ITT we argue about the many fallacies commonly believed about 3.5, the big one being: caster supremacy
>it's true, but not nearly to the degree people make it out to be
>>44281471
How do you figure? Casters got something cool out of pretty much every new book because everyone wanted new spells, whereas the new feats usually sucked ass. Add to that new full-caster PrCs that didn't really require any sacrifice on the part of the wizard, and you can see how each splatbook increases the power of the wizard without doing much or even anything for anyone else. That might not be a core 3.5 issue, but iirc (and it's been awhile for me so I admit I may be wrong here! My apologies in advance) a lot of the splats that really ramped up caster power came out after 3.5 did. The best way to reduce caster power to merely 'unreasonable' levels is to brutally cut down on supplements available to casters, or pre-vet everything casters can use and be liberal with the use of the word 'no'.
But on topic! How about this one? "3.5 was an improvement over 3e!" A bunch of concepts got fucked over, including primarily martial concepts, and the stuff that really made casters over the top got left untouched. Some skills that nobody used went away and nobody really cared because nobody, player or DM, used them. In a lot of ways the ruleset became worse because the wording on the rules was sloppier and more open to abuse.
>>44281646
>How do you figure? Casters got something cool out of pretty much every new book because everyone wanted new spells, whereas the new feats usually sucked ass. Add to that new full-caster PrCs that didn't really require any sacrifice on the part of the wizard, and you can see how each splatbook increases the power of the wizard without doing much or even anything for anyone else. That might not be a core 3.5 issue, but iirc (and it's been awhile for me so I admit I may be wrong here! My apologies in advance) a lot of the splats that really ramped up caster power came out after 3.5 did. The best way to reduce caster power to merely 'unreasonable' levels is to brutally cut down on supplements available to casters, or pre-vet everything casters can use and be liberal with the use of the word 'no'.
the thread title says "Core 3.5"
>A bunch of concepts got fucked over, including primarily martial concepts
Oh? Do tell.
>>44281471
Even if you're only going with core, the most important thing that will determine how overpowered people think casters are, is how they look at levels.
If they look at the majority of their own play experience, which is usually mainly between levels 1 and 10, wizards or sorcerers start out as glass cannons that can usually take out their fair share of enemies with the Sleep spell, and then by level 10 they're actually strangely tough due to buff spells, and arguably the greatest contributor to combat success in the party - AND by far the greatest contributor to out-of-combat success due to the usefulness of spells - to the point where if the party wants to maximize success at that point, they have to plan around getting the caster his good night's sleep as much as possible (which is arguably an interesting risk-reward puzzle sometimes.)
However, it so happens that there are 10 more levels in the game.
>>44281471
Mostly agree... I think the caster supremacy thing was overdone. /tg/ largely envisions casters under ideal circumstances, with the right spells ready, not under attack, not having spent their spells too soon, infinite time on their hands, enemies that can't make saving throws, contingencies, etc. It's easy to paint them as god mode when you assume they're always at their best, because they were designed to be strong when expending magic, and weak when not. I'm normally a forever GM, and have never found stressing casters to be difficult, but it's something I need to be mindful of.
That said, I don't think they were balanced. 3.5/pathfinder casters aren't able to scale properly given their double-dip of spell levels and caster levels. 5e has removed that, in addition to giving fighter types a bit more punch on command in addition to their normal reliability, so I think that's one of the better aspects of the newer edition.
>>44281741
>>44281741
sleep is actually a bad example, because it has a full round casting time and has a limit to how many people it can affect, though it does have a good range
a better example would be color spray, which has a regular casting time, no HD limit, and isn't as easy to be resistant or immune to, though it emits from you in a 15ft cone, so you have to be closer to danger and it has a somewhat smaller area, but then, its easier to aim in battle without hitting your friends
buff spells typically have durations of minutes/level or less, and each one is a spell slot given up and a round used to cast
so they can make for an easy encounter, maybe a couple, but take several rounds to get ready (and given the sound of spellcasting, you need to be far away from your enemies to avoid detection before hand, which means time taken to get to the enemy afterwards)
out-of-combat utility is likewise constrained to one-use per spell slot (typically) and again often shortish durations (whereas the rogue can do it all day); if something blocks the spell or it fails to work for some reason, you have to wait until tomorrow to do it again (or otherwise have it prepared twice or use expendables)
many of these spells (like fly or invisibility) only affect one person in the party
dont forget that a spell can be interrupted or counterspelled or dispelled, and has to be ready when the situation arises (so, prepared and not used)
in order to regain spells for the day, an entire day has to pass; people like to talk about the 15 minute adventuring day, but they fail to mention that you have to wait and entire day to do it again (and have an uninterrupted 8 hour rest in there somewhere, + 1 hour of preparation for most casters)
intelligent enemies and/or lively dungeons aren't gonna just sit around and wait on you
Trying to imagine how would it be to play without core
>>44281471
In my group we were playing core 3.5. All was rough from the beginning, but finally went to shit when wizard got Tentacles. Rogue, fighter and paladin immediately disappeared from the battlefield. Yeah, no caster supremacy.
>>44281899
>Trying to imagine how would it be to play without core
You would only have this playble race:
Varag
The others races
1-Have core classes as favorited classes
2-are half elf, and so need base human
3-are human subraces that need human
4-other races that need core stuff
And what is worse, this one has a LA of +2
>>44281901
well, you get it at 7th level at the earliest, by then you'll be fighting high-str large or larger opponents, and 7th level rogue with max ranks of escape artist (or anyone under a grease spell) has a decent chance of escaping
it takes 18 in a score to get a bonus 4th level spell, and 26 to get two, and a 7th level wizard has 1 4th level slot
so...at best a conjurer can cast it 3 times per day, if he prepares no other 4th level spells
big whoop, man
>>44281871
>What is rope trick
>what is daern's instant fortress
>what is an spell that generates and extra-dimensional space
Of course there are situations where these spells can't be used. Mostly though you can blow a load in a dungeon encounter, rope trick then pop out. The way to counter these shenanigans would probably be time constraints on the mission / quest / objective.
>>44282090
those things exist, and while they have counters and such, you have a point
still, even if the group can rest safely or wait 16 hours in order to rest another 8, the enemies in the dungeon will have used that time to prepare, or move around anyway
Can we talk about Druids? Don't they get a free fighter as a class ability?
>>44281471
the other day I realized something to counter the "in-combat healing is useless!" argument
while yes, the healing cannot often keep up with the damage being received, that's only true if the fighters keep fighting as normal; what if they start fighting defensively/total defense/combat expertise/use a tower shield? Then, they should be taken far less damage, allowing the healer to heal them up before resuming to fight as normal.
>>44281899
Well, that depends on what you mean by "without core"
I've played without core classes before, but never without core feats or core races
>>44282157
No, tier one classes are boring unless the entire party are all playing tier one classes
>>44282157
Sure. They get a low-AC, stupid meatshield that can't open doors, climb ropes/ladders/whatever, might have trouble with stairs, has to be successfully handled (easy if you have many ranks of handle animal), larger ones cannot fit or move easily in many dungeons, and they can't be given complex commands and will continue to do what they were last commanded until otherwise noted, they also can't heal themselves in any way
So, they come with many setbacks in a dungeon environment.
>>44282176
At that point they might as well not show up because the attack penalties would make them even more useless.
You know what's a good way to not take damage? Staying at home.
ITT: Stockholm Syndrome at its finest.
>>44282176
That would be more valid if any of those options for being defensive were anything other than utter shit
>>44282052
Nah, there were plenty of non-Core races added by later books. Some were even monsters made more easily available to PCs. Goblins, kobolds, thri-kreen, elans, gnolls, aasimar and tieflings, githzerai and githyanki, the list goes on.
Non-core can even mean access to more 3pp stuff, so it opens a ton of options.
Of course, you're also the first person I know of to hear 'non-core' and think it applied to races as well as classes. The vast majority just want to try a game of Exemplars and Beguilers and Warlocks and such instead of the standard classes.
>>44282271
>fight normally until you receive enough damage that you start to need healing
>begin fighting defensively or whatever while the cleric starts to heal you
>once your hp is high enough again, begin fighting normally again
So hard to understand.
>>44282286
>no argument
>>44282293
>burden of proof
>>44282310
>cleric spends actions healing the fighter instead of actually fighting or buffing as he can do
>fighter stops contributing while he waits to be healed
>next round he is going to be wounded again
>Meanwhile a wand of CLW costs a pittance
You think this is an argument in favor of in-combat healing?
