A few 3.5e tidbits...
A'koss
Stoneskin: DR 10/ adamantine.
- About what I figured.
Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
- Nerfed - good.
Disintegrate: From a 25th lvl caster disintegrate does 40d6 on a failed save,
5d6 if saved.
- Well, I guess that cinches that Save or Die spells have all been converted to
damage - yay! I have a funny feeling that Andy Collins had a hand in this and
that the damage is 20d6 +1d6/level to a max. of 40 dice, we'll see.
Slow: only a move or standared action. Move is at half speed and targets are
at -1 to Attack, AC, and Reflex saves.
- About what I figured.
Magic items are listed with a degree and type of magic (presumably for purposes
of detect magic). Example: a new magic item, the Red Slaad Cloak, is listed as
"strong abjuration" (it grants a natural armor bonus and various energy
resistance).
From Dungeon 100: The Druid/Ranger's Animal Companion gets a boost. There's a
9th level Druid whose Animal Companion has the Special Qualities of "Link",
"Share Spells" and "Devotion" (+4 bonus on Will saves vs Enchantment effects).
The Animal Companion has a 2 Intelligence and knows 9 tricks (I don't know if
that's something new for 3.5).
Cheers,
A'koss.
--
The Rings of Concordance have moved!
http://members.shaw.ca/infinity
James Quick
"A'koss" <infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
> - Nerfed - good.
That sure makes Persistent Spell more attractive.
> Magic items are listed with a degree and type of magic (presumably for
> purposes of detect magic). Example: a new magic item, the Red Slaad Cloak,
> is listed as "strong abjuration" (it grants a natural armor bonus and
> various energy resistance).
That is a nice addition.
> From Dungeon 100: The Druid/Ranger's Animal Companion gets a boost. There's a
> 9th level Druid whose Animal Companion has the Special Qualities of "Link",
> "Share Spells" and "Devotion" (+4 bonus on Will saves vs Enchantment
> effects).
> The Animal Companion has a 2 Intelligence and knows 9 tricks (I don't know if
> that's something new for 3.5).
Yeah, cause Animals companions are so weak as it is <rolls eyes>.
--
James Quick [][][] jamesqu...@hotmail.com
"Who's your dungeon master *now*?"
A'koss
news:pkYAa.78830$3C2.2...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca...
> Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
One bit that I forgot here was that all spell Stat buffs are +4 to your ability
score, no more rolling (and therefore no more Empowered versions either...).
Shane
<JamesQuick1967-D90...@news.bellatlantic.net>:
>In article <pkYAa.78830$3C2.2...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca>,
> "A'koss" <infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
>> Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
>> - Nerfed - good.
>
>That sure makes Persistent Spell more attractive.
Unless they plan to nerf that in 3.5E too?
Shane.
Talen
<JamesQu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
At low levels, Animal Companions are nice. At high levels, they suck
_ass_.
--
Talen
http://hypercrescendo.net/talen/
"People fail to realize that DBZ isn't just in a totally
different league than pretty much all other fiction, but
actually in a different game altogether."
- Jim Stanfield
The Gurus love you
Talen
wrote:
It ain't in the core rulebooks.
--
Talen
http://hypercrescendo.net/talen/
"Devoutness doesn't have anything to do with, as I like to
call it, the Complete Fucking Idiot factor."
Talen
<infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>"A'koss" <infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
>news:pkYAa.78830$3C2.2...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca...
>
>> Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
>
>One bit that I forgot here was that all spell Stat buffs are +4 to your ability
>score, no more rolling (and therefore no more Empowered versions either...).
They just wanna steal all our fun.
--
Talen
http://hypercrescendo.net/talen/
"Start small... throw yourself under a Lego train"
- Q, advocating suicide practice
The Gurus love you
gilmae
> They just wanna steal all our fun.
It's funny, boy, but when you said that Cyndi Lauper started singing
inside my head.
g.
Talen
wrote:
Shouldn't I be more appropriately dubbed girl in that situation, then?
--
Talen
http://hypercrescendo.net/talen/
"Von Trapp's first name was Gaylord, by the way."
- Preceptor
The Gurus love you
James Quick
Talen <ta...@spamspamspamspam.iinet.net.au> wrote:
> >Yeah, cause Animals companions are so weak as it is <rolls eyes>.
>
> At low levels, Animal Companions are nice. At high levels, they suck
> _ass_.
If you use the rules in MoTW for legendary animals, and the rules for
spending XP to increase your animal companions HD, they keep pace
quite well.
Talen
<JamesQu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>In article <m2o8dvc6h7af6hrn6...@4ax.com>,
> Talen <ta...@spamspamspamspam.iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
>> >Yeah, cause Animals companions are so weak as it is <rolls eyes>.
>>
>> At low levels, Animal Companions are nice. At high levels, they suck
>> _ass_.
>
>If you use the rules in MoTW for legendary animals, and the rules for
>spending XP to increase your animal companions HD, they keep pace
>quite well.
No they don't. The Legendary animals that can beat/match your
wildshape abilities or combat allies aren't available until about
level 20 or so. And by then, animals are _truly_ feeble.
--
Talen
http://hypercrescendo.net/talen/
<captainspud> I'm a 27-year-old English teacher from Ottawa.
<captainspud> And I make little cartoon animals maul each
other to death.
The Gurus love you
Halzebier
<ta...@spamspamspamspam.iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>If you use the rules in MoTW for legendary animals, and the rules for
>>spending XP to increase your animal companions HD, they keep pace
>>quite well.
>
>No they don't. The Legendary animals that can beat/match your
>wildshape abilities or combat allies aren't available until about
>level 20 or so. And by then, animals are _truly_ feeble.
"Animal Growth" is the ticket.
My druid is level 13 now and for the last couple of levels, I've been
worried about my companion being too powerful and stealing the
warriors' thunder.
A double-size, 24 HD dire bear with a +4 Greater Magic Fang cast on it
each morining dominates many stand-up fights.
(Obviously, there are situations where it can't be brought along or
where it's not effective - e.g. vs. flying or invisible foes - but
that's to be expected.)
Regards,
Hal
Halzebier
<infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>From Dungeon 100: The Druid/Ranger's Animal Companion gets a boost. There's a
>9th level Druid whose Animal Companion has the Special Qualities of "Link",
>"Share Spells" and "Devotion" (+4 bonus on Will saves vs Enchantment effects).
>The Animal Companion has a 2 Intelligence and knows 9 tricks (I don't know if
>that's something new for 3.5).
The save bonus seems largely unnecessary as "Animal Growth" has a
similar effect. A 12 HD dire bear gains save bonusses of +6/+6/+4.
Regards,
Hal
Halzebier
<infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>"A'koss" <infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
>news:pkYAa.78830$3C2.2...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca...
>
>> Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
>
>One bit that I forgot here was that all spell Stat buffs are +4 to your ability
>score, no more rolling (and therefore no more Empowered versions either...).
Excellent. While a luck-factor is fun in and of itself, the new effect
is easier to calculate (and can be precalculated, too).
Regards,
Hal
Thom Jeffries
>
> Stoneskin: DR 10/ adamantine.
> - About what I figured.
