally handicapped retard that cannot into magic or at very least shiving people and having all the skills?
Because not everyone wants to play someone from a sufficiently wealthy background that their family could afford a wizarding apprenticeship?

>> No.28759393

>>28758993
>>28759098
You just have a bad player. I've rarely run into optimal players who ruin games. Generally speaking they end up playing traditionally weak concepts at a power level that keeps them effective at the table.

>> No.28759479

>>28759271
Sorcerer, bard, paladin, cleric, oracle, you want me to continue asshat?
>>28759254
It's less broken than 3.5, and those two bans make up for it to be way better than 3.5 too.

>> No.28759485

>>28759393
That is indeed true at times, yet even if they "play weak concepts at power levels that keep them effective at the table", they never stop complaining. And if they are assholes, they try to sneak in OP shit.

Banning fighter is even worse, not everybody wants to spend half their time rummaging though rulebooks and spell lists.

Its much easyer to tell the 1 dude that wants his powerfantasy to shut up than force the whole other party to up their game and bring warblades and druids to the table

>> No.28759505

>>28759485
>not everybody wants to spend half their time rummaging though rulebooks and spell lists.
Barbarian, paladin most of the time, etc?
Also
>Using D&D for anything but high fantasy
If I wanted to play low or dark fantasy where warrior is king I would play warhammer fantasy RPG.
Or GURPS.

>> No.28759507

Also, DnD 3.5 played at the "ima play a fighter, and why not take some random ass feat cuz its fun" works really nice. Thematic monsters are thematic. Trolls & undead scare the players and whatnot.

DnD played when the munchkin convinced the others to play a full-powered tier 1-2 party turns into WoW, where DR is made up, and challenge ratings dont matter

>> No.28759530
File: 278 KB, 470x440, 1386114001107.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
28759530

>How to fix DnD 3.5

Don't play DnD

>> No.28759537

>>28759530
but its fun

>> No.28759544

>>28759479
>sorcerer, oracle
Not everyone gets the virtue of divine luck or an unusual magical bloodline.
>bard
Nor can afford to attend a bardic college where they teach bardic knowledge and spellcraft.
>paladin, cleric
Nor has the stalwart faith for the clergy.

Fighter, barbarian, rogue. Those are for normal people who don't come from a privileged background but have the grit, training, and talent to do great things anyway. They absolutely have a place even in high-magic settings for the same reason that in the real world not everyone can afford a college education or enlist in the military, yet get to lead interesting and exciting lives regardless.

The fighter was just executed terribly. That's its real problem. The game would benefit greatly by rolling rogues, fighters, and so forth into a single class that covers the broad scope of mundane people - badasses who can fight and have skills out the wazoo. That and making casters have to succeed in checks to cast spells - the same as mundanes succeeding at skill checks and attack rolls - would do wonders for balance and utility.

>> No.28759559
File: 44 KB, 451x392, 1342049273703.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
28759559

>3.5e isn't broken, the players are broken!

when will people give up trying to justify this shit system

>> No.28759575

>>28759544
>The fighter was just executed terribly. That's its real problem. The game would benefit greatly by rolling rogues, fighters, and so forth into a single class that covers the broad scope of mundane people - badasses who can fight and have skills out the wazoo. That and making casters have to succeed in checks to cast spells - the same as mundanes succeeding at skill checks and attack rolls - would do wonders for balance and utility.
So, I have to homebrew for hours just to play a worse anima: Beyond fantasy?
That's so cool anon!

>> No.28759588

>>28759043
how to fix DnD 3.5:
KILL STEVE JACKSON

>> No.28759610

>>28759559
>I didn't read the first post or any of the thread.

>> No.28759638
File: 103 KB, 768x576, Pinball_Wizard.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
28759638

The game system rewards optimization and has vastly superior advancement options presented to characters with equal cost as under-powered options. I don't think its the players fault for doing what the system seems to be built to do.

If you want a game focused on roleplay, pick a system that mechanically supports that type of game instead of blaming the players.

>> No.28759655

>>28759638
BUT A GAME SHOULDN'T FUCKING RECOMPESATE PLANNING AHEAD.
THAT'S NOT HOW GAMES WORK. AND IT'S WRONG DESIGN.
FUCK OFF IVORY TOWER FAGGOT

>> No.28759932
File: 798 KB, 600x505, 1376183004487.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
28759932

>>28759214
>Two, nat 20 is ALWAYS success and nat 1 is, also ALWAYS a fail.

>A commoner always has a 5% chance to do damage to a god
>A trained professional always has a 5% chance to trip over his own shoelaces

>> No.28759960

>>28759932
It's actually mare of a hilarious effect, example a nat 20 on stealth makes you invisible or suddenly makes the whole universe forgets you exist for a few minutes/seconds.
It makes any campaign into a silly wacky one.

Also
>Caring for realism on dungeons and retards

>> No.28760025

>>28759932

In a system that uses a percentile this works, as it's only a 1% chance, but I fully agree that 5% is too high for this rule.

>> No.28760053

>>28760025
>>28759932
>caring for realism on D&D

>> No.28760094

>>28760053

There's a certain suspension of disbelief that goes along with it, what >>28759932 said causes a hairline fracture in everyone "buying" what's happening ingame, turning the system and experience into something like Who Framed Roger Rabbit when it was supposed to be a slightly more serious (though not grim and dark or anything like that) detective film. I could completely buy a character having a 1 in 100 chance of succeeding at something they tried (within reason, of course, our game has a house rule that nothing past a certain difficulty modifier can experience 01 success) by getting exceedingly lucky or some happenstance causing them to do it in spectacular fashion, but when you crank it up to a 1 in 20 chance, you turn it into a cartoon.

>> No.28760113

Ban caster classes. All caster classes.

Every class is martial in some way, and some classes can eschew their ability to wield weapons to have access to a limited pool of spells.

Make casting spells more difficult. It's a full-round action, possibly multiple, and worlds Ultima-style where every spell needs a specific combination of reagents that must be pre-combined in different ways depending on the spell, which require physical prep-time for the wizard. You want to cast a Fireball spell? You make a Fireball spell, but unless you spend time making multiple preps per day, you get the one you made and that's it.

Access to spells requires more than just "I'm level 5, I get level 5 spells.", you need to dedicate time to being taught them.

Spell failure is always a flat 30%.

>> No.28760114

>>28760094
>having this low of a supsension of disbelief.
Alright, wanna the explanation?
The all powerful god is the trickster god, he cursed everyone to have a 5% of epic failure that will be written in all books or success.
Now shut up and enjoy it.

>> No.28760125

>>28760114

>that DM

:)

>> No.28760138

>>28759214
>nat 20 is ALWAYS success and nat 1 is, also ALWAYS a fail.
This introduces so much unneeded and fake drama... Our group was fighting in the streets against some thugs once. A fucking random encounter. Dwarf cleric throws his hammer, rolls a 1. DM says "Tough luck, you hit a bystander and kill him."
He was arrested after the fight and tried for murder. We had better things to do, such as following the fucking plot, but this whole shitty story derailed everything for one whole session and wasn't much fun to boot.

>> No.28760141
File: 30 KB, 300x300, red_dwarf_cat.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
28760141

>>28760125
>If you do what I don't like you're that DM!1
>Mfw the group qualified the game as "fucking YES"
>mfw we all had the time of our lives
>mfw they solved all combat encounters by getting arrays of nat 1 on attacks and nat 20 on fluff/diplo/etc and making people believe the fire arrows where fireworks.
>mfw you're butthurt

>> No.28760150

>>28760113
>You know this game balanced around casters?
>Yes.
>BAN ALL KUZTARDS DEI EVUL!11 ONLY MOV AND ATTAK.
Heh D&D drones are the worst.

>> No.28760151

>>28760138

See, this is what I mean. A 1 in 100 chance is "oh shit, a completely believable accident", a 1 in 20 chance is going down to the store to buy bread and accidentally starting a nuclear war or something.

>>28760141

>implying that was me

>> No.28760160

>>28760141
>Be the most inbred retard on the planet
>Try to convince 4chan you're not by saying "lol all mai playurs luv my gamin lul"

Mmhm.

>> No.28760162

>>28760113
>How to really fix D&D
Ban all martial classes, this way everyone is OP.
And spells>move and attack combat.

>> No.28760168

>>28760141

>has shit ideas and refuses to admit some people might have different ones and his aren't as ubiquitous or enjoyable as he thinks

yeah, you're that DM.

>> No.28760169

>>28760150
>>You know this game balanced around casters?

Then it's a shitty fucking game.

>> No.28760172
File: 267 KB, 962x764, The S team.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
28760172

>>28760160
>Most inbred retard
I'm not the one taking D&D seriously or trying to add realism to it fag.
Pic related, the group.

>> No.28760183

>>28759214
I still hate that second rule with every fiber of my being. "I would like to roll to punch through this wall. oh no, I failed. better roll 19 more times until I get a 20."

>> No.28760187

>>28760169
>Then it's a shitty fucking game.
Why?
I guess Mage: The awakening is a shitty game too then!
So is warmachine since it's balanced around each player having at least 1 caster (warlock, warcaster).

>> No.28760188

>>28760150
>You know this game balanced around casters?

it's not

the game isn't balanced around anything. it's not balanced period. it's a jumbled mess.

>> No.28760193

>>28760172

>posts pics of the shit team and expects people to change their minds on his retarded "lol trickstur god makes everyone bad" game system

No one cares if your group of idiots had fun, a moron can have hours of enjoyment banging two pieces of square wood together and drooling. Doesn't mean anything.

>> No.28760210

>>28760172

You know, your position would seem a lot more reasonable if you just admit you go full on Loony Toons with your game and that's the way your group likes it instead of trying to justify it by saying ">IMPLICATIONS ABOUNDING THAT DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS ART NOT EQUIVALENT IN REALISTIC VIRTUE TO THINE ANIMANIACS" and pretending that you're just playing it How It Was Meant To Be Played

>> No.28760218

>>28760187
This is a joke post, right?

>> No.28760224

>>28758993
How to fix 3.5:

Play one of the updated versions of 3.5 where they're "fixed", using whatever houserules you need to on top of that to really "fix" it (pathfinder, trailblazer, whatever actually makes sense)

Throw out the idea of classes needing to be "balanced" and explain to the players that it is a co-op game not a game where you should one-up each other.

Find players that understand being the "Omg u guise im so badass lookit how badass I am y rnt u lookin omg so badass!!" dude doesn't work

>> No.28760228

>>28760183

This is another issue with the rule, though our game group solved it by saying "01 and 100 only apply on the first roll you attempt". That way people don't try and scum.

>> No.28760235

Right now for me and my group its
>All my problems, EVER, come from the following: someone wants to play a non Jedi

Star Wars Saga
Fuck Rebellion Era and in a small way Legacy Era

>> No.28760289

>>28760224
A co-op game needs to be balanced just as much as a competitive one.

>> No.28760291

>>28760224
>Throw out the idea of classes needing to be "balanced"
If one player can solve every challenge while the rest of his team are glorified cheerleaders, that isn't solved by it being a co-op game.

>"Omg u guise im so badass lookit how badass I am y rnt u lookin omg so badass!!"
Its not players' fault for playing the way the system rewards, no matter how retarded you make your strawman.

>> No.28760300
File: 65 KB, 507x525, 98-93-723479280.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
28760300

>>28759190
first ed fag here fhats wrong with a fighter?

>> No.28760301

>>28759932
>>28760025
>>28760094
>>28760114
Honestly the premise is pretty inaccurate. You can't crit success or fail skill checks, and anything with a Divine Rank of 1 or above has DR 35/epic out of the box. Even a civilian with a 2d4 pick won't have a chance to injure a god. Admittedly the game doesn't instill versimillitude very well...

>>28760188
The game is balanced using the action economy. At high levels of optimization, this becomes the glass ceiling that holds down virtually everything. Preparation-based magic items and certain spells fuck up the action economy, which is where magic absolutely needs nerfing.

