[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/tg/ - Traditional Games


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.




File: file.png (387 KB, 384x499)
387 KB
387 KB PNG
For discussion of D&D 3.5e

>SRD
https://www.d20srd.org/index.htm

>3e Trove
the trove is now torrent. SEED PLEASE bit<dot>ly/2Y1w4Md

>D&D Tools
https://dndtools.net/
https://srd.dndtools.org

Last Thread: >>86046243

Exotic Edition
Have you ever tried to make exotic weapon proficiency worth the feat and the hassle?
>>
Is there a compilation of average monster stats (hp, ab, ac, saves, etc) by CR somewhere?
>>
>>86098115
No, but if Pathfinder devs are to be believed, you can use the Pathfinder stats-by-CR, and just upgrade the CR by one step for what it would be in 3.5, since a CR 1 monster in Pathfinder is supposed to be equivalent to a CR 2 monster in D&D 3.5 I believe.
>>
>>86098115
>>86098296
Alright, I actually found something quite interesting.
>>
>>86098115
Yes. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1J7KongPAMxJCKuSlDFIyRKj7YPWsTP2fJUh_tuS16Qs/edit#gid=1854430337
>>
>>86094468
This is still cope and you do not understand why you are dumb.
>>
File: d&d_art_laziness.png (679 KB, 921x592)
679 KB
679 KB PNG
Alright 3.5 bros I gave it a shot. I made a prestige class review video for the tempest. I mentioned my ambitions a few times in previous threads, so I finally did it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmFI37SeSc0

My goal is to do one of these for every 3.5 prestige class. Seeing as this is a first attempt, any feedback or advice would really help me. I do have access to a better microphone. If my voice is a problem in general let me know. I recorded myself in audacity and did my best to make myself sound more listenable. I didn't go directly off a script but I had something akin to one. Anything I should add to my "formula" for the reviews here? Should I get someone else to narrate it? Should I ditch the whole idea? And if I do continue it, which prestige class should I review next? Please be brutally honest, I want these videos to be as good as possible so if I have to make compromises I will.
>>
>>86098779
You even put the little personal story snippet in the beginning.
Nice!
And talking about the opportunity cost and what are these other options is really, really good info.
Your voice sounds good and your diction ain't bad.I'd say as you evolve your style, you should add some graphics, some free stock images instead of just the one static image.
Also, some low volume background music would be lovely, and would mask some of the white noise coming from your mic.
Here's an idea. Since you are grading these, you could put some graphics on the screen as you talk about the pros and cons of each category (good old gold stars), and have an actual ranking with your grading so far.
If you want to go even further beyond, make a google sheet with the grades and some of your commentary and add it to the description of the feat.
All in all, I'm really impressed for a first go.
>>
>>86098946
>and have an actual ranking with your grading so far.
and have an actual ranking of each class graded so far at the end of the video.*
>>
What are some martial PRC that get stuff good enough to keep getting levels on it and that don't need convoluted multiclassing to get going?

Thinking of stuff like Paladin 5 / Hellreaver X, Ranger 5 / Horizon Walker X or Fighter 6 / Disciple of Dispater.
>>
>>86098946
>>86099008
Alright I'll give that a shot. Any ideas for categories I could go into besides just "concept" and "execution"? Stuff like "ease of entry" and the like? I was gonna do "fun" and "power" as well but this felt like a bad prestige class to start with those on.
>>
>>86099190
Revenant Blade, though that's because it has a ridiculous capstone.
>>
>>86099190
Occult Slayer, Outcast Champion if you can meet/handwave the race requirements
>>
>>86099336
Since you commented on the trade off of both the per-requisites and the class itself, you might as well rank it based on that also.
I think you could also sparingly grade random category for some class or another like "gishiness", fun, "bear summoning bears riding a bear", something silly just for fun.
But overall I think the format you have is pretty good.
It's the perfect kind of video for me to listen to while taking a shower or washing the dishes.
After a while (5 videos or so?), when you are felling more comfortable with the process, you might want to start a secondary series to run in parallel.
Maybe something a little broader like talking about whole sub-systems and the like, discussing things that changed from 3.0 to 3.5, maybe a whole video on the history of the changes polymorph effects went through even.
There's a lot you can do with your channel, but that's for the future.
>>
>>86099190
I've heard good things about runescarred berserker, and is generally uncomplicated.
>>
>>86099549
>Outcast Champion
That class is pretty cool.
What's the context behind the racial requirements.
>Outcast champions bring hope to those who have no place in society.
The class reads like it would work just fine as any race, as it's a pretty broad concept.
>>
>>86099590
Yeah I was planning to do some alternate series as well, maybe some on monsters, but I'm not sure yet.
>>
>>86099336
Here's some of the questions I ask myself when looking at a prestige class -

How far out of your way do you need to go to not only qualify for the prestige class, but actually utilize it well? Am I planning for this from level 1 or can it dovetail with my build by accident?
How many unique rewards does it offer as an actual build? Am I better off just taking a few feats to do this gimmick?
Is it fucking badass? Would I make a character just to play this class?
Does it open up opportunities for my party to do sick shit in concert with me? Theorycrafting is all well and good but it needs to work in a team.

It's easy to compare things like damage per round or minmaxed builds but I think "how often is a dwarven defender going to defend a goddamn thing" or "what are the dumbest spells for a spellwarp sniper to turn into a ray" is a much more interesting type of topic for you to tackle.
>>
>>86098115

Trailblazer touches on this a little bit too.
>>
Posting in this thread has made me want to 1) go through the different 3.x books and look at the evolution and history of the system and 2) play some games with an open mind to the game as it is
>>
>>86100564
>It's easy to compare things like damage per round or minmaxed builds but I think "how often is a dwarven defender going to defend a goddamn thing" or "what are the dumbest spells for a spellwarp sniper to turn into a ray" is a much more interesting type of topic for you to tackle.
This is some good advice.
>>
>>86100877
>2) play some games with an open mind to the game as it is
Starting with the Multiclass XP penalty, of course.
>>
>>86098779
>My goal is to do one of these for every 3.5 prestige class
see you in 2042 when you're done
>>
>>86099190
champion of gwynharwif is absolute kino
>>
>>86103290
Yeah. I think the effect of that is to push toward a party of mostly gishes and casters that 1-20 smoothly.
>>
>>86098779
Nice job anon. Kudos for the project, its aims are monumental!
>>
>>86098626
"This is cope" is not an argument and you are an autist unable to understand scenarios and playstyles.
If it depended on you, not even 5% of this edition would be played.
The only thing you are doing is to repeat 10 years old optimization board memes and saying "cope".
>>
>TQ
If players opted to come from a certain part of the world, D20 Modern Firearms were gated behind Exotic Weapon Proficiency. Probably the only way I've seen it used outside of specific niche builds by players with a much higher proficiency in charop than I have.


For my own purposes though
Anyone know of some features, races, prestige classes or other options that lend themselves to poisons in any significant measure? Cloudkill and similar spells seemed like a first-line to check but I wonder if there might be others I missed and should consider.

No particular concept in mind yet; wanted to see what was available first before I looked into fleshing it out, but it mostly looks to be a small set of lists of various poisons (as one might find in Complete Scoundrel, BOVD, or BOED's anti-evil toxins) rather than full PrC's that I've located at least.
>>
>>86100810
>Trailblazer
What do you guys think about their change to full attack?
Basically if I have my fighter hitting on a +9 at level 6 (when my BAB is +6/+1 in 3.5) I can now full attack for +7/+7.
Higher level iterative are removed.
>>
>>86105200
>you are an autist unable to understand scenarios and playstyles.
No. It's the other way around. You are incapable of understanding why scenarios you make up in your head don't work out the way you think they do even when presented with math proving that they don't, not even in highly favorable conditions.
>>
>>86105287
Anon, my point is that I accept that there are 2 possible (more actually) playstyles, you don't.
You are the one not accepting it and throwing a shitfit because a maneuver (or spell I presume) doesn't work 100% of times.
>>
>>86105287
And I forgot: your "math" assumes pounce AND shocktrooper AND kaorti resin to be viable.
Also still waiting an answer to the fact that retards like you assume 1 monster of the higest CR as the only type of encounter.
>>
>>86105260
Don't like it. While some of Trailblazer is fine, the math underpinning their decisions is questionable.
>>
>>86105369
Care to elaborate on that? I ask because I heard people questioning it on 2 different sides.

One side says that -2 is shit and the highest to-hit should remain (say a +9/+9 in the example above.
Another side says the second attack being just a -2 on the theoretical first messes up with the armor, decreasing the effective window of the armor class of the enemies.

I find the second argument more solid, but I think it ignores that also the first attack suffers a -2. Perhaps it concerns the highest levels in which no additional attack is added? AFAIK, Traiblazer just says that at level 16 say if you have a +23, you will get a +22/+22. I think.

Maybe they should keep the penalty and do a +20/+20/+20? Or give an option for +22 OR +20/+20 OR +18/+18/+18?
I think it could mess up a rogue tho I mean arguably low level trailblazer already does or pushes to optimize.
>>
>>86105365
>your "math" assumes pounce AND shocktrooper AND kaorti resin to be viable.
No it doesn't.
>Also still waiting an answer to the fact that retards like you assume 1 monster of the higest CR as the only type of encounter.
I gave your Fighter a CR -2 lowball and didn't specify whether it was the entire encounter or not. CR -3 is the point where enemies stop being able to threaten you worth a damn if they don't have something special going for them.
>>
>>86105422
>Care to elaborate on that?
It's a nerf masquerading as a buff.
>>
>>86105427
>I gave your Fighter a CR -2 lowball and didn't specify whether it was the entire encounter or not. CR -3 is the point where enemies stop being able to threaten you worth a damn if they don't have something special going for them.
Anon you didn't demonstrate shit. You answered with assumptions that are critically retarded and you also assumed no party around what the fighter is doing, and you also ignored that caveats on which feats one wants to swap were made.
You are exactly the type of cancer that made the end of 3.5 unsufferable.
>>
>>86105453
Thank you anon, but you didn't really elaborate.
It's because it lowers the highest hit cap? High level fighters hit quite consistently, but I guess at level 6-8 the -2 is dire. Is this your point?
>>
>>86105510
Less attacks means less value out of raw stats and conditional buffs. It's not a nerf early when they're still equalized in attacks per round, but by the end of the game it's almost a 20% damage output drop baseline and so much worse if large buffs, more complex feats, or maneuvers get thrown into the mix.
>>
>>86098779
Definitely need to cut out the background noise
>>
>>86105561
Their point is that on a non-optimized or just normally optimized game third and fourth attacks would not hit.
I admit that in my experience this is the case only against well armored high CR foes, while buffed or "feated" warriors will generally use all the iteratives on groups of foes.
Hyper-optimized pouncers will use all of them, but aren't the 3rd and 4th attack on that type of PC already redundant anyway?
>>
>>86105602
The third attack is usually >50% but the last one rarely hits. Considering you can throw them away for maneuver attempts, easily get buffs in excess of +10, or use feats that change the calculus entirely it's hard not to see it as a nerf.
>>
>>86105501
Not that I have a dog in this race, but a little of this.
You do not need to spend every single feat on optimizing for combat.
I would dare to broach that outside of power attack and whatever feat(s) you need to pursue your method of attacking (as well as NOT going sword and board), you kinda have some free rein to do your thing, you just won't be as possibly powerful as you could be.
If you have something resembling party support, you can be a primary attacker, or if you have something like a rogue or another class with sneak/precision damage, you can be the anvil to their hammer.
The idea that you must be able to lone wolf a situation at all times runs counter to the proposed 'party' ideal of D&D.
>>86105662
It's not a nerf for the player who doesn't exceed mid level optimization. That is why ToB maneuvers are still of use for even rookie tier players.
>>
>>86098779
I highly recommend either just straight up lifting the rules out of the pdf via screenshot or abbreviated with bullet points because I watched the video and barely understand what the class did even though you described the class features verbally
Check out Auspex Tactics, a really dry-cut, 40k channel that manages to convey the information needed using pretty much just powerpoint https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6Gco9PWxmJmJ5CqfbChuiQ
Also maybe rate the PrCs on ease of qualifying for along with the fluff and actual execution like you already included
You need to stop fidgeting and bumping into the desk and try to minimalize saying "uh"