Perhaps I missed the info on this from a previous post, but has there
been clarification on whether the DR subtype are going to be placed
within a hierarchy, or are they standalone requirements?
For instance, if a werewolf is hit with a silver weapon, it will
penetrate damage reduction. Will it be the case that any material
"more powerful" than silver will beat the DR as well, or is each
material considered the _only_ way to bypass DR? In the case above
it's a little less than clear-cut since there's a supernatural disease
involved, but for the Stoneskin listing, does this mean that _only_
adamantine weapons can penetrate the DR, no matter what the bonus
on the weapon? Or will any magical bonus on the weapon beat it since
the magical bonus are "more powerful" than plain adamantine?
Jesus that sounded confused and deranged. Hopefully somebody knows
what I mean.
> Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
> - Nerfed - good.
Good.
> Disintegrate: From a 25th lvl caster disintegrate does 40d6 on a failed save,
> 5d6 if saved.
> - Well, I guess that cinches that Save or Die spells have all been converted
> to damage - yay! I have a funny feeling that Andy Collins had a hand in this
> and that the damage is 20d6 +1d6/level to a max. of 40 dice, we'll see.
Is this qualification in place for inanimate objects as well or are they
still simply destroyed? Walls of force?
I hope they don't force me to keep a list of object hardness and hp around.
I have enough paperwork on the table during a game as it is.
> Slow: only a move or standared action. Move is at half speed and targets are
> at -1 to Attack, AC, and Reflex saves.
> - About what I figured.
Reasonable, but again, I've never had any slow-happy spellcasters.
> Magic items are listed with a degree and type of magic (presumably for
> purposes of detect magic). Example: a new magic item, the Red Slaad Cloak, is
> listed as "strong abjuration" (it grants a natural armor bonus and various
> energy resistance).
That's awesome, even if it does bulk up the magic item entries a little.
> From Dungeon 100: The Druid/Ranger's Animal Companion gets a boost. There's a
> 9th level Druid whose Animal Companion has the Special Qualities of "Link",
> "Share Spells" and "Devotion" (+4 bonus on Will saves vs Enchantment effects).
> The Animal Companion has a 2 Intelligence and knows 9 tricks (I don't know if
> that's something new for 3.5).
So they're going a little towards familiars without the intelligence.
That's actually pretty cool. Especially if they make the companion
advancement in MotW part of the core rules with Awaken. Gives them
more feasible options for higher-level play than just hiring or attracting
other nature-oriented cohorts.
For once, I like the sound of all of the changes. Thanks for the update.
--
Thom Jeffries
Ed Chauvin IV
>It has been brought to my attention that Shane <sabriel@quietdawnorg>
>wrote:
>
>>James Quick in
>><JamesQuick1967-D90...@news.bellatlantic.net>:
>>>In article <pkYAa.78830$3C2.2...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca>,
>>> "A'koss" <infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
>>>> - Nerfed - good.
>>>
>>>That sure makes Persistent Spell more attractive.
>>
>>Unless they plan to nerf that in 3.5E too?
>
>It ain't in the core rulebooks.
It might be in the 3.5 core books.
Ed Chauvin IV
--
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
It is by the Beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed,
the hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning.
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
"I always feel left out when someone *else* gets killfiled."
--Terry Austin
Stephenls
> Perhaps I missed the info on this from a previous post, but has there
> been clarification on whether the DR subtype are going to be placed
> within a hierarchy, or are they standalone requirements?
> For instance, if a werewolf is hit with a silver weapon, it will
> penetrate damage reduction. Will it be the case that any material
> "more powerful" than silver will beat the DR as well, or is each
> material considered the _only_ way to bypass DR? In the case above
> it's a little less than clear-cut since there's a supernatural disease
> involved, but for the Stoneskin listing, does this mean that _only_
> adamantine weapons can penetrate the DR, no matter what the bonus
> on the weapon? Or will any magical bonus on the weapon beat it since
> the magical bonus are "more powerful" than plain adamantine?
> Jesus that sounded confused and deranged. Hopefully somebody knows
> what I mean.
There's not going to be a hierarchy. A +15 weapon won't kill a
lycanthrope any better than any other given sword if it's not silver.
Well, except that lycanthropes only have DR 10/silver, so the
enhancement bonus on the sword alone will chew through it with five
points to spare.
Most actual damage reduction numbers will be reduced as well.
5/something will be the most common, with 15/something being the
effective upper limit. (I hear animated skeletons will have DR 5/blunt
instead of that "take half-damage from slashing and piercing weapons"
thing.)
So yeah, only adamantine weapons will beat Stoneskin. The other
alternative is just to do more than 10 points of damage or hit the damn
wizard with energy based spells. Neither option is particularly difficult.
--
Stephenls
Geek
Reginald Blue
> "A'koss" wrote ...
>>
>> Stoneskin: DR 10/ adamantine.
>> - About what I figured.
>
> Perhaps I missed the info on this from a previous post, but has there
> been clarification on whether the DR subtype are going to be placed
> within a hierarchy, or are they standalone requirements?
>
> For instance, if a werewolf is hit with a silver weapon, it will
> penetrate damage reduction. Will it be the case that any material
> "more powerful" than silver will beat the DR as well, or is each
> material considered the _only_ way to bypass DR? In the case above
> it's a little less than clear-cut since there's a supernatural disease
> involved, but for the Stoneskin listing, does this mean that _only_
> adamantine weapons can penetrate the DR, no matter what the bonus
> on the weapon? Or will any magical bonus on the weapon beat it since
> the magical bonus are "more powerful" than plain adamantine?
If I understand your question, there is no heirarchy. Silver is the only
viable substance for lycanthropes. Adamantine is the only viable substance
for stoneskin.
Note that this isn't as big an issue, given many of the feats and such to
increase damage, because the DR 'values' have all been reduced.
--
Reginald Blue
"I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my
telephone. My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my
telephone."
- Bjarne Stroustrup (originator of C++) [quoted at the 2003
International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces]
A'koss
> >>>> - Nerfed - good.
> >>>
> >>>That sure makes Persistent Spell more attractive.
> >>
> >>Unless they plan to nerf that in 3.5E too?
> >
> >It ain't in the core rulebooks.
>
> It might be in the 3.5 core books.
Nope, here is the list of the Metamagic Feats in the 3.5e core books:
Empower Spell
Enlarge Spell
Extend Spell
Heighten Spell
Maximize Spell
Quicken Spell
Silent Spell
Still Spell
Widen Spell
George W. Harris
<JamesQu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
:In article <pkYAa.78830$3C2.2...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca>,
: "A'koss" <infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote:
:
:> Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
:> - Nerfed - good.
:
:That sure makes Persistent Spell more attractive.
Except, of course, that you can only make
Persistent spells with range Personal or Fixed; the
range of Bull's Strength is Touch.
George W. Harris For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'
George W. Harris
The angels wanna steal my red shoes.
:
:g.
A'koss
news:JamesQuick1967-D90...@news.bellatlantic.net...
> In article <pkYAa.78830$3C2.2...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca>,
> "A'koss" <infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
> > Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
> > - Nerfed - good.