>> No.28760340

>>28760291
The wizard solves all problems with spells, the barbarian solves all problems with strength and intimidation, the paladin solves all problems with justice, the fighter solves all problems with a boot the groin, the rogue doesnt solve problems

Problem?

Your players suck if they can't have fun because the master of arcane is being more useful than the dual bastard sword wielding murderhobo

>> No.28760364

>>28760224
>Throw out the idea of classes needing to be "balanced" and explain to the players that it is a co-op game not a game where you should one-up each other.

imagine if you had a party with a level 20 wizard, a level 20 druid, a level 20 cleric and a level 1 fighter

1. do you think the fighter in this situation is capable of contributing co-operatively to the problems that the party will face?

2. do you think the fighter in this situation is likely to have as much fun as the other classes?

you can replace the level 1 fighter in this situation with a level 1 wizard, rogue or anything else, if you like, the point is just to try and gauge the importance of relative power in a co-operative effort.

>> No.28760370

>>28760300
There are a few minor things, but by far the biggest is that they're a 1-trick pony. In a dungeon crawl until about level 5 to 10, they're able to hold their own. But after that, they are overshadowed by just about any other class. In a non-dungeon crawl setting, they aren't able to play to any of their strengths (i.e. hitting things). They don't have a backup plan.

>> No.28760372

>>28760289
why? people aren't all equals in any scenario. how has rebalancing shit over and over helped anything blizzard has ever done that to?

>> No.28760380

>>28759240
This. min-maxers seem to conveiniently forget that lots of spells need reagents. Enforce the spell component rule (and make items rare to find) and you make casters powerful, but not infinite cannons of destruction.

>> No.28760383
File: 65 KB, 640x480, 1331658291740.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
28760383

>>28760301

>You can't crit success or fail skill checks

You can if your DM steps slightly outside the rules and makes something up appropriate to the situation. Like if you crit fail a lockpick a guard happens to come upon you, or if you crit succeed at making a cake it's so good some nobleman smells it and wants to buy it from you for an exorbitant price. It adds a measure of luck and happenstance to the game, but a 5% chance is too damn high.

>> No.28760384

>>28760340
Just because you can have fun with a pile of shit doesn't mean you should keep playing with a pile of shit when there are multitudes of better alternatives .

>> No.28760426

>>28760380
>Enforce the spell component rule
That's not how spell components work you fucking retard. You're 'enforcing' a rule that doesn't work that way.

>> No.28760433
File: 44 KB, 225x223, sachi stop_1.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
28760433

>>28760380
>Enforce the spell component rule

>Enforce inventory management in a game about adventurers
>The solution doesn't even work because of how easy it is to side step with various feats and abilities

>> No.28760459

>>28760426
>>28760433
Taking feats specifically to side-step balance means you need to be ejected from every gaming group you've ever been a part of.

>> No.28760468

>>28759240
>>28760380
>Spell components
What is a spell pouch? Otherwise, you're introducing bookkeeping that will slow down the game for everyone else. "Hang on guys, before we continue, I need to investigate these caves for guano. Now I need to pick up some string. Let me check...now I need to pick up..."

>Skill check
I can agree with this. One of the most unsatisfying thing for me is that spells are "I cast grease. Make a reflex save." Or "I cast haste. Have fun.". While we're at it, ideally I would like to see the spell effects take a toll on the caster and have him end up fatigued if he casts a certain number, and nix the maximum spells per day.

>> No.28760473

I do find it odd that groups which regularly complain about characters being too strong also do not enforce things like encumbrance, ammo, material components, etc etc etc.

>> No.28760474

>>28760300
Meh, nothing really. Its just ingrained into /tg/ to argue about it.

>> No.28760483
File: 1.28 MB, 1613x2188, oh lawd.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
28760483

>>28760380

WFRP has an element of risk to casting magic in which you can fuck over your party or kill yourself or summon demons or... a myriad of other bad things if you roll doubles on your casting roll. It's always bothered me that magic in D&D is so risk free and is essentially the same as a weapon or a gun or any other piece of equipment, rather than controlling a powerful force that doesn't always take kindly to being controlled.

>> No.28760485

>>28760459
"taking feats"
1) Divine casters don't use spell components with any sort of regularity and they are much more abusive than the typical arcane caster.
2) SPELL COMPONENTS DON'T FUCKING WORK THAT WAY. Read the fucking rules before you talk about 'enforcing' them, you stupid shitstain. http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/goodsAndServices.htm#spellComponentPouch

>> No.28760487

>>28760384
all rules systems for pnp games are are ways to show whether or not you fail or succeed at what you say you are doing

then again, i don't play 3.5 anymore, so i'm not really defending 3.5 itself. the mentality that it needs to be "fixed" or "balanced" will never stop seeming silly to me. the guy who rolls low on his stats but squeaks by enough to play and makes a halfling rogue will get totally butt raped in combat by a barbarian max strength half orc weilding whatever the biggest thing his starting cash would allow him. it isn't just casters... the barbarian will also smash open anything the rogue could pick open in a dungeon. now lets fight some skeletons. oh look not usefull again.

everyone in my dnd group understood inherently that you take some levels of things for their class abilities. man a level 1 wizard should would get their shit fucked up in combat without a lowly melee class to help them out. then they manage to survive a few levels and theyve mastered the arcane well enough to be powerful? OH LORDY WHEN CAN WE GET SOME BALANCE UP IN THIS BITCH THIS DUDES STOPPIN TIME AND SHIT

>> No.28760489

>>28760340
>the barbarian solves all problems with strength and intimidation
Doesn't work that way, even if you take that DR feat that lets you use Strength instead of Charisma for Intimidation. Fear has very limited uses, of which most of them are "let the enemies retreat and come back with reinforcements" or "shut down the encounter and make it unfun for everyone else."

>the paladin solves all problems with justice
No it solves everything with spells. Swift action spells, in fact.

>the fighter solves all problems with a boot the groin
It's a problem when the groin is 15 feet up. Or the enemy has no groin. Or the groin auto-disintegrates all boots.

>the rogue doesnt solve problems
You're damn right it doesn't.

>>28760380
No they haven't, they realize that by RAW and RAE that spell component pouches account for all normal spell components and the couple that don't are usually diamond dust. Paranoid casters make their pouches out of adamantium, attach alarms to them, and set up diamond acquisition and grinding facilities across the land. Or they just take Eschew Materials, which is PHB.

Protip: No one likes to quest for spell components, especially all of the non-casters. If you do enforce it in a retarded way, you've just made the casters into commoners.

>>28760383
No designer will make assurances that your personal modifications of the system will be safe. (Not that D&D 3.5 is a very rigorous system, but still.)

>> No.28760509

>>28760473
Those factors almost always fuck over non-casters moreso than casters.

>> No.28760521

Why not solve the problem by giving pure-martial classes another base attack per round and a free scaling bonus on combat maneuvers?

More attempts per turn and more utility in combat would aleviate a lot of the failure of "Move, attack, move, attack". And give all magical loot to your martial characters.

Seems fine to me. Sure, by level 15 your wizard is free-casting Wish every 6 seconds, but no games last that long anyway. You can just handwave things the fighter wants to do in combat that would require a skill roll, or make them auto-confirm crits earlier than level 20.

>> No.28760523

Why not just play 4e?

>> No.28760534

>>28760300
The 3E Fighter is a horrible, sick joke compared to the AD&D Fighter. Imagine the AD&D Fighter with all of their cool stuff given away to other classes, and on top of that, they have to stay in place to use extra attacks instead of moving, their extra attacks past the first one are at a severe penalty, and your damage is roughly the same, but you're less accurate and you're fighting things with up to 4 to 5 times as much HP as they had in 1E.

>> No.28760550

>>28760468
>>28760489
The point of spell components isn't

LETS GO FIND 50 OF THIS THING BEFORE STARTING THIS QUEST

it is.

I only have 3 of these PERIOD for this thing I better use them well.

>> No.28760572

>>28760550

This. Why do people assume that the party needs to let the wizard control it for his own personal shit? The fighter doesn't drag the party off to get a weapon for his own person use when others don't get anything out of it.

>> No.28760573

>>28760550
Nobody fucking cares what you think, and that's also not how spell components work in practice.

Those are not the rules. You are talking about 'enforcing' things that are the opposite of the rules, and it's ignoring that many retardedly abusive spells have very common components.

>> No.28760580

>>28760523
or legend, dungeon world, 13th age, ect

in fact, just play something that isn't 3.5e. it's probably better.

>> No.28760583

>>28760523
4e is so balanced and MMO-ish! oh look! no one plays it in favor of pathfinder

>> No.28760595

>>28759240
>>28760380

>enforce spell components
>unironically suggesting an argument that people bring up as a strawman to laugh at how retarded the "I CAN FIX 3.5e" side is

holy fuck that's hilarious.

>> No.28760605

>>28760595
It's not brought up as a strawman.

It's brought up because of people like these two tards who insist on it being a real balancing method.

>> No.28760619

>>28760583
If I hadn't already posted those screencaps of Pathfinder ripping powers off 4e in another thread, I would have posted it here.

Pathfinder is laughable.

>> No.28760625

>>28760521
Level 9 spells aren't the only thing that fuck over the other classes. Generally speaking level 2, 4, 5, 6, and 8 are the levels that break the game (further). Besides, the issue is that 3.5 is all about a giant set of hidden checks, similar to gear checks, that cockblock a character if they don't have anything to deal with it. For example, flying.

I gave Fighters a capstone that make them immune to virtually everything (amongst many other abilities over 20 levels). They're still woefully underpowered. The immunity looks like the following:

Immunity to stun, critical hits, precision damage, sleep, sickened/nauseated, fear, paralysis/petrification, negative levels/energy drain, selective immunity to polymorph subschool, SR 20 + level...

The issue is that they can't do shit. It's like the monk... feasible to pump defenses vs spells, but you've just created an island that is ignored by the enemy casters.

>> No.28760638

>>28760523
>>28758993
I use 4E when I want to make sure I can balance encounters and dungeons the way I want them, and easily tweak them to make them more difficult on the fly.

The problem is, without a decent compliment of class options and build styles, like Pathfinder has, 4E is a balanced but ultimately uninteresting system. It's entire class system is bland and just not fun to build within.

That and every published adventure or setting for it is shit.

>> No.28760639
File: 449 KB, 643x542, 1377614060625.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
28760639

>>28759214
Characters with multiple attacks would look like complete and utter morons with nat 1 being a failure.

>> No.28760640

>>28760605
By strawman I meant we laugh at it like "what the fuck are you going to say next, enforce spell components? lmao"

Because it's fucking retarded.

>> No.28760645

>>28760468
>While we're at it, ideally I would like to see the spell effects take a toll on the caster and have him end up fatigued if he casts a certain number, and nix the maximum spells per day.

You should take a look at Dungeon World or Burning Wheel. They pretty much do exactly that

Dungeon World's system boils down to a caster using Vancian casting, and every time he casts a spell, there are 2 things that can happen:
(He rolls really well)
The spell goes off perfectly without a hitch and you can cast it again later
(He rolls averagely)
Pick 1
The spell is used up from the character's and can't be used again until he has a chance to sit down and prepare his spells again
The spell fatigues the character's body and he takes a penalty to all future spells cast until he sits down and prepares his spells again
The casters draws "unwelcome attention," usually from monsters but purposefully left vague for reasons that become apparent if you read the system

Burning Wheel goes "can cast as much as you want, but it fatigues you until you have to rest" style, and the spellcasting is closer to Lord of the Rings level than Dungeons and Dragons

Both are quite nifty systems. I think Warhammer Fantasy has something similar but I never read the system

>> No.28760658

>>28760619
Just link them.

>>28757729
>>28757740
>>28757745

>> No.28760671

>>28760625
Don't forget level 1.

