|
7 months ago ::
Oct 25, 2012 - 8:44PM
#111
|
Date Joined:
Dec 10, 2008
|
I'm not saying my way is right or the gotcha playstyle is wrong.
Then I'll say it for you. You're right and the gotcha playstyle is wrong.
OD&D, 1E and 2E challenged the player.
3E challenged the character, not the player.
Now 4E takes it a step further by challenging a GROUP OF PLAYERS to work together as a TEAM.
That's why I love 4E.
"Your ability to summon a horde of celestial superbeings at will is making my ... BMX skills look a bit redundant."
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Oct 25, 2012 - 8:47PM
#112
|
|
|
I'm not saying my way is right or the gotcha playstyle is wrong.
Then I'll say it for you. You're right and the gotcha playstyle is wrong.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Oct 25, 2012 - 8:50PM
#113
|
Date Joined:
Dec 10, 2008
|
The people you play games with make a MUCH bigger difference than the game, or its rules.
QFT, my friend. QFT.
OD&D, 1E and 2E challenged the player.
3E challenged the character, not the player.
Now 4E takes it a step further by challenging a GROUP OF PLAYERS to work together as a TEAM.
That's why I love 4E.
"Your ability to summon a horde of celestial superbeings at will is making my ... BMX skills look a bit redundant."
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Oct 25, 2012 - 9:25PM
#114
|
Date Joined:
Nov 17, 2011
|
Why were people who disliked magic playing D&D?
Hell if I know. If I had to take a stab at it, I would say that they really liked sitting around and pretending to be other people. I can't even chalk it up to them being D&D purists because they liked a lot of other games just as much. I think it was because they thought magic was OP to the point of ruining the game. They also hated high level play now that I think about it. They routinely commented on how levels 5-9 were the best in all of D&D. Personally I liked levels 1, and 20, the best. Does that make me an extremist?
I hate to agree with a bunch of people who sound like general jerks, but in this case they were right. Many magic-using classes do break 3.5E, and I've banned them when I DMed (typically the Cleric/Wizard/Druid/Sorcerer, as the Bard/Paladin/Ranger were not problems).
That being said, there's no call for being jerks. Tell people the expectations when they sit down. "Clerics, Wizards, Druids, and Sorcerers are banned (as well as artificers, Psions, and a few more obscure classes). If you like the Druid, I encourage you to make a Wildshape ranger, the Wizard can make a wonderful Beguiler or Dread Necromancer. Also here's the tome of battle, flip through and see if you like anything."
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Oct 26, 2012 - 4:29AM
#115
|
|
|
I've never played 3.5, but if that's true, that the magic classes break the game, then 3.5 sucks big time. Why would anyone like that edition?
How do they "break" it exactly?
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Oct 26, 2012 - 8:53AM
#116
|
Date Joined:
Nov 17, 2011
|
I've never played 3.5, but if that's true, that the magic classes break the game, then 3.5 sucks big time. Why would anyone like that edition?
How do they "break" it exactly?
By being able to do anything, honestly.
Oh there's a bad guy on the loose? Buff up and unleash a Scry+Teleport to his exact location, have the entire party unload on him, and teleport out.
Oh there's an incoming army? Throw up a few walls of force, blind them all, and laugh.
Dragon? Give yourself a 20 on your next attack roll, hit them with Shivering Touch using Mage Hand, laugh. Then reanimate the dragon as your undead servant (did you know there's rules for doing that? It's pretty cool)
There's a valley full of traps left by orcs that you have to pass over? Summon a few minions to lead the way, float behind them on Tenser's Floating Disk.
A sufficiently creative spellcaster can solve virtually any problem in the game at higher levels. 3.5 can be a fun edition, there's cool things you can do, but banning the "pure" spellcasters is incredibly necessary if the campaign is going above 8th level or so (and Druids are banned at all levels always forever). I don't want to get into a long debate about the relative merits, but it's really not a troll opinion that spellcasters are absurdist in 3E. That being said, it's not right to just sit there complaining at the table. Man up and outright ban them if you don't like it, or have everyone play a spellcaster and enjoy the ridiculous insanity that occurs (it's like a game of Exalted, basically, but with a better ruleset).