Love the idea of you fixing the class and I feel like your script is pretty decent. Keep it up bro
>>
>>86105715
Even in mid level optimization it's a nerf. It's only not a nerf when attacks per round are equal or in very low, sub-Iconic tier op where a character can barely hit their second attack.
>>
>>86100143
>Outcast Champion
>What's the context behind the racial requirements
Just because fluff, basically. Iirc it's presented in a segment in Races of Destiny about a city where half-humans are discriminated against, so it has a half-elf or half-orc restriction slapped on top. As a somewhat more "noble" character path to contrast the scar enforcer, which was fluffed as being for members of a group of half-elf supremacists.
As you say however it's an incredibly broad concept at it's heart and there's nothing mechanically tying it to those races beyond that. It would be a shame to see it restricted so in practice if a player was interested given just how decent the abilities are with a respectable smite-equivalent and its aura buffs. The book even says so.
>>
>>86105826
Question - how high is supposed to be the first attack at level 6 and at level 16.
You can give me a range say level 6 is +11 to +14 plus temp buffs.
AC in SRD monsters CR 6 goes from 16 to 23 mostly in the 19-21 range.
>>
>>86105993
> it's presented in a segment in Races of Destiny about a city where half-humans are discriminated against, so it has a half-elf or half-orc restriction slapped on top. As a somewhat more "noble" character path to contrast the scar enforcer,
Ah, that's the context then.
Thank you anon.
>>
>>86105826
I can demonstrate this. Let's make Not-Tordek. Not-Tordek uses a dwarven waraxe and a shield, takes the Weapon Focus feat tree, Power Attack, and Improved Critical as soon as it's available, starts with 15 STR and increases his STR at every chance, and has magic items that are somewhat under par for his level. Not good, but this is intentionally a low op character. Let's take snapshots of him at 6, 12, and 18 fighting something appropriate for each. At 6, a babau, at 12, a roper, and at 18, a nightcrawler because it's the only thing that isn't throwing everything off by being an under-CRed dragon or an under ACed animal that skews this.

At 6, Not-Tordek has a +1 axe and 16 STR. Against the Babau's 19 AC, that places normal iterative rules at 14.4375 DPR per full attack and Trailblazer's at 15.125. It's an increase, but not much of one. This makes sense because they make the same amount of attacks but one has a lower total penalty to deal with.

At 12, Not-Tordek has upgraded his axe to +3 and he's gotten a +4 belt of STR in addition to increasing his base STR to 18. Against the roper's 24 AC, normal iterative rules result in a DPR of 53.28 and Trailblazer rules result in 48.84.

At 18, Not-Tordek has gotten his hands on a +4 axe and a +6 belt of STR. Against the nightcrawler's 35 AC, this puts normal iteratives at 46.74 DPR and Trailblazer iteratives at 41.82. This is despite the nightcrawler's solid AC resulting in the second and third iteratives having a 35% and 10% hit chance.
>>
>>86106072
+11 and +28
>>
>>86106189
CR12, some more data (NTA)
Abyssal Basilisk AC 17
Pyro/Cryohydra AC 22
Frost Worm AC 18
Kolyarut AC 27 (!!!)
Kraken AC 20
Leonal AC 27 (fucking outsiders)
Le big scorpion AC 26
Elder Pudding AC 1 (ok, this one is special)
Puple Worm AC 19
Dragons are 26-28
>>
>>86106361
CR18 is the Nightcrawler then Dragons in the 32-37 range. BlaD 35, BluD 34, GreD 33, ReD and SilvD 32 (still relatively young), White Dragon is ancient at 37 bu the rest will be meh.

Less "swingy" than level 12 but there are only 2 types of monster here. Later manuals will probably increase the ACs from MM3.

In any case, question for >>86106189
I suppose Trailblazer assumes high buffing? a +2/3 here and there could make a difference. My players buff whenever is possible and I think the game assumes it too.
>>
>>86106412
Buffing makes the default rules stronger for the simple reason that there are more attacks for them to apply to. Consider a party pulling out some stops to help level 18 Not-Tordek. He gets polymorphed into a Sun Giant and buffed with Haste, Greater Heroism, and Prayer. That leaves his normal attack routine at +40/+40/+35/+30/+25 and his Trailblazer one at +40/+40/+40 for a base 3d8+25 damage. The latter dumps -7 into Power Attack, the former does nothing. The gap is now 194.04 to 155.61 while the latter is benefitting from Power Attack.
>>
>>86106627
I expected this but thank you for crunching it
>>
>>86106627
Does this take into account how power attack is "supposed" to be used?
I mean, with normal subtraction of to-hit.
Also, I presume this assumes overcoming any DR. Because otherwise PA could have a role and complicate everything.
>>
>>86106666
Yes, it just doesn't do anything to the hit chance because +33 to hit still only misses on a 2.
>>
>>86106699
>Yes, it just doesn't do anything to the hit chance because +33 to hit still only misses on a 2.
You mean the DR? PA will affect it after a certain penalty is taken.
>>
How would you buff the CA Ninja?
>>
>>86105589
Will a better mic help? I tried noise reduction in Audacity but it sucked. I'm in a pretty quiet place too.

>>86105750
Alright I'll try to do bullet points or screenshots next time. I'm used to listening to YouTube as audio only on my earbuds at work, I download a bunch of videos to mp3 in the morning before I go so I have stuff to listen to throughout the day.
I'll write a more solid script and avoid touching the mic at any cost.
Thanks for the feedback.
>>
>>86108558
The mic could be the issue or it could just be ambient noise from a fan or the AC
Unironically go into your closet and try a test recording there, the clothes dampen the sound a lot
>>
>>86108971
Alright I'll try that.
Should I write out a more explicit script and stick to it to avoid "uh" and "um"? I had one but I kept deviating from it as I thought of more things.

>>86108028
Ki dodge giving actual concealment would be a nice start.
>>
>>86108558
>>86109282
Did you do the entire video in one take?
If you did, you can just chop up the recording into a few separate ones. Maybe per subject or per "slide" if you go that route.
>>
>>86109411
It was like 3 or 4 takes but yeah they were a bit too long.
>>
So, the way I'm understanding it, if I wanna include Tome of Battle classes in my campaign, I should be vetoing fighters, paladins and monks?
>>
>>86110933
I wouldn't veto them, as much as warn your players that if they aren't playing fighter etc with the specific intent of going for some highly optimized multiclass shenanigans, that they are probably gonna have a bad time.
>>
>>86110933
This is totally not 3.5 persay, but the spiritual successor from pathfinder (path of war) has archetypes for base classes like the fighter and similar that, maybe with a little tweaking you could offer to people that want to play something other than the main initiators:
https://www.d20pfsrd.com/alternative-rule-systems/path-of-war/classes/abilities-for-other-classes/
>>
>>86110933
Nah. They can be mishedmashed in several different ways, then there are the ACFs, substitution levels, etc.
You should be informing your players if a given class fits their concept better if they don't have a specific trick or combination in mind, I think.
>>
Why is Damage Reduction so expensive on armor? Is it actually viable? I don't see why 3 points of DR should cost 15,000 gold (Adamantine).
>>
>>86110933
No. But you should strongly advise dips, instead of 1-20ing them. Ftr2 for 2 bonus feats is usually good, as is Monk1/2. Paladin is very frontloaded, so going up to Pal4 can make sense - but Pal2/CruX (for a fluffy multiclass) is probably better with ToB in play for the IL.

It also depends on the level you expect the campaign to end at. Dungeoncrasher ACF is nasty if your campaign ends at level 6. While there are low-level goodies like Grease and Glitterdust, casters overshadowing other classes at their niches tends to come online once they get 4th level spells. Another factor is what classes are whitelisted/blacklisted. Are you banning T1s and using their T2 thematic equivalents like Sorc, Spirit Shaman, and the Favored Soul? Even then, TOB classes can't really keep up with the eye-watering amount of damage a somewhat optimized charger can output.
>>
Favorite base class and why?
>>
What's some good equipment/magic items for a shapeshifter? I'm going to play as a doppleganger/changeling.
>>
>>86113280
Shiftweave from Magic Item Comepndium.
Choose five outfits when you create the item. The Shiftweave can change into one of those five garbs. There's no price limit either. The item only costs 500 gp, but by RAW you can select outfits that cost a lot more than 500 gp, include a noble's outfit, the stillsuit from Sandstomr, and the damage resistant earthsilk jersey from Races of Stone.
>>
>>86113259
Cleric.
Has been my favorite class ever since I've first interacted with DnD via videogames.
It just does the holy warrior archetype in a way that really appeals to me, that being much more holy than warrior.
That plus prepared casting with access to their whole list means I can never get bored.
The there's all the god damn support it gets from splats in this edition.
Being a powerhouse aside, it's just so fucking fun.
>>
>>86113259
Oddly enough, Duskblade.
Imo, perhaps the best made base gish class in 3.5, and hits the sweet note in power scale between dedicated fighty and dedicated casty.
If it had gotten some splat support, I think it would have gotten very far, but alas.
>>
>>86114743
>Duskblade
Man, I so want to play one one of these days.
I wonder if one could pair duskblade and sublime chord.
I should give the online handbooks a read one of these days.
>>
>>86113259
Psychic Warrior. It scratches my combat itch, gets lots of feats and a nice selection of powers to play with. Has a lot of fun powers that can go a couple directions. And you can just kinda 1-20 the class without thinking too hard and do well.