>
> That sure makes Persistent Spell more attractive.
Persistant Spell only affects personal or fixed range spells so it won't help
with the buffs...
Spinner
> >
> >One bit that I forgot here was that all spell Stat buffs are +4 to your
ability
> >score, no more rolling (and therefore no more Empowered versions
either...).
>
> Excellent. While a luck-factor is fun in and of itself, the new effect
> is easier to calculate (and can be precalculated, too).
>
and Empower should affect one spell and not another merely because the spell
has some variation in effect. I don't know how to implement this without
the worms coming out of the can, but wouldn't an empowered +4 be nice and
easy and still pretty balanced, appropriate in-game and more sensible than
requiring a die roll be present?
Brad P
Spinner
> - Nerfed - good.
>
identical nerf. Was it there on ENWorld? If not, what do you think?
Brad P
Keifer0999
>
>Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
>- Nerfed - good.
>
Useless now. Most combats last under 10 rounds. And most DM's don't throw
multiple encounters at players minute after minute...some do. But IMHO anything
that makes you have to track time is bad for game play. Its easy to track an
hour. Its a PIA to track minutes.
And...what about Cat's Grace? If BS is broken, then CG is even more so...you
can get a + to hit, a + to INit and to AC and reflex saves. BS only gave your
str a small boost.
Morons.
Hong Ooi
>>From: "A'koss" infinitySP...@shaw.ca
>
>>
>>Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
>>- Nerfed - good.
>>
>
>Useless now. Most combats last under 10 rounds. And most DM's don't throw
>multiple encounters at players minute after minute...some do. But IMHO anything
>that makes you have to track time is bad for game play. Its easy to track an
>hour. Its a PIA to track minutes.
It's an even bigger PITA to track variable additions to stats, especially
if it happens every day.
>
>And...what about Cat's Grace? If BS is broken, then CG is even more so...you
>can get a + to hit, a + to INit and to AC and reflex saves. BS only gave your
>str a small boost.
I think it's fair to say that all the stat buff spells will go the same
route.
>
>Morons.
You poor thing. Have a WANGER on me.
--
Hong Ooi | "I'm so confused all the time"
ho...@zipworld.com.au | -- MC
http://www.zipworld.com.au/~hong/dnd/ |
Sydney, Australia |
A'koss
news:bb2nbb$517a5$1...@ID-194018.news.dfncis.de...
I didn't see that specifically, but a playtester mentioned that these kinds of
bonuses get similar nerfs (power and/or duration).
Cheers,
Hong Ooi
wrote:
>"Spinner" <bpre...@uwo.ca> wrote in message
>news:bb2nbb$517a5$1...@ID-194018.news.dfncis.de...
>> > Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
>> > - Nerfed - good.
>> >
>> I'm very curious about Greater Magic Weapon/Fang. I predict it'll get an
>> identical nerf. Was it there on ENWorld? If not, what do you think?
>
>I didn't see that specifically, but a playtester mentioned that these kinds of
>bonuses get similar nerfs (power and/or duration).
>
IIRC, the gossip was that GMW will be changed so that a weapon's total
bonus can't go over +10, and it's +1 per 4 caster levels, not 3.
James Quick
"A'koss" <infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> "James Quick" <JamesQu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:JamesQuick1967-D90...@news.bellatlantic.net...
> > In article <pkYAa.78830$3C2.2...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca>,
> > "A'koss" <infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> >
> > > Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
> > > - Nerfed - good.
> >
> > That sure makes Persistent Spell more attractive.
>
> Persistant Spell only affects personal or fixed range spells so it won't help
> with the buffs...
The range on these is "touch". I have always considered that a fixed
range. Am I wrong? Have they clarified this somewhere?
A'koss
> In article <yc5Ba.82089$ro6.2...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca>,
> "A'koss" <infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
> > "James Quick" <JamesQu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:JamesQuick1967-D90...@news.bellatlantic.net...
> > > In article <pkYAa.78830$3C2.2...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca>,
> > > "A'koss" <infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
> > > > - Nerfed - good.
> > >
> > > That sure makes Persistent Spell more attractive.
> >
> > Persistant Spell only affects personal or fixed range spells so it won't
help
> > with the buffs...
>
> The range on these is "touch". I have always considered that a fixed
> range. Am I wrong? Have they clarified this somewhere?
"Fixed range" spells are those that eminate a fixed distance from the caster,
not touch spells. Eg. The many detect spells.
Cheers,
James Quick
"A'koss" <infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> "James Quick" <JamesQu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:JamesQuick1967-C3C...@news.bellatlantic.net...
> > In article <yc5Ba.82089$ro6.2...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca>,
> > "A'koss" <infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> >
> > > "James Quick" <JamesQu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:JamesQuick1967-D90...@news.bellatlantic.net...
> > > > In article <pkYAa.78830$3C2.2...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca>,
> > > > "A'koss" <infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
> > > > > - Nerfed - good.
> > > >
> > > > That sure makes Persistent Spell more attractive.
> > >
> > > Persistant Spell only affects personal or fixed range spells so it won't
> help
> > > with the buffs...
> >
> > The range on these is "touch". I have always considered that a fixed
> > range. Am I wrong? Have they clarified this somewhere?
>
> "Fixed range" spells are those that eminate a fixed distance from the caster,
> not touch spells. Eg. The many detect spells.
Well this has the potential to really piss off my players. :-)
A'koss
news:map9dv0upcp1l0npa...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 28 May 2003 16:22:14 GMT, "A'koss" <infinitySP...@shaw.ca>
> wrote:
>
> >"Spinner" <bpre...@uwo.ca> wrote in message
> >news:bb2nbb$517a5$1...@ID-194018.news.dfncis.de...
> >> > Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
> >> > - Nerfed - good.
> >> >
> >> I'm very curious about Greater Magic Weapon/Fang. I predict it'll get an
> >> identical nerf. Was it there on ENWorld? If not, what do you think?
> >
> >I didn't see that specifically, but a playtester mentioned that these kinds
of
> >bonuses get similar nerfs (power and/or duration).
> >
>
> IIRC, the gossip was that GMW will be changed so that a weapon's total
> bonus can't go over +10, and it's +1 per 4 caster levels, not 3.
Okay, sounds reasonable. Hmm, I'm still willing to bet it's duration gets
nerfed...
Wayne Shaw
<infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>From ENWorld...
>
>Stoneskin: DR 10/ adamantine.
>- About what I figured.
Ah. Well, that makes it at least a little useful at top end levels.
>
>Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
>- Nerfed - good.
I suspect you can expect the same from Endurance and Cat's Grace. I'd
heard it was 10/level, but...
>
>Disintegrate: From a 25th lvl caster disintegrate does 40d6 on a failed save,
>5d6 if saved.
>- Well, I guess that cinches that Save or Die spells have all been converted to
>damage - yay! I have a funny feeling that Andy Collins had a hand in this and
>that the damage is 20d6 +1d6/level to a max. of 40 dice, we'll see.
I'd bet you're right.