>>44282310
Or
>cleric buffs you up
>you never need the healing
Or or
>cleric buffs himself up
>you go home due to being a useless fighter when compared to the cleric
>>44282330
Good luck with your 3.5 hugbox, man.
>>44282343
>why fight if the fighter has the monster contained
>buff spells are prepared, healing spells are spontaneous chosen from any non-domain prepared spell, meaning buff spells might be expended already
>fighter is contributing *less*
>gets wounded later, sure, but at least he's fighting again, while the monster is not getting healed
>wands are great....out of battle
>>44282348
>you are buffed but fall prey to something anyway, like an AoE spell or a projectile weapon
>cleric has x spells/day with limited durations, which can be interrupted or dispelled, fighter doesnt
>fighter has more feats and higher bab, plus can focus his stats/items purely on fighting
>>44282355
enjoy your smaller, less fleshed-out alt games with tiny playerbases
>>44281471
I love 3.5, I really do, but if you think core 3.5 was good, there is something wrong with you
>>44282458
Please tell me, how does a 3.5 core only fighter "contain" a monster? And how does he do in in a way that a cleric cannot, to boot?
>>44282458
>enjoy your smaller, less fleshed-out alt games with tiny playerbases
Yes I do enjoy them, because "my" games are good. And I don't need a huge playerbase to validate my opinions.
Okay, so I've never actually had trouble balancing casters - as a player or the few times I've done a one-off adventure (like 3 or 4 sessions for one quest a few times over the years to give breaks to busy people).
Archers.
A smart enemy will have a few archers. They don't even have to have good BAB to hit, if you've got a group of five with crossbow bolts aiming NOT INTO MELEE so they're shooting the back line. If even one hits, test concentration.
My DM has gotten to the point that I broke the Ranger and it is not on my allowed list any more. Two good saves, great skills, and a weapon for all occasions.
>>44282518
what level?
also if they pass concentration youre gonna get rekt
Instead of core, can we talk about non-core stuff?
I was recently in a campaign where another player and I played a pair of goliath brothers, I was a setting sun unarmed swordsage and he was an iron heart fighter/warblade.
It was the most fun I've ever had with the system, and I've been playing for more than ten years
>>44282487
with lockdown stuff like improved trip + combat reflexes + reach weapon
or
by standing in the space it would need to cross through to get to the cleric, like a hallway, doorway, or some other chokepoint
if he is enlarged, he can block a 10ft space and reach out to 20ft (or more with a whip)
if it has great reach, at least the fighter provides soft cover
if the fighter is using a tower shield and the monster cannot tumble, the only thing it can do is bullrush/overrun/sunder.
the cleric *can* do it, but not as well
>>44282518
>Casters
>Not having the best AC in the party if they want to.
>>44282518
>wind wall
>cover
>having your own archers
This actually isn't a terrible way of dealing with casters, but it's hardly a solution. And that's really the problem, there is no single solution. A DM would have to go meta as fuck to put a core-only wizard/druid/cleric on par with a core-only fighter.
>>44282500
a larger playerbase means more players
or ANY players if you live somewhere with fewer people
>>44282589
I can't tell you what to talk about, but I wanted to keep it core because splats make things ridiculous, whereas core at least has a unifying design sensibility
>>44282568
Various levels. I've been in campaigns that made it to 17. It wasn't core that ruined it, it was the Ultimate Magus.
And, if they pass concentration, they're still quite wounded.
The secret to dealing with encounter difficulty is not the levels, but the variety. Extra opponents, mindless constructs, undead swarms... outsiders on occasion because a few of them simply have SR. Find something to make it harder for one particular character so that the others have a chance to shine and they are forced to think outside the box and not use their ONE SPELL. Or, I dunno, have someone hear the battle and come running.
>>44282631
>splats make things ridiculous
>wish and friends don't make things ridiculous
I see where you're coming from, but come on man
>>44282222
>mfw I increase its intelligence by
>mfw it gains sapience
Also handle animal allows complex commands at a higher DC
>>44282607
Wind wall is a third level spell, right? If I make them second guess just memorizing lightning bolt and fireball, I'm doing my job.
>>44282458
>2015
>huge 3.5 player base - especially for core rules
>>44282590
>by standing in the space it would need to cross through to get to the cleric, like a hallway, doorway, or some other chokepoint
Does not depend on the fighter
>if he is enlarged, he can block a 10ft space and reach out to 20ft (or more with a whip)
Needs a caster to buff him (exactly what you said wasn't needed)
>if it has great reach, at least the fighter provides soft cover
Or the monster can just walk around a bit
So basically the one good tactic is reach + improved trip, ok.
So to sum it up, your argument in favor of in-combat healing is that if the fighter is built the right way, and the fight happens in conditions that impede the opponents' movement, and the fighter fights defensively, the cleric can stay behind and heal him instead of taking a more active approach? And this is supposed to be a good thing?
>>44282518
>blur
>invisibility
>fog
>>44282607
>>44282607
>A DM would have to go meta as fuck
I'd argue that he simply has to heed ALL the rules and DMing tips the books give, not just the easy ones
>>44282595
>>44281834
> /tg/ largely envisions casters under ideal circumstances, with the right spells ready, not under attack, not having spent their spells too soon, infinite time on their hands, enemies that can't make saving throws, contingencies, etc. It's easy to paint them as god mode when you assume they're always at their best, because they were designed to be strong when expending magic, and weak when not. I'm normally a forever GM, and have never found stressing casters to be difficult, but it's something I need to be mindful of.
>>44282631
>a larger playerbase means more players
>or ANY players if you live somewhere with fewer people
You don't need more than four people to play almost anything. That shouldn't be hard if you don't have a severe social impairment.
Oh, right. You are a 3.5 player.
>>44282706
I will never understand how the massive variance between how effective casters are with and without spells could be seen as a good thing.
I mean, it works absolutely fine if everyone is like that, because it can keep a party on their toes, aware of their resources and how to spend them, but when some party members are wildly variable and others are mediocre but consistent? Well, the game just revolves around the variable party members. Leaving the consistent party members forgotten.
Vancian casting systems only work if everyone is a caster
>>44282709
It's surprisingly easy for stuff like FATE, but surprisingly hard for stuff like DnD 4e
>>44282645
wish is a 9th level spell and costs fucking 5000 exp
>>44282649
you can't increase their intelligence
>unless you cast fox's cunning or give it a headband of Int
>>44282684
>Does not depend on the fighter
what?
>Needs a caster to buff him (exactly what you said wasn't needed)
Only if he needs to block a 10ft space over a 5ft one, and its a 1st level spell
>Or the monster can just walk around a bit
not if theres nowhere to walk
>So basically the one good tactic is reach + improved trip, ok.
its one of them
>So to sum it up, your argument in favor of in-combat healing is that if the fighter is built the right way, and the fight happens in conditions that impede the opponents' movement, and the fighter fights defensively, the cleric can stay behind and heal him instead of taking a more active approach?
If the fighter is built of ONE of the few right ways, and the fight takes place in a dungeon or other non empty space, and the fighter fights defensively WHILE GETTING HEALED, the cleric can heal him for a round or three instead of something else, yes, in-combat healing can be an effective use of time
>>44282693
>20% miss chance for a 2nd level spell, for min/level (does block sneak attack though)
>good unless you need to cast a spell that targets or includes a target in it's effect
>good luck not seeing what you're doing
>>44282709
>You don't need more than four people to play almost anything.
but finding people who want to play the game is harder if they dont know or dont like the game
D&D has the advantage with both
>>44282803
>Well, the game just revolves around the variable party members. Leaving the consistent party members forgotten.
I don't see how this is necessarily true. It *can* be, but nothing says it must be.
In my experience, the casters just have to keep up if they blew their load too early, but once the majority of the party needs to rest (and if time/conditions allow), they do
>>44282862
From my experience, if the caster blows his load too early, the party dies due to not being able to keep up without spells. The only way to avoid this is to drop the difficulty of encounters once the caster is out, at which point, well, the game is revolving around the caster.
Just coming into say that if you took as many ridiculous steps to mitigate wizards/druids/clerics as you did with ANY OTHER CLASS then you'd be considered THAT DM instantly.
And that's a problem.
>>44282911
I think you mixed up "ANY OTHER CLASS" and "wizards/clerics/druids" there
>>44282590
Trip starts to fall off as a tactic pretty early since monsters gain strength bonus and size bonuses to resist much more easily than the PCs, and if you they have more than two legs good fucking luck.