>>86114743
3.5 is the dream edition for gishes.
>>
>>86115960
>I wonder if one could pair duskblade and sublime chord.
Even if you dipped bard, you still have 2 different caster stats.
>>
>>86115960
Yeah, you theoretically could. Duskblade/Warrior Skald/Sublime Chord works but you'd need to take the Apprentice feat to get into Warrior Skald due to skill requirements and you'll always suffer from the fact that Duskblade is INT casting and Sublime Chord is CHA casting.
>>
>>86116032
>3.5 is the dream edition for gishes.
Ain't that the truth.

>>86116050
>Duskblade/Warrior Skald/Sublime Chord
Oh shit, I'm saving this one for later, thanks.

>INT casting and Sublime Chord is CHA casting
Surely there's a way around that, and if not, that's fine too.
While not the best, sounds pretty fucking fun.
>>
>>86110933
>So, the way I'm understanding it
None is falling for it, ToBfag.
>>
>>86116191
How does 3.5 play with a party of gishes and skillmonkeys?
>>
>>86116310
Depends on whether the skillmonkeys can hold it down.
The gishes will have to be circumspect with their spell choices, but after early game, the party should be ready to rock.
>>
>>86116310
Depends a bit on knowledge of the gish in particular, but so long as the skillmonkeys can scout and cover traps, should do great. Like I ran a Wu Jen gish once and despite only ending up with +15 BAB I felt I threw down harder than the pure martial did in melee.
>>
>>86117868
Wu Jens are surprisingly good at times.
I saw one in action, and despite the limitations of the class, never thought he couldn't pull more than his weight.
>>
>>86117927
Some of those unique spells were nuts if you could melee, like the on that made you colossal or made a bunch of nonmagical copies of yourself. 24HD limit on spirit binding was crazy too though I didn't get to play with that unfortunately.
>>
>>86113259
Actually I'd say Scout.
Personally I feel scout is what the Ranger should have been. It can move through any terrain, has a shitton of skills, and can use anything to kill people up to just doing it with a sharp tree branch. The only thing it lacks to be 100% better Ranger archetype than Ranger itself is inbuilt Knowledge Devotion.

It also has a lot of multiclassing options so you can easily make just the kind of character you would want while retaining Scout core features - swordsage, warblade, cleric, rogue, ranger all can work really nice with a Scout.
>>
>>86118250
I made a straight up destructive ranger/scout bow user.
My group got made at me because my personal knowledge of dungeoncraft, sneaky stuff and gear made me able to nearly solo dungeons alone.
I killed 2 dire lions by myself, and the DM gave me all of the xp. Turns out dire lions are pretty weaksauce if you hit them with tanglefoot arrows on the ambush. Skinned the bastards myself and made some cloaks out of them, Hercules style. Gave one to a duke we were trying to court.
>captacha DND
>good work, captcha
>>
>>86118311
>mad
>>
>>86108028
Their issue is that they've got all the weaknesses of rogue and all the weaknesses of monk without anything to really make up for it. Ki powers are expensive and not particularly effective, sudden strike is 'sneak attack at home' and because it doesn't apply in a flanking situation you're much less useful/consistent as a frontline attack or as a ranged harasser, and you don't even have UMD as a class skill.

I'm not sure how you'd buff it without stepping on the toes of Rogue or Monk. Obviously the intent is that you run up walls and poof in and out of visibility like a ninja and land beefy sudden strikes in the process, but by the time you're high enough level to do that consistently it doesn't really cut the mustard. Maybe if you let sudden strikes restore a ki point the ninja has more incentive to use their mobility tools to deny opponents their dex bonus to AC consistently without running out in a single encounter.
>>
>>86118250
A Swift Hunter Scout is basically what Ranger should have been.

>>86109282
That's a good one. Perhaps giving the him ki dodge earlier, and upping his sudden strike damage to d8s too.
>>
>>86118399
I found out that Ninja's are perfect NPCs for players to hate. They don't have the damage output but their sneaking and movement abilities are top notch. So in any campaign where PCs go against an organised group of opponents Ninja could play the role of scout and saboteur.

Poisoning food and water in a military camp three nights in a row really ramped up the player blood pressure. And there were really satisfied when a week later they were able to finally hunt the Ninja down. Even though it almost cost them the battle.
>>
>>86116191
>INT casting and Sublime Chord is CHA casting
Wasn't there a (Dragon?) feat that changed your casting stat? Lost Tradition or something?
>>
>>86118629
That feat is from a third party book form Green Ronin, called Bastards & Bloodlines.

Here's the wording:

Lost Tradition
You are descended from a group of spellcasters who had very different ways of mastering magic, and you follow in their tradition.
Prerequisite: Must be taken at 1st-level
Benefits: Choose one spellcasting class. You may change which ability score governs spellcasting with that class. That ability cannot be changed again.
For example, Elric is a Talrik cleric. He takes the Lost Tradition feat and chooses to base his clerical spellcasting on Charisma instead of Wisdom. He now uses his Charisma score to determine his bonus spells, spell save DCs, maximum spell level he may cast, and any other calculation regarding his cleric spells.
Special: You can take this feat only at 1st level.
>>
>>86118487
That's the thing though, as NPCs they can blow all their ki points in a single encounter to fuck over the players and they can freely disengage if the fight turns sour. A PC will constantly have to endure their low resources and disengaging is less of an option when you're abandoning the less-mobile members of your party. A roper can be a useful and annoying enemy in the DM's toolbox but no one would want to play one.
>>
>>86118687
RAW does that mean you could have spellcasting go off of one of the physical attributes?
>>
>>86118729
Yes.
>>
>>86118766
Wizard with 20 Con it is.
>>
File: triathlete-tim-reed.png (1.99 MB, 1143x1715)
1.99 MB
1.99 MB PNG
>>86118781
>this is how I wizard
>>
>>86118781
Not going Wizard/War Hulk just to flex on people with your Str casting. What are you - peasant?
>>
>>86118886
Genius!
>>
>>86118886
Musclewizard is all well and good, but being able to flex on people with +30 on your concentration checks and more HP than the fighter beats literal flexing. Also you get insane stat boosts from war hulk but no increase in caster level which is the death knell for wizards taking a prestige class.
>>
>>86118781
I think STR or DEX would be the best due to Polymorph and size change spells. There's a non-zero possibility of waltzing around with 52 DEX pre-Epic. 56 if the DM interprets inherent bonuses to stick around in Polymorph forms.
>>
>>86118687
Do people use third party material?
3.5e has so much official and "second party" content that my group never even considered dabbling in third party material.
>>
>>86118999
Not in my experience for precisely these reasons. It's one level above homebrew in terms of unintended synergies or wildly unbalanced intended synergies.
>>
>>86118999
Only if it's needed to pull off a concept without jumping through bullshit hoops, which isn't that frequent.
>>
>>86118924
Wizard 5/Red Wizard 5/ Warhulk 10

Add Bard/Warchief party member for +30 Str total and +15 on all the spell DCs.
>>
>>86119018
>It's one level above homebrew
That's our stance as well.

>>86119047
Can you give an example?
>>
>>86118999
I thought the Goodman Games settings were cool, but I can't speak to the crunch.
>>
Given the class disparities, why not just return to TSR D&D and let lower-tier classes level faster?
>>
>>86119149
Because it doesn't help much? You'll need to have wizard and the like only getting like half the EXP and even then hope to all the gods that the caster in question doesn't optimise.

Because when E6 was only starting there were a couple theorycrafting threads on how to deal with high HD/CR enemies. Party of 4 murdered the fucking Balor. Of course they didn't do it by being fighters.
>>
>>86113259
Psion. It has a nice diversity of builds without being too overwhelming, especially if you use the alternate class features from the web supplement. I also prefer power points over spell preparation.
>>
>>86119227
To be fair, Wizards/Mages/Magic-Users have been one of, if not the strongest classes in most editions of D&D. The problem of caster supremacy is a matter of degree more than anything.
>>
>>86119407
At the end of the day if one dude's options are various flavors of "hit enemy with stick" and one dude's options are "fly/teleport, scry information, boost and debuff stats, inflict AoE damage from range, and also summon dude to hit enemy with stick" the first guy needs to be REAL fucking good with that stick or it's going to be imbalanced
>>
>>86119478
>the first guy needs to be REAL fucking good with that stick or it's going to be imbalanced
PF2e "fixed" this by making martials more interesting, and really good at doing their thing, and making casters pretty weak, and relegated to prepare the stage so that the martial characters can do their thing.
I put fixed in quotes because it did really fix the issue for the most part, but in the process it made casters really boring, I think.
Me? I prefer an unbalanced messy as shit system where I can let my creativity fly, but for people looking for a pretty well balanced "this is pretty much DnD" system, PF2e ain't bad.
>>
>>86119576
I maintain that the best form of balance is that if the wizard can teleport us across the planes and the druid can summon earthquakes that level towns, the fighter should be able to cut a mountain in half and the rogue should be able to lie so convincingly that it changes the truth. The fact that martials are consistently fettered by what's physically reasonable while casters are out here lactating fireballs and pissing thunder is what annoys me. 4e did a surprisingly reasonable job of leveling the playing field just because it gave everyone a role (in combat) with a variety of tools (for combat) and everyone got to do the sort of resource preservation and decision-making of casters (to save up for future combats). It just sucked donkey dick if you wanted to do shit other than punch dudes.

I'm mostly with you that I'd rather be in 3.5's buffet of options and work with the party to find our preferred power level than have a tightly restrained system that's inevitably going to need tweaks anyways, but at this point it's been decades and too many players I encounter just assume wizards should always be stronger because they've "always been stronger".
>>
>>86119478
At least in M&M you can use your strength for fun stuff - like throwing people and dinosaurs for half a mile, reshaping the landscape or doing the classical thunder clap. D&D kinda sucks at actually utilising physical stats.
>>
>>86098021
is DoftU the last 3.5 official printed book?
>>
>>86119478
I don't disagree with you. My point is that it's a matter of degree; MUs and Mages could do that in AD&D as well. I'm not experienced enough with 5e, but it would seem that toning down Caster Supremacy slightly also reduced many of the complaints on that front.