Wayne Shaw
<ta...@spamspamspamspam.iinet.net.au> wrote:
>It has been brought to my attention that Shane <sabriel@quietdawnorg>
>wrote:
>
>>James Quick in
>><JamesQuick1967-D90...@news.bellatlantic.net>:
>>>In article <pkYAa.78830$3C2.2...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca>,
>>> "A'koss" <infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
>>>> - Nerfed - good.
>>>
>>>That sure makes Persistent Spell more attractive.
>>
>>Unless they plan to nerf that in 3.5E too?
>
>It ain't in the core rulebooks.
Might be in 3.5, though I wouldn't expect it. But they did report
they're pulling in some feats from other sources.
Wayne Shaw
<infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>> >>>> Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
>> >>>> - Nerfed - good.
>> >>>
>> >>>That sure makes Persistent Spell more attractive.
>> >>
>> >>Unless they plan to nerf that in 3.5E too?
>> >
>> >It ain't in the core rulebooks.
>>
>> It might be in the 3.5 core books.
>
>Nope, here is the list of the Metamagic Feats in the 3.5e core books:
>
>Empower Spell
>Enlarge Spell
>Extend Spell
>Heighten Spell
>Maximize Spell
>Quicken Spell
>Silent Spell
>Still Spell
>Widen Spell
Hmmm. Wonder why they didn't import Sculpt Spell? I've often found
that one is actually reasonably useful for Sorcerers at least...
Wayne Shaw
wrote:
>"A'koss" wrote ...
>>
>> Stoneskin: DR 10/ adamantine.
>> - About what I figured.
>
>Perhaps I missed the info on this from a previous post, but has there
>been clarification on whether the DR subtype are going to be placed
>within a hierarchy, or are they standalone requirements?
>
By all evidence, they're standalones.
Wayne Shaw
What makes you think they didn't change the time on it, too?
Sorcier
>
> Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
> - Nerfed - good.
There's gonna be tears. ;)
Likewise for Cat's Grace and such I'd assume.
(Ow, that one stings.
Nerfing damage machines I can behind, but nerfing Rogues!?!
That's dirty...)
> Disintegrate: From a 25th lvl caster disintegrate does 40d6 on a failed save,
> 5d6 if saved.
140 average damage?
Too many things can walk right through that. ;(
At least once.
> Slow: only a move or standared action. Move is at half speed and targets are
> at -1 to Attack, AC, and Reflex saves.
> - About what I figured.
Yuck.
Should have been just the first or just the latter.
> Magic items are listed with a degree and type of magic (presumably for purposes
> of detect magic). Example: a new magic item, the Red Slaad Cloak, is listed as
> "strong abjuration" (it grants a natural armor bonus and various energy
> resistance).
Good move.
> From Dungeon 100: The Druid/Ranger's Animal Companion gets a boost. There's a
> 9th level Druid whose Animal Companion has the Special Qualities of "Link",
> "Share Spells" and "Devotion" (+4 bonus on Will saves vs Enchantment effects).
> The Animal Companion has a 2 Intelligence and knows 9 tricks (I don't know if
> that's something new for 3.5).
I hope those are rewards for keeping one around and not just side
effects of
the spell.
Switchable high HD "familiars" for Druids would cheapen the real thing
in
comparison.
--
"Huxley would have rocked on USENET."
Sorcier
>
> >Nope, here is the list of the Metamagic Feats in the 3.5e core books:
> >
> >Empower Spell
> >Enlarge Spell
> >Extend Spell
> >Heighten Spell
> >Maximize Spell
> >Quicken Spell
> >Silent Spell
> >Still Spell
> >Widen Spell
>
> Hmmm. Wonder why they didn't import Sculpt Spell? I've often found
> that one is actually reasonably useful for Sorcerers at least...
I would have like to see Eschew Materials go core too.
Unless they've "fixed" Sorcerers and monsters to have it for free...
Sorcier
>
> It's an even bigger PITA to track variable additions to stats, especially
> if it happens every day.
Point.
In a pefect world, Bull Strength, etc., would be just a straight +4 or
such.
Sorcier
>
> "A'koss" <infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:pkYAa.78830$3C2.2...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca...
>
> > Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
>
> score, no more rolling (and therefore no more Empowered versions either...).
Cool!
I wish I'd read that five seconds ago though! ;)
Sorcier
>
> On Wed, 28 May 2003 18:12:44 +1000, gilmae <gilma...@mail.ru> wrote:
>
> :Talen wrote:
> :
> :> They just wanna steal all our fun.
> :
> :It's funny, boy, but when you said that Cyndi Lauper started singing
> :inside my head.
>
> The angels wanna steal my red shoes.
That which isn't nailed down...
(Hm, solars with ruby slippers...
Drag queens of the gods!)
Sorcier
>
> Although it now suddenly strikes me as weird that something like Maximize
> and Empower should affect one spell and not another merely because the spell
> has some variation in effect. I don't know how to implement this without
> the worms coming out of the can, but wouldn't an empowered +4 be nice and
> easy and still pretty balanced, appropriate in-game and more sensible than
> requiring a die roll be present?
No easy fix, but you could house rule letting those who have the feats
apply them to spells you feel appropriate.
Don't know a good boost for Maximize or combo-ing them though.
Sorcier
>
> So yeah, only adamantine weapons will beat Stoneskin. The other
> alternative is just to do more than 10 points of damage or hit the damn
> wizard with energy based spells. Neither option is particularly difficult.
They are if you're a rogue.
Unless you get the flank...
Reginald Blue
> Hong Ooi wrote:
>>
>> It's an even bigger PITA to track variable additions to stats,
>> especially if it happens every day.
>
> Point.
> In a pefect world, Bull Strength, etc., would be just a straight +4 or
> such.
I thought someone said that in another post?
--
Reginald Blue
"I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my
telephone. My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my
telephone."
- Bjarne Stroustrup (originator of C++) [quoted at the 2003
International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces]
Stephenls
> They are if you're a rogue.
> Unless you get the flank...
So alternate between feinting and striking each turn. Or get the flank.
Or give the massive damage dealers a chance to shine, since you get a
lot of the non-combat spotlight, presumably. That's what rogues are for.
--
Stephenls
Geek
Sorcier
>
> Sorcier wrote:
> > Hong Ooi wrote:
> >>
> >> It's an even bigger PITA to track variable additions to stats,
> >> especially if it happens every day.
> >
> > Point.
> > In a pefect world, Bull Strength, etc., would be just a straight +4 or
> > such.
>
> I thought someone said that in another post?
Propogation rates vary.
I saw that post after I wrote mine.
Sorcier
>
> Sorcier wrote:
>
> > They are if you're a rogue.
> > Unless you get the flank...
>
> So alternate between feinting and striking each turn.
Right, make me waste points on Bluff just so I can be useful
in combat again. ;)
> Or give the massive damage dealers a chance to shine, since you get a
> lot of the non-combat spotlight, presumably. That's what rogues are for.
True. But some reason those mdd's whine when we extremely
useful noncoms hide when the blows start falling. ;)
Peter Knutsen
A'koss wrote:
> Magic items are listed with a degree and type of magic (presumably for purposes
> of detect magic). Example: a new magic item, the Red Slaad Cloak, is listed as
> "strong abjuration" (it grants a natural armor bonus and various energy
> resistance).
will it then be possible to specifically create an item which
registers as less magical than it really is, for the purpose of
keeping a low profile?