>>44282818
>Does not depend on the fighter
>what?
I think the argument he's making is that when you point out the ways in which a fighter can shine in a combat healing relationship, you're not actually talking about the fighter shining at all. You're talking about the environment shining.
Enlarging a character to cover a larger area. Sitting in a choke point that was already conveniently there. Using abilities that are granted by weapons themselves that other classes can take proficiencies in. None of that has anything to do with the fighter. These were the examples you used to justify not only a combat healing scenario but also to justify the fighter's existence in that scenario, and you effectively seemed to have left the fighter completely out of it.
At least those are the concerns I take from it....
>Book of Weeaboo Fightan Magic
>Tome of Magic
>Magic of Incarnum
>Dread Necromancer and Warlock
Why the fuck would I play with core when splats had some much more interesting shit that had better balance.
>>44283114
I'm trying to figure out a way to buff monk into being a tier 4 class for a tier 3/4 game
Would giving monk full BAB do the trick? Or is that not enough?
>>44283163
It'd help, but you still got two big problems to address with monk: it's a class that tries to avoid using magic items in a system with a heavy magic item bias and beyond the punching it has a lot of weird abilities that don't really do much most of the time.
Easiest route would just be using the Unarmed Swordsage variant.
>>44283220
So... ki strike also gives a +1 bonus to attacks that increases with level?
>>44283007
true, some monsters are gonna be basically untrippable, though there are ways to boost your roll
>>44282911
I just plain disagree. You're not *punishing* them, you're just playing by the book.
>>44283096
>Enlarging a character to cover a larger area. Sitting in a choke point that was already conveniently there. Using abilities that are granted by weapons themselves that other classes can take proficiencies in. None of that has anything to do with the fighter. These were the examples you used to justify not only a combat healing scenario but also to justify the fighter's existence in that scenario, and you effectively seemed to have left the fighter completely out of it.
The fighter can use those proficiencies better than other classes (except for some raging barbarians). A rogue isn't gonna be blocking a hallway. Chokepoints aren't exactly rare (and making a chokepoint with spells for the fighter to use is often a better use of a single spell than attacking those enemies or providing a buff).
>>44283114
because they give you all the abilities you would ever need instead of making you think, turning the game into WoW rather than D&D
>>44283163
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?262690-My-houserules-(all-forty-billion-of-them)
go here, open up "class changes", then at the bottom the "monk revamp"
its about tier 3 or 4, and doesnt make the monk into something else entirely
>>44283287
>because they give you all the abilities you would ever need instead of making you think, turning the game into WoW rather than D&D
All of those classes have less ability variety than your average wizard or cleric.
>>44283310
That's really interesting, I like the mobility changes a lot
>>44283314
no, your wizard and cleric have to prepare their spells, which are then expended after casting
most of that splat shit either gets all day crap, per encounter crap, or draws from an all-known list, not including their numerous class abilities that wizards and clerics dont get
>>44283382
yeah, it keeps monks monks, but fixes their main problems
and I think the monks biggest strength is supposed to be their speed anyway
>>44283630
The mix of the 10th level feature and 15th level feature seems quite strong
I've never seen a problem with Monks. And why would you avoid magic items - are you stupid? Magic Item Compendium has everything you need to make sure you're getting an item for every slot. If you want to go into the whole MAD argument, well shit you don't play one if you rolled a bunch of 11's and a single 18.
The only thing I might change is making them proficient in the Longspear, because wtf
>>44283759
The thing is though, a monk with 18 in 5 stats is around the equivalanet of a fighter with 18 in 2 stats.
That's the real cost of MAD, even when you do have the stats, you're only equal at best to less MAD classes with the same stats
>>44283697
its intended to be
>>44283759
monk really is straight garbage
and im the guy that's been arguing in favor of core this whole time
>>44282818
>If the fighter is built of ONE of the few right ways, and the fight takes place in a dungeon or other non empty space, and the fighter fights defensively WHILE GETTING HEALED, the cleric can heal him for a round or three instead of something else, yes, in-combat healing can be an effective use of time
You do realize that the whole reason in-combat healing is useful is because the damage PREVENTED by KILLING THE MONSTER FASTER is greater than the damage you can heal in the same number of turns, right?
If the cleric spends his spells and turns buffing himself and/or the party in order to kill the thing faster, he does a much greater boon for their hp totals than if he'd spent the same spell slots and turns casting Cure X Wounds.
>>44281471
I often hear that rogues suck, but I don't really understand why; is it true?
>>44284222
Yes
They're a class that relies on making basic attacks to do damage, but doesn't have full BAB or any spells or spell-like abilities to counteract the fact that they don't have full BAB
That said, they suck significantly less than monks do, and are generally better than ordinary fighters (although a two level dip into fighter is still a good choice for rogues)
>>44283287
>though there are ways to boost your roll
In core only?
Outside of the Improved Trip feat, about the only ways to boost your trip checks are enhancement bonuses to Str (which cap out at +6, and require either higher-level wealth for a permanent item or a caster to put Bull's Strength on you) and Enlarge Person (which again requires a caster buddy, unless you want to hemorrhage coin buying dozens of potions).
About the best bonus you can possibly get to trip checks is +21: Start with 18 Str, +5 from levels, +6 enhancement, +5 inherent from stat tomes/Wishes, +2 from Enlarge Person for a total 36 Str, giving +13; +4 from size being Enlarged; +4 from Improved Trip. That's at level 20. For lower levels, say around level 12, you'll have more like a +8 Str bonus (only +3 Str from levels, +4 enhancement, no inherent bonus, still +2 size), for +16 to the trip check. To look at how that stacks up against some iconic enemies at that CR:
>Glabrezu: +18 (61.75% chance to beat you in the opposed check)
>Displacer beast packlord: +20 (70% chance to beat you)
>Young adult red dragon: +22 (77.25% chance to beat you)
>Abyssal greater basilisk: +15 (47.5% chance to beat you)
These are pretty typical values for monsters in the mid- and high levels. Tripping is fine against human-sized humanoids, but most monsters are going to beat you more often than not. And again, this is dependent on Enlarge Person, so you're even worse off on your own without a caster to make sure you pull your weight.
>>44284268
>>44284268
i dont think rogues suck because they lack attack bonus
thers plenty of ways to get it high enough on them
take a halfling rogue, for instance (they're the standard rogue race), they are small (+1), have +2 dex (+1), and have +1 to thrown attacks
add in PBS and a MW weapon and maybe bless and/or reduce person and you've got a good bonus, good enough for TWF probably
then theres the fact you can make sneak attacks with touch attacks like alchemists fire or wands of ray of frost or whatever
produce flame is particularly good
>>44281471
>it's true, but not nearly to the degree people make it out to be
Until level 5-7 (depending on the caster) then all goes out the window.
>>44282595
>highest AC
>not a manifester
A psion or ardent can easily get an AC in the 40s without even trying.
>>44284132
*useLESS, rather
>>44284222
3/4 BAB, hilariously weak defenses, and their main source of damage isn't always easy to get off, and a huge chunk of monsters are immune to it. If you want a skill monkey the Beguiler absolutely blows it out of the water and is a damn fun class to play.
>>44282298
>Of course, you're also the first person I know of to hear 'non-core' and think it applied to races as well as classes.
It applies to everything.
Thats why only varag remains.
the main problem WOTC sort of assuming only core and the splatbook exsting when making a splatbook, so you have most of races having core classes as favorited class, instead of whateaver the hell would be the best/most logical choice.
Other races (not varag) makes mentions of core races or depend on them to exist
>>44284707
>It applies to everything.
That is the literal meaning of the words, yes, but when people talk about "banning core" they invariably mean core CLASSES.
>>44284550
you can dip into barbarian for rage
which stacks with the rage spell
there's also the bard spell good hope for +2
a stone of goodluck adds +1
as does a pale green prism ioun stone
none of that is cheap, of course
the monsters presented are also the ones you probably wouldn't try tripping anyway
some tactics just arent gonna work on some enemies
>>44284707
>It applies to everything.
So no spot, listen, use magic device, or any other core skill? No core feats either? Well that kills just about all melee builds since splat feats generally branch off of core feats. No core spells? Well that can be worked around I guess, although no core items might make it a bit tricky to arm people, but the complete warrior has enough.
>>44284745
>but when people talk about "banning core" they invariably mean core CLASSES.