What with sleep, colour spray, charm person, grease,,,

>> No.28760678

>>28760625
>but you've just created an island that is ignored by the enemy casters.

Which is why nothing I said about them involved immunity and defense from high-level magic and attacks.

Give them a reason to get up in an enemy's face. Let them do heroic acrobatic shit, like taking a running leap off a wall to grapple a flying creature and stab it. Give them more attacks and access to more things to use in combat. We know the Wizard is going to be standing in the back casting Meteor all day, so you have to have the other players know they can actually do something other than "I have the armor, now let's hope they hit me."

>> No.28760680

>>28760638
>The problem is, without a decent compliment of class options and build styles
Oh, so you don't use 4E and you're talking out of your ass because no 4E player would say bullshit like this. Okay, then.

>> No.28760682

>>28760638
Ultimately, every class could have had just as many options as the fighter, but instead they killed it.

>> No.28760693

>>28759932
well, not exactly, tripping over your own shoelaces would be a balance check, and skill checks don't use those rules. Also gods probably have a miss chance and DR or something, or just don't let filthy commoners get that close, because really, why would you?

>> No.28760701

>>28760658

>Those pictures

I think that's the most galling thing I find about people who claim to prefer Pathfinder over 4e on the basis that 4e isn't as "fluffy" or seems "bland." For fucks sake people, if having well written, comprehensibly formatted, straight-and-to-the-fucking-point rules and abilities makes a system bland, then give me the fucking gruel. Taking a paragraph to explain what can be summarized in a small enough an info blurb to be stuck on a fucking card is not fluffy, it's a sign of poor writing

>> No.28760708

>>28760595
>>28760605
Honestly, there are already a couple of pretty decent patches for 3.5 that have been mentioned in the past.

>Option 1
Ban core classes, spells, and feats. Anything that declares a dependency on those outside of core has such a dependency removed. If this removal causes early entry, remove the feature.

>Option 2
Enable Gestalt and remove all extra-action effects. This also includes effects that shift actions, like Celerity.

>Option 3
Enable E6, which caps feature gain at character level 6.

Mixing these options is pretty sound as well. My group uses option 2 and it works wonderfully for a more Exalted-like game. Option 1 is more a quick fix but if you have a hankering for the old classes Option 3 is also pretty good (as this is the section that was actually playtested).

>> No.28760713

>>28760638
4e Fighters have at least four different builds. Every class was designed with a minimum of two different playstyles available. The game itself has 40+ base classes, not including the combinations that can be produced from hybridization. Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies number well over a hundred, and add an infinite combination of options and playstyles.

4e does not lack for options

>> No.28760719

>>28760459
the feat he's talking about is given to you for free for being a sorcerer. It's hardly a munchkin only choice.

>> No.28760742

What always makes me fucking laugh are the people who claim that they can fix 3.5.

The ones that, against all common sense and intuition handwave over 10 years worth of research and playtesting because "trust me guys, I know how to fix the system", as if nobody has ever brought up their fucking ideas earlier, and then goes on to scream that everybody but their group of flawless players are aspie autistic grognards who don't know how to roleplay.

It's these people who always later prove that they have no fucking clue what makes or breaks the system. Do you know why? It's because people who truly know why 3.5 never say that you can "fix" 3.5. They always say one of two things.

First and foremost, they say don't play 3.5

Second, if you're going to play 3.5, they will give you insanely sweeping fixes which remove almost all but two splatbooks released for the game - after which they look at you dead in the eye and say "and that still doesn't fix everything." And at that point, why continue playing 3.5?

>> No.28760752

>>28760459
WELLP BETTER EJECT THE NEW GUY FOR WANTING TO PLAY A SORCERER WHO GETS THE FEAT FOR FREE

WHAT A FUCKING AUTISTIC DICKHEAD IM GLAD HE'S NOT IN MY GROUP

>> No.28760753

>>28760680
>so you don't use 4E and you're talking out of your ass because no 4E player would say bullshit like this

I do, and I just did. I'm not a fan of 4E's classes, by and large. They're generic and largely same-y, and really only made different by taking Themes, which I blanket remove from my games anyway because I see them as a pointless addition of free power with no drawbacks, and everyone just takes Sohei without even knowing "Oh, I'm supposed to ROLEPLAY this?"

>>28760713
>The game itself has 40+ base classes
I count less than 30 when you remove Hybrid options, Essentials versions, and classes which are functionally identical to things named the same but with a different sub-name.

And let's not pretend anyone has ever played a Rogue that wasn't a Brutal Scoundrel.

>> No.28760770

>>28760671
Level 1 is weird. They're great but they're not flawless and if they aren't applied correctly you'll still have a pretty shit time.

>>28760678
>Give them a reason to get up in an enemy's face. Let them do heroic acrobatic shit, like taking a running leap off a wall to grapple a flying creature and stab it. Give them more attacks and access to more things to use in combat.
You should check out Complete Scoundrel at some point. Those are skill tricks. Or, if you're not hung up on retard logic, those are also maneuvers and Initiators (Tome of Battle) have prime access to those (though anyone can take them with enough levels on their belt and a free feat slot or two).

Funnily enough, Martial Rogues (UA variant that trades their sneak attack progression for fighter bonus feat progression) are great at this as they have the skill points for all the tricks they'd want. Bonus points for Changeling Rogues, which have 10 skill points per level.

>> No.28760798

>>28760138
Your GM is a dick.
>GM: Roll attack
>Dwarf: Bloody hell mate, i got meself a one!
>GM: Well, you try to open the head of the bandit like a watermelon under your hammer, but you miss. The hammer misses and goes right into a bazar. You see smoke
>GM: Ok people, there's going to be fire and the guard in three rounds. I suggest you to get your shit together right now.
>Now the players yell at the Dwarf player and everybody gets involved to get the fuck away.
Its fucking easy.

>> No.28760801

>>28760753

>Complains that all the classes are samey
>Removes one of the primary features intended to allow differentiation because it's "free power"

Well alright then.

>> No.28760802

>>28760753
>And let's not pretend anyone has ever played a Rogue that wasn't a Brutal Scoundrel.
Are you insane? Artful Dodger is straight up competitive with Brutal Scoundrel because you're not looking at powers that get effects from Artful Dodger.

>> No.28760810

>>28760753
>They're generic and largely same-y,
Please tell me more about how my laser Cleric is identical to the Warlord, which is the same as a polearm Fighter.

Oh wait. You're talking out of your ass. Fuck off.

>> No.28760820

>>28760801
If they had been done in a way that replaced class abilities and meshed with progression, instead of just "You're a Sohei now. Don't worry about the flavor text, it means you get to tack on a free attack to any power you use. Enjoy.", they might be worth using.

>> No.28760823

>>28760742
Try these. >>28760708

>>28760753
>And let's not pretend anyone has ever played a Rogue that wasn't a Brutal Scoundrel.
Sup.

>> No.28760825

>>28760742
> against all common sense and intuition handwave over 10 years worth of research and playtesting because "trust me guys, I know how to fix the system", as if nobody has ever brought up their fucking ideas earlier, and then goes on to scream that everybody but their group of flawless players are aspie autistic grognards who don't know how to roleplay.

This, every time.

>> No.28760826
File: 559 KB, 865x1250, 1316736373744.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
28760826

>>28759214
Because magic is, culturally speaking, the province of cowards, demons, and old folk of ambiguous benevolence and uncertain humanity?

>> No.28760830

>>28760810
I think he means that on paper with the way the skills are built in the game they all boil down to very close to the same thing.

How you want to flavor it up however changes that quite a bit.

>> No.28760847

>>28760830
They don't, and anyone who says that they do clearly has not played 4E with more than one class or is retarded and can't get over the fact that they have similar formatting long enough to notice that classes don't do similar things, not even when they're in the same role. The Ranger is nothing like the Rogue, and they're even the same source and role.

>> No.28760850

>>28760753
what exactly about the classes feels the same that can't be said about class features and feats taken by 3.5 martials/casters?

>> No.28760852

>>28760753
Cunning sneak rogues are the core of several perma-stealth builds in the game. Artful dodgers are archetypal swashbucklers and acrobat rogues. Sure, if you just want raw damage with no fancy shit attached you can go brutal scoundrel, but that's arguably one of the most boring builds.

Why would you remove essentials from the class listing? It's the same game. And even the sub classes play radically differently than the parent classes. Berserkers don't play like barbarians, Slayers really don't play like fighters, Hexblades have wholly different mechanics than warlocks, etc.

>> No.28760873
File: 126 KB, 1213x255, 1386613569269.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
28760873

>>28760830
>>28760850
>>28760847

See this shit is exactly what I was talking about when I posted >>28760701. It is fucking uncanny how many people confuse succinctness with blandness

>> No.28760909

>>28760850
Because every build of a Barbarian is just a Barbarian. One may take a different rage power than another, but they still function exactly the same, and neither will get access to any different or more interesting skill or power choices. Every Barbarian is picking from the same power list.

I like the Archetype system because it's a layer of interest you place on top of a character template that gives you features unique to that Archetype. So a Lore Warden Fighter is nothing like a Rodelero Duelist Fighter or a Tower Shield Specialist Fighter.

Again, I'm not saying 4E is bad, I'm saying I wish I could say something more than "My Fighter is different because he uses a Gouge instead of a sword."

>>28760852
Essentials aren't at all balanced with non-Essentials. Running both in the same party will end up with wild power differences.

>> No.28760927

>>28760909
>Because every build of a Barbarian is just a Barbarian.
What?
>One may take a different rage power than another, but they still function exactly the same
No, no they do not. There are huge, huge differences between Barbarian styles in 4E, and this right here proves that you have no fucking clue what you're talking about at all.

>> No.28760956

>>28760909
>I'm saying I wish I could say something more than "My Fighter is different because he uses a Gouge instead of a sword."
Except those two use different powers that do vastly different things, use different Paragon Paths, and have different supporting feats that make them even more different. Polearm Momentum, anyone?

The 3E and PF melee classes are more similar than two 4E melee bulids within the same class.

>> No.28760981

>>28760927
>No, no they do not. There are huge, huge differences between Barbarian styles in 4E
All kinds of this. Some of the fondest memories of our group were about the calm stoic warrior with a polearm who on one occassion got riled up enough and proceeded to trip/destroy an entire squad of soldiers. This is very different from, say, barbarians that are the classic undestructible rage types.

>> No.28760989

>>28760909
No you won't you stupid, stupid fool. Slayers/Thieves, two of the best strikers in Essentials STILL cannot surpass a Ranger in raw DPR. Though they can surpass lower strikers like warlocks, placing them smack in the middle of class balance.

>> No.28760991

Dont fool yourselves, there are only so many ways you can get a bonus to a character. Call the feat "barbarian training", "swashbuckling genius" or whatever, its still a +1 to whatever d8 you are using.

Wanna play a monk in 3.5? Say that you buy weapons and armor, and grind them into dust and inhale them, giving you +8 ac(fullplate) and a 1d8+2 to damage (longswords).
Voila, you now have a functioning monk. Punch shit and reskin everything.

Its literally how they make classes. Decide on how much bonus you can give, name the fucking bonuses as "axeman slash technique", or "fist punching mastery" and now you have a axepunchmaster.
Nobody has played a axepunchmaster before, have they?

>> No.28761035

>>28760991
This becomes reeealy transparent when you try to build a system.

That +2 with poleaxes? Its the same thing as getting a +1 to hit and using it to powerattack.

That +2 to saves against fear? Its a lesser version of Iron will.

Same shit. The only problem is when a few too many things stack into a huge pile

>> No.28761039

>>28760909
Dude, do you even understand the options presented in the game? Your fighter isn't different because he uses a Gouge, there's an entire build centered around switching up weapons. Did you not notice the grappler fighter that entirely changes to focus of your class to pinning, immobilizing and dragging enemies around? Or the tempest fighter that emphasizes mobility and multi-attacking? Seriously, actually look at the fucking game

>> No.28761187

>>28760991
>>28761035
That's the baseline stuff, yes. Those things are made generic such that the system has something centric to it. But then there's the role layer and the class layer that goes on top... and these days you also have a subclass layer.