Like if I'm making a Sword +2 Flaming Burst (total +4), which might
normally register, on Detect Magic, as [category] Medium, but I'd like
it to register instead as [caregory] Weak, perhaps in exchange for the
cost of a further +1 bonus, so that the total cost to create the sword
is as if it was a +5 sword?
I think it's a legitimate concept, but it raises the question of
whether one can then completely mask weak magic, i.e. make a
[category] weak item register on Detect Magic as non-magical. That
would be messy.
> A'koss.
--
Peter Knutsen
Peter Knutsen
A'koss wrote:
> "Fixed range" spells are those that eminate a fixed distance from the caster,
> not touch spells. Eg. The many detect spells.
It should be trivial to research a "Buff" type spell that has Range:
Personal instead.
Since it's really a downgrade ("Touch" is better than
"Personal"/"Self"), such a spell should be able to have the exact same
stats, and same spell level.
Problem solved!
Reginald Blue
> Reginald Blue wrote:
>> I thought someone said that in another post?
>
> Propogation rates vary.
> I saw that post after I wrote mine.
Actually, that was me stating that my memory isn't that good. :-)
Ed Chauvin IV
>> >>>> Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
>> >>>
>> >>>That sure makes Persistent Spell more attractive.
>> >>
>> >>Unless they plan to nerf that in 3.5E too?
>> >
>> >It ain't in the core rulebooks.
>>
>> It might be in the 3.5 core books.
>
Is that final? Are you sure?
Ed Chauvin IV
--
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
It is by the Beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed,
the hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning.
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
"I always feel left out when someone *else* gets killfiled."
--Terry Austin
Ed Chauvin IV
You could let them use Maximize on other spells that still qualify. I
don't know anyone who'd complain about getting free Maximize on Bull's
Strength in 3.0.
George W. Harris
<ed...@wherethefuckaremypants.com> wrote:
:Mere moments before death, Sorcier hastily scrawled:
:>Spinner wrote:
:>>
:>> Although it now suddenly strikes me as weird that something like Maximize
:>> and Empower should affect one spell and not another merely because the spell
:>> has some variation in effect. I don't know how to implement this without
:>> the worms coming out of the can, but wouldn't an empowered +4 be nice and
:>> easy and still pretty balanced, appropriate in-game and more sensible than
:>> requiring a die roll be present?
:>
:>No easy fix, but you could house rule letting those who have the feats
:>apply them to spells you feel appropriate.
:>Don't know a good boost for Maximize or combo-ing them though.
:
:You could let them use Maximize on other spells that still qualify. I
:don't know anyone who'd complain about getting free Maximize on Bull's
:Strength in 3.0.
Too bad it's a fixed +4 instead of a fixed +5, so
nobody is getting a free Maximize.
:Ed Chauvin IV
--
Want to help fund terrorism? Drive an SUV.
George W. Harris For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'.
Talen
<sNoEr...@cavtel.net> wrote:
Eschew Materials is no longer a metamagic feat, it's a general feat.
Advantage being sorcerors can now use it without being in serious
shit.
--
Talen
http://hypercrescendo.net/talen/
"My Crowbar allows for much more than any sword. First of all,
it is nondescript and mundane. I can walk about any garage or
hardware store and blend in perfectly. You, on the other hand,
will be forced to press your way through thronging admirers
cooing and ah-ing over your shiny +1 phallus enhancer. Greasy
fingers over the polished surface will mar its luster and
tarnish the blade. In a back-alley street fight, you will draw
fire like a purple deer in Northern Wisconsin."
- Iron Chef Vastrox
The Gurus love you
Talen
<ed...@wherethefuckaremypants.com> wrote:
>Mere moments before death, A'koss hastily scrawled:
>>> >>>> Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
>>> >>>> - Nerfed - good.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>That sure makes Persistent Spell more attractive.
>>> >>
>>> >>Unless they plan to nerf that in 3.5E too?
>>> >
>>> >It ain't in the core rulebooks.
>>>
>>> It might be in the 3.5 core books.
>>
>>Nope, here is the list of the Metamagic Feats in the 3.5e core books:
>
>Is that final? Are you sure?
It's not absolutely final, but it matches my source.
Talen
wrote:
They've shown us what feats they're using. Persistant spell ain't one
of them. Unless it gets revised, Bull's Strength is still less useful
because it's touch range, and you can't make 'em persistant.
--
Talen
http://hypercrescendo.net/talen/
"But this is no time for re- aw, fuck it. It's the perfect
time for revenge."
- Bob Macfie
The Gurus love you
Talen
<Halzebi...@gmx.de> wrote:
>On Wed, 28 May 2003 06:05:09 GMT, "A'koss"
><infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
>>From Dungeon 100: The Druid/Ranger's Animal Companion gets a boost. There's a
>>9th level Druid whose Animal Companion has the Special Qualities of "Link",
>>"Share Spells" and "Devotion" (+4 bonus on Will saves vs Enchantment effects).
>>The Animal Companion has a 2 Intelligence and knows 9 tricks (I don't know if
>>that's something new for 3.5).
>
>The save bonus seems largely unnecessary as "Animal Growth" has a
>similar effect. A 12 HD dire bear gains save bonusses of +6/+6/+4.
The two do stack.
Talen
<ho...@zipworld.com.au> wrote:
>On 28 May 2003 16:15:05 GMT, keife...@aol.com (Keifer0999) wrote:
>
>>>From: "A'koss" infinitySP...@shaw.ca
>>
>>>
>>>Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
>>>- Nerfed - good.
>>>
>>
>>Useless now. Most combats last under 10 rounds. And most DM's don't throw
>>multiple encounters at players minute after minute...some do. But IMHO anything
>>that makes you have to track time is bad for game play. Its easy to track an
>>hour. Its a PIA to track minutes.
>
>It's an even bigger PITA to track variable additions to stats, especially
>if it happens every day.
I'd have done one or the other, to be honest - made it a fixed number,
or nerfed the duration down. As it is, I'm not sure I'd bother taking
them - not a case of 'I can't see myself always wanting this' as it is
a case of 'I can't see myself _ever_ wanting this'.
--
Talen
http://hypercrescendo.net/talen/
"Start small... throw yourself under a Lego train"
- Q, advocating suicide practice
The Gurus love you
Wayne Shaw
<ta...@spamspamspamspam.iinet.net.au> wrote:
>It has been brought to my attention that Wayne Shaw <sh...@caprica.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 28 May 2003 17:31:07 +1000, Talen
>><ta...@spamspamspamspam.iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>
>>>It has been brought to my attention that Shane <sabriel@quietdawnorg>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>James Quick in
>>>><JamesQuick1967-D90...@news.bellatlantic.net>:
>>>>>In article <pkYAa.78830$3C2.2...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca>,
>>>>> "A'koss" <infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
>>>>>> - Nerfed - good.
>>>>>
>>>>>That sure makes Persistent Spell more attractive.
>>>>
>>>>Unless they plan to nerf that in 3.5E too?
>>>
>>>It ain't in the core rulebooks.