Some degree of caster supremacy is not a problem to most players. I would tend to agree that unchaining a lot of the mechanics that reigned in casters in 1e and 2e pushed them over the top in the eyes of far more tables. I don't think you need to turn it into 4e or PF2 to bring things down to a level that's enjoyable for Tordek.
>>
>>86114743
>>86115960
B.A.B of duskblade should be regular (0-15), like in pathfinder

good b.a.b is jut too greddy

fav class too
>>
>>86119655
>The fact that martials are consistently fettered by what's physically reasonable while casters are out here lactating fireballs and pissing thunder is what annoys me
I agree with this so hard.
Past level 6, maybe 8 at the latest, realism should go out the window.
I also agree that 4e, for all of its faults of not really feeling like DnD and making everybody work under the same power framework making thins feel pretty homogeneous, did a fantastic job thematically.
Just look at the things epic destinies can pull off.
Anyhow, I'm perfectly satisfied with 3.5e, whats with my preference for Gish type character.

>>86119767
Elder Evils, I think.
>>
>>86119767
Going off of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Dungeons_%26_Dragons_rulebooks#Dungeons_&_Dragons_3rd_edition_and_v3.5 it looks like Exemplars of Evil and Elder Evils came out later in 2007 along with a couple compendiums/guidebooks, but DotU was definitely one of the last ones.
>>
>>86119808
>>86119822
I see
>>
>>86119655
I think a lot of the practical annoyances are how tedious a full-caster's turn can be, if they aren't prepared - things like not having summon/transfomation stats handy. It's like you're simultaneously watching someone fumble and jerkoff.
>>
>>86119786
I also think that one of the implicit limitations of casters gets essentially ignored by most tables, namely spell slots. The strength of martials is ideally consistency and longevity compared to casters being able to leverage massive power by committing resources to bear, but unless you're playing an attrition-based dungeon crawl where due to either location or time-pressure the players can't restock on resources at will (to say nothing of the fact that too many tables equate the end of a session IRL with a long rest for the party) the casters are going to be topped off far more than the should be going by the encounter guidelines.
>>
>>86119865
That's definitely a huge factor. Say what you will about the monotony of "I full attack and end my turn" at least the fighter usually remembers his base attack bonus and damage die from session to session.
>>
>>86119892
In my, admittedly short, experience, things change so much from moment to moment and fight to fight that people are always having to recalculate their attack bonus and damage.
Ac and saves too, but to a much lesser extent.
Between short term buffs, enemy debuffs, circumstantial abilities and the like, the characters in my group that just hit shit real good never get bored.
My also be a case of characters who were built in a particular way, I don't know.
>>
>>86119953
A lot of it is encounter design as well. Fighting a single brute in a 20x20ft room is a lot different than trying to break out of a terraced goblin killbox even if they have the same effective CR. You're definitely right that ideally players should never know what exactly their next turn is during their current turn.
>>
>>86119871
>to say nothing of the fact that too many tables equate the end of a session IRL with a long rest for the party
I think that's been an issue in D&D since day 1
>>
>>86111945
Personally I would halve the cost of most DR items to make them even remotely cost-effective.
But most players seem to try to get DR from class features instead of paying for it.
>>
>>86119871
The problem is due to how healing and recovery work - martial work day is also tied to spell slots or magic item charges.

The earliest you can get Fast Healing is something like Wildshaping Ranger 5/Nature's Warrior 1
And that still doesn't allow you to recover from fatigue. Most DMs don't enforce it very strictly but it does crop up when you are going for a long while.

And at higher levels Reserve Feats and other bullshit make the supposed endurance basically obsolete.
>>
>>86111945
You can literally make armour give DR equal to AC and not really suffer much of a problem. Except for the fact that TWF combatants will suck more.
>>
>>86120251
You aren't wrong, but that's an effect primarily of fights focusing on parties exclusively fighting the biggest motherfucker available for their CR. Horde fights against masses of lower CR monsters let martials leverage their higher AC and access to tools like multiple attacks from higher BAB/cleave while not only putting pressure on casters to choose between AoE effects or saving spells for bigger targets but also risking them getting swarmed. Healing is a bottleneck for martials staying in the fight, but its just as much of one for every member of the party and if the party is only going up against enemies too dumb to focus the backline squishies then that's also the DM's fault.

As a side note, this ties into the side convo about why DR is as expensive as it is, because there's threats that exist other than big single hits and being able to shit like wade through a pack of wolves while ignoring their attacks allows you to overcome a major source of chip damage.
>>
>>86119953
>>86119985
>>86120028
Oh yeah, to comment on the long rest thing.
I play in two groups currently, a 5e and a 3.5e one. In both groups, (long) rests only happen when they make sense, so it's pretty common for us to go a session or two without recovering our resources.
It's been over a month of weekly 3 to 4 hours sessions since we've last had a long rest in my 3.5e group, now that I think about it.
In that game, Both me and the Bard are very careful with using our spell slots, and the Rogue-artificer-technomage type guy is also using some of his wands, so the rogue-type and the two brawlers are really doing the work.
It also helps that a bunch of the enemies we are facing are a mixture of undead, outsiders, golems, and other creatures with a myriad of resistances and immunities, so we never know what we will encounter next.
Basically, it seems like our DM is doing one hell of a good job at keeping us all on our toes.
>>
>>86120409
Cleave should just be a class feature like it was in AD&D
>>
>>86120570
Cleave, Power Attack, what else?
Parrying Shield? Two weapon Fighting?
>>
>>86120409
Your post is the complete opposite of my experience dealing with fights like that. There is a reason I hate 40 mook fights in 3.5 with a passion and it's because they're slow as shit to adjudicate and never dangerous without external factors because of the game's math.
>>
>>86120723
And they get handwaved by mass save-or-lose spells like Fear, Cloudkill, and Friends. I agree that they tend to be total slogs, and not particularly threatening unless unless you're really cheap with PC equipment.
>>
>>86120818
Which is fucking annoying because you're incentivized to spend resources on a fight that isn't threatening to the party for the sole purpose of not having the next 35 minutes taken up by a fight that won't do much more than shave some HP off.
>>
>>86120874
Mass Combat rules need some actual work instead of the bullshit we got.
>>
>>86120910
Not that anon, but what are the mass combat rules like?
>>
>>86120874
Beyond like 8-12 entities in an encounter, combat becomes too much of a slog. If you want to fight a kobold tribe, that should probably be broken up into several more manageable encounters instead of "here's 40 kobolds in a big room"
>>
>>86120985
Basically swarms but made out of normal sized creatures. The results are fucking atrocious. Heroes of Battle have some limited attempts at them but they are pretty subpar.
>>
>>86120409
>let martials leverage their higher AC
A level 6 Wizard has 24, sometimes 26 AC with basic items, Mage Armor, and a single casting of Alter Self. This can go up very hard if the Wizard wants it to. A level 6 Fighter has 22 AC with +1 full plate added to the item list or 24 or 25 with a +1 shield on top, which is no different from the Cleric. If you're looking for low AC, look at non-halfling Rogues at 20 AC.
>>
>>86121120
Do you wish 3.5 had "muh bounded accuracy"?
>>
>>86121418
No, bounded accuracy is the single worst thing that ever happened to D&D.
>>
Confession, I've never had a campaign go beyond level 12 or so. What does the game actually play like 10-20?
>>
>>86121493
Rocket tag.
>>
>>86121500
What about non-combat stuff?
>>
>>86121471
It is one way to make kobolds and goblins viable for things besides a pair of hands, or dumping a bunch of class levels and templates for them to keep up with the PC math.
>>
>>86121471
I would agree but it does make fighting a few hundred orcs into an actual challenge.
>>
Why did they make weapons of legacy so fucking bad?
>>
>>86123362
They really aren't that bad, but you kinda need to make your own catered to your own campaign. The abilities you get are at a significant gp discount compared to if you had to buy them separately.
>>
Favorite LA1 race and why
>>
>>86120633
The two "kinds" of feature I'd give the 3.5 Fighter are "take feats anyway" properties to bring down the MADness of a rounded use of the feats, and reduction of detriments relating to equipment.

Essentially, my goal is to make completely incongruous nonsense happen. 4 Int Water Orcs in Full Plate being Chain Trippers that never took the EWP and do in fact fully benefit from their Dexterity, Weapon Finesse included.

>>86121418
To be more specific than >>86121471, the problem of Bounded Accuracy is that it fundamentally demands a limitation of scope that doesn't work properly with D&D, because the monsters themselves are frequently defined by increasing scope.
>>
>>86123362
>The abilities you get are at a significant gp discount compared to if you had to buy them separately.
I remember the cost of the rituals coupled with the penalties to attack, saves, hp, and the like making it not worth it.
Maybe I need to give the book a read again.
Anyhow, as far as systems for special items, I think I like item familiars, ancestral relics and the bonded item rules in the DMG II better.
>>
>>86128232
Fuck, meant for >>86124096.
>but you kinda need to make your own catered to your own campaign
That could be interesting.

>>86125977
>The two "kinds" of feature I'd give the 3.5 Fighter are "take feats anyway" properties to bring down the MADness of a rounded use of the feats
Fighter being able to ignore certain kinds requirements of certain classes of feats would be cool as hell.
It could even be a feature that scaled with level, so at level 1 and 2 it could get bonus feats as it does today, at level 4 and 6 it could ignore attribute requirements, 6 and 8 it could ignore a single feat, and so on and so forth.
Something of the sort.
>>
game style.
>>
>>86119808
>I also agree that 4e, for all of its faults of not really feeling like DnD and making everybody work under the same power framework making thins feel pretty homogeneous, did a fantastic job thematically.
I recognized the 4rrie stench from up thread. In the very moment this type of threads are taken over by 4rries and ToB, it's over. it's no longer comfy talk about an edition, it's endless whining about the issues of a self-inflicted playstyle.
>>
>>86121493
>>86121500
It's rocket tag with a huge caveat. If both PCs and enemies are played as non-retards, there is significant intelligence and counter-intelligence and planning before major confrontations.
Also, there are ways to be elusive, just not for everyone.
>>86121512
Pretty cool, you can train huge beasts or train your army in the PC's personal demiplane
>>
>>86113259
Artificer. In my mind the artificer is both the single best class of 3.5 as well as being the class that can interact with pretty much every rule & splatbook of 3.5's catalog.

Artificers outside of 3.5 lack the spark of ingenuity one could have mixing enhancements, materials, weapon crystals, wand chambers, etc. Let alone the more oddball stuff.

The Artificer IS 3.5
>>
>>86128284
I'll have to find it again, because it was a Waybackmachine of a WOTC forum thread, but iirc, Weapons of Legacy have something like a 50-80% discount in GP vs buying their abilities separately. And then you can make up the penalties with your WBL and still come out ahead vs buying those abilities in separate magic items.

And even if you go "WBL is broken, we're using Legacy Items", you just end up with a somewhat lower-powered game - which perhaps expands the range of usable encounters.
>>
>>86129543
>but iirc, Weapons of Legacy have something like a 50-80% discount in GP vs buying their abilities separately
Hot damn, alright.
I'll look for that thread, thanks.
>>
>>86128284
>Fighter being able to ignore certain kinds requirements of certain classes of feats would be cool as hell.
It would be pretty cool but still probably won't be not enough. I once allowed for fighters and other non-casters to buy feats for money similar to how wizards can buy spells. It still wasn't enough though it did help.