There are degrees of differentiation. They're not as great as 3.5, but they're also much more grounded.

>> No.28761241

>>28758993
Yes. You are the only one.

>> No.28761266

>>28758993

This. Munchkins complain the loudest and make up the most obtuse arguments, which most of the time never actually took place in-game, but only happened in hypothetical-land.

You fix 3.5 by understanding all the words in the rules are rules. When is says "earn" experience, thats a rule. Whats funny about this rule is that immeediately after showing how RAW balances everything out with one fundamental word, the munchkins and neckbeards start to sperg about "muh fairness, levels should be equal". No, they shouldn't, even 2eadnd understood this.

All of my rage. 3.5 is not that difficult, people. And I won't even start on how bad dming feeds this cancer so much.

If you think someone has near-infinite resources and versatility, chances are you've been fudging the parts of the game that castrate broken shit.

This goes double for character creation starting after 1st level.

>> No.28761295

>>28761266
see
>>28760742

>> No.28761314

>>28760701
I don't like 4e because the combat is long and tedious.

>> No.28761362

>>28761266
>This. Munchkins complain the loudest and make up the most obtuse arguments, which most of the time never actually took place in-game, but only happened in hypothetical-land.

why would munchkins complain about 3.5e? i swear this is the dumbest fucking argument. the game is designed for munchkins, literally. they made "system mastery" a core part of their design, the game not only makes no attempt to prevent munchkinnery but actively rewards it by putting trap options side-by-side with game-breaking options and giving no indication of which are which. 3.5e is a munchkin paradise, a land of milk and honey with boundless room for creating characters that are mechanically and mathematically superior in every way.

>> No.28761390

>>28761295

You missed the point entirely. It is not that the game needs fixing, but that DMs are skipping over wagonloads of fairly presented rules which already existed in the first place and neuter all the "classic pitfalls".

A lot of people present arguments as if theyre mentioning something that needs fixing.

Instead of saying the truth: The DM made it easy for me.

Literally every complaint can be traced back to the DM freely giving the problem player freebies of various themes.

>> No.28761423

>>28761314
How long is "long", exactly? I can see people wanting it to be shorter than the 30-or-so minutes it takes my group, but the 4 hours people go on about is your own damn fault.

>> No.28761425

>>28761390
>Literally every complaint can be traced back to the DM freely giving the problem player freebies of various themes.

yup. it's too bad that new player gave that druid class feature "animal companion" as a freebie and made the fighter redundant. fuck the dm. it's his fault the game is broken. fuck the players too. let's blame the players instead of the devs

>> No.28761460

>>28761390
>Literally every complaint can be traced back to the DM freely giving the problem player freebies of various themes.

You're right. The problem player is always, without fail, the new player who's never played 3.5 before but thinks a War Cleric, a Druid, or a Transmuter or Conjurer Wizard sounds like a fun idea.

Fuck off.

>> No.28761465

>>28761390
>3tard detected

Literally any system can be social contracted, houseruled and fiated into playability. You judge a system by how much effort it takes to do that. 3.X fails entirely by that metric.

>> No.28761466

>>28761266
>>28761390
Yes, the social contract comes first and foremost. Those who don't recognize that tend to become problem players.

This is not a characteristic that correlates to munchkins any more than it does to say, roleplayers.

>> No.28761488

>>28760989
Are rangers still the king of non-cheese dpr? If so, that's not the fairest comparison. Though, at early levels a scout's twin strike 2.0 will out-dpr a core ranger, but as soon as the ranger gets a couple more encounters and another daily and the scout is stuck with more uses of power strike the situation gets grim. The free action attack nerf and the fact the scout's primary attribute is dex makes it harder to swap out standard ranger powers also suck; but really, power strike is fucking balls.

>> No.28761496

>>28761314
That is fair. In my final days of running 4e games I halved enemy hp and maximized their damage. The ratio only works well for a range of levels, about 1-9 or so.

>> No.28761503

>>28761465
>Someone making sense on this board.
Get out.

>> No.28761508

>>28759214
>random commoner has a 5% chance of leaping in a single bound to the top of a mountain
>random commoner has close to a 10% chance of convincing a dragon to give them its entire hoard by saying "pleeeeeeeeaaaaase?"
>beholder with maxed out spot, magic items that boost its spot, buffs that boost its spot and all its many eyes pointing straight forward will fail to notice a wall in front of it and bump into it once every two minutes

Great houserules brah.

>> No.28761540

>>28761266
>which most of the time never actually took place in-game, but only happened in hypothetical-land.

Except that's fucking bullshit, since Mike Mearls admitted these were massive problems in the system that he and his players personally experienced while playing 3.5, and went on to describe them in great detail.

Fucking Monte Cook said they were put in intentionally to reward system mastery.

But no, you know better than fucking everybody. It doesn't happen to you, therefore it doesn't exist.

Oh wait, that's right. You're just another braindead trip. Into the filter you go.

>> No.28761552

>>28761508
Why stop at a mountain? I want to jump to the moon.

>> No.28761614

>>28761266
>chances are you've been fudging the parts of the game that castrate broken shit.

like fucking what.

show me right fucking now exactly what castrates broken shit so i can go on gleemax and rub it in their faces.

show me it right now so i can go and tell mike mearls that everything about his fucking system design is wrong.

show me right now what everybody for the last 10 years has been fucking missing from the equation, but that you have miraculously found against all odds

>> No.28761683

I don't understand the part about enforcing spell components. Most components are easy to find and the majority will be contained with a spell component pouch. In fact most spells are written in such a way that if there is a component that's not in the pouch you know from the description. Also if you are a caster you have to pick out spells ahead of time. Just add the component to your inventory sheet. If you can't find things like graveyard dirt or a wooden circle somewhere you can find an inn and a bar you aren't thinking hard enough. Casters aren't about charging in and making it up as you go along. Its about skillful preparation to help your party. Be it healing spells buffs or just nuking all the small monsters off the battlefield so the sword users know who to stab.

>> No.28761705

>>28758993

>How to fix DnD 3.5

Play 2 or 4.

>> No.28761731

>>28761683
literally take eschew components

none of the problem spells require costly components

black tentacles? colour spray? glitterdust? fucking reverse gravity? eschew materials and they're free. hooray for that "enforce spell components" rule, huh?

>> No.28761751

>>28761683
It's almost as if the people who suggest enforcing material components have some form of trisomy! Who would have guessed?

>> No.28761836

>>28761425

>that strawman

I never said "new player" even once, nor do they have the tendancy of doing broken things, nor are said "broken" things even a problem if you DM halfway decently. Try again.

Animal companions are no where near close to being as good as a fighter unless the Druid spends all of their spells keeping it buffed and all of their money giving it special equipment. 9 times out of 10 familliars, companions, and the less-armored will go down/take some scary hits at the first sign of a mildly intelligent foe.

Now factor in multiple encounters, requrire them to conserve spells under duress, and we can start talking.

>> No.28761867

>>28761731 yeah but then you are out a feat.

>> No.28761875

>>28761836
>Animal companions are no where near close to being as good as a fighter
You know we had someone do the math on this, right? At level 7, a Druid's brown bear animal companion is better and scales more aggressively with buffs than a level 7 Fighter will. A 2H Fighter will do more damage, but the bear grapples, and quite competently, for free, and costs you next to nothing to keep up.

So no, fuck off, retard.

>> No.28761880

>>28761836
Are you really one of those people who thinks that fighters don't rely on spell slots just as much as casters do? Good luck healing all that damage on your own. When the casters run out of spells, the entire party is fucked, not just the casters.

>> No.28761886

>>28761836
That's not a strawman. It's an argument against you. New players can fucking break the game completely by accident.

>Animal companions are no where near close to being as good as a fighter unless the Druid spends all of their spells keeping it buffed

Complete horseshit. There was a thread on /tg/ a week ago where we mathematically and objectively worked out that an unoptimized bear companion as strong if not stronger than an equivalent level fighter WITHOUT BUFFS - and that wasn't accounting for the fact that it gets free combat manoeuvres as part of its attacks.

>> No.28761899

>>28761614

Sleep, magic item and spell purchasing availability, duress and spell conservation, giving benefits under training rules to non-crafters or enchanters during "down time", and finally, if all that didn't equalize the playing field, administer exp bonuses or penalties based on how hard people have been "earning" their experience.


Its really not that hard. The lower teirs should have good saves and really high Acs normally even better hitpoints. Factor in a couple bonus levels if you need them and they can truck all day.

>> No.28761900

>>28761836
please shut up you're actually fucking retarded

>> No.28761924

>>28761899
>Sleep,
Not an issue.
>magic item and spell purchasing availability,
Harder on fighters.
>duress and spell conservation
Not a real issue for a player who knows what they're doing.

>> No.28761936

>>28761899

You are being this:
>>28760742

People have tried to houserule 3.5 into something good. People much smarter than you. And they've been trying for years.

Your idea is not groundbreaking. It doesn't work.

>> No.28761954

>>28761836

You are fucking clueless.

The 3.5 Druid has better skills and non-combat than the fighter, can shapeshift into an animal with pounce that has great physical stats which means that they can dump physical stats and have great casting stats which means their full casting is awesome. Oh and they get a nice pet for DPR increase.

Druids are so much better than Fighters in 3.5 it's not even funny. Same with Clerics.

>> No.28761966

>>28761867
>Hey guys I can solve 3.X caster supremacy! With a single-feat tax!

>> No.28761982

>>28761899
>Sleep
Fantastic, it's almost as if the 5 minute workday isn't a fundamental flaw with the system. The party is much worse off with a caster that's out of spells (which stops happening after mid levels anyways), and it becomes a complete liability to keep going without it in the first place. If you think that somehow balances the fighter - the fact that he has to coddle casters who can easily rope trick away anyways till they get their spells back or just get a ring of sustenance for 2000 gold - then you're retarded.

>magic item and spell purchasing availability

This objectively harms fighters and martials more than casters, since casters automatically learn new spells on level up, and if you're going to withhold buying spells for a caster, then there's no reason for them to take the powerful ones straight off the bat. Likewise, fighter progression assumes that fighters have a constant flow of money and resources with which to spend on magical items. Monster progression assumes that fighters have the magic weapons and armors to deal with them, especially when you start getting into the "golfbag fighter" problem, which wizards don't need to deal with as magic bypasses all immunities.

Again, you're acting as if this is the first time anybody has ever brought up any of these arguments.

>duress and spell conservation
Once again, this stops being a problem under mid levels, and harms the fighters much more than the casters.

>> No.28761983

>>28760380
>Balance Wizards by turning the game into being centered around the Wizard.

>> No.28761997

>>28761899

The game math in 3.5 is simply broken bro everything you mention is only a bandage on top of the bad game math and what's worse some of them are actually counter productive.

>> No.28762004

>>28761936
Just saying, these fixes patch 90% of the issues alone: >>28760708

The rest might require their own line item patches but they're pretty easy to spot.

>> No.28762013

>>28761954

I can back this up about clerics. Provided you have a competent group and choose the correct feat and prestige class you can have a near untouchable cleric. Of course he won't be winning any battles but that's what the sword users are for.

>> No.28762028

>>28762013
>Of course he won't be winning any battles but that's what the sword users are for.
Except the Cleric is better at swording than nearly any other class in the game when built for it and can blow up encounters on their own.

>> No.28762047

how to enjoy 3.5 and pathfinder: don't play with anyone who calculates "dpr" and thinks it means anything

>> No.28762056

if you play fighter and expect to be anything other then a damage sponge, you have unrealistic expectations
rangers are better for damage anyway, either at range or close

>> No.28762061

>>28761836
>Animal companions are no where near close to being as good as a fighter unless the Druid spends all of their spells keeping it buffed and all of their money giving it special equipment. 9 times out of 10 familliars, companions, and the less-armored will go down/take some scary hits at the first sign of a mildly intelligent foe.