>>
>>Might be in 3.5, though I wouldn't expect it. But they did report
>>they're pulling in some feats from other sources.
>
>They've shown us what feats they're using. Persistant spell ain't one
>of them. Unless it gets revised, Bull's Strength is still less useful
>because it's touch range, and you can't make 'em persistant.
I'd seen the fighter bonus list given publically, but has the whole
list appeared somewhere. But yes, you can't Persistant Bull's
Strength anyway.
Wayne Shaw
wrote:
>Stephenls wrote:
>>
>> So yeah, only adamantine weapons will beat Stoneskin. The other
>> alternative is just to do more than 10 points of damage or hit the damn
>> wizard with energy based spells. Neither option is particularly difficult.
>
>They are if you're a rogue.
>Unless you get the flank...
So buy an adamant dagger and move on.
Wayne Shaw
wrote:
>Hong Ooi wrote:
>>
>> It's an even bigger PITA to track variable additions to stats, especially
>> if it happens every day.
>
>Point.
>In a pefect world, Bull Strength, etc., would be just a straight +4 or
>such.
You're about to enter a perfect world, then.
Wayne Shaw
wrote:
>> Disintegrate: From a 25th lvl caster disintegrate does 40d6 on a failed save,
>> 5d6 if saved.
>
>140 average damage?
>Too many things can walk right through that. ;(
>At least once.
I suspect that's rather the point.
Stephenls
> I'd seen the fighter bonus list given publically, but has the whole
> list appeared somewhere. But yes, you can't Persistant Bull's
> Strength anyway.
Unless they change Persistent Spell in one of the 3.5 supplements.
--
Stephenls
Geek
Talen
wrote:
I have a suspicion that it's either going to get a massive rejig or
they're just not going to talk about it. Kind of like the Spelldancer.
--
Talen
http://hypercrescendo.net/talen/
"Name three things a cow can do which a carton of milk cannot
do" (3 marks)
- Actual GSCE Science Paper Question
The Gurus love you
Jeff Heikkinen
> I'd seen the fighter bonus list given publically, but has the whole
> list appeared somewhere.
Yes, it has, on WotC's Web site in the Revision Spotlight column about a
month ago.
Jeff Heikkinen
> In article <m2o8dvc6h7af6hrn6...@4ax.com>,
> Talen <ta...@spamspamspamspam.iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
> > >Yeah, cause Animals companions are so weak as it is <rolls eyes>.
> >
> > At low levels, Animal Companions are nice. At high levels, they suck
> > _ass_.
>
> If you use the rules in MoTW for legendary animals, and the rules for
> spending XP to increase your animal companions HD, they keep pace
> quite well.
So what you're saying is that if you change the rules, you can *make*
animal companions viable.
How exactly is that supposed to be an *objection* to changing the rules
to make animal companions viable?
Jeff Heikkinen
>
> Perhaps I missed the info on this from a previous post, but has there
> been clarification on whether the DR subtype are going to be placed
> within a hierarchy, or are they standalone requirements?
From what I've read about the reasons for it, the whole *point* of the
change is to do away with the heirarchy. So I would think that they are
what you call standalone requirements.
Sorcier
>
> Sorcier wrote:
> > Reginald Blue wrote:
> >> I thought someone said that in another post?
> >
> > Propogation rates vary.
> > I saw that post after I wrote mine.
>
> Actually, that was me stating that my memory isn't that good. :-)
I'm sorry, what were we discussing?
Jeff Heikkinen
> >From: "A'koss" infinitySP...@shaw.ca
> >
> >Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
> >- Nerfed - good.
> >
>
> multiple encounters at players minute after minute...some do. But IMHO anything
> that makes you have to track time is bad for game play. Its easy to track an
> hour. Its a PIA to track minutes.
Yeah, one of Monte's design diaries mentioned really disliking minute-
per-level durations for combat-useful spells. I agree with him because
I've seen it too - some players feel a certain pressure to rush to a
second encounter before their buffs wear off, which just doesn't feel
right.
Jeff Heikkinen
> > Disintegrate: From a 25th lvl caster disintegrate does 40d6 on a failed save,
> > 5d6 if saved.
>
> 140 average damage?
> Too many things can walk right through that. ;(
> At least once.
>
Sorcier
>
> >I would have like to see Eschew Materials go core too.
> >Unless they've "fixed" Sorcerers and monsters to have it for free...
>
> Eschew Materials is no longer a metamagic feat, it's a general feat.
> Advantage being sorcerors can now use it without being in serious
> shit.
I was going to ask how this changes anything, but I guess it changes
at least the full round casting time.
Any other affect I'm missing?
Is the pre-req changing?
Sorcier
Nah, other things would be different there also. ;)
Sorcier
>
> >> So yeah, only adamantine weapons will beat Stoneskin. The other
> >> alternative is just to do more than 10 points of damage or hit the damn
> >> wizard with energy based spells. Neither option is particularly difficult.
> >
> >They are if you're a rogue.
> >Unless you get the flank...
>
> So buy an adamant dagger and move on.
And a silver one, and a holy one, and a mercurial one, and a tungsten
one,
and a wooden one, and a salt water taffy one, and...
Or just play a frickin' Fighter with the Str to carry all this stuff
that he won't need in the first place because he went all munchy on
the MSB "STR problem".
Sorcier
It does take some of the connotation out of "Disintegrate". ;(
Jeff Heikkinen
> Jeff Heikkinen wrote:
> >
> > Sorcier, worshipped by llamas the world over, wrote...
> > > > Disintegrate: From a 25th lvl caster disintegrate does 40d6 on a failed save,
> > > > 5d6 if saved.
> > >
> > > 140 average damage?
> > > Too many things can walk right through that. ;(
> > > At least once.
> > >
> > You say that like it's a bad thing...
>
> It does take some of the connotation out of "Disintegrate". ;(
True (I can't wait to see the flavor text), but game-functionally it
works much better for me than the old version.
A'koss
news:436advcde0ge430ap...@news.supernews.com...
> Mere moments before death, A'koss hastily scrawled:
> >> It might be in the 3.5 core books.
> >
> >Nope, here is the list of the Metamagic Feats in the 3.5e core books:
>
> Is that final? Are you sure?
Yup.
You can see all the core 3.5e feats on WotC's site here:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rs/20030415a
Cheers,
A'koss.
--
The Rings of Concordance have moved!
http://members.shaw.ca/infinity
A'koss
news:3ED57C...@cavtel.net...
> Wayne Shaw wrote:
> >
> > >> So yeah, only adamantine weapons will beat Stoneskin. The other
> > >> alternative is just to do more than 10 points of damage or hit the damn
> > >> wizard with energy based spells. Neither option is particularly
difficult.
> > >
> > >They are if you're a rogue.
> > >Unless you get the flank...
> >
> > So buy an adamant dagger and move on.
>
> And a silver one, and a holy one, and a mercurial one, and a tungsten
> one,
> and a wooden one, and a salt water taffy one, and...
I can't say that I'm all that keen on the new DR rules myself. You can
understand why they'd want to do it that way but it does create a
golf-bag-o-weapons mentality I'm not big on. CRs are tricky enough to establish
already - do you assume the characters all have weapons that can bypass it's DR?