Fighters need some actual class features that allow them to do something more at higher levels.
>>
>>86118999
I have a soft spot for many lines, especially Mongoose's Quintessential and Encyclopaedia Arcane series, and Fantasy Flight's Legends & Lairs. Apart from a small handful (Quintessential Gnome and Human being two of them. Nothing in them was good, the whole lot was trash) there is always something that provides some great inspiration for games, even if it's new special subsystems that you will probably have to really tinker with, plus they can just be fun to read.
Some others I can recommend were Races of Renown, which includes the Bastards & Bloodlines mentioned by >>86118687.
>>
>>86130892
Any opinions on the White Wolf stuff - like Ravenloft and D20 Gamma World?
>>
>>86131107
At least for Ravenloft, it's pretty much what you'd expect from White Wolf (of the era). Writing and world building is pretty solid (though obviously it's mostly based on what TSR had already made), mechanically it's all over the place.
>>
grog here we only bought ravenloft for castle maps and artwork and stuff that came in the boxes the hex grid overlays the cards with pics of castles etc.
>>
>>86121500
I ran two super high level 3.5 campaigns. Super high as in starting at level 1 and ending up going into epic levels up to 28 and 25 respectively. In the first one we kept to the rules rather religiously and it was indeed an insane game of rocket tag, actually fun as fuck but very time consuming to prepare and balance encounters correctly.
The second campaign with a different group, I was much older, much more experienced and also influenced (or poisoned) by 5e so I actually decided to avert the rocket tag. I think it was a fairly succesful attempt, honestly. Basically the players did usual player things and optimized the fuck out of their characters but I didn't do insanely optimized enemies meant to counter-murder them in 1-2 rounds. Instead I kept enemy offensive power comparatively low, enough to maybe kill the party in 5 rounds if they didn't heal themselves at all, and instead made up for it with much greater enemy numbers and massive HP bloat. The final boss of the campaign had like 5k HP, some healing of his own, and a way of deflecting attacks onto his allies so that they soaked the damage for him too.

I fucking love high level 3.5. After finishing that second high level campaign some 4 years ago I promised to myself I am forever done with 3.5 but the desire to run it again is constantly gnawing on me and I think I'm eventually gonna cave in again.
>>
>>86131879
>I ran two super high level 3.5 campaigns. Super high as in starting at level 1 and ending up going into epic levels up to 28 and 25 respectively
Holy fuck, I'm jelly.

>Instead I kept enemy offensive power comparatively low, enough to maybe kill the party in 5 rounds if they didn't heal themselves at all
This sounds reasonable.

>The final boss of the campaign had like 5k HP, some healing of his own, and a way of deflecting attacks onto his allies so that they soaked the damage for him too.
That's pretty insane.
How many rounds did the party take to kill this absolute unit?
>>
>>86129543
>>86129669
The real grib can be whatever task you need to perform to get to the next tier.
Finding a lost city is one thing, soloing a lich is another.
>>
>>86130570
I think something like PF and it's archetypes is ideally the best idea for Fighters.
You have a checklist of scaling class features you can choose every so many levels, with and without pre-reqs, allowing you to basically craft whatever manner of fighter you want, from a generalized take all comers to a specialized warrior to a budget multiclass.
>>
>>86132191
It was something like a 40 round combat if I remember right, basically the longest fight of the whole campaign because they were fighting the thing closest to a god in the godless postapocalyptic setting and whenever he ubercharger paladin charged at him to do a 300-400 damage at once kind of smite he used an immediate action to pull a Balor out of his proverbial ass to take that hit for him. Other than that the closest thing to compare would be CR30 Mephistopheles from Pathfinder SRD because that was the base statblock I started to modify for the boss.
I unfortunately can't find the original statblock for the boss, but I did find the "human" version of him. Because plot-wise it was basically a fighter-king superhero who later transplanted his soul into the devil-demon Satan entity and took dominion over both hell and abyss. The "human king" form was meant to be a pretaste and it was like:
>1300 HP
>58 AC, touch AC 28
>modifiers: STR +23, CON +12, all the others +5 or +7
>Fort +34, Ref +21, Will +34
>SR 32, DR 10/-, Resistance 15 vs everything
>BAB +40, +5 divine bonus to hit
>Artifact +7 spear that always deals critical (2x) damage if it hits
>Roughly typical ubercharger build with Shock Trooper etc.
I had noted down his typical attacks:
>average charge: -40 to own AC, then does full attack on charge for +77 (1d10+154), +72 (1d10+139), +67 (1d10+124), +62 (1d10+109)
and then I had some more lines for attacks when not using shock trooper etc. Actually this goes against my idea of not following rocket tag but I guess this enemy was an exception because the hollow human form had few helpers to join the fight and he was also meant to prove to the party that the ultimate villain is a real serious threat. By the way I also gave him Iron Heart Surge for the heck of it, despite not qualifying for it from classes or anything, just added it on top of everything as a special fuck you to the party.
PS All save-or-die were turned to 200 damage in case you wondered.
>>
>>86119801
Nah, it is basically an arcane paladin in terms of mechanical design, with magic supporting face beating, not balance between the two
>>
>>86133168
I cannot imagine a 40-round fight being fun, frankly.
>>
Favorite LA1 race?
>>
>>86134270
Human
>>
>>86134270
Goliath.
>>
>>86134270
Arctic elf.
The biggest snobs in the setting.
>>
>>86131107
I played in a d20 Gamma World game but not read the books, so I don't have a really informed opinion. I do know it's supposedly not quite the same tone as the previous or subsequent editions but I enjoyed it well enough.

>>86134270
Aasimar because they are MADE for clericy goodness or Genesai as they also scratch that planar itch but with elemental flavour.
>>
>>86134270
Kalashtar.
Runner up in concept only, because they were criminally underused, would be the Hellbred.
>>
If an ambitious mortal manages to trick a LE devil into giving him power without losing his soul by using mundane transparent ink to slip a hidden clause into a contract, would the devil be positively predisposed to him if he asked for future employment?
>>
>>86135315
The devil would either have already gotten one up on the mortal or they would let that one go since Hell DEFINITELY purposely lets some mortals get off scot free since it makes their contracts more appealing.
>>
>>86134270
Putting another vote for Aasimar and Hellbred.
>>
>>86119801
How does the Duskblade compare to the Psychic Warrior and Warblade, which are the obvious points of comparison?
>>
Frankly I can't believe we're at, what, seven consecutive threads? Kinda amazing
3e Renaissance when?
>>
>>86109411
>>86108971
Should I try remaking the first video and reuploading it? I still have the project file so I'd just rerecord the audio and go from there, but with an actual script I stick to hardcore, and less background noise. Plus adding a bit more info about the class.
>>
>>86136859
Do a new class. Especially when you're testing out a project like this the main ways to fail are loss of momentum and letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. You will improve as you do these, and that means your earlier ones will almost certainly be worse. That's okay. Keep moving forward rather than getting bogged down in doing this video in particular perfectly. Also once you do enough of them you're going to have one that's not as good as the best you've ever done. That's okay too. Just keep at it as long as you keep enjoying the process.
>>
>>86136859
I'd just move on to the second video, I think.
The first one isn't awful, and the more videos the better.
it's better to keep the ball rolling early on, and you can always revisit older videos later.
>>
>>86136838
Maybe it's copium but I always hope that maybe a small fraction of people inducted by 5E will start to yearn for a little more complexity, some better customisation, and leave the normies and thots behind as they discover 3.5.

>>86136859
I agree with the other two, keep going and you'll find your groove.
>>
>>86136838
I sometimes wish I could have been able to get into 3.x closer to the beginning instead of towards the end.
>>
>>86137023
>I always hope that maybe a small fraction of people inducted by 5E will start to yearn for a little more complexity, some better customisation
That does happen, what's with 3.5e's fame/infamy in the ttrpg scene, albeit rather infrequently.
I got introduced to ttrpgs not even 3 years ago with 5e. This year I got invited to a 3.5e group and I'm having a fucking blast.
>>
>>86137023
A lot like the 22 year run of AD&D, the 17 year run of 3.PF was highly influential on the RPG space. A lot of people played it and are nostalgic for it. As as someone who moved to the OSR space with 4e, I've been really missing 3.x lately.

People were nostalgic enough for TSR D&D only a couple years after it was printed such that Castles & Crusades was released in 2004. Now that 3.PF is truly dead with PF2, I'm not completely surprised that people are taking another look at the system.
>>
>>86137023
>maybe a small fraction of people inducted by 5E will start to yearn for a little more complexity, some better customisation, and leave the normies and thots behind as they discover 3.5.
I got into the hobby back in 2014 with 5e's LMoP. Since then I've grown disillusioned with 5e and come to adore 3.5.
I'm probably in the minority but we do exist.
>>
>>86137058
Yeah, as the resident 3.x grog, I had to be the "uh actually" guy when someone brought up that asinine peasant railgun.
>>
>>86137131
Its kinda shocking when you realize that almost all of those famous screencaps and storytimes are total bullshit
>>
>>86137145
A lot of them are just "Here's this retarded thing that works with the rules as they're written but no DM in their right mind will let slide"
Except the Arseplomancer.
>>
>>86137145
Honestly, I think /tg/ greentexts from the 3.x era have had a negative influence on player expectations.
>>
>>86137207
I've met someone who brought up MULTIPLE greentext characters trying to pass them off as his own ideas.
>What I want to do is play a BEAR, with lots of points in disguise with a butler to translate for me, aren't I such a funny and quirky guy.
>>
>>86137090

I keep thinking this too, other than considering Pathfinder part of D&D or 3E-era canon. It does make me sad that it was the only real attempt at keeping 3E/3.5E alive and was commercially successful at it in a way that is deeply disproportionate with its design merits. But I do respect that they tried, and now with 2E they've pretty much fully moved on from it. With that, 3.5E is nearing prime 20-year nostalgia cycle, and nobody is really on it. With the whole diaspora of 3.5E heartbreakers and other D&D-likes though, I wonder what it would take to make something that could actually catch an audience.
>>
>>86137280
I think the main issue is that the popularity of 3.5 is in many ways a result of direct opposition to current trends within the tabletop space rather than a groundswell that could really be ridden. Modern RPG design emphasizes fail-forward scenarios, flexible rules, and a focus on permissiveness and flexibility. 3.x is incredibly fiddly with dictionaries of obscure interactions, rules-heavy, and intensely restrictive because every cool interaction is locked behind a feat/skill check/spell/class feature/etc. You CAN do anything but by christ you will need to plan for it and have it written in triplicate. Some people love that kind of cruft (myself included) but I think trying to make a love letter to 3.5 in today's environment would involve a lot of cutting chaff to make room for QoL improvements and simplifications.