You're objectively fucking wrong and making blind, unsubstantiated assertions isn't going to win you any arguments.

The math has been worked out multiple times to show that completely unoptimized companions outperform fighters at every turn because they get grapple and trip attempts for free as part of their attacks - something fighters need to use a complete skill chain to get, making them one trick ponies.

Again, I'm specifying unoptimized. Like core-only, a new player will pick it because it's iconic kind of shit. If you think that animal companions are nowhere near as good as a fighter, you will literally cry if I showed you the numbers that a Fleshraker pumps out.

And that's assuming the druid doesn't shapeshift into another one while retaining his spellcasting abilities, or use summon nature's ally multiple times to get a few more of them.

>> No.28762064

>>28762013

why the fuck would you want an "untouchable character", that sounds like the most boring shit imaginable.

>> No.28762070

>>28760830
Keep in mind though, following this line of logic, 3.5/PF has only 2 classes(Caster and Not-Caster)

>> No.28762072

>>28762004

Still problematic.

Solution 1)You can fix full casters, you just need to neuter the fuck out of the spell list which is apparently too much work. Plus low tier classes are still shit. Plus the MMs ares still arguably balanced around the party having some full caster.

Option 2) Gestalt simply isn't that stellar because now you can have 2 trap options instead of just one. This merely increases the level of system mastery needed.

Option 3) decent but not everyone like telling grim and gritty e6 games especially because there are fuck ton of good content that's aimed towards higher level gameplay.

>> No.28762078

>>28762061

MY NUMBEEEERS

how the fuck do you people have friends to play with?

>> No.28762089

>>28762047
>how to enjoy 3.5 and pathfinder: don't play 3.5 and pathfinder

I fixed it for you. If you think "dpr" is the problem with pathfinder or 3.5, then you know about as much about game balance as the Pathfinder devs do, which is to say not very much considering they think TWF is a stronger feat than Natural Spell or Leadership.

>> No.28762109

>>28762078
>Fighter is worse than an animal companion
>HURR DURR THE PROBLEM IS YOU
Fuck you faggot.

>> No.28762115

>>28762028

I guess. i never played any of mine that way. But I am a caster player if playing 3.5 because attack and damage rolls get tedious and id much rather spend my tedium thinking unique ways of using my spells while healing the comedic relief aka the sword users. If they are that great I'll give them a shot next time.

>> No.28762116

>>28762089

sorry to break this to you, bro, but people are enjoying both pathfinder and 3.5 every day all around the world. some of them don't even house rule.

>> No.28762118

>>28762070
Nah, it has caster, martial adept, binder, shadow... person thing, I never read that section of ToM, truenamer (lulz), meldshaper and, if you really like being shit, mundanes.

>> No.28762125

>>28762013

With divine metamagic and persistent spell you can bring up the holy trio and be a damned good fighter on top of being a full caster.

That's where 3.x got really silly. They added additional power ups to classes that didn't really need them.

Core was bad enough core plus powerups is a fucking nightmare.

Of course some fuckheads think that amping every class up to the level of an optimized tier 1 class is the obvious solution when tier 1 class gameplay is a shitfest.

>> No.28762130

>>28762056
Except Rangers are shit for damage? The Barbarian is the typical beatstick and is way better than any other core melee but CoDzilla at it. That's what happens when you have an actual class feature that matters.

Damage sponging also doesn't work in 3E for a lot of reasons.

>> No.28762131

>>28762078
see
>>28760742

>The ones that, against all common sense and intuition handwave over 10 years worth of research and playtesting because "trust me guys, I know how to fix the system", as if nobody has ever brought up their fucking ideas earlier, and then goes on to scream that everybody but their group of flawless players are aspie autistic grognards who don't know how to roleplay.

this literally happens in every edition war thread, and has been happening for the past 3 years.

people ask for objective evidence. they receive objective evidence and are proven wrong. they then proceed to scream and call everybody aspie autistic social reject neckbeard virgins who should never be able to find a group because they're such losers.

i will never understand why people blame the players for such a shitty system.

>> No.28762135
File: 36 KB, 560x282, dammit_syndrome.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
28762135

>>28760162
When everyone's OP, no one will be!

>> No.28762141
File: 146 KB, 381x353, Goliathwat.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
28762141

>>28761836
>Animal companions are no where near close to being as good as a fighter
Holy shit, I didn't think people still actually believed this.

Animal companions outclass a Fighter in pretty much every way. The math has been done and you're wrong.

>> No.28762149

>>28762118

You forgot psionic

>> No.28762161

>>28759655
Your writing hurts me, but I agree.

I don't have the free time I did in high school. If I have a few extra hours to come up with home brew material, I'd rather it be material that will make the game fun and unique (settings, NPC's, monsters), rather than trying to fix the system.

I have played many enjoyable games of 3.x, and no regrets were had. If the system really bugs you, learning a new one is not that hard--probably much easier than house ruling WotC's attempt to cash in on the D&D trademark into a completely new system.

captcha: and tsrFiv

>> No.28762163

>>28762116
>sorry to break this to you, bro, but people are enjoying both pathfinder and 3.5 every day all around the world. some of them don't even house rule.

sorry to break this to you bro, but people are enjoying FATAL and Worlds of Synnabar every day around the world. some of them don't even houserule.

you can have fun with your group. go ahead. that doesn't make pathfinder or 3.5 well designed or a good system. what you have to understand is that generally, if you have to resort to "BUT I HAVE FUN ANYWAYS FAGGOT" as an argument, it means you're having fun in spite of the system, not because of it.

and at that point, why use said system and not something else?

>> No.28762169

>>28761899
>Sleep
Rope trick says hi.

>Magic item purchasing availability
Hurts non-casters too, and more. Unless you're going to be metagame as fuck and have the only gear be +1 Flaming Keen Falchions?

>Duress
Contingency/dimension door, for starters.

>Spell conservation
Again, rope trick. Or if you're in a "The world will end unless you do the thing in three days" plot, staves/wands.

>XP bonuses/penalties
The last resort of a shit system. Not saying a 20 fighter can't beat a 1 wizard, but that says nothing about martial/caster balance.

>> No.28762178

>>28762141

is your dm an algorithm or something? what the fuck kind of game are you even playing

>> No.28762180

>>28762161
>probably much easier than house ruling WotC's attempt to cash in on the D&D trademark into a completely new system.
I hope you realize that that was exactly what 3.X was because it played in no way like its predecessors did. 4E was closer to them than 3E was.

>> No.28762181

>>28762064 healing superiority. Its like being the master in master blaster. I keep them alive. They kill shit for me. I solve the puzzles. We both drink beer. Problem solved.

>> No.28762205

>>28762178
A game where the animal companion hits harder, is just as durable, and grapples better than the Fighter.

Do you want to pretend that the Fighter gets something that matters? Go for it. You'll be wrong.

>> No.28762207

>>28762116

Pathfinder and 3.5 is fine if nobody has system mastery or nobody actually uses their system mastery to fuck up your game.

What happens though is most groups have people with different levels of system mastery and a good percentage of those people don't like to self-consciously limit their power.

So you get shitfests where the player with system mastery is playing CoDzilla in a game with a player who likes big dumb fighters and has no system mastery and feels like the game is really unfun because the CoDzilla is better in his core competency than he is and he's completely inept in all other phases of the game.

3.x/PF rewards system mastery which leads to competition between players. That's unhealthy to having good gameplay

>> No.28762230

>>28762163

hm, something else. like what?

(sincere question)

>> No.28762236

>>28762141
The problem is, an animal companion IS outlclassed by, say, a Dungeoncrasher Fighter, a Fighterbarian Pounce-charger, etc. But a run-of-the-mill, core-only, single-class Fighter? Yeah, utterly useless compared to the animal companion. And then, Enlarge Animal.

... yeah.

>> No.28762241

>>28762178
I play a game where my God of War Fighter is completely fucking obsoleted in every combat situation by the fucking hippy's pet dog you fucking mongoloid.

>> No.28762244

>>28760468
>What is a spell pouch?
I make a spell pouch only good for one day's worth of spells. Prep the spells, entire pouch is consumed.

>> No.28762267

>>28762236
>The problem is, an animal companion IS outlclassed by, say, a Dungeoncrasher Fighter, a Fighterbarian Pounce-charger,
Yeah, a bear is. But if you apply the same approach to the Druid and take the Fleshraker instead of Bearforce 1, that stops being true again.

>> No.28762274

>>28762236
Which is incredibly depressing that a class who's only ability is fighting, has to munchkin the shit out of his character in order to not be obsoleted in fighting by one class feature.

>> No.28762275

>>28762178
I literally don't understand what you're trying to say here.

Are you blaming his DM for a flaw in the system design that can very easily make players feel redundant?

I mean, aside from the fact that the game designer Monte Cook said he did that on purpose to reward people who can spot the differences, and the fact that Mike Mearls has not only admitted that these problems exist, but has given examples in great detail about how they affected his own personal games, I'm not really sure what you're trying to say.

If someone gives you one class and says "you hit for 5 damage a round" and gives another a class that says "your minion hits for 7 damage a round, and you can make him stronger and summon more of him at will", why would you blame that on the players? Wouldn't that just flat out be a problem with the system?

>> No.28762286

>>28762230
see >>28760580

you can look up reviews of them to see what they do well/do poorly and decide which is most appropriate for your game. they're all better than 3.5, though.

>> No.28762289

>>28762241

you should probably leave that game, sounds like it sucks

>> No.28762293

>>28762236

Yep you can make some specialized high system mastery melee builds that are superior to the base fighter. You also shouldn't need to pull out an ubercharger or chain tripper in order to contribute because those builds are frankly unfun as fuck

>> No.28762294

>>28762230
Try 13th age.

>> No.28762296

>>28762180
Yes, that was my point. 3.x is full of nostalgia for me, but I don't like what WotC did with the charmingly bizarre AD&D.

I hate what it does to players who are full of creative ideas, but feel like they need to search out the perfect prestige class or supplementary rule to justify their character. That, or I'm just tired of it, and looking for something different.

I'm pretty much going rules-lite-4-lyfe these days.

>> No.28762305

>>28762267
No, it still does, since the Fighterbarian can use a specific feat and prestige class chain to up his damage into "one-round wipe the tarrasque" levels of silly.

But we're talking about a knowledgeable player knowing exactly what they're doing vs. Hey cool, I can have a pet deinonychus!

>> No.28762307

>>28762289
but i paid good money for this book and i want to use it

>> No.28762322

>>28762289
Hence why I stopped play Pathfinder/3.5.

Then I played 4e and holy shit, my Fighter is actually INTERESTING and can do awesome shit now without getting overshadowed by someone else's class feature.

>> No.28762349

>>28758993
>How to fix DnD 3.5
Just play a different system. Trying to fix DnD is like trying to turn a pile of dog feces into copper.

>> No.28762350

>>28762289
>man, this classes class feature completely makes other players obsolete
>better blame the players!

>> No.28762361

>>28762294

i looked at the pdf and got bored before the introduction, sorry

think i'm just gonna keep having the wrong kind of fun with pathfinder and call of cthulhu!

>> No.28762376

>>28762305
>since the Fighterbarian can use a specific feat and prestige class chain to up his damage into "one-round wipe the tarrasque" levels of silly.
And the Druid can cheese Venomfire to add 225 acid damage to each poison hit, of which the Fleshraker has 3, and it doesn't require the Fleshraker to shit up their AC to do it.

>> No.28762377

>>28762322
The worst is people who try and claim that Pathfinder is somehow better than 3.5

The existence of Pathfinder is an admittance that 3.5 was heavily flawed and needed a rules overhaul, and yet they chose Sean K Reynolds, the least qualified game designer to design the fix.

It's almost farcical.

>> No.28762390

>>28762361
Oh, you're a troll. Fuck off.