Some? None? It will make a difference (even if it's not a huge one).
A'koss
news:20030528121505...@mb-m04.aol.com...
> >From: "A'koss" infinitySP...@shaw.ca
>
> >
> >Bull's Strength lasts 1 min/lvl.
> >- Nerfed - good.
> >
>
> Useless now. Most combats last under 10 rounds. And most DM's don't throw
> multiple encounters at players minute after minute...some do. But IMHO
anything
> that makes you have to track time is bad for game play. Its easy to track an
> hour. Its a PIA to track minutes.
Andy Collins on 1 min/lvl spells:
1) At 1 hour/level, the stat-booster spells are no-brainers. Not only do they
crowd out all other 2nd-level spells on every spellcaster's list, but they also
crowd out the +2 and +4 stat-boosting items (and for some characters, even the
+6 items). Every character should want a Con-booster, a Wis-booster, and a
Dex-booster every day, and most should want a Str-booster too. That's a lot of
system damage.
2) At 1 hour/level, every NPC spellcaster (or NPC accompanying a spellcaster)
above 5th or 6th level must be assumed to have them in effect. That often forces
a second stat block for the NPC, and defines dispel magic as the single-best
1st-round tactic for PCs.
3) At 10 min/level, the DM must track the passage of time over the course of
several encounters, and that's a real hassle. When durations stretch to hours,
the DM can "hand-wave" time, and at 1 min/level or less, it's pretty easy to
keep track of time. When the duration is 30 minutes, how many encounters is
that? Three? Eight? Ten? It's the 10 min/lvl duration that really encourages
"speed through the dungeon" play, not 1 hr/lvl or 1 min/lvl, and that's why
these aren't 10 min/level.
4) At 1 min/lvl, characters must choose carefully when they use the spells. The
wizard waits to cast bull's strength until right before the big fight. The
cleric waits to buff up the rogue's Con until the character really needs it
(such as right after taking Con damage from the poison dart). Etc. It's exactly
when a spellcaster has to think carefully about using a spell that it's probably
at the right power level.
5) At 1 min/lvl, characters who really depend on a specific stat shell out for
the magic item rather than relying on their spellcasters to take care of it.
That frees up the spellcaster to cast spells of his choice, rather than of other
people's choice.
No, these spells aren't the right ones for boosting your Diplomacy for a long
day of negotiations. I'd say a spell that gave you a +5 or +10 to Diplomacy
checks for 1 hr/level would be a fine low-level spell, and would be much better
for the task.
- Point made by one poster: "In almost no situation do dungeon explorations last
more than an hour."
- Andy's response: Exactly why 10 min/lvl doesn't solve the problem of all-day
durations for stat-boosters. Bull's strength at 10 min/lvl is almost as good for
PCs as 1 hr/lvl, but far worse for NPCs (who typically have a harder time
predicting when a fight is coming). 1 min/lvl balances the playing field much
more.
In every 3.0 campaign I participated in or heard about, the stat-booster spells
were abused. My sorcerer cast a half-dozen *every day*, and it would've been
more if the cleric didn't also contribute a few. They were, hands-down, the best
2nd-level spells in the game at almost every character level, and the lack of
variety that breeds is simply bad for the game. (Not to mention the interminable
before-you-head-to-the-dungeon arguments about who gets which spells--have the
same argument outside the door to the wizard's lab and he'll just fireball you.)
Frankly, nerfing these spells was one of the easiest decisions the revision team
made.
*My thoughts: Personally, I'd have gone with 1 round per level and maybe make
them all 1st level spells to compensate. Then they truly are "one encounter"
buffs and the whole time tracking issue becomes moot.
> And...what about Cat's Grace? If BS is broken, then CG is even more so...you
> can get a + to hit, a + to INit and to AC and reflex saves. BS only gave your
> str a small boost.
>
> Morons.
All the buffs are identical in duration, power, etc. AFAIK...
Cheers,
A'koss
news:JamesQuick1967-369...@news.bellatlantic.net...
> In article <IU5Ba.83732$3C2.2...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca>,
> "A'koss" <infinitySP...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> > "Fixed range" spells are those that eminate a fixed distance from the
caster,
> > not touch spells. Eg. The many detect spells.
>
> Well this has the potential to really piss off my players. :-)
HTH... ;0)
Talen
<sNoEr...@cavtel.net> wrote:
>Talen wrote:
>>
>> >I would have like to see Eschew Materials go core too.
>> >Unless they've "fixed" Sorcerers and monsters to have it for free...
>>
>> Eschew Materials is no longer a metamagic feat, it's a general feat.
>> Advantage being sorcerors can now use it without being in serious
>> shit.
>
>I was going to ask how this changes anything, but I guess it changes
>at least the full round casting time.
>Any other affect I'm missing?
Nope, but that's the most important one. To a wizard, it's freedom
from material components. To sorcerors, it's a choice between full
round castings or a bag of bat shit.
>Is the pre-req changing?
I don't know.
--
Talen
http://hypercrescendo.net/talen/
"They're *French*, what more of an insult do you need?"
- Khendon
The Gurus love you
Peter Knutsen
>>Is that final? Are you sure?
> Yup.
No. Nothing is final until the 3.5 books get published.
> You can see all the core 3.5e feats on WotC's site here:
> http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rs/20030415a
Which has the usual "nothing is final" disclaimer.
> A'koss.
--
Peter Knutsen
Talen
<pe...@knutsen.nospam.dk> wrote:
The books are *printed*, dude.
--
Talen
http://hypercrescendo.net/talen/
"You, you, you shouldn't, you shouldn't traumatize women with
sexual intercourse. I should know, I'm a medieval doctor, I
own a moat!"
- Kookiejar's Built-in Quotefile
The Gurus love you
Andy
"Jeff Heikkinen" <o...@s.if> wrote in message
news:MPG.193f38016...@news.easynews.com...
It is...
Andy
Hong Ooi
I've seen it in exactly one player so far. Mind you, this player is also
one whose PCs tend to die like flies, and has the uncanny ability to make
wrong decisions.
It's quite funny, really. He's a powergamer at heart and _tries_ to munch
out his characters, he just can't seem to get it right.
--
Hong Ooi | "I'm so confused all the time"
ho...@zipworld.com.au | -- MC
http://www.zipworld.com.au/~hong/dnd/ |
Sydney, Australia |
Keifer0999
>> >>
>> >> It's an even bigger PITA to track variable additions to stats,
>especially
>> >> if it happens every day.
>> >
Not really. Whats the point of taking a buff spell if its good for one
encounter? A mage is better off taking a 1st level spell for that second level
one and hitting a monster with magic missile, or using mirror image or
somerthing. By making BS a one encounter spell and not the other buff spells,
the balance gets thrown out.
BTW anyone know WHY they are making all the Save or Die spells damage based
now??? Did too many players whine that they were losing characters????
I feel like Old Pete in the KODT cartoon. H said something like...Saving Throws
are a crutch for weak players. IN my day we didn't have them!
Hong Ooi
>>> >Hong Ooi wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> It's an even bigger PITA to track variable additions to stats,
>>especially
>>> >> if it happens every day.