Plus the grognards don't want a love letter to 3.5 with a few slight rules changes that'll constantly be forgotten, they just want 3-5 dudes to play 3.5 with.
>>
>>86137207

It's funny to think that 3.0 came and went before 4chan existed, and /tg/ only came about near the very end of 3.5.

>>86137131
>>86137145
>>86137172

Well yes, most of these are old WotC MinMax/CharOp forum observations. I remember there generally being an awareness that these were not genuinely useful tricks meant to be used at the table, just observations of weird ways the rules could break either when the writers didn't think something all the way through, or when they collide with physics in odd ways. Like the consequences of linearly-processed simultaneity with an abnormally large number of entities, and how far an object can be made to travel that way in a known duration of time. Pun-Pun is partly meant to be a concrete demonstration that there is no such thing as "the strongest build" without the context of your individual game and expectations.

>>86137207
>>86137254

And the problem, then, is playing with That Guys with no awareness about that context (or no self-awareness in general).
>>
>>86137324

Any popularity it currently has, yeah, probably has some "counterculture" elements to it. I think a grossly copyright-infringing fan-edit with some nice polish might be the best way to catch on with the crowd who would still be the most interested in it. Personally I've just preferred it long enough to be a grognard now too, and I actually would like something that was cleaned up with some actual rules changes where necessary. I agree you could slash and burn some of the third-tier fiddly cruft (skill tricks and ACFs and such), or consolidate and condense a lot of it back into the base rules, and no one would shed a tear, and that you could also make a lot of balance tweaks and QOL changes to core and it would be far better for it. Can you believe we never got a printing of the PHB that included swift and immediate actions?

>they just want 3-5 dudes to play 3.5 with.

But yes, this hurts my soul in ways that make me want to take on recompiling millions of words of game rules because it's not like I'm doing anything better with my time like actually playing the game.
>>
File: The Tomes.pdf (1.98 MB, PDF)
1.98 MB
1.98 MB PDF
>>86137392
Don't be too hard on yourself, if we didn't love theorycrafting the implications of esoteric rules we wouldn't be fans of 3.5.

As far as fan projects to consolidate the rules and file off some serial numbers, this PDF has a variety of interesting ideas. I particularly like how feats scale in utility off of BAB/skill points and even though there's a maximalist design to put nearly everything on the scale of clericzilla rather than scale it down I find that sort of design a lot more fun. I will say it goes off the rails with the prestige classes, to my understanding they were a later addition by the people who collated the various documents and they're clearly homebrewed to make specific PCs overpowered. And to your point, I've never actually played it so there's a real chance the wheels fall off once you're at the table.
>>
>>86137428

I know of the Tomes, but haven't made time yet to give it a full cover-to-cover. I do know that Frank himself said looking back, he regrets doing some things like the scaling feats. Personally, I'd also take a pass at knocking the spellcasters down at least a little bit before bringing everyone else up to their level, and I'd want it to be with a lighter touch overall than most projects (Tomes, Pathfinder, etc) so that it would still be recognizable as 3E D&D.
>>
>>86137465
I think every fan of 3.5 has had that notion now and again and the issue I always see is that if you use too light a touch, it's just another layer of rules that need to be remembered without the familiarity and ubiquity of the source material. Not a reason to avoid it per se, but there's a reason the ones that get notoriety are the larger-scale projects.

I'm surprised to hear that the scaling feats were a point of regret. Do you recall the reason?
>>
>>86137486
>I'm surprised to hear that the scaling feats were a point of regret. Do you recall the reason?

Can't seem to dig up a source with a quick Google, but I am 99% sure that I can remember reading about it (it was just this year, cruising old posts). I saw others mention it, then saw a post from Frank confirming the same, and I don't think it talked about why but I have no idea if an earlier post discussing it in more detail might exist. Wish I could find it, it would probably be interesting.
>>
>>86137655
Mulling it over, if I had to guess it'd be because it introduces a lot of the same issues 3.5 classes have in general. Some are designed to peak early and dwindle off, some are unimpressive until an inflection point and then monstrous, and some are just niche. Because few campaigns run the gamut of 1-20 where those choices and trade-offs actually play out, things instead end up homogenized by whatever strata dominates the level of play that actually takes place. I still think it's better than feat chains and every interesting combat maneuver having six prerequisites and a table in a dragon magazine article, but I can see the seams.
>>
>>86137721

Yeah that's probably a fair guess. It would probably be better to just condense feat chains and let those feats be better up front. Naturally, Pathfinder did the opposite back in the day..
>>
Were there any really good 3.5 adventures, official or otherwise?
>>
>>86137863
Literally the two best adventure paths written for any D&D system, Age of Worms and Savage Tide.
>>
>>86136399
>How does the Duskblade compare to
>Psychic Warrior
Not nearly as many tricks in the bag, and can't reach the same heights of optimization, but absolutely has a higher floor.
>Warblade
Will absolutely get BTFO'd in combat capability by any margin, unless you purposefully nerf your Warblade pc.However, magic offers utility that the Warblade simply can not replicate.
>>
>>86137721
>>86137805
I hold to the opinion that the biggest issue with 3.5 was the fact that it was clearly not designed with the intent to support play past level 12, at most.
With how frontloaded many classes, and how poorly many class features scale past level 15, or are simply unusable unless you optimize for it at late game play, I find it both sad and pathetic that the game is really half of a game played continuously.
>>
>>86137324
>Plus the grognards don't want a love letter to 3.5 with a few slight rules changes that'll constantly be forgotten, they just want 3-5 dudes to play 3.5 with.
Ain't that the truth.
I agree with the anon from a couple of threads back that a sort of re edit and re organization of all printed official material is much closer to what I would want for a community effort.
It would be pretty cool to have all of the web releases, errata, some re-wording in line with the more widely accepted FAQ rulings, some of the table-text contradictions fixed, etc, separated into a couple of well organized pdf files instead of a community homebrew document.
Although a homebrew document alongside that would not be a bad idea also.
Might even be a good starting point to get the ball rolling.
>>
>>86140330
I'd like something a little more modular, though I know it would be asking a lot. I just like the idea of a GM being able to pick and choose from a grab-bag of different ideas to make his 3.5 feel different.
>>
What are some cool Cleric spells to give a npc using Imbue with spell ability? That spell sounds like a pretty decent way to gain some small action economy advantage.
I thought about things like Resurgence, Sanctuary, and Restoration, Lesser.
Maybe even some healing spells.
>>
>>86114743
>If it had gotten some splat support
they're spontaneous casters, you can use a Drake Helm (or extra spell if your DM interprets it that way) to give them some really nice extra spells.
Combust or Shivering Touch can make you absolutely brutal
>>
>>86137392
fuck you i love skill tricks.
>>
>>86140692
Me too.
I also like ACFs.
>>
>>86140330
i don't know if the people who made the ultimate SRD are even still alive, but working on completing that might be a real godsend
>>
>>86137392
One problem with retrocloning 3.5 is that a lot of it's more interesting bits - TOB, MOI, TOM, a bunch of spells and feats - are not under OGL if I understand it correctly.
>>
>>86140717
>ACFs
Yes, love them too. The customization, the differentiation, it's fantastic.
>>
>>86140330
A heartbreaker instead of just reorganized 3.5 has the problem of "Now we have N+1 competing standards" - and PF1 already has a lot of the "tidied 3.5" mindshare.
>>
>>86140821
Agreed.
As the other anon said, Grogs don't want DnD 3.895, we just want DnD 3.5.
>>
File: star-trek-ds9.gif (7.32 MB, 640x360)
7.32 MB
7.32 MB GIF
I'm running my players to DS9 reskinned as an outpost in the Astral Plane and running them through a game of Chula tonight. Using The Book of Challenges and Grimtooth's Traps to fill out the halls between the scenes in the episode.

Anyone else have any success reskinning Star Trek episodes into 3.5 adventures? I was thinking the salt monster from TOS could be cool as a thrall protecting his magically disguised Illithid master.
>>
>>86140692
>>86140717
>>86140783

A lot of the options are cool, but as extra subsystems all that stuff is very crufty. ACFs for example, just build the choices into the base class description, or just make it a freebie (part of the class by default) or a feat, or if it's a more major swap may it deserves a whole alternate class writeup with more polish. Those are all design spaces that already exist.

>>86140821
>>86140775

This is why I say the best way to do it is probably just as a hugely copyright infringing fan edit, if you wanted to make it legal you'd spend way too much time reinventing the wheel on all the extra bits people care about and it still wouldn't be cozy and familiar.

>>86140399

I have this idle fantasy of having the whole 3.5E corpus as a marked-up git repository or equivalent, and then you'd have scripts that could spit out a linked HTML version, or some adequately formatted and organized pdfs, or whatever else, with something like compiler flags that would tell it what to include or leave out, and which versions of certain sections to use. Nothing would be more authentically 3.5E than a community discussing their favorite builds of the whole system.
>>
>>86142317
that's just design, you could build ACFs like how they made subclasses in the 5etools site.
the thing about making them freebies is that some of them have requirements (skills or races) so that complicates things, and not every QM will agree with "dead level" filling buffs
>>
>>86142401

If I were actually doing all that, I would be suggesting choosing what to do with each item on a case by case basis, not a blanket approach for all, so it's okay that not every approach works for every item. Also though, ACFs and substitution levels were technically two distinct things, even though they did essentially the same thing in the end. That's also the kind of cruft I'm talking about, they could have been presented in the same format even if some have prereqs and some don't.
>>
>>86142317
>I have this idle fantasy of having the whole 3.5E corpus as a marked-up git repository or equivalent
Interesting idea.
Having all of the information stored in a more portable format (JSON, XML) instead of just raw html would be pretty nice too.
That way people could use it to make their own websites, create apps, things like that.
Man, if I didn't already work in front of a computer for 40 hours a week I'd totally do something like that.
>>
>>86144035
>Having all of the information stored in a more portable format (JSON, XML) instead of just raw html would be pretty nice too.

Oh that's what I meant, yeah, marked up in something abstract so that scripts could turn it into the HTML version or a PDF or whatever like I mentioned. I feel like there are already projects like the dndtools database that have a lot of the work done already, you'd just have to get a rip to start working from.
>>
The Rain of Embers Sanctified spell has a pretty interesting mechanic where a creature in the area of the spell can stop using it's shield or shield spell to defend itself and use it to get a bonus to the saving throw against the spell.
Are there other instances of non-standard, self contained, mechanics like that?
>>
>>86138674
I'm curious, tell me about those adventure paths
>>
>>86141752
Great idea. Star Trek is some of my fav inspiration for D&D.
>>
Running a 3.5 oneshot for some 5e players. Wish me luck.
>>
>>86144124
>Oh that's what I meant, yeah
Fuck, rereading your post that's pretty obvious, so my bad.