>> No.28762402

>>28762072
>You can fix full casters, you just need to neuter the fuck out of the spell list which is apparently too much work. Plus low tier classes are still shit. Plus the MMs ares still arguably balanced around the party having some full caster.
The Spell Compendium spells are pretty alright barring action economy modifiers. The issue largely stems from those core spells and access to them.

>Gestalt simply isn't that stellar because now you can have 2 trap options instead of just one. This merely increases the level of system mastery needed.
Gestalt bumps builds up to the action economy ceiling pretty nicely. Trap options add completely, while casters get very little out of doubling up on casting. Remember that in such a system you're looking for non-action abilities. That being said, the limitations on action economy betrayal is key to making it work, since the glass ceiling works only if it can't be broken.

>decent but not everyone like telling grim and gritty e6 games especially because there are fuck ton of good content that's aimed towards higher level gameplay.
Agreed, which is why it's not the only solution presented. But it's a very good one if you like grit.

>> No.28762404

>>28762377

To be fair, SKR wasn't involved in Pathfinder Core. Buhlmann largely did it by himself. And he knows better he just didn't want to do the effort necessary to actually fix 3.x gameplay because to a certain % of gamers the lack of balance is a feature not a bug.

>> No.28762409

>>28762390

sorry i don't like the right games, dude.

next i guess you're going to call me a troll because i like pineapple on my pizza

>> No.28762434
File: 662 KB, 600x1304, 1386620751243.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
28762434

>>28762377

By definition wouldn't Pathfinder HAVE to be better then 3.5, considering they're both the same fucking game, and one was just streamlined a little more?

>> No.28762436

>>28762289
If by "game", you mean "system", then I agree completely.

>> No.28762447

>>28762434
No. You're assuming they use the same material when they flat out do not.

>> No.28762452

>>28762434
arguably, pathfinder actually makes 3.5e less balanced

if you can believe that

>> No.28762456

>>28762436

well, yeah, if 3.5/pathfinder isn't something you enjoy you should probably stop playing it instead of shitting up boards like this with your insane ramblings

>> No.28762460

>>28762409
it'd be more apt if you told me you liked shit on your pizza, and i suggested a shit flavoured substitute with none of those pesky disease vectors

but no, fuck your substitute, i love my diseases and shit, you tell me, you're clearly socially retarded if you don't like shit and disease on your pizza

>> No.28762462

>>28762434

Better in some ways worse in others

>> No.28762485

>>28762434
Funny enough, because they tried to fix the wrong things, they almost made it worse.

Monks and Rogues got completely fucked since Tumble is nigh-unuseable now

Monks in general are just worse

And monsters were buffed in ways that martials can't exactly keep up with them anymore.

>> No.28762499

>>28762460

if someone on the internet playing the wrong game can get you this riled up you probably have some anger issues

>> No.28762548

>>28762456
>well, yeah, if 3.5/pathfinder isn't something you enjoy you should probably stop playing it instead of shitting up boards like this with your insane ramblings

>thread made because "HEY GUYS I CAN FIX A BROKEN SYSTEM"
>gets told he's fucking retarded
>"NUH UH"
>gets told he's fucking retarded with math to prove it not even bringing up the fact that the design philosophy is inherently flawed at a deeper level than just the math
>"YEAH WELL YOU'RE JUST A DOODOO HEAD WHY DO YOU KEEP SHITTING UP THE BOARDS WITH YOUR INSANE RAMBLINGS"

face the music kid. your game fix sucks, and you brought this up in the first place.

go and play your dogshit game, nobody is stopping you. just stop trying to serve us shit while telling us it's caviar.

every fucking edition war in a nutshell.

>> No.28762590

>>28762499
>if someone on the internet playing the wrong game can get you this riled up you probably have some anger issues

>implying I'm riled up
there's nothing to get mad about though. i'm calmly stating the same facts that have been used in these threads since the beginning of /tg/. not my fault that you're too new to have seen them already

seems like you're just projecting your anger onto me now that you're dealing with your own buyers remorse for buying a game that was literally designed, as admitted by the lead designer, to be broken in every way possible

>> No.28762592

>>28762485

Martials can keep up with monsters in combat (well rogues and monks struggle) but in general PF is much better if you avoid the fuck out of the 4 PCs vs a single CR+3 or +4 monster which martials are admittedly going to struggle with.

The major problem with PF is that they didn't do enough about the core spellbook's power and have promptly done away with some of the limitations on caster power.

Oh and they failed to give the fighter stuff to do out of combat

>> No.28762593
File: 152 KB, 691x1295, No Parrot.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
28762593

>>28762452

Oh, I know that. I wasn't talking about balance. Just streamlining.

>>28762447

The core game is the same, same some changes. Everything built around it is altered or new.

>>28762462

I have a hard time finding fault in pathfinder where 3.5 did it better. None of my games are super rule heavy, or combat intense, so maybe I just haven't been exposed to them.

>>28762485

I've been playing a unarmed fighter and the CMB system seems to make much more sense then the grapple one. Sure, I miss the knock down ability of 3.5, but I don't think the monk is gimped at all.

>>28762485

I have used tumble once in a 3.5 campaign in all my time of playing table top games. It's not the best part about being a rogue or monk. Rogues are good for sneak attacks and skill monkies. Monks are good for shutting down single targets by forcing them to fight on their own terms.

>> No.28762615

>>28762593
You have no idea what you're talking about. Stop.

>> No.28762632

>>28762593

No slight intended but you seem to be playing in a low system mastery game. Which really isn't a problem and is frankly where PF does okay but it's really easy to miss the flaws when nbody is actively stressing the flaws of the system

>> No.28762644

>>28762593
>Rogues are good for sneak attacks and skill monkies. Monks are good for shutting down single targets by forcing them to fight on their own terms.

Tumble was the bread and butter of both rogues and monks back in 3.5. I'm not sure you know this, but tumble is made at a flat check to allow you to move without provoking AoOs.

This allows rogues to move into a flanking position to deliver a sneak attack without taking AoOs. Likewise with monks.

It's by and large the skill that made "sneak attack" as good as it was in the first place.

>> No.28762650

>>28762592
>Martials can keep up with monsters in combat
Not by 3.5 standards. 3.5 martials can and will shitstomp Pathfinder martials in a comparison, and that's before bringing in things like ToB that make PF look like a sick joke.

>> No.28762660

>>28762615

Don't be a dick, he doesn't see the flaws because they don't show up as clearly in his game due to low system mastery.

We can educate him about the problems without being rude aspie neckbeards

>> No.28762696

>>28762593
>I have used tumble once in a 3.5 campaign in all my time of playing table top games. It's not the best part about being a rogue or monk. Rogues are good for sneak attacks and skill monkies.

That's literally what tumble was used for.

>Tumble at one-half speed as part of normal movement, provoking no attacks of opportunity while doing so.
>Tumble at one-half speed through an area occupied by an enemy (over, under, or around the opponent) as part of normal movement, provoking no attacks of opportunity while doing so.

Are you sure you were playing 3.5? What did you think tumble was used for?

>> No.28762697

>>28762149
Nah, just decided not to include it because it's really just reskinned magic.

>> No.28762710

>>28762650

Simply talking about PF martial vs PF monsters. Keep in mind one-shotting CR appropriate monsters is not seen as a design goal of PF.

One-shotting monsters in 3.5 is easy but isn't necessarily what everyone wants out of the game

>> No.28762712

>>28762660
>Don't be a dick
I'm not. I'm telling the truth.

>> No.28762714

>>28762697
Except for the fact that it's a completely different mechanical subsystem...?

>> No.28762756

>>28762207
> Pathfinder and 3.5 is fine if nobody has system mastery

If you're lucky. If you're not, someone is going to say that hey, druids sound cool! I love tree hippies. Then they'll take a riding dog as an animal companion at level 1 because hey, ogs are awesome! And then later they realise that oooh, if I take natural spell I can be a bear with a bear companion summoning bears, how unBEARable lel! And now look, we've got one character outshining the rest of the party without having the slightest bit of system mastery. 3.5/PF works if players DO have system mastery, and they use it to work together and make an enjoyable experience for everyone, rather than trying to 'win D&D'.

>> No.28762774

>>28762710
>Keep in mind one-shotting CR appropriate monsters is not seen as a design goal of PF.
Certain PF melee can do this. A Sohei can, and that's a Monk(albeit with +5 to hit and damage and flurrying with a real weapon). So can a Barbarian, and any build that takes advantage of a Barbarian dip well. A Paladin can do it with the double damage Judgement spell.

The issue is that if you AREN'T oneshotting monsters at your CR, many of which can turn around and one-round a PC in full attack range or severely wound them by high levels, you're not keeping even with them and you're going to suck against enemies with higher CRs. That's bad.

>> No.28762778

>>28762714
not him, but I disagree; it just replaces more traditional vancian magic with a different from of quantificatione; ie: a mana pool

>> No.28762819

>>28762756

The bear animal companion is actually pretty mediocre in PF.

Druids could use some further nerfing in PF but the days of the druid being good at eveything are gone because you either need to focus on physical stats or mental stats.

3.5 druids could be SAD and still be awesome in melee

>> No.28762841

>>28762710
>One-shotting monsters in 3.5 is easy but isn't necessarily what everyone wants out of the game
Spending one round full attacking and having a boatload of options that can be used to replace full attacking is better than spending two rounds full attacking because everything that isn't full attacking sucks.

>> No.28762843

>>28762207
Weirdly enough, I found the complete opposite.

For me, 3.5/PF only works when all or most of the players have system mastery.

My DM regularly takes part in edition war arguments on /tg/. He knows the flaws of the game like the back of his hand, and he sat down and talked to us beforehand about them so that we could try to curb them. We do have a wizard, and he's arguably the most well versed in the game, so he takes care not to make the newer players feel redundant.

>> No.28762850
File: 59 KB, 736x602, 1386119828707.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
28762850

>>28762644
>>28762696
>>28762632
>>28762615

Couldn't you just take the mobility feat, which I thought was core on Rogues. With a monk combat maneuverability isn't as important. It's about disarming and tripping your opponents, or grappling them into submission.

The one time I made my tumble check was after falling 20 feet to take half damage.

>> No.28762865

>>28762850
No, no you couldn't, and you shouldn't. Mobility is shit and so is the prerequisite.

>> No.28762881

>>28762850
>With a monk combat maneuverability isn't as important. It's about disarming and tripping your opponents, or grappling them into submission.
Monks are BAD at combat maneuvers. They have low CMBs compared to the real fighting classes and that is a serious handicap in a game where CMDs are really high compared to your bonuses.

Tripping is almost impossible for the Monk to do against any CR 10 enemy while they're actually level 10.

>> No.28762887

>>28762774

Meh, even the sword and board fighter which is by far the weakest build should be able to 2 round most monsters that are CR equivalent.

And the number of CR appropriate monsters that can one-shot a fighter in one round past level 6 or so is really small.

At low levels there is enough variances with crits that death can come quickly but later on there really aren't a ton of melee monsters that can do absolutely enormous DPR.

>> No.28762893

>>28762850
>being this bad at 3.5
I'm not sure what to tell you. Lurk more, I suppose.

>> No.28762912

>>28762850
Mobility is a trap feat put into the game to trick new players.

Or at least it was in 3.5. When you use tumble, you make the check on your own terms. A flat 15 to move without AoOs, whereas you're letting the enemy potentially get a hit on you by hoping he doesn't break your AC.

It might be more viable in Pathfinder since tumble got so neutered.

>With a monk combat maneuverability isn't as important. It's about disarming and tripping your opponents, or grappling them into submission.

Oh lord no, Monks are awful at this. I mean, shit, they don't even have full BAB progression.

>> No.28762922

>>28762887
>And the number of CR appropriate monsters that can one-shot a fighter in one round past level 6 or so is really small.
It's not the Fighter that needs to worry. It's classes like the Monk and the Rogue.