>>> >
>
>Not really. Whats the point of taking a buff spell if its good for one
>encounter?
To buff up. Duh.
>A mage is better off taking a 1st level spell for that second level
>one and hitting a monster with magic missile, or using mirror image or
>somerthing. By making BS a one encounter spell and not the other buff spells,
>the balance gets thrown out.
Why do you assume that the other buff spells won't all get changed?
>
>BTW anyone know WHY they are making all the Save or Die spells damage based
>now??? Did too many players whine that they were losing characters????
Probably.
>
>I WANGER like Old WANGER in the WANGER cartoon. WANGER said WANGER like...WANGER Throws
>are a WANGER for weak WANGERS. IN my WANGER we didn't have WANGERS!
Indeed.
Peter Meilinger
Not sure how I feel about that. I like the idea that some materials
aren't on a hierarchy, but for others it makes sense. Although I
can't think of any examples right now, of course. No big deal,
though, it's easy enough to change.
I assume that the generic magical plus weapons still work on
a hierarchy system? Otherwise a +5 sword wouldn't be effective
against a creature that requires +1 weapons to hit. That'd
be amusing, but odd.
Pete
Hong Ooi
IIRC, the DR categories are now
- magic (anything up to +5)
- material (silver and adamantine are the only ones mentioned so far)
- alignment (G, E, L, C)
- epic (+6 or higher)
Hong Ooi
No it's not.
Ed Chauvin IV
>It has been brought to my attention that Peter Knutsen
><pe...@knutsen.nospam.dk> wrote:
>
>>
>>A'koss wrote:
>>> "Ed Chauvin IV" <ed...@wherethefuckaremypants.com> wrote in message
>>
>>>>Is that final? Are you sure?
>>
>>> Yup.
>>
>>No. Nothing is final until the 3.5 books get published.
>>
>>> You can see all the core 3.5e feats on WotC's site here:
>>> http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rs/20030415a
>>
>>Which has the usual "nothing is final" disclaimer.
>
>The books are *printed*, dude.
www.wizards.com is not a book, dude.
Ed Chauvin IV
--
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
It is by the Beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed,
the hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning.
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
"I always feel left out when someone *else* gets killfiled."
--Terry Austin
Ed Chauvin IV
>>>> >>>> - Nerfed - good.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>Unless they plan to nerf that in 3.5E too?
>>>> >
>>>> >It ain't in the core rulebooks.
>>>>
>>>> It might be in the 3.5 core books.
>>>
>>>Nope, here is the list of the Metamagic Feats in the 3.5e core books:
>>
>
OK.
Ed Chauvin IV
>"Ed Chauvin IV" <ed...@wherethefuckaremypants.com> wrote in message
>news:436advcde0ge430ap...@news.supernews.com...
>> Mere moments before death, A'koss hastily scrawled:
<persistent spell>
>> >> It might be in the 3.5 core books.
>> >
>> >Nope, here is the list of the Metamagic Feats in the 3.5e core books:
>>
>> Is that final? Are you sure?
>
>Yup.
>
>You can see all the core 3.5e feats on WotC's site here:
>http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rs/20030415a
It's my understanding that nothing we see is final until we see it in
the book(s).
Ed Chauvin IV
>On Wed, 28 May 2003 16:33:04 -0400, Ed Chauvin IV
><ed...@wherethefuckaremypants.com> wrote:
>
>:Mere moments before death, Sorcier hastily scrawled:
>:>Spinner wrote:
>:>>
>:>> Although it now suddenly strikes me as weird that something like Maximize
>:>> and Empower should affect one spell and not another merely because the spell
>:>> has some variation in effect. I don't know how to implement this without
>:>> the worms coming out of the can, but wouldn't an empowered +4 be nice and
>:>> easy and still pretty balanced, appropriate in-game and more sensible than
>:>> requiring a die roll be present?
>:>
>:>No easy fix, but you could house rule letting those who have the feats
>:>apply them to spells you feel appropriate.
>:>Don't know a good boost for Maximize or combo-ing them though.
>:
>:You could let them use Maximize on other spells that still qualify. I
>:don't know anyone who'd complain about getting free Maximize on Bull's
>:Strength in 3.0.
>
> Too bad it's a fixed +4 instead of a fixed +5, so
>nobody is getting a free Maximize.
OK, but I don't know anyone who'd complain about *that* either.
Ed Chauvin IV
That's why they're lowering the DR values. The high end (where you'll
probably see more of the harder to override DRs like holysilver) is
supposed to be 15 now, instead of 30.
A'koss
> Mere moments before death, A'koss hastily scrawled:
> >"Ed Chauvin IV" <ed...@wherethefuckaremypants.com> wrote in message
> >news:436advcde0ge430ap...@news.supernews.com...
> >> Mere moments before death, A'koss hastily scrawled:
>
> <persistent spell>
>
> >> >> It might be in the 3.5 core books.
> >> >
> >> >Nope, here is the list of the Metamagic Feats in the 3.5e core books:
> >>
> >> Is that final? Are you sure?
> >
> >Yup.
> >
> >You can see all the core 3.5e feats on WotC's site here:
> >http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rs/20030415a
>
> It's my understanding that nothing we see is final until we see it in
> the book(s).
True, but the books (as Hong has pointed out) have been printed for some time
now and their 3.5e web previews continue to have this "disclaimer"... I would be
very surprised if something else snuck through.
A'koss
news:055cdvcna6htt9l1m...@4ax.com...
> On 29 May 2003 14:01:32 GMT, Peter Meilinger <mell...@bu.edu> wrote:
> >I assume that the generic magical plus weapons still work on
> >a hierarchy system? Otherwise a +5 sword wouldn't be effective
> >against a creature that requires +1 weapons to hit. That'd
> >be amusing, but odd.
>
> IIRC, the DR categories are now
> - magic (anything up to +5)
> - material (silver and adamantine are the only ones mentioned so far)
> - alignment (G, E, L, C)
> - epic (+6 or higher)
I think these are all the ones appearing in the core books: silver, cold iron,
magic, holy, adamantine, epic (+6 or better), bludgeoning, piercing, slashing,
alignment. And combos possible, magic-silvered for example. Ranges 5 to 15 (but
I think he mentioned 20 appearing in there somewhere...)
Stephenls
> www.wizards.com is not a book, dude.
I think he means that if the books are already printed, then logically
the manuscript from which the printers are drawing their information
must have been finalized some time ago. And presumably wizards.com is
working from that finalized manuscript.
Why would they be working from some other, non-finalized manuscript when
the final version has been available for some time?
--
Stephenls
Geek
Hong Ooi
wrote:
I'd have thought that "holy" would subsume good-aligned weapons.
Stephenls
> IIRC, the DR categories are now
> - magic (anything up to +5)
> - material (silver and adamantine are the only ones mentioned so far)
> - alignment (G, E, L, C)
> - epic (+6 or higher)
Also damage type, so that skeletons can have their 5/blunt. Presumably
there are other monsters with x/piercing or y/slashing.
And "holy," and I'm going to hazard a guess and say "unholy" might be as
well.
--
Stephenls
Geek