>>86144124
>you'd just have to get a rip to start working from.
You know what. I'll give it a try.
I'll code something to rip the info straight out the html pages.
I'll start with the spells on srd.dndtools.org.

>>86147471
Are you starting at level 1? Did you help them make their characters or give them some gidance?
Do you know the party makeup already?
How are they as players, and why did they want/accept playing 3.5e?
Ah, yes.
Good luck.
>>
>>86147487
>I'll code something to rip the info straight out the html pages.

There have been downloadable copies of the database before, last time I tried looking for one I couldn't find a link that was still good but maybe someone out there still has one. Would be easier than scraping it all again.
>>
>>86147807
Oh shit, I had no idea.
With this information, I was actually able to find working links.
https://drive.google.com/u/0/uc?id=1C3ucsm05FolsahmBlnFRuqgdC8MDrqYo
https://web.archive.org/web/20141005193135/https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/8uwuvhbg8cc7y5m/dnd.zip?dl=1&token_hash=AAGEpJ6AE0ROuCSuoWThKPfpCHQ_Wuvfg_t8cNCtfKAOdg

Might want to add these to a pastebin and have it in the OP or something, so it can spread around.
>>
>>86147892

Oh shit, good detective work, that's cool to have. Thanks for coming back with the link.
>>
>>86147938
At first glance, the modelling of the database looks a little weird.
I expected a lot more tables somehow.
>>
File: dnd_spells.png (140 KB, 1920x1080)
140 KB
140 KB PNG
>>86147982
And of course I forget the fucking image.
>>
>>86147892
>>86147938
Oh yeah, by the way, while looking for the database, I also found something called the Encyclopedia Vinculum Draconis, which seems to be a compilation of information in xlsx and docx format.
I threw the link together with the database links in a pastebin : https://pastebin.com/
>>
>>86148055
>https://pastebin.com/
I'm a genius without parallel, truly.
The actual link : https://pastebin.com/nhCGejQy
>>
>>86148055

Ah, that one I actually have, it's the work of someone on minmaxforums. I forgot how extensive it is, it's also full of additional notes and stuff.
>>
>>86098779
definitely shove the class progression table in the video somewhere, but it's pretty fine.

that class makes me wish the swashbuckler was actually good.
>>
File: behir_mount.jpg (702 KB, 1300x688)
702 KB
702 KB JPG
Any way to get magical beasts, or specifically a Behir, as a mount using official printed material?
I love these guys.
>>
>>86150654
Behir's can speak and are smart enough. So diplomancer works.
>>
>>86150872
Fucking diplomancers, what can't they do.
Actually, your point of Behirs being intelligent makes me think that one could just get a Behir companion via Leadership.
>>
>>86152236
>Fucking diplomancers, what can't they do.
They can do anything the fuck they want unless their victim is both aware of them and is a powerful enough spellcaster or has other ways of acquiring Mind Blank or a similar effect. And even then it's not a perfect defence. Just prevents them from turning you into fanatically subservient groupie.

I used it as part of concept for the high powered setting. Basically the world, that was the size of Jupiter, was considered a kind of playground for the "kids" with all the empires, adventurers and so on. Everyone who grows in power too much, through any means, including diplomancers, epic wizards, vestige abusing binders and so on, is encouraged to either fuck off to a personal demiplane, one of the demiplanes with custom rules that prevent certain abuses of magic and skills or one of the moons with reinforced terrain. So that world could actually function and not end in a horrible apocalyptic mess.

A good chunk of high level entertainment was about watching small people down on the world do their things. Plus bets, a lot of bets. Or using depowered simulacrums or puppets to participate personally in the events.

Of course from time to time someone refuses to leave the world and then finds out that he wasn't the first munchkin to exist and others had much more time to work on their skills.
>>
>>86150654
beast heart adept can get a behir companion at 9th
>>
>>86152388
Did you actually play in that setting?
What did the players do?

>>86152455
>beast heart adept
Didn't know that one, thank you.
>>
>>86128321
>I recognized the 4rrie stench from up thread. In the very moment this type of threads are taken over by 4rries and ToB, it's over. it's no longer comfy talk about an edition, it's endless whining about the issues of a self-inflicted playstyle.
Yes. They want a game that is fundamentally not-D&D, it's a faggoty combat skirmish game. I want high level fighters to be sword-swinging dudes who fight dragons and demons, not MUH EBIN MOUNTAIN CUTTER.

Go play Exalted, faglords.
>>
>>86155379
>I want high level fighters to be sword-swinging dudes who fight dragons and demons,
No you don't.
>>
>>86137428
Frank Trollman is an autistic faggot. His game design is mediocre, and the assumptions around which he has based his design are totally cancerous.
>>
>>86155404
You almost got it right and then you shit yourself at the end.
>>
>>86155379
>I want high level fighters to be sword-swinging dudes who fight dragons and demons
That's all well and good, and an aesthetic I also like, but how do you fulfill that fantasy alongside Clerics, Wizards and Bards without having them play second fiddle?

>not MUH EBIN MOUNTAIN CUTTER.
Hyperbole does your point no good bro.
>>
>>86155379
There is nothing more fantastical than some regular asshole killing dragons and reality warping demons with nothing but a mundane sword and vaguely defined grit or whatever. Even Thor was re-shaping mountains with his hammer blows.
>>
>>86155379
>fundamentally not D&D

Martial classes being shit isn't part of D&D's 'identity', just 3.5's. Expand your horizons
>>
>>86155383
High-level fighters can stare down balors and pit fiends.
>>
>>86155632
Because of their magic items. They stand no chance whatsoever without them.
>>
Best module or adventure path? Sell me a little on them
>>
>>86155476
>That's all well and good, and an aesthetic I also like, but how do you fulfill that fantasy alongside Clerics, Wizards and Bards without having them play second fiddle?
Ninth-level spells are for NPCs and BBEGs, not PCs. I firmly believe that PCs were never meant to accumulate the level of power encapsulated by those spells...and especially with all the limitations of spellcasters stripped away in the 3e era.

1e and 2e had more martial/caster parity with certain design choices, and I think that most OSR systems provide a more solid framework--the non-casters are still the weakest classes, but it's easier to bring them to parity in those systems.

>hyperbole
There's a guy in this very thread who wants fighters to cleave mountains.

>>86155582
4e isn't D&D, either.

>>86155544
>There is nothing more fantastical than some regular asshole killing dragons and reality warping demons with nothing but a mundane sword and vaguely defined grit or whatever.
And that's how fighters should be.

This is what a high-level fighter vs. caster should be like in D&D:

https://youtu.be/vem7Ie-6iIo
>>
>>86155696
>4e isn't D&D, either.

Then I guess ad&d and other stuff that preceded 3.5 isn't D&D either. Gee I wonder which edition this retard started playing with
>>
>>86147487
Level 2
I did premades, but it ended up being Barb/Sorc/Rogue
I think it has nothing to do with the merits of 3.5 and more to do with me being more organized than the usual DM.

All said it went pretty well. The sperg got a little annoyed at the dungeon having some secrets (rumors mentioned a holy sword, which was true, but which he was unable to recover) at the end.

As usual, it is players that are more troublesome than the system. But it could be a difference of DMing styles.
>>
>>86155696
>. I firmly believe that PCs were never meant to accumulate the level of power encapsulated by those spells
Considering that 3.x has rules for players to go even beyond that, I see no indication of such. I think you are conflating that which you think would be better with designer intent.

>and I think that most OSR systems provide a more solid framework--the non-casters are still the weakest classes, but it's easier to bring them to parity in those systems.
That is true, those are also systems that work under a wholly different philosophy when compared to 3.x, I think.

>There's a guy in this very thread who wants fighters to cleave mountains.
Fuck, you are right.

Ultimately, a high level fighter as just a "regular guy" doesn't work in 3.x, which is not to say one needs to go "full anime" as it were to get a better experience, in my opinion.
I'd say high level (14+) 3.x work better when they are more like the myriad demigods of myths. Cú Chulainn, Heracles, Gilgamesh. Maybe not quite Karna and Thor, at least not pre-epic.
More high fantasy and less sword and sorcery.
Not that there's anything inherently wrong with either approach, mind you, it's a question of works better, mechanically and thematically, alongside other options the system provides.

>>86155822
>All said it went pretty well
Cool.
Do you think they'll want to play again?
>>
>time for a mudcore fetishist to shit up and bait the thread
already?
>>
>>86155840
I don't think that's quite what he's getting at.
I think his vision is more in line with the e6 experience, which fundamentally goes out the window at higher levels when taking into account the way the system itself is designed.
There is an escalation of power in every dimension that prevents that experience from being achieved without causing extreme levels on internal contradictions past a certain point.
>>
>>86155647
I never actually played in a 3.5e module campaign, so seconding the question.
I do have a friend who's thinking of running the series of adventures that begin with Sunless Citadel.
>>
>>86155832
>Considering that 3.x has rules for players to go even beyond that, I see no indication of such. I think you are conflating that which you think would be better with designer intent.
I think designer intent was that wizards played nukers and clerics played healbots, and I think they didn't fully understand how the myriad of rules interactions would play out when they converted 2e to 3e.

I think it's fair to assume that the designers were hoping to create a game in which (a) every class could contribute to the game equally, and (b) every player would have an enjoyable experience at the table. It would seem malicious for them to deliberately design the game in which spellcasters overshadow non-casters, leaving the latter as dead weight who are stuck playing sidekick.

I'd believe in incompetence over malice...which bears out with all of Monte Cook's and Mike Mearls's mediocre design.
>>
>>86155832
>Do you think they'll want to play again?
I think so. I think I'll probably run a few more one-shots. I moved, and I'm playing with/running for FLGS randos; so I hope I can get enough people so I can boot the sperg (but maybe its a matter of adapting to a playstyle where I'm less indulgent of anime "rule of cool" stuff than the other guy).

They were surprised at how punishing movement was in 3.5, with all the things that draw AOOs if you do them in an enemy's face. However, I think they also ended up enjoying the tactical puzzle. I think mostly they were happy to go into a dungeon, make some meaningful choices, use a greater breadth of their PCs abilities. I could have done better, but I'm a bit rusty at DMing.

I think continued interest, as mentioned before, is going to have more to do with preferring my degree of preparation, the type of adventures I run, and (this may just be a pet peeve of mine) a DM that uses little profanity than it will with 3.5 as a system of choice.
>>
>>86155953
I've been told Red Hand of Doom is pretty good
>>
>>86156033
I will say, I did enjoy that moment of "Wait, you can do that in 3rd edition?" when an enemy tried to sunder the Barbarian's greatsword.
>>
>>86156033
>I think so. I think I'll probably run a few more one-shots.
Nice.