>> No.28762943

>>28762841

Not everyone likes rocket launcher tag bro.

Being able to splat anything that's in charge range I guess can be fun for some people but maybe the game should be designed so that instagibbing the monsters isn't possible.

4e generally succeeds with this

>> No.28762966

>>28762887
>Meh, even the sword and board fighter which is by far the weakest build should be able to 2 round most monsters that are CR equivalent.
They can't do it at level 10 and I doubt they'd be any better at 15.

>> No.28762986

>>28762943
"Generally" is pretty accurate, as is "mostly." Still, depending on how nova-happy players are rocket-tag is most certainly a possibility.

>> No.28763043

>that all or nothing logic
>its impossible to comprehend that 3.5 players exist who recognize it has some imbalance and can play through it with minimal effort
>because everyone else's pet systems are paragons of balance and veritable cornocopias of player choice.

>not understanding how AC works and why the fighter is't going to need healing that often
>not understanding how high fort saves, a decent dex, and cloak of resistance means spells won't touch his hitpoints either.
>and when he does get hit, he has a lot of hp to work through

Meanwhile any spell that targets the fighter's will save can have its caster taken down by one or two rubes, not even requiring caster support.

I'm just going to have to demo a game to show you I don't think the words are getting through.

Also some of the game creators are terrible dungeon masters, and so are most of the playtesters, I usually don't like mudslinging but I think its important you realize that the people responsible for those mistakes in the first place are the ones tripping over more retardation.

If you are the type of anon who can't figure out the reason why sleep is hard for a caster to get, then you need more dm experience or your game master does.

I don't have the time to go through all the examples now but Ill put some together and let tg play their favourite core only pets.

>> No.28763056

>>28762943
>Not everyone likes rocket launcher tag bro.
Rocket launcher tag is the only way you're going to make 3E's shitty combat interesting. PF combat manages to be even more static and retarded than 3E's was because it's more of the same but with lower numbers and weaker melee.

If you wanted combat that wasn't instagib city but actually had interesting stuff going on, that's what 4E was for.

>> No.28763081

>>28762986
Novaing an enemy to death in 4e is still possible, it's just a team effort now instead of one guy casting the "I win the encounter" spell.

I actually had one game where we bursted down a 4e Solo in 2 rounds with some dailies and good coordination. And a Warlord, can't forget the Warlord.

>> No.28763088

>>28763043
>not understanding how AC works and why the fighter is't going to need healing that often
AC requires absurd focus to get to the point where they aren't being hit. This is not negotiable. This can be worked out by comparing what you can get from WBL to CR averages.

>> No.28763108

>>28762986

Really rocket launcher tag really only comes into place with SAD casters vs single target opposition using SoL tactics.

If monsters aren't CR +3 or +4 their success rate with SoL tactics vs PCs is somewhat limited (assuming people actually invest in Save defenses) so really you are only talking about the handful of melee monsters that can insta-gib melee types with one set of full actions.

Granted Monks and Rogue are still going to struggle but they are almost completely irredeemable under the current math.

>> No.28763149

>>28763043
>any spell that targets the fighter's will save can have its caster taken down by one or two rubes

Except if the Fighter has any chance of getting close to the caster, that shit Wizard has already failed.

More likely the Fighter gets instagibbed after a Wizard spams Save or Die spells from 50 feet up in the air behind a Wind Wall wit his Teleport contingency spell ready in case he somehow manages to get hit so he can Rope Trick to re-prepare his spells and Scry and Die the Fighter at a time of his choosing.

>> No.28763189

>>28763088

Actually it's generally a point of diminishing returns anyway because of the cost of stuff like natural armor bonuses. You simply can't reduce the success rate of CR appropriate monsters that much.

Damage negation simply isn't that viable unless you play with a mook heavy GM.

Of course full healing between battles is pretty much the norm so it's not like damage negation is really that important anyway.

Now if you do a armor as DR variant + class based defense you can get some better math but it's a more complicated game

>> No.28763213

>>28759960
> hilarious
People like you are the kind of cancer that plays fishmalks.

Realism =/= immersion. I can be immersed in something nonrealistic, so long as it takes itself seriously.

>> No.28763442

>>28762850
>Monk is about tripping and disarms

Yeah, that's not going to work when CR-equivalent CMD scales such that by 10th level an optimized tripper is sitting on a 20%-or-so chance of succeeding on when those actions are possible (and half the time, the monsters are straight up immune). Is your GM just throwing a bunch of Human Expert X's at you or something?

>> No.28763614

>>28763442

Unfortunately full BAB is still way overrated as a class element.

Yes it's critical to have a success hitting people but if BAB isn't needed to actually impact the battlefield the absence of it simply isn't that big of a deal.

The result is that fighters have full BAB but nothing else and the monks and rogues have 3/4 BAB and some skills but technically need full BAB to be fully functional.

If you go ahead and promote all the martial classes to full BAB then you can start balancing them with other relevant class features.

Personally i'm not entirely sure that everyone shouldn't just have full BAB because it's not like Wizards really need it and you can balance Clerics and Druids easier if you don't overrate full BAB

>> No.28763658

>>28760183
In every group I've ever played with that kind of shit would get laughed at. For us, nat 20s were automatic successes at something that could potentially be succeeded at. If you're a muscle bound strong man trying to punch through a wooden wall then a nat 20 would let you do that. If you're a wizard trying to punch through concrete no role will let you succeed. If you actually have DMs allowing nat 20s to do something completely impossible you need to stop playing with autists.

>> No.28763661

>>28763614
And now you're 4e.

>> No.28763676

>>28762819
Bear is decent at low levels, switch to an allosaurus or large cat at higher. PF animals are no longer outperforming the fighter, but they're still doing enough damage to make the fighter look like an extra.

>> No.28763687

>>28762819
That's because the PF bear starts off small, rather than at medium.

Instead you have to worry about the big cat that has retarded stats and Pounce by level 7. I mean, really, 23 STR, +6 natural armor, 17 DEX and CON, and an attribute point to spend in what you want.

>> No.28763710

>>28763661

4e has some completely valid ideas.

4e + PF in some combination would be a very viable alternative to eithe

>> No.28763899

>>28760138
No buddy, your problem is a shitty DM.
A natural 1 means a special kind of failure, not the DM doing whatever he wants in order to screw over the player. With my regular gorup, we always use a fumble table. So you do get characters throwing their weapons around by accident, but it's down to a roll of the dice, not the DM pulling shit out of his arse.

>> No.28763913

>>28763614
Monk gets effectively full BAB for maneuvers as a class feature. CMD just scales shittily in PF for everyone. A full BAB class with 26 strength and +4 from improved X will have +27 CMB on his chosen maneuver at level 15. Random CR 14-15 monsters:

Ancient white dragon, CMD 44 (48 vs trip). Chance of success, 20%
Phoenix, CMD 50. Chance of success, 5% (nat 20 only)
Nalfeshnee, CMD 42. Chance of success, 30%

It's not this awful at low levels, but the higher you go the worse it gets.

>> No.28763996

One problem I see a lot is that the shitty, uninvolved players tend to stay out of harm's way, while the players that put in hard work for the group are the ones getting max damage greatsword crits to the face.

Our DM threw a difficult encounter at us, and the Summoner (playing PF) just sat on his ass throwing Acid Splash. No summons, no buffs, nothing. Meanwhile our Sorcerer was nearly annihilated, and my Barbarian as well.

>> No.28764071

>>28763913
Also, giving everybody full BAB only hurts this, since CMD is determined by BAB. In fact, it's a straight up nerf, since the only times combat maneuvers are at even maybe-usable is against NPCs with class levels in 1/2 and 3/4-BAB classes.

There isn't a quick fix. The math of the system doesn't work out, because it was never intended to.

>> No.28764079

>Nat 20 is always success
Can I take 20 for transcendance then?

>> No.28764324

>>28764071

If you normalize CMB and CMD it's much easier to figure out the math correctly so that you can generally succeed in maneuvers a certain percentage of the time but it's not an instant gib tactic.

Or you can change what grab/grapple means so that you can have a high success rate with it but someone being grabbed can still do something else especially if they are bigger

>> No.28764460

>>28763676
>PF animals are no longer outperforming the fighter
I'm coming up with a different story. The issue I'm seeing is that all attacks with primary natural weapons are made at your highest attack bonus, as opposed to one attack being made at the highest and all of the rest of them being made at -5, and unlike in 3.5 there's nothing stopping you from using all of your natural attacks at once.

As far as I can tell, anyways, because there are no fucking rules on this that say anything about full attacks. The writing on this is so opaque that Paizo should be ashamed of themselves.

>> No.28764491

How to fix D&D 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, AND Next:

Play True AD&D, consisting of OD&D, BD&D, AD&D, and AD&D 2E all informing and assisting one another.

>> No.28764514

>>28764460

Are you implying that anyone with natural attacks gets pounce for free?

Because that's totally not the case bro.

>> No.28764559

>>28758993
>How to fix DnD 3.5
play PF instead, that's pretty much what it is; 3.5, but fixed.

>> No.28764574

>>28764514
No, I mean that there's literally nothing saying "you take -5 to attack with all attacks after the first when making full attacks with natural weapons" or "when full attacking you can only use one primary natural weapon". There's nothing written about it in the full attack or natural attacks section and the monster blocks in PF lack a full attack section.

>> No.28764586

>>28764559
Pathfinder didn't fix shit.

>> No.28764636

>>28764559
>Pathfinder
>fixing anything

>> No.28764646

>>28764491
Enjoy your retarded, broken kits from 2E destroying the game and Jedi classes from 1E.

>> No.28764733
File: 1.39 MB, 224x178, 1378605200226.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
28764733

>>28760753
>4e has no options when I remove half the options!

>> No.28764812

>>28764733
If we removed all the options in 3.5/PF that were shitty, what'd we be left with?

>> No.28764835

>>28764812
Cleric, Druid, and Wizard.

>> No.28765100

>>28764574
Apparently, I'm right. You get all of your primary natural attacks in a full attack at their maximum bonus in Pathfinder. I'm going to do some math on this and see what I get.

>> No.28765159

>>28758993
DnD Next solved everything

Also everyone complains but no one does anything about it. No one will ever actually care enough to make the system and crunch and balance all the numbers.

>> No.28765179

>>28758993

http://dnd-wiki.org/wiki/Category:Tome

>> No.28765190

>>28764586
>>28764636
you've never actually read any of the PF books have you?

>> No.28765198

>>28765100
Actually, it's dependant on primary or secondary natural attacks (the latter get the -5 to hit and only get 1/2 strenght bonus applied to them, but most monsters and abilities give you primary natural attacks)

>> No.28765234

>>28765198
Well, yes, the secondary natural attacks get the -5 penalty, but cats only get primary attacks, which is why I was confused as hell. In 3.5 it didn't work like this.

>> No.28765250

>>28765190
Yes, I have. It's awful and if you think it fixed anything you're a retard who doesn't understand the game.

>> No.28765792

Never had an issue playing 3.x in any of the groups I joined/DM'd mostly because the groups wanted to play a game and work with one another to have fun, not backstab and shoot'n'loot.

BUT that being said, my house rules for mitigating balance issues if they come up:

1- All spells take a number of rounds equal to their level to be used, or in the case of instantaneous spells, recover from.
In other words, casting a sixth level spell took 6 rounds, or the spell went off, and you needed five consecutive rounds recovery.

2- all components had to be carried, counted into encumbrance individually, and immediately availible "It's in my backpack" did not wash

3- Concentration checks were brutal, especially in combat

>> No.28765808

>>28765792
Why did you take a shit on Bards?

>> No.28765846

>>28765792
The first rule is the most retarded thing I've ever seen catch on. Why do people think that's going to do anything but make casters unplayable in combat while noncasters are still shit compared to monsters?

>> No.28765894

How to fix DnD: stop making this pointless thread every day.