Ok, this increase the list of possible races to:
Half-Elf (base, Aquatic, Arctic, Desert, Fire, Jungle),
Human (base, Aquatic, Aventi),
Illumian,
Underfolk
Elf (Umbragen)
Varag
>>44284846
...You do realize that you can play a race without being its favored class, right?
>>44284697
You can get a plenty-high attack bonus on a rogue, that's not a problem
weak defenses, mostly true, but you should be using stealth and mobility to avoid getting hit or even targeted in the first place, but at higher levels your AC should be fine and you'll have shit like greater invisibility/blink/displacement on items
constructs, elementals, oozes, plants, undead, and anyone who has a miss chance or fortification armor
constructs and oozes are generally easy to avoid in the first place and are mindless, I cant speak with authority on plants; I never seem to encounter them or know much about them, undead have low hp and are very vulnerable to clerics, which leaves elementals and npc's as the main tough ones for rogues,
and miss chance can be overcome with faerie fire and/or darkvision (which are relatively easy to get)
>>44284875
>weak defenses, mostly true, but you should be using stealth and mobility to avoid getting hit
>you should be running and hiding instead of actually engaging in the combat
>>44284875
>You can get a plenty-high attack bonus on a rogue, that's not a problem
It has 3/4th BAB with 0 attack boosting options in-class.
This is why the "best" core rogue build is using a fuckload of acid vials for touch attacks, since that makes up for their shitty BAB.
>>44281471
Caster supremacy is unbelievably true in 3.5.
A core Fighter cannot match an equally leveled core Druid. At all. At any level, with any equipment.
When armed to the teeth, head to toe, in the best of non-core equipment (such as the nearly-necessary Cowl of Warding and something to give them persistent Death Ward), then they stand a chance against an equal leveled core druid.. who is naked.
If the druid gets access to non-core material or magical items, there's not even a contest.
The only core martials of note are Rogue (who can prestige into many partial casters and can use magic items) and Barbarian (who can prestige into a very great partial caster and are the only ones actually good at what they do to begin with), and even then they're not up there with full casters, just standing above fighter and paladin bullshit.
>>44284985
Fighter does have some cool alternate classes. So does paladin IIRC.
>>44284916
It's only bait because of toxic board culture where people would rather bitch than have positive discussion.
>>44285012
They usually hardly compare to things like Champion of Gwynharwyf, Runescarred Berserker, or even Assassin.
Paladin does have some good options but the base paladin is so bad that it's basically a trial to even get them.
>>44284932
>you should be running and hiding
to prepare for your next attack, yes
surprise round + win initiative (on average, due to high dex and imp init)
then either flank with the fighter if you can tell you won't be slaughtered in two rounds
or
run and hide behind cover, then come out for a sneak attack, then run and hide behind cover, etc
or
use spring attack into flanking positions or while hiding if possible
or
snipe
or
be invisible/blinking
or, if you absolutely must, feint
If you intend to stay in melee, you better have a lot of hp, a good fort save, and good AC.
>>44282676
>fireball and lightning bolt are problem spells
Ah, the DM who isn't aware of how casters work and thinks he has solved the problem.
>>44285119
If you're only dishing one attack every two or three rounds, you're barely contributing to the fight at all, even with sneak attack bonus damage. Dealing 1d6 + (1/2 level)d6 every other round is absolutely pathetic.
You're not exactly helping the case for the rogue's usefulness in combat, here.
>>44285149
>>44285149
>thinking stinking cloud, glitterdust, and black tentacles can solve every encounter
>>44285220
only one of those options had the rogue doing an attack every two or three rounds
the rest were at least one per round
>>44285226
>thinking they don't, each individually, solve dramatically more encounters than fucking fireball and lightning bolt put TOGETHER
If I had the option of casting both fireball and lightning bolt, combined, with the same standard action and spell slot, I'd still prepare something else.
>>44285083
But you got like, Dungeon Crusher+Knockback, and it's hilarious as fuck.
>>44285119
>run and hide behind cover, then come out for a sneak attack, then run and hide behind cover, etc
You literally can not do that. That's not how the hide rules work. Your turns would look like:
1. move in, make 1 attack (you are standing next to monster, he full attacks you)
2. move away, get AoO'd, make stealth check
3+: repeat 1-2.
You are doing an average of 0,5 attacks per turn. It's terrible.
>use spring attack into flanking positions or while hiding if possible
Not how spring attack works.
>snipe
Has a limit of like, 30 ft
>be invisible/blinking
Would be nice if you could do that without somebody else doing it for you. But yes,this is why all rogues are expected to get the magical items that do that.
>or, if you absolutely must, feint
It's actually better than the run away and hide thing, since you don't eat extra AoOs. It's still shit.
Actually good thread on PF forums:
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2t6ov?Dispelling-Myths-The-CasterMartial-Disparity
>>44285256
I do agree Dungeoncrasher is indeed hilarious (paint your armor yellow and pretend your a bulldozer), I don't think it's spectacularly strong or anything.
Unless you interpret that gimmicky rule where the fighter slams their opponent into a wall, then keeps going, dealing damage for every 5 feet traveled..
>>44285241
actually no, even with the "run and hide" approach, you can still do an attack every round
>>44285318
You can also do silly things like take a flying template (I think there's a half dragon one that's actually not terrible) and bash downwards, then pulverize the guy into a hole.
I mean, sure, it's about as versatile as a stick, but not bad. You even get some utility in the form of breaking walls and traps. You can combine it with Zentharim too, and it makes fighter a passably playable class at least.
>>44285324
How.
Describe how your turn goes.
>>44281471
>it's true, but not nearly to the degree people make it out to be
Counter argument: Druid
>>44281471
core 3.5 made casters even more powerful because in 3.5 core martials have no good options at all.
>>44285251
>enemies that are immune to many status effects, like constructs or undead
>a ton of weak enemies over a large area
>swarms
>an enemy with freedom of movement
>your tank having immunity to your AoE spell for some reason, allowing you to bomb the fight with no regard
>You literally can not do that. That's not how the hide rules work.
1. already be in position due to surprise round or otherwise high stealth, make attack, run behind total cover or total concealment (tumbling to avoid AoO if necessary)
2. pop out into regular cover or concealment while making hide check, attack
3. attack (probably not sneak attack unless flanking or enemy otherwise vulnerable), then move back behind cover
4. repeat
>Not how spring attack works.
Sure it is. Prove how I'm wrong.
>Has a limit of like, 30 ft
So?
>It's actually better than the run away and hide thing, since you don't eat extra AoOs.
You can tumble to avoid AoO's, you can't tumble to avoid full attacks.
>>44285451
And before you say "You can deal damage well if you-" yes but what about OUTSIDE of that? What sort of tools does a fighter actually have at his disposal?
And if you say "magic items" then you've already missed the issue.
>>44282676
>Evocator
>A problem
kek
>>44283163
Monk2/Psychic warrior 18 with Tashalatora feat
Monk/Ur Priest/Sacred fist
Is not that hard
Also, no, Full BAB and HD 10 doesn't solve shit, see PF, they did that with unchained monk and they're still meh Tier4
>>44285483
Though, that would be fair in its own way if, even when limited to core, casters didn't have a dozen ways of utterly invalidating HP and half a dozen ways of outputting HP damage better than those fighters anyway.
Take for example 5E, which dials back caster edition way further (not completely, but it's miles better than 3.X) simply by making casters terrible at ending fights. They still have plenty of gimmicky versatility, but they just can't wave their finger and end things instantly. (excluding a single save-or-lose spell, which is 9th level and requires a colossal GP investment [Imprisonment])
5E fighters have a sledgehammer, 5E wizards have a toolbox. Toolbox is more versatile, but it can't do what the sledgehammer do.
Daily reminder that:
1. Favored enemy is just shit
2. Precision damage was a mistake because half the monsters negate it
3. Monk is a fucking joke
4. Barbarian extra HPs during rage should be temporary HPs
5. Martials with only 2+Int ranks is bullshit
6. If you have negative int you get less ranks is also bullshit
7. Not being able to do combat maneuvers against creatures more than one size category bigger than you is stupid
It's been awhile since I played 3.5, but I remember these issues rustling my jimmies a lot
And this is without touching the caster/martial issue
>>44285571
>5E fighters have a sledgehammer, 5E wizards have a toolbox. Toolbox is more versatile, but it can't do what the sledgehammer do.
