|
2 months ago ::
Mar 10, 2013 - 5:27PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Aug 25, 2007
|
well they have mentioned that there will be changes in the fighter.
moving from the expertise dice as they are now, to doing multiple weapon dice damage.
Also some of the rumors are that manuvers will be more encounter based, probebly with a way to recover manuvers for very long encounters.
to me this sounds like manuvers will become more like they are in the 3.5 book of 9 swords.
the book of 9 swords was one of the inspirations that lead to 4th edition encounter powers.
i haven't manahed to play with the book of 9 swords a lot myselve, so what can people tell about the gaming experiance using the book of 9 swords ?
|
|
|
|
2 months ago ::
Mar 10, 2013 - 6:46PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Nov 21, 2012
|
I've never used it myself. I know a guy who swears by it, but from what I've read it looked completely overpowered in the scale of 3.5. That doesn't mean the concepts are bad, though, they could be made to work very well in 5th edition.
I just want the next packet already, whatever they've come up with. We've all been dealing with the completely broken martial damage dice for a while now and I think we're running out of things to test at this point.
|
|
|
|
2 months ago ::
Mar 10, 2013 - 8:33PM
#3
|
|
|
I've never used it myself. I know a guy who swears by it, but from what I've read it looked completely overpowered in the scale of 3.5.
You honestly think that they are overpowered in the system that brought you the 3E Wizard, Druid, and Cleric?
EVERY DAY IS HORRIBLE POST DAY ON THE D&D FORUMS.
Everything makes me ANGRY (ESPECIALLY you, reader)
|
|
|
|
2 months ago ::
Mar 10, 2013 - 8:39PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Nov 21, 2012
|
I've never used it myself. I know a guy who swears by it, but from what I've read it looked completely overpowered in the scale of 3.5.
You honestly think that they are overpowered in the system that brought you the 3E Wizard, Druid, and Cleric?
I can maybe see the Druid, but how is the Cleric overpowered?
|
|
|
|
2 months ago ::
Mar 10, 2013 - 9:09PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Sep 19, 2006
|
I've never used it myself. I know a guy who swears by it, but from what I've read it looked completely overpowered in the scale of 3.5.
You honestly think that they are overpowered in the system that brought you the 3E Wizard, Druid, and Cleric?
I can maybe see the Druid, but how is the Cleric overpowered?
Extra Turning, Nightstick, Planning Domain (for Extend Spell), Persistant Spell, Divine Metamagic: Persistant Spell with pretty much anything you want = 24-7 Fighter with Divine Power & Righteous Might spells.
Then there's Divine Feats, prof. with all armor and shields, spontaneous casting, all spells known.....ever, etc.
As for the Tome of Battle, I swear by the book as well. It's a great supplement to add to your game and has diverse and mechanically sound classes and options. The only thing that's suspect is the way in which maneuvers are recovered and maybe Adaptive Style feat. Many people say that the Warblade is what the Fighter should've been and the same is for the Crusader for Paladin and the Swordsage for the Monk.
So long as the recovery mechanics make sense then I'd be OK with such an implementation. I like the way maneuvers work now, however.
|
|
|
|
2 months ago ::
Mar 10, 2013 - 9:17PM
#6
|
|
|
Looking forward to seeing something beyond boring at-will spam. Not holding my breath.
...whatever
|
|
|
|
2 months ago ::
Mar 10, 2013 - 9:19PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Apr 15, 2001
|
Book of Nine Swords was fine in terms of power level as just using the core 3.5 books you could create a Druid with natural spell, augment summoning and wild armor. Breaking the cleric usually required non core material.
The tone of the book is a bit silly though and some DMs did not like it in that regard or did not know how to abuse the spellcasters so they may have viiewed it as broken and overpowered. I have the book but never saw any of the classes used and I have said the PCs can use it in Pathfinder if they want. Apparently it was a popular book along with the Warlock class but despite owning the books I never saw them classes get picked.
Reducing a character to a list of dice rolls and modifiers is not role playing*
*pg 30, AD&D 2nd Ed DMG, 1989.
|
|
|
|
2 months ago ::
Mar 10, 2013 - 9:20PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Apr 15, 2001
|
I've never used it myself. I know a guy who swears by it, but from what I've read it looked completely overpowered in the scale of 3.5.
You honestly think that they are overpowered in the system that brought you the 3E Wizard, Druid, and Cleric?
I can maybe see the Druid, but how is the Cleric overpowered?
Extra Turning, Nightstick, Planning Domain (for Extend Spell), Persistant Spell, Divine Metamagic: Persistant Spell with pretty much anything you want = 24-7 Fighter with Divine Power & Righteous Might spells.
Then there's Divine Feats, prof. with all armor and shields, spontaneous casting, all spells known.....ever, etc.
As for the Tome of Battle, I swear by the book as well. It's a great supplement to add to your game and has diverse and mechanically sound classes and options. The only thing that's suspect is the way in which maneuvers are recovered and maybe Adaptive Style feat. Many people say that the Warblade is what the Fighter should've been and the same is for the Crusader for Paladin and the Swordsage for the Monk.
So long as the recovery mechanics make sense then I'd be OK with such an implementation. I like the way maneuvers work now, however.
Should have seen the 3.0 build. 6 attacks at 1d8+25-30+ damage each and that was still better than infinate spell DCs or spell DCs in the 40s and 50s + haste in 3.0.
Reducing a character to a list of dice rolls and modifiers is not role playing*
*pg 30, AD&D 2nd Ed DMG, 1989.
|
|
|
|
2 months ago ::
Mar 10, 2013 - 9:20PM
#9
|
|
|
Book of ine Swords was fine in terms of power level as just using the core 3.5 books you could create a Druid with natural spell, augment summoning and wild armor. Breaking the cleric usually required non core material.
The tone of the book is a bit silly though and some DMs did not like it in that regard or did not know how to abuse the spellcasters so they may have viiewed it as broken and overpowered. I have the book but never saw any of the classes used and I have said the PCs can use it in Pathfinder if they want. Apparently it was a popular book along with the Warlock class but despite owning the books I never saw them classes get picked.
I never considered the 3.5E Cleric broken in context. The broken stuff just put it on par with Wizard and Druid.
...whatever
|
|
|
|
2 months ago ::
Mar 10, 2013 - 9:23PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Apr 15, 2001
|
One kind of had to at least try to break the cleric though. Druid was more or less broken all by itself and the wizard was broken at high levels all by itself just using the PHBand 0 magical items. Most of the time the Cleric was not a major offender. Druid lvl 1 "Hi Mr fighter meet my wolf".
The 2nd ed Druids handbook rocked and then they made 3rd ed and added natural spell from a splat in 3.0 to 3.5 core.
Reducing a character to a list of dice rolls and modifiers is not role playing*
*pg 30, AD&D 2nd Ed DMG, 1989.
|
|
|