>> No.28765947

>>28759214

>no fighters allowed
>it's high magic, why is the hero not magic

Because fuck you, son. I'll fight magic on my own terms. Maybe I *want* to play the dude who charges through a horde of ravening monstrosities with naught but metal and bravery, hefting a fuckhueg axe over my shoulder and letting the enemy know it's going right for their necks.

>> No.28765956

Math =/= good decision making
Good decision making =/= actually being prepared
Wanting to be prepared =/= having the time or available sources to
Low teir needingraw bent in places to honor the spirit of the game =/= the end of the world
Experience scaling =/= shit last option, it was the standard in 2adnd

TBH the "fixes" aren't even fixes they are straight up options in core or splat, and out of all the ideas you really only need one. Very little effort, like unlocking gestalt.

TBH none of my games have ever even needed fixing, even the twinks and munchkins, the flying windwall wizards and CoDzillas spent more time whining about wanting more downtime than stealing thunder.

>> No.28765975

>>28759214
>mentally handicapped retard that cannot into magic
I thought you were banning fighters, not barbarians.

>> No.28766004

this thread is still hilarious

people pretending that their clean room thought experiments and calculations are actually "system mastery", and that they matter to real gameplay in non-dysfunctional groups

oh, and then there's the complete disregard for everything that happens outside of combat...

>> No.28766007

>>28765947
Yeah, you be that guy. Until a wizard casts charm person.

>> No.28766028

>>28766007
Not that anon, but how about you re-balance it so that wizards don't get powerful so fast?

>> No.28766058

>>28766007

oh, yeah charm person is great... until someone makes their save

>> No.28766293

>>28765100
Okay, done. Also confirmed the obvious; shield bashing is shit until much later in the game because 1d6+a pittance isn't going to make up for the -2 penalty you eat until you start getting free shield bashes for criticals.

20 STR Fighter with a Falcata, 28 DPR while sword and boarding without bashing. Bashing lost DPR and caused some serious MAD. When 2Hing the Falcata, the Fighter pulled 34 DPR, which means he 3 rounds the average CR 7 mob. Not impressed.

The unbuffed lion pulled an incredibly low 20 DPR when staying in full attack range. Pouncing, no Power Attack, that shot up to 41.65 DPR. Power Attacking, 45.5 DPR. Add Greater Magic Fang onto that and you're looking at 55.5 DPR.

>> No.28766355

>>28766004
>people pretending that their clean room thought experiments and calculations are actually "system mastery", and that they matter to real gameplay in non-dysfunctional groups
Let me let you in on a little secret.

Fighters are at their best in a white room scenario. They don't have to worry about terrain stacked against them preventing them from full attacking, they don't have to worry about being shit on by the first Will save debuff that flies their way, and they don't have to worry about their impotence out of combat because none of those things matter. MAD? Doesn't matter, and neither does the fact that they're going to be stuck full attacking the entire time.

>> No.28766367

>>28765100
Animals still have 3/4 BAB, and have fewer hit dice than fighter has class levels starting at 7th (and equal by 4th). You're also only getting STR and 2 for 1 power attack while the fighter is getting 3/2 STR and 3 for 1 power attack. I've only done the analysis on a few sample levels, and it was back pre-ARG, so there's a chance that there's some period that fighters are outperformed, but I don't think that's the case. At any rate, it's not hard to pick up 2 claws and a bite as a fighter in PF if the nat attacks end up putting the animal ahead.

>> No.28766378

>>28760113
truenamer is not overpowed, actually its considered the worse class, it has it own separated tier

>> No.28766536

>>28766367
>Animals still have 3/4 BAB
That only starts mattering later. Starting out with more HD than the Fighter is and has always been stupid.
>You're also only getting STR and 2 for 1 power attack while the fighter is getting 3/2 STR and 3 for 1 power attack.
Since the animal companion has much more STR starting at 7 and the cat has many more attacks(5 on a pounce!), that doesn't break down in the Fighter's favor. If you're comparing a 2H guy to the cat, disregarding iterative penalties on the Fighter, the Fighter gets 3x return on his STR for raw damage and 12 damage from Power Attack while the companion gets 5x return and 20 from Power Attack when they're both at -2.

>> No.28766582

>>28766355

meanwhile, in another white room scenario, the wizard never runs out of spells, never has to deal with counterspells, never fails his concentration checks and always seems to have the right spell memorized for every situation

>> No.28766631

>>28766582
>the wizard never runs out of spells,
Crafting, scribe scroll, etcetera. Doesn't happen regularly with a good Wizard.
>never has to deal with counterspells
Being counterspelled is good because it means the enemy caster wasted a turn instead of raping your party's face off when they had initiative.
>never fails his concentration checks
You shouldn't be making those frequently and you have many tools to stop damage from being dealt with you, with two of the most powerful ones being available to you as soon as level 2 spells.
>and always seems to have the right spell memorized for every situation
Pretty easy to prepare a spell list that works in 95% of situations. You might not think so, but then again, you seem to not understand the Wizard.

>> No.28766641

>>28766293
You literally picked the level at which the lion is at its best in the DPR race, and compared it to a fighter with unenchanted weapons. You're also failing to account for the next-to-zero chance that all of your attacks hit and you get the rake on the punce, the -15% chance to hit you've got on the fighter, and the existence of greater magic weapon.

Try doing an analysis next time, instead of stacking the deck.

>> No.28766676

>>28766631

i'm sorry your dm sucks at challenging spellcasters :)

>> No.28766705

>>28766676
>Someone points out system flaws
>3tard blames the DM

This entire thread, folks.

>> No.28766736

>>28766705

if you want a system where the dm doesn't matter, we're not in the same hobby.

which is fine by me, i probably wouldn't be able to take a single mining of your whining irl

>> No.28766765

>>28766641
>and compared it to a fighter with unenchanted weapons
+2 weapon, actually, and the falcata is the best DPR weapon you can get.
>You're also failing to account for the next-to-zero chance that all of your attacks hit and you get the rake on the punce
Wrong, and you can automatically rake on a pounce.
>the -15% chance to hit you've got on the fighter
Accounted for that too. The Fighter even has Furious Focus to make them more accurate for one hit. Didn't do anything for their DPR.

>> No.28766786

>>28766736
I want a system where the DM isn't fighting constantly against a design philosophy which explicitly is meant to reward munckinism in order to get anything resembling balance. Nice strawman, though.

>> No.28766810

>>28766786

that's nice. seriously, i hope you find a system that works for you! why do you have to care so much about other people's fun, though?

>> No.28766819

>>28766765
Show the math, then. I see the same numbers as those which when you assume always hitting.

I admit I missed rake. My bad.

>> No.28766878

>>28766641
I picked the level because it's the lion first gets its size bonus, not to shit on the Fighter(although the Fighter is *awful* at this level range). If you want it at level 10, I can do that.

>> No.28766900

>>28764646
Can you post the experience table for the Jedi? Was that from Dragon Magazine or something?

>> No.28766907

>>28766810
I'm just going to link to this guy >>28762548. It's not about your fun, it's about your making objectively wrong statements as fact and acting like a smug cunt.

>> No.28766951

>>28766819
Fighter Guy
20 STR, 7 BAB, EWP Falcata, Power Attack, Furious Focus, +2 Falcata, Weapon Focus etc., Weapon Training +1
+16/+11, 1d10+10
vs AC 20, PA
.8*18.5+.1*2*.8*18.5 = 17.76
.45*18.5+.1*2*.45*18.5 = 9.99

2H
.8*22.5+.1*2*.8*22.5 = 21.6
.45*22.5+.1*2*.45*22.5 = 12.15

Cat
24 STR, 4 BAB, Power Attack, Weapon Focus(Claws), Toughness
Bite: +10, 1d8+8
2 Claws: +11, 1d8+8
2 Rakes: +11, 1d8+8

Full attack
.55*11.5+.05*.55*11.5 = 6.64125
.6*10.5+.05*.6*10.5 = 6.615*2 = 13.23

Pounce
.65*11.5+.05*.65*11.5 = 7.84875
.7*10.5+.05*.7*10.5 = 7.7175*4 = 30.87

Power Attack
.55*15.5+.05*.55*15.5 = 8.95125
.6*14.5+.05*.6*14.5 = 9.135*4 = 36.54

GMF
.6*16.5+.05*.6*16.5 = 10.395
.65*15.5+.05*.65*15.5 = 11.26125*4 = 45.045

>> No.28766973

>>28766951
I stand corrected. I'm going to have to look over my math from ages ago, then, because this isn't the result I remember.

>> No.28767007

>>28766951

holy shit, this is spergy as fuck

have you considered spending more time on games you actually like?

>> No.28767042

>>28767007
>have you considered spending more time on games you actually like?
Calculating DPR is fun. Do you have a problem with that?

>> No.28767065

>>28766900
If I could, I would. I don't have it anymore.

>> No.28767069

>>28767042

only if you use your powers for evil

>> No.28767189

>>28766973
It's an issue of +8 to STR and a damage dice increase applied five times on attacks with no iterative penalties and full STR damage bonuses compared to getting two attacks with an iterative penalty and with slightly higher base damage. In play, the bigger issue wouldn't even be the damage, it'd be the fact that the animal companion has Pounce and is reasonably accurate.

>> No.28767231

>>28767069
>Melophet, the optimizer-wizard, spend years developing a system for measuring the vitality of a creature using a single integer. After further years of observation and experimentation, he created a system for predicting based on weapon type, fighting style, and natural strength exactly how much damage a given creature would do to this number over the course of six seconds.
>It was then that Melophet swore never again to adventure with swordsmen, as the Druid's pet kitty was proven to be far more effective in battle.

>> No.28768262

>>28766878
Level 10 results against 24 AC: 20 DPR on a full attack, 42 DPR on a pounce, 47 DPR on a power attack pounce, 54 DPR with Greater Magic Fang, 59 DPR if GMF is cast twice on its claws. With a Corrosive AoMF bought for it, it's got ~64.5 DPR with one casting of GMF and 70 DPR with two, which is really, really high for an animal companion and beats most Fighter builds. They have issues against high DR if you don't abuse Greater Magic Fang, however.

>> No.28768467

>>28767065
Oh, because I have every single issue of Dragon from TSR itself, OCRed fully and searchable, as well as Aeolia's index, and I happen to know that you're lying.

True AD&D is the superior edition. It transcends editions; it is a way of life. What's dead may never die, but rises again; stronger.

>> No.28768674

>>28768467
It's not called the Jedi, dipshit. It was something like the Templar, but that wasn't its name either.

>> No.28769167

>>28767231
>Although Malophet would be constantly reminding the Druid he should trade that kitty in for an acid spitting dinosaur when he gets a chance. The loss of an adorable pet is more than worth the extra killing ability.

>> No.28769725

>>28760169
This is 3.5 we're talking about

>> No.28769791

>>28760372
Go play a game of Pandemic where the medic's ability is changed to "spend an action to remove all cubes of one colour on the board" and see how fun that is.

>> No.28769816

>>28760380
>Eschew Materials

>> No.28770137

>>28763043
>Also some of the game creators are terrible dungeon masters, and so are most of the playtesters, I usually don't like mudslinging but I think its important you realize that the people responsible for those mistakes in the first place are the ones tripping over more retardation.

I don't think you understand that d&d 3.5 was purposefully designed to be this way.

The creator himself literally stated this on his blog. He wanted it to be more like MtG and called it "Ivory Tower Gaming".

>its impossible to comprehend that 3.5 players exist who recognize it has some imbalance and can play through it with minimal effort

No you fucking cunt. You offered us ways to balance the system, and said that the reason it was unbalanced was because nobody was listening to you. Then, surprise surprise, you have no idea what the fuck makes the game unbalanced in the first place. Fuck you for twisting your goalposts like that.

>because everyone else's pet systems are paragons of balance and veritable cornocopias of player choice.

Nobody said this. We're still waiting on your supposed fixes that "neuter the broken parts" of the system.

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action