>They were surprised at how punishing movement was in 3.5, ... think they also ended up enjoying the tactical puzzle
As originally a 5e player, I can relate.
>>
>>86156446
Man I like 5e but the amount of things that DONT cause an attack of opportunity there is ridiculous. Literally run a marathon around your opponent, take out a potion and down it and he just stares
>>
>>86149631
>definitely shove the class progression table in the video somewhere, but it's pretty fine.
Definitely will do.
Should I worry about getting copyright flagged for that? I know their AI isn't that advanced but still. I think it should count as fair use. I edited the class character art just in case (and to fit the video aesthetic better). I'm not planning to get YouTube bucks from this channel but still would like to not disqualify myself.
>>
>>86156973
>Should I worry about getting copyright flagged for that?
Nah.
There's plenty of videos showing the pages of the books in full, in your case, putting a table up is just part of your commentary.
I mean, fuck, Mrrhexx shows pages and tables from the current edition routinely, and everything is just dandy.
>>
>>86154298
>What did the players do?
Dealt with the tourists. As in Dark Lord was actually just a puppet of a much bigger and badder guy who was doing some bets with his friends up there. He was engaging in some kind of a game with Good guys who got points that they could spend on helping adventuring parties to topple him.

Players were in the middle of this bullshit. They did manage to beat the Dark Lord but we never got to the high levels where PCs were supposed to ascend themselves.
>>
>>86157850
I don't remember does her memory return in first part or only in the second? Because being a Mars aligned terrorist is kinda a big deal.
>>
>>86156545
I'm pretty sure you can stand up from prone surrounded by enemies without any repercussion.
>>
File: whelloftime3x.png (28 KB, 1184x404)
28 KB
28 KB PNG
Wait a fucking second, there's a wheel of time 3.x adaptation?
Anybody here ever played this?
>>
>>86160303
In 5e? Yeah, In my one and only 5e experience I picked up the shieldmaster feat only to find out that the free shove/trip attempt it gave was essentially useless.
>>
was there ever any material on slaving/slave markets written down? Like prices etc.? I feel like 3.5 was the last time we could've gotten something as edgy as that. I wonder how much a humanoid goes for in the Underdark. How much is a troll?
>>
>>86161745
There's some rules in Lord of Madness, page 101, for the Neogi.
>The value of slaves is a different matter. Multiple factors go into the value of a slave, and the interest shown by the potential buyer is not the least.
>The basic method for determining the value of a slave is based on the creature’s CR, using the follow- ing formula:
>Cost = (CR, minimum 1)2 × 100 gp
>An unskilled dwarf, for example, with CR 1/2, costs 100 gp (CR 1/2 rounds up to 1; 1 squared = 1; 1 times 100 gp = 100 gp).
>A troll slave, on the other hand, costs 2,500 gp (CR 5 squared = 25, times 100 gp = 2,500 gp).
>>
>>86161745
Lords of madness has exactly what you’re looking for more or less in the section on Neogi
>>
>>86161745
The Return to the Vault of the Drow that Paizo did, the one with the Drow women coming when their children strangle each other in the womb iirc, might be your best bet.
>>
>>86161432
That’s probably a direct response to dedicated tripper builds being one of the few things Martials could do that actually impacted the battlefield in 3.X
>>
>>86161794
The price for an unskilled dwarf seems to be a bit too much. Removing the costs for food and shelter that you'll need to supply dwarf will make you something like 20 to maybe (highly unlikely) 50 gp a year. And if you are living say in the Underdark investing into an unskilled labor for more than a year in hope of getting some return on it seems like a bad idea.

I can see an apprentice craftsman going for 100 gp, whom you would buy in hope of him growing in skill over time. And in case he dies he should give you at least some return on your money in a year. Even if it won't be very good.

Troll prices on the other hand seem pretty good as he could be used as gladiator, warrior or very hard labor. And his regeneration makes him very unlikely to die easily. You just need a way to control him.

I'd use something like | ((2/"Class tier")*level)^2 x100 gp | for those who have class levels. But most monsters also could be placed in similar tiers with animals and vermin being at the bottom and something like dragons and outsiders being at the top.
>>
>>86098296
*without class levels, secondary RHD options and templates.
The moment any monster option or variety is applied to .5 monsters its closer to 68-75% instead of double.
>>
>>86163397
Neogi are space aliens that will sell everyone to everyone. Also 20-50 year profit ain’t bad, since that means a 5 year maximum to pay off your initial investment, which is nothing considering dwarves live for over a hundred years easy.
>>
Is the Inscribe Rune feat without taking levels in the Runecaster class worth it?
I'm thinking yes, since those can be activated without an UMD check and whatnot.
>>
How far ahead do you guys plan your characters progression?
Do you plan the specific minutiae or just a general direction, as in the exact skill points, feats, classes vs "he will become a crafter and learn some ToB manuevers"?
I plan the whole thing ahead of time, as I'm creating the character.
I do that mostly for fun, since the plans get revised as things happen in the table, so the original plan often ends up being nothing like what I planned originally, which is great.
Deleted and re-posted because fucking hell am I groggy right now.
>>
>>86164850
From 1-20. Game is too harsh on you making character building decisions on the fly. Magic items are the only thing I don't plan.
>>
Do gnoll girls have dicks?
>>
>>86165206
I think you're looking for /5eg/ or /pgg/
>>
>>86165253

I coulda sworn I was in 5eg. My bad. Lol
>>
>>86165206
Does the pope shit in the woods?
>>
>>86163647
The problem with slaves is that they are not willingly serving under you. So aiming for long time investment unless the slave is a professional, whom you will be supplying with everything needed, is very risky.
20-50 gp estimate is with basically feeding the dwarf at the lowest possible prices and housing him in barracks sleeping on the ground. If he gets sick, gets wounded, is too stubborn to work or a miriad other things you are going to lose money on him.

For the dwarf to live to a hundred years you'll need to feed, cloth and supply him properly. Which would put you at something like 5 gp of profit a year. And again he still can get sick, can get wounded and a lot of other things can happen.

There is a reason unskilled slaves were orders of magnitude cheaper than professionals in our world.
>>
>>86098021
If someone were to convert magic to work by psionics point rules and wanted to implement some partial recovery mechanic in place of just recovering all of your resources every day what’s a good way to math that out?
>>
How is the Spirit Shaman?
>>
>>86165992
Naive way would be to convert spell level of any slots available directly to points at a 1:1 ratio, but you run into the issue that sometimes three second level spells is dramatically better than one sixth level spell and so power won't scale linearly. You also seriously step on sorcerer's toes.
>>
>>86166446
The free raise dead is pretty cool. Some of his utility depends on the amount of "spirits" you encounter. Broadly, he's a detuned Druid.
>>
>>86167420
The obvious way is to go "Literally copy/paste the psionics rules for spells 1:1, dropping the augmentation rules for some kinda partial recovery one". So 1st is 1 point 2nd is 3, 3rd is 5, etc.
>>
>>86164850
>How far ahead do you guys plan your characters progression?
I have a 1-20 plan and then a low epic plan.
>>
Besides E6 and the regular E20, what are some other interesting breakpoints to adopt a flattened Epic progression?
>>
Goddamn I've been taking an unreal amount of time procrastinating because I can't decide on what to use for easy low level encounters. I have unlimited cool CR 3+ encounters, but not much in the way of interesting low level encounters.

Its for a gestalt campaign about solo adventurers btw.
>>
>>86168466
Worst case you can take a CR3 encounter but have some reason for them to be softened up already. An owlbear where the player initially has terrain advantage. A bandit caravan fleeing the scene of a heist successful but bloodied. The same rats/goblins/kobolds/dire weasels of every other low level adventure because fuck it, gotta get XP somewhere.

Or just start at level 3.
>>
>>86167420
Maybe this can help inform the rations : https://srd.dndtools.org/srd/variant/unearthedRecharge.html
Also : https://srd.dndtools.org/srd/variant/unearthedSpellPoints.html

>>86168065
I've seen talk of E8, but I don't see hoe that changes things much.
I think an E12 could work decently well for a higher fantasy kind of game that didn't get to the point of going completely and utterly off the rails from a player power standpoint.

>>86168466
I like >>86168686 idea.
A mix of the usual wild animals, npcs with class levels that can pull one trick off really well, and weakened higher CR monsters should do the trick.
>>
>>86169464
>give Wild Animals TOB maneuvers so even the bears are kung-fu fighting
>>
File: 1650220269952.jpg (636 KB, 1800x3200)
636 KB
636 KB JPG
>>86133676
It isn't too hard to imagine for me. Not the person your responding too, but I've also played in a few high level campaigns. Starting from 3rd level and going all the way up to 40th level. Our high level play was rather similar to this guys first experience of it just being rocket tag until we realized that rocket tag doesn't always necessarily mean you KNOW what defenses the person you are attacking could have, and never really knowing whose pieces belong to who.

That young king? Probably the gambit of one of the other players who is trying to get some standing and he might have some magical protection from that guy so attacking them might be a risky gambit. This turns the game into a type of high level Wizard cold war type deal where we TRY to outwith one another and steal special artifacts from one another trying to become gods before others, thwarting the divine aspirations of others, and so on and so forth. It was fun, but after a while we stopped and started over again.

The next game was much the same and we realized that this kingmaker, birthright style of play just suited our group. It was fun. We recently restarted the game all over again and the long term speculation is that our currently 8th level characters will be doing much the same.
>>
Are the Goodman Game 3e Dungeon Crawl Classics modules any good?
>>
>>86164850
i plan maybe one or two level ahead and then totally wing it.

it usually works fine, but it leads to a few cases of "why the fuck did i take this feat?"
>>
>>86098021
Pathfinder player trying to run a 3.5 adventure. Could someone explain EL to me? Do I even need to worry about it?
>>
>>86165206
>dicks
no. unless you're playing something retarded like 5e
>pseudopenises
quite probably, furfag.
>>
File: file.png (165 KB, 425x255)
165 KB
165 KB PNG
>>86170178
The extremely short answer is that Encounter Level / Challenge Rating is roughly "A full party of this level can reliably defeat this encounter while only expending a reasonable portion of their resources". There's a lot of things that it doesn't take into account like terrain, tactics, external pressures like time limits or priority targets, or the like, but in general if you treat it as a benchmark of party power vs. encounter power it'll get the job done to start.

Look at page 48 of the Dungeon Master's Guide for more detail.
>>
>>86169464
>I've seen talk of E8, but I don't see hoe that changes things much.
it lets 3/4 BAB classes enter more PrC, something they can rarely do at level 6 because all the cool shit is locked behind BAB +5.

that's the one think i can think about.
>>
NEW THREAD
>>86170580
>>86170580



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.