Unless there's a sledghammer in the toolbox, such as with the necromancer or the sorclock.
>>44285474
>1. already be in position due to surprise round or otherwise high stealth, make attack, run behind total cover or total concealment (tumbling to avoid AoO if necessary)
And you complain about /tg/ assuming ideal circumstances for a caster...
And even in this ideal scenario, you're still making one attack per round, with sneak attack only on two out of three attacks. That's better than one sneak attack every other round, true, but still pretty underwhelming.
>>44285767
Eh, sorclock was an unprecedented interaction, not something working entirely as intended. Won't deny necromancer armies are clearly outside the curve though.
>>44285767
Even if sorlock has a pretty fucking stronk synergy, it doesn't outdamage the best martials (unless they're clearly doing something wrong)
>>44285813
There's still some stuff, especially at low levels. I remember Druids with summons being quite ahead the curve for quite a while.
>>44285841
Only champion fighter out damages them, and only in their burst rounds. Over 4 rounds the difference is made up entirely.
>>44285474
>1. already be in position due to surprise round or otherwise high stealth, make attack, run behind total cover or total concealment (tumbling to avoid AoO if necessary)
Does that mean you somehow get a surprise round with an enemy right in front of you, or you already being in cover?
You know you only get 1 action in surprise rounds, right?
Anyway:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/hide.htm
Actually read the hide rules. You get massive penalties to hide while in combat. Played by the rules, your strategy simply does not work, both because of action economy, and because of these penalties.
>>44285884
>4d10 = 22
>27.81
>4x(2d6+3) = 40
>31.90
Mmm, I must be an ignorant because I don't really understand that chart, what am I missing?
>>44286024
Hex?
>>44286048
>>44286024
Also, it's against AC. Meaning it calculates miss chance.
>>44285975
>Does that mean you somehow get a surprise round with an enemy right in front of you, or you already being in cover?
Either. You can sneak up on somebody, then attack, or you can charge them (one action). Or you can just shoot them from cover.
>Actually read the hide rules. You get massive penalties to hide while in combat. Played by the rules, your strategy simply does not work, both because of action economy, and because of these penalties.
Action economy doesn't keep it from working.
You will probably get the accelerated sneaking penalty if you opt for melee, which is -5, I think.
For sniping, you get -10, but with sniping you can be up to 30ft away, and for each 10ft of distance, the enemy gets a -1 on spot and listen.
Hide is one of the easiest to buff skills, and a rogue with max ranks, a good dex, and presumably some misc bonus will usually have a higher hide check than an equal CRed enemy has in spot. Usually.
>>44286048
Yeah, that makes more sense...but hex only works against one target, and takes a bonus action to pass into another, and is concentration (and warlock lacks Con saves), not saying you shouldn't use it, but assuming you're always going to use it perfectly is wishful thinking, specially because when you get metamagic it also takes a bonus action to turn spells into sorcery points and at that point. And quickened metamagic is also a bonus action now that I think of...so using the 3 of them without overlapping some on every turn seems kinda impossible.
>>44284985
Level 1 fighter wins
>>44286138
It just worksNo, it doesn't, but not many GMs realize how it works, and if they do they don't they aren't always paying attention to your action management, so you can cheat, I know I do it a lot
>>44286156
1st level fighter against a Druid with it's animal companion? I think that at best he has a 50/50
Why are psions never in the discussion for brokenness? While on paper they don't seem so, their on the spot versatility, and the fact that powers aren't spells makes them so much more adaptable in worse case scenarios. They don't need components, to be able to move, or be able to even make a sound to pop them off, the system allows them to be much more versatile with their powers chosen, and they are way, way tougher - especially at lower levels - due to psionic body feat abuse and the ability to wear full armour.
>>44286156
Against a Druid and his animal companion? Unlikely.
/tg/ quick quastion, from what you are saying about casters it looks like you throw your party agients one encounter a day. Wizards are usefull but have a limit of spells a day, and cant read your mind, if you stop looking at the spell list and start looking at what your little magic blaster can really do you might have a diferent perspective on the whole thing. How on earth can a level 10 wiz mass spam invis + wall of wind?
>>44286195
Because they really aren't
>>44286212
Remember senpai, scrolls and wands are cheap as shit. People forget to drop money on consumables because they don't like the idea of "wasting" money, but practical experience playing 3.x for over a decade has told me that casters should probably spend over 30% of their wealth on consumables, it will work so much better for them.
>>44286116
>Action economy doesn't keep it from working.
>1. already be in position due to surprise round or otherwise high stealth, make attack, run behind total cover or total concealment (tumbling to avoid AoO if necessary)
>Attack
>then move
You can not do that. You have 1 action. You can charge, but you can't move into hiding after.
>4 Repeat
How do you get a new surprise round mid combat?
>>44286230
well yes but casters are not the only class that can use wands and scrolls, from my expierience a well placed roug with high stealth + use magic iteam can be a lot more dangreus than a wiz or sorc can
>>44286227
I've played both for a long time, many games, low, mid, and high levels. Psions absolutely hold up to wizards in game; similar to how Beguilers are better in practice than on paper due to their sheer versatility and ability to adapt to worse case scenarios, so are psions. Wizards don't have that adpatability. Steal their spell component pouch and spellbook and suddenly, they hurting.
>>44284916
The whole damn thread.
>>44286138
It calculates it overlapping on the first turn at later levels. Against multiple enemies, you can blast instead of single target strike with EB, so your DPR is even higher even without Hex.
EB is also a ranged attack, so you probably won't get your hex broken that easily, especially once you get spellsniper+far eb.
>>44286195
So I guess monks are broken too because they don't depend on equipment?
Also powers have the same problems that spells have, they're subject to all the problems spell have (SR, antimagic fields, AoO, etc), they simply have eschew materials, silent spell and still spell, whoopty doo, powers don't improve with level (you have to spend more points on them), you have a limite on power points equal to your level and their effects are 99% of the time worse than spells.
No, 3.5 Psyonics aren't broken, they're in fact how caster should be.
>>44286280
>I've played both for a long time, many games, low, mid, and high levels. Psions absolutely hold up to wizards in game; similar to how Beguilers are better in practice than on paper due to their sheer versatility and ability to adapt to worse case scenarios, so are psions. Wizards don't have that adpatability. Steal their spell component pouch and spellbook and suddenly, they hurting.
Component pouch costs a pittance, no reason to have less than 3-4. Eschew materials is also a single feat.
Spellbooks you'll NEED more than one to hold all your spells to begin with, and you are expected to have backups.
>>44286200
>>44286191
>>44286156
Depends on who goes first. Fighter with a great sword and average str can 1 shot a druid assuming average rolls.
>>44286191
If he gets 18 str, I'd bet on the fighter. If they both have elite array, the odds are in favor of the druid, I'd say, at about 40/60, but it really depends on the druids spell selection.
>>44286230
30% on scrolls and wands is only a lot if you buy 1st level spells, and many DM's won't let you buy partially-charged wands.
>>44286273
You misunderstood.
You get your surprise round, THEN initiative is rolled. If the rogue wins (and they should), they get their turn. There is no other suprise round in the combat.
>>44286195
Because 3.5 Psions are just Sorcerers, but moreso.
What they gain in flexibility over the course of the day and ability to use powers under adverse circumstances is completely overshadowed by their lack of shifting versatility. They are able to use a tiny number of powers, they can Spam them, but they lack utility versitility. They cannot swap out powers to have the right tool for the job. They have only their flavour of hammer and must pray ever problem is a nail.
>>44286329
>Able to cast from 300ft or more
Kek, maybe if your GM wants you to do it, ambushes happen, enemies aren't on a field with clear vision, and they don't lack ranged options.
Below 80ft is really the usual distance in which you can range in real, not theoretical, games, and at that distance monsters can move to your possition and then lock you (that's why you also pick the pushing invocation).
Also lets not forget dungeons, important location in D&D.
>>44286364
Most casters pick improved initiative because BaB +0 doesn't let you pick many feats and druid only has Natural Spell as must have.
Like I said, at best 50/50.
>>44286364
So can a druid with high STR two handing a scimitar.
EVERYONE can oneshot at 1st level.
Also, assuming they are even in range.
So if your argument is that fighter wins if
-the druid is in charge range
-there's nothing (terrain, AC in the way) stopping the charge
-can _possibly_ oneshot the Druid
-then not get killed by the AC for double KO
It's looking pretty bad.