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Oct 26, 2012 - 9:00AM
#117
|
|
|
I've never played 3.5, but if that's true, that the magic classes break the game, then 3.5 sucks big time. Why would anyone like that edition?
How do they "break" it exactly?
Going by strict raw can help in a lot of ways, especially if you do not allow magic spells to be bought but rather have to be found. This can keep the "magic arms race" in check nicely.
The other thing to consider is whether or not the scale of magic is common along the world. For instance, if casters that can cast 7th level spells exist in a good number, then there will be precautions against those spell-casters as a "matter of course" among higher level characters of any class. You'd want a security system.
On the flipside, if higher level magic ISN'T available, then the PCs will be in a very rare class indeed so they will have to be challenged in other ways and its probably time for them to start going to other planes and whatnot where that level of power can be challenged. Nothing wrong with that. Superman can't grab purse-snatchers all day.
In my world, (I run Pathfinder) characters stop full advancement at level 12...that is, they don't gain higher spell levels or full HP or attack bonus, etc, etc. They still get some stuff and class abilities, though so there's still plenty of reason to advance. The casters, therefore, can cast spells between level 0 and 6 at most without outside assistance. All other spells above that require more work to cast but are still possible.
Note, I did that though to scale the entire world, not just casters because it fit the framework myself and the players wanted to interact with more. Mileage may vary.
I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end.
If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it. #SuperDungeonMasterIITurbo
My blog and stuff http://dmingtowin.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Oct 26, 2012 - 9:51AM
#118
|
|
|
That's not a flaw of 3.5 then. All editions have the issue of high level wizards being too awesome. But why shouldn't they be? It's a high level wizard! That's realistic high fantasy. Or at least, how I would picture it. It's also how a setting like Dark Sun is a logical conclusion of such crazy magic.
Depending on the campaign style you may not want that. I wouldn't resort to banning it though. The DM could do lots of things to prevent it. And if the player managed to do it anyway, then hooray, they win.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Oct 26, 2012 - 9:53AM
#119
|
|
|
That's not a flaw of 3.5 then. All editions have the issue of high level wizards being too awesome. But why shouldn't they be? It's a high level wizard! That's realistic high fantasy. Or at least, how I would picture it. It's also how a setting like Dark Sun is a logical conclusion of such crazy magic.
Depending on the campaign style you may not want that. I wouldn't resort to banning it though. The DM could do lots of things to prevent it. And if the player managed to do it anyway, then hooray, they win.
That's basically how I've always seen it. Never had it come up as a major issue in a game. In D&D though, for some reason "balance" has been fetishized even though it's not PvP
I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end.
If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it. #SuperDungeonMasterIITurbo
My blog and stuff http://dmingtowin.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Oct 26, 2012 - 10:01AM
#120
|
Date Joined:
Nov 17, 2011
|
Sure, magic having to be found slows down Wizards some. Clerics and Druids? Not so much.
More to the point, people have a right to rather than houseruling a system for hours and hours (which probably won't even solve the problem) instead say "yeah, we don't want to deal with the problem, don't take problem classes." It's actually a fair thing to say. I used to do it all the time (there's very little I hate more than system tinkering at this point, back in AD&D it was fun, but over the years I've grown to hate it). Don't take Clerics, Druids, or Wizards, sounds good to me.
P.S. Teleport proof buildings suck, because then the big bad is stuck in their lair (unless they want to risk a telegank squad landing on them). That's just not very intimidating. "Grrr, I'm the big evil villain, I'm gonna terrorize the countryside by hiding in this building for the rest of my life."
P.P.S. Having entire classes (Fighter, Monk, Paladin) that are obsoleted by other classes (Druid, Cleric) is just poor. You can call it 'fetishizing balance' all you want, but it's just not fun for anyone when the Druid solves the entire combat and makes everyone else look like a chump (well maybe the druid enjoys it, but meh).
I would have thought you'd be the biggest proponent of balance, Yamagi, since if the point of D&D is to gain power, then the Druid and Cleric gain more power faster than every other class. Druid levels are worth more than fighter levels, they give you more power (cleric levels are miserable and should be prestiged classed out for a full spellcasting PrC ASAP).
|
|
|