>>44286359
>Spellbooks you'll NEED more than one to hold all your spells to begin with
>not running with a Boccob's Blessed Book
what kind of pleb wizard
>>44286376
If the DM doesn't sell it to you, make it yourself.
Wizards get bonus metamagic or item creation feats, have scribe scroll built in. Clerics can also take these feats. Far better to have these as items than waste spell slots. If the DM isn't selling, remind him you are a caster and you'll play your way. Spend a pittance of money and exp and fuck him if he didn't want you to have that item
>>44286401
Right, sure, but you CAN push+ move away, and many monsters won't be able to follow and also attack. You are also more likely to SET the ambushes, being a fly/invisibility/teleport etc. capable caster.
I mean, sure, some situations you get like Balor just teleporting up to you and vorpaling off your head is pretty BS, and the fighter can survive it more often than you, but most of the time you are way more out of harms way than the great weapon fighter.
>>44286482
yes, if you have the time and safety
>>44286452
Well, you still have your old books if you upgrade to boccob's.
>>44286156
Un-fucking-likely.
>>44281646
Easy way to fuck over all casters?
DM house rules:
>All spells above third level are barred
>Casters CANNOT multi-class. Ever
>All things now have spell resistance
>Anti-magic field every five feat
>Divine spells are counted as Arcane
>All atheists though are struck down by angry gods though if this point is used to try to claim "gods are just wizards"
>This is not a very serious post
I forbid fedora tippers at my table!
>>44286540
Not that impossible, the fighter is going to be built to deal with shit in melee but not all the druids are, so the fighter has a 60/40 in those situations, but if the druid is built for melee? yeah, shit becomes nightmare mode on for the fighter.
>>44286520
Yes, DM bullshittery.
The only way to oncoveneince Casters.
The only way to make non-caster vaguely relevant.
A cockmongering DM can also attack a 1st level party with a team of Doppelganger assassins with house ruled powers that make them invincible.
Yes, That DM certainly can stop the players at every turn and enjoy masturbating to the realm where they are omni-god.
>>44286619
the real challenge is the fighter fighting two enemies at once, he has the better AC and damage, but that's it
the druid can use shillelagh and flank if he's quick enough, or can use produce flame to touch attack some of the fighters hp away, or use entangle if they're in vegetation
In a fight between the animal companion and the fighter, I'd give it to the fighter for higher damage and AC, but with the druid added in, I dunno
If it was just the fighter versus the animal OR the druid, Id say the fighter almost everytime, especially if he has 18 str
>>44286612
Easier without making things impossible to them.
-Enforce school focusing on wizards
-Either Wildshape (avenger druid) or Animal companion (whatever it's name is) not both
-Cloistered cleric (I know I know, it's just so they don't become better fighters than the fighter)
-They start with 25 point buy while non full casters start with 32
-Other stuff I don't remember
This is what my group did
>>44286619
>Fighter is 100% all the time optimized for this particular situation
>Druid won't be optimized LAWL I WIN
Where did my goalposts go?
>>44286667
You mean doing what the books say? I can see why a little reality and adversity might upset a proud person.
>>44286720
>>Fighter is 100% all the time optimized for this particular situation
any fighter who isn't built for meleeing would die when paired against a stiff breeze
>>44286754
So ranged Fighters aren't a thing?
>>44286720
Dunno, maybe it's where you left your reading comprehension
>>44286805
Not a good thing at all considering how many anti-ranged projectile attacks exist
>>44286717
>-Cloistered cleric (I know I know, it's just so they don't become better fighters than the fighter)
They get Knowledge devotion and Divine Might and they become better fighters anyway.
>>44286436
>>44286376
>>44286200
Everyone forgetting about ranged fighters. Clearly superior in core.
>>44286805
Ranged 1st level fighter don't kill a druid in one hit, not in two, maybe not even in 3, they deal 1d8 period. And as soon as the wolf reaches him he's fucked.
>>44286839
>Clearly superior in core.
Maybe in PF. In 3.5 ranged fighters were pretty meh.
>>44286839
>>44286805
That's what I get for not refreshing before posting
>>44286852
2d8 with rapid shot.
>>44286915
Average of 9, assumign you have an 18 on dex you hit with a +3. Druid can easly have 17-18 on AC. So you hit with 14+ and as soon as the wolf enter melee you're fucked.
I don't think this is the wisest idea, 2hd Powerattack with cleave is probably the best, charge dog first (because low AC), then cleave the druid.
>>44287004
18 ac at first level bro? Come on now
>>44287040
>14 Dex
>hide armor
>Shield
10+2+2+3 = 17
And lets hope he didn't use a spell to improve it ;^)
>>44287040
Druids can use shields and hide armor. That's +5. If he has 14-16 DEX, he's got it.
>>44286744
Doing what the books say you should do =/= doing what players find fun. Having one ambush encounter every now and then is one thing and most players expect that, having constant harassment to prevent the casters from preparing spells only hurts the martials in the long run because nobody's going to get any healing without the cleric's spells. All you'll succeed in doing is wearing down the martials who end up having to bear the brunt of all the fighting and suffering for it. It's not fun for anyone if the casters just plain cannot participate in a fight with their best abilities, and the martials are without their crucial lifeline that keeps them healthy to go to the next fight.
>>44284707
>Banning core
>No more skills, stats or XP progression
Yours has to be the most autistic interpretation of a thing I've ever seen.
Are you a robot?
>>44287071
>>44287075
Kek, no, read the PHB again.
>>44287082
>because nobody's going to get any healing without the cleric's spells
>actually wasting spell slots on healing
>not just carrying 50 Healing Belts that you cycle throughout the day
750gp for 6d8 hp..
>>44285317
I was ready to sperg but then I read the thread (well, the OP) and it's actually good.
>>44287186
Yes, anon, you can game the system as any class and find a way to break the intended class synergy. It stopped being impressive a decade ago.
>>44287082
Sitting in a dungeon scribing scrolls is asking for trouble. At the inn, you're probably safe, unless it's a dangerous city or you have personal enemies after you.
>>44287236
No, I mean, actually using spell slots to heal is just one of the worst things you can do.
It's not even "gaming" the system. Clerics are better fighters than fighters. Healing is best left to magic items that anyone can carry because a wand of lesser vigor will just pay off more.
The idea that the cleric is "intended" to be the healing class is flawed. There is no intended healer. The "tank healer dps" schema didn't come around until well after 3.5's core was printed.
Clerics were supposed to be good at direct healing, but at no point was "healbot" supposed to be a viable class.
>>44287246
Then again, you can just rope trick...
>>44287280
>The "tank healer dps" schema didn't come around until well after 3.5's core was printed.
More like it wasn't executed correctly, but the trinity had been alive well before 3rd.
>>44287303
As a concept it was more like "support" instead of "healer". The cleric's job was more to buff people and keep enemies from escaping, then heal people before they die, not try to keep them at full HP.
>>44287343
Okay, yeah, I can agree to that.
>>44287246
It should not be impossible to prepare spells in the field if you've set up camp. Only a terrible GM sends random encounters at the party every time they try to rest, unless the party is resting after every encounter.
>>44287280
You must be really new to the game if you think it's common for clerics to heal during battle. Cleric heals are free, healing items cost money. It's pretty stupid to spend uses of wands of clw or whatever you bought when you can just let the cleric spontaneous cast heals after an encounter.
>>44287284
its a 2nd level spell, it lasts 1 hour/level, and it can be found and entered by enemies (all they need is detect magic or see invisibility, or presumably scent)
You need to be at least 9th level to have a rope trick last long enough for you to create a magic item, because you need to spend 8 uninterrupted hours working on them per day (even a 1st level scroll), and you can't cast spells during that time.
Thought experiment for the 3.5 thread. Don't take this too seriously, it's just something that I came up a while ago (after I already stopped playing 3.5) but I think it could go somewhere.
What if we change all the classes' spell progression by taking it down one step. Full casters now go to level 6 (bard progression), bard uses one of those that go up to 4th. Ranger and paladin can keep theirs.
Spell lists stay the same, only you reduce access a lot. Spells of level 7+ now are the realm of epic spellcasters.
Would you play this?
>>44287394
Why would you write scrolls in the middle of a dungeon? That's what downtime is for.
>>44287373
>It should not be impossible to prepare spells in the field if you've set up camp.
It's not. I was talking about scribing scrolls though, or making other items.
?Only a terrible GM sends random encounters at the party every time they try to rest, unless the party is resting after every encounter.
Unless there are enemies in the dungeon who are aware of the party's presence and want them dead or gone.
>>44287408
Pretty much every hotfix for casters involves forbidding any spells above x level. It's not totally bad, as long as you instead give the casters free metamagic feats so they can fill the higher level slots that they won't be able to use with metamagic spells from lower slots.
>>44287394
You can cast it twice. Y could set up shop in a dungeon and they couldn't do shit about it.
>its a 2nd level spell, it lasts 1 hour/level, and it can be found and entered by enemies (all they need is detect magic or see invisibility, or presumably scent)
When this spell is cast upon a piece of rope from 5 to 30 feet long, one end of the rope rises into the air until the whole rope hangs perpendicular to the ground, as if affixed at the upper end. The upper end is, in fact, fastened to an extradimensional space that is outside the multiverse of extradimensional spaces (“planes”). Creatures in the extradimensional space are hidden, beyond the reach of spells (including divinations), unless those spells work across planes. The space holds as many as eight creatures (of any size). Creatures in the space can pull the rope up into the space, making the rope “disappear.” In that case, the rope counts as one of the eight creatures that can fit in the space. The rope can support up to 16,000 pounds. A weight greater than that can pull the rope free.
Spells cannot be cast across the extradimensional interface, nor can area effects cross it. Those in the extradimensional space can see out of it as if a 3-foot by 5-foot window were centered on the rope. The window is present on the Material Plane, but it’s invisible, and even creatures that can see the window can’t see through it. Anything inside the extradimensional space drops out when the spell ends. The rope can be climbed by only one person at a time. The rope trick spell enables climbers to reach a normal place if they do not climb all the way to the extradimensional space.
>>44281741
>wizards or sorcerers start out
Fallacy 1: Ignoring Druid and Cleric, the equal classes to Wizard.
>to the point where if the party wants to maximize success at that point, they have to plan around getting the caster his good night's sleep
Fallacy 2: Ignoring how the difference between High Bab and Medium BAB is almost non existing. Its not even significant. And by the time it kicks in (3 attacks versus just 2), its spells allows it to be ignored
Yet acknowledging that Wizard and Sorcerer have horrible BAT.
>wizards or sorcerers
Fallacy 3: The class which is inferior due getting spells slower(remember: Exponentiation spell growth) is somehow equal to the one which gets it earlier.
Its ironically less of a issue as the levels drags on, but at the same time: The earlier Save or Die spells are up, or One Size Fits All encounter tools
>>44287457
>You can cast it twice.
Dude, read the fucking posts before you respond.
No, you can't cast it twice if you're resting to restore spells or making an item.
Nice copy/paste there, did you have a point?
>>44287373
>You must be really new to the game if you think it's common for clerics to heal during battle. Cleric heals are free, healing items cost money. It's pretty stupid to spend uses of wands of clw or whatever you bought when you can just let the cleric spontaneous cast heals after an encounter.
Clerics shouldn't waste spell slots on heals AT ALL. Those magic items are not expensive. A wand of lesser vigor (far better than a wand of cure light wounds) is 750 GP for 550 HP (every cast will assuredly heal 11 HP exactly).
That will probably easily get your party to level 5 before being depleted, even with lavish use. At which point, 750 GP is pocket change.
>>44287408
May as well play Epic 6 rules. You're not fixing much. Caster supremacy will still be firmly rooted by level 5.
>>44286156
That ends with what... Grease + animal companion?
Winning chances for the druid ends up at something like 80% considering how rolls can fuck up astronomically.
Even a rat dealing 1d2 damage has a 50% chance to hit, adding 1d2 damage to whatever the druid is using(like fists)
>>44287082
>>44287186
>>wasting money on healing wands
sure you should have them as a back up, but between channel energy and spontanious casts healers are effective in combat. they negate the enemies turn by removing conditions that fuck the party and heal them so the enemy has to focus on attacking them.
>>44287797
Grease isn't a druid spell..
If the area is grassland he can totally use Entangle though.
>>44287836
"Wasting" 750 GP is hardly burning anything at all if you're following WBL.
And instead you gain far better uses for those spell slots, ensuring survival far more efficiently.
Use E6 rules
Use Midnight rules for spellcasters
Increase ALL casting times by 1rd
Give all spells an xp component
Allow non-spellcasting levels to gestalt
Force spellcasters to take one level of monk for every spellcasting level.
>>44288001
>Force spellcasters to take one level of monk for every spellcasting level.
Now that's just cruel and unusual punishment
>>44288001
Congrats, you just made them absolutely useless.
>>44288001
Easier rules:
Play Tier 3 and Tier 4 only.
>>44288001
>Increase ALL casting times by 1rd
Honestly, just making all spell casting times 1 round or longer fixes a lot of problems. Remember, 1 round spells go off at the beginning of their next turn - a rule that a baffling number of players either forgot or never read.
>>44282056
Yeah, so he can only win 3 encounters each day.
He really sucks.
And he can combo it with Solid Fog which removes the opponents ability to move out of it.
Yeah Tentacles isn't retardedly good.
Or you know, a transmuter could just prepare polymorph 3 times and win every encounter.
>>44282642
>Various levels. I've been in campaigns that made it to 17. It wasn't core that ruined it, it was the Ultimate Magus.
If Ultimate Magus ruins your games you haven't seen a properly built wizard ever. Wizard 17 is almost always better than any combination that includes ultimate magus without fast progression classes.
>>44282590
>with lockdown stuff like improved trip + combat reflexes + reach weapon
Doing trip lockdown against core monsters without anything to buff you up in size is close to impossible.
A level 5 fighter with 18 strength and improved trip has a +8 on a trip roll. A troll has +10.
Without buffs you dont even have a 50/50 chance of tripping the troll before calculating in the chance of hitting the troll.
>>44287864
how is negating what the enemy does to the party a waste of spell slots? sure there are good spells that really buff or lock down enemies. but you don't exactly need an army of them. 750 isnt a lot only if you actually blow resources that refresh for healing. if you don't, then 750 is litterally only enough on average to heal two moderately leveled pcs with d8s or 10s and decent con, or 3 wizards.
>>44286156
A Level 1 fighter will be unable to keep up with a naked Druid with a club, using Shillelagh.
Or any Animal companion as a gank squad.
>>44288559
>>trip is too hard guise.
a properly made cmb build can take a shit on almost anything with manuevers, the only real problem they face is A freedom of movement, and B, immunities due to flight and size.
other than that cmbs of monsters really isnt that impressive, especially when most of your buffs still apply due to many cmbs being attack rolls as well as cmb checks.
>>44288559
oh, and you're a dipshit, a level 5 fighter with 18 strength has a +11. thats before any other bonuses like buffs.
>>44288868
Wand of lesser vigor, mate
11 HP per use, 50 uses
an Eternal Wand of lesser vigor doesn't wear out, but is instead limited to 22 HP per day
>>44288868
>how is negating what the enemy does to the party a waste of spell slots?
Because you can just waste the enemy with those spell slots and not have them do anything. Prevention is the best cure.
You don't function under the "caster edition" mindset, do you?
>>44288906
Is this pathfinder stuff?
This is a 3.5 thread.
>>44285406
Druids are a big offender, yes. They get an animal companion, can wildshape and then still cast spells, and can summon animals (and elementals and fey and magical beasts) all the time. They get spot and listen and can track if they want.
Animals suffer from this:
>>44282222
Your AC in wildshape won't be great, but you can cast barkskin.
Summoning takes an entire round.
Grappling can be fairly easily countered by the grease spell, and completely countered by freedom of movement. For the most part, being able to fly or even just climb will negate the threat from animals (but not from elementals). The most dangerous ones are large or larger, so medium-sized tunnels will grant a big advantage.
A +1 full-plated fighter with a +1 tower shield and combat expertise can handle them without too much trouble, because their AC's are fairly low, assuming he's greased or has freedom of movement.
They are OP, yes, but still.
>>44289052
>>wand of vigor
>>pathfinder
no.
>>44289073
it uses up about the same ammount of spell slots if you are fighting monsters appropriate for your level.
>>44289497
pathfinder is assumed because its the place that makes manuevers more difficult in poplar belief. the reality is that it's fucking easier in 3.5. a level 5 fighter with 18 str and improved hits at a 9 but gets to make their stomp on shit attack immediately without blowing extra feats.
>>44290139
You should work on your reading comprehension, seeing as OP says "Core 3.5 appreciation thread".
>>44290139
>>pathfinder
Fuck the fucking fuck off
Why can't people just use the tiers and be happy with that?
You want to play a wizard? Fine, so long as you're playing with clerics and druids. You want to play a barbarian? Fine, so long as you're playing with rogues and rangers.
3.5 works so much better if you just separate it out into several different "games" all using the same system
>>44282090
>What is rope trick
A useful spell that's going to take up a slot, just like any other. And you'll need to Extend it if you want to get any sort of proper use out of it before level 8. And you'd better not have any Bags of Holding.
>what is daern's instant fortress
55000 gp and not for sale off the shelf, if your DM runs settings with any sort of restraint.
>>44281471
Offtopic, but what would you call a mage who uses sound?
Telepaths are Telekines, fire mages are pyrokines, what is a sound mage then?
>>44297938
Acoustikines.
>>44297938
Anything you want, because all the names are wonky as fuck if you actually look at their meaning anyway.
>>44297938
A phony wizard
>>44287103
>>Banning core
>>No more skills, stats or XP progression
NOPE
Just
Classes
Stuff that need those classes to be able to exist
Races
Stuff that need those races to exist
Prestidge Classes
Stuff that need those prestidge Classes to exist
Spells and items
Stuff that need those spells and items to exist.
Feats
Stuff that need those feats to exist.
Monsters
Stuff that need those monsters to exist.
Gods
Stuff that need those gods to exist.
No core class kills every single playable race excluding varag
No core spells, kills almost every caster ever because they will need those spells (instead of being able to cast everything, or just some specific schools [schools arent banned], they specifically tell what spells they can be used and include core ones).
This will kill alot of things because they will get core feats because "urr dur we need to use core stuff"
>>44298458
What point are you trying to make? You syntax is weird as fuck.
>>44290113
>A +1 full-plated fighter with a +1 tower shield and combat expertise can handle them without too much trouble
Turn into bear
Grappe
Fighter dies because grapple is a touch attack and then is Str checks
>>44298514
>assuming he's greased or has freedom of movement.
Don't just counter half of the argument.
>>44297938
Noise Marines
>Consider the 8th level druid. Now, an 8th level druid can do many things, like cast spells or shapeshift, but they also get an animal companion. At 8th level, their animal companion is likely to be a brown bear. Now, a Brown Bear gets 3 attacks a round, is Large (he gets free attacks whenever anyone moves up to him), has a 27 strength, and can make grapple checks as a free action whenever it hits you. An 8th level fighter, for comparison, can only make 2 attacks a round, although he probably has better accuracy and AC and he should have more tricks to use than a bear.
>But that's just one of the druid's abilities. The druid can also turn into a brown bear. So every time she wakes up in the morning, whatever else she does, an 8th level druid is, at minimum, 2 brown bears.
>Except one of those brown bears can cast spells. There's a feat in the PHB that lets you cast spells while wildshaped without any penalty at all. Oh, and any magic cast on the druid automatically affects its animal companion for free. Druids get many, many spells that benefit animals, so this is a useful power.
>So a druid is like two bears, each of them capable of more attacks per round than a fighter, except both bears can fly (Air Walk), both of them have magically enhanced claws, and one of them is throwing lighting bolts and and turning the ground to spikes and summoning more bears.
>That's caster supremacy. One guy gets a sword and armor, the other person is an aggressively hegemonizing ursine swarm.
>>44281871
You don't actually have to be that far from your enemies, as the verbal components of a spell don't have to be shouted or even said above a whisper, and with a door between yourself and your opponents, it should be able to make -most- things incapable of hearing them, meaning that if you're the one doing the attacking, then you'll have time to spare.
>>44298556
Any 8th level fighter worth their salt can beat 2 brown bears easily, even if they fly and shoot lasers.
>>44298603
Care to demonstrate?
>>44297251
>And you'd better not have any Bags of Holding.
Blatant false bullshit. Rope Trick has no actual interaction with Bags of Holding.
>>44298556
there is a limit to spells, shapeshifts and such. A level 8th fighter will always be something usefull as long as he has HP, a 8th level druid is only usefull untill he runs out of spells. Dont get me wrong, i belive in the caster problem BUT you are making in out like the druid has a infinate amount of spells
>>44298740
...no, he won't be, because a fucking fully kitted out fighter can't match CRs like he should.
If the caster is dry, the party fucking stops, because otherwise they fucking DIE.
>>44298740
>8th level druid is only usefull untill he runs out of spells
Even if he runs out of spells, which is fucking unlikely unless he's a pew pew retard, he's two fucking beats in one chasis
>>44298759
This is, in my opinion, the real problem of caster supremacy
When a caster is present, every decision made by the party revolves around the caster, and this makes the whole game worse for everyone, caster and DM included
>>44298891
I don't think it's the real problem, persay.
It's the problem in that it's the end result of them being so fucking powerful.
I see what you mean, though, even if I'm being figity about the wording of it. Also I agree. The end result is the game is warped around them to an unheathy degree.
DM tries to ignore it? Well, the game gets broken over it's knee.
DM tries to fix it? The game because a fuckfest of annoyance for the player, because god that sucks, so many things just 'happening' to try and make you be worse, or at worst, useless.
>>44298564
>as the verbal components of a spell don't have to be shouted
"You must be able to speak in a strong voice".
I've started threads about this in other forums, and the consensus is it's a DC 0 listen check to hear.
>>44298514
the animal companions or summons will only grapple after hitting with their claws
a wildshaped druid could do this, sure, but it'd take AoO's, and would likely get hit, ruining the attempt. However, I guess they could make three a round since they technically have three attacks. So, yeah, this would go to the druid unless the fighter were enlarged or greased.
>>44298656
read the 2nd to last paragraph under rope trick
>>44298759
Unless they can't rest.
>>44298966
And then...they fucking die, you drooling retard. Just like I fucking said.
If they can't rest, the whole party is fucked, unless you are pathetically soft-balling the foes so the fighter can actually take them all on their own.
>>44298759
>...no, he won't be, because a fucking fully kitted out fighter can't match CRs like he should.
Poorly calculated CRs are not a caster-related issue.
>>44298965
This is why 3.5 functions so much better if you separate the game into tiers.
The full casters are all in the high tiers, so high tier games have everyone limited by their spells per day.
The lower tiers have exceedingly few partial casters, and only one or two full casters, so the game doesn't warp around the spells currently available to the party
>>44299160
No, even then it's a bit of a fuckfest. Best to play something actually well designed.
>>44288906
First off, this is not pathfinder.
Trip requires you to be at best one size smaller than your opponent.
That means anything that is Huge is immune to unbuffed fighters.
Anything that is Gargantuan is immune to even buffed up fighters.
>>44299153
It is, since the CR is calculated so that the monster can deal with casters
>>44299160
I wouldn't call this working. Also, how do you caliber encounters for those different tiers?
>>44298965
>so many things just 'happening' to try and make you be worse, or at worst, useless
Hashing out the details of basic survival while out on an adventure is a perfectly legitimate part of the game.
>>44299160
Problem is that CRs don't care about tiers, you put a group of 6th level Tier5-6 against a CR6 monster and they die horribly because CR system is a shit.
>>44299191
>CR
>calculated
You misspelled 'ass-pulled'.
>>44299203
3.5 CR system is a shit.
>>44298966
>a wildshaped druid could do this, sure, but it'd take AoO's, and would likely get hit, ruining the attempt. However, I guess they could make three a round since they technically have three attacks. So, yeah, this would go to the druid unless the fighter were enlarged or greased.
Enlarge is a spell. Cast by a caster. Which the fighter can't do.
Grease is a spell. Cast by a caster. Which the fighter can't do.
There are cleric builds that can cast both though, but why cast them on the fighter when you are yourself even better?
Oh and bears get improved grab as an Ex ability. So you get it with wild shape. So bears don't provoke AoO.
>>44299216
PF's is shit too
>>44299182
True, but it works better that way then allowing parties with both fighters and wizards in them
>>44299191
The same way you caliber encounters normally, by going over the capacity of the party and the capacity of the threats you're considering using and working out whether or not the threat is a challenge for the party.
3.5 CR is fucked, you're best off ignoring it
>>44299196
That's not what I mean, and you fucking know it.
I mean shit like tons of anti-magic zones, rests ALWAYS getting ruined(Which fuck the rest of the group just as hard), magically immune enemies out the asshole, and so on and so forth.
>>44299216
The idea was good. The application was really sloppy.
