 |
We all know that DND is awesome. But few know why. So, why is DND awesome in your eyes? question
|
|
|
Is that a lighter I hear?
If not, here, have mine. I don't like D&D; 3rd ed made things entirely too breakable with its synergies and also weakened the mages and clerics to the point where a strict DM could force all useful mage spells down to ineffectiveness. That isn't to say it hasn't had its place; I started in 2nd ed, saw the atrocity fighters and druids were there, and I like what happened to them in 3rd ed. But, fundamentally, as a system, I don't like it. I've moved on to other systems that manage to make the die roll a risk rather than a foregone conclusion, and the worlds in and of themselves are nothing unique to fantasy gaming. Far from "awesome." |
 |
|
|
I LOVE D&D!!
There is nothing quite like a good fantasy Roll playing game. The element of mystery is constantly spicefying things. "is there a monster behind this door", "is this door trapped", "how many hit points does the monster have left", "are the Sailors friendly or pirates?", "what is the monsters AC". I also enjoy group debates/trash talk over the best class. But your answer for me is that the mystery makes it fun. |
|
|
@ LiaThistle
I was talking about 4th Ed. |
|
|
|
LiaThistle weakened the mages and clerics I'm rather curious as to why you say this. Granted, I haven't played 2e, but if full-casters were weakened for 3e, what were they before? On par with gods? Casters with full progression are already easily the most powerful characters in the game. On-topic, there isn't really an objectively "best" game. 4e and 3e are both pretty good in their own right, with pros and cons to each--I can't speak for previous editions, but I hear 2e is still very loved among those who play it as well. But play lots of systems, get a wide variety of experience. D&D is fun overall, but there are other systems that do some things better. |
|
|
Same here, ive played 3.5 and 4 but not 2e. Personally, I thought that casters were brought back in 4th ed. with the at-will/encounter/daily skill system. But thats just me.
|
|
|
|
Eliico @ LiaThistle I was talking about 4th Ed. The third post - yours - is the first one to specify the topic's edition. Please be more clear in the future; a lot of players here vastly prefer their "precious" 3rd/3.5 ed to 4th. I myself have not touched 4th due to bad experiences with 3rd and 3.5. ThePhantomSquee LiaThistle weakened the mages and clerics I'm rather curious as to why you say this. Granted, I haven't played 2e, but if full-casters were weakened for 3e, what were they before? On par with gods? Casters with full progression are already easily the most powerful characters in the game. On-topic, there isn't really an objectively "best" game. 4e and 3e are both pretty good in their own right, with pros and cons to each--I can't speak for previous editions, but I hear 2e is still very loved among those who play it as well. But play lots of systems, get a wide variety of experience. D&D is fun overall, but there are other systems that do some things better. Durations, spell levels, saving throw difficulties, and spell flexibility were all altered negatively. From what I have seen in 3rd/3.5, casters are actually the weakest of the base classes, as all their spells and powers and mystic stuff can be negated by rolls of 2 or higher on saves by characters of the same level. While that is an exaggeration, the saves are ridiculously biased in the non-caster's favor, if for no other reason than they go up passively while increasing the caster's DC requires active expenditure. Durations on some of the buff spells were shortened from hours to minutes. I want to say Stoneskin and Bull Strength were two of those, but I'm not sure. Polymorph got broken down into two cases - objects, and victims. Previously, even in 3rd (but changed in 3.5), an enemy could be affected by the 4th level Polymorph. In 3.5, the level 8 Baleful Polymorph is required. Cantrips were also adjusted in terms of power - now, they're measly 0th level spells that really can't do anything, whereas in 2nd, they were 1st level spells that a crafty mage could make have a larger indirect effect than several 6th level spells. Unbuckled belts, ripped corset/gown strings, banana peels in odd places (like cliff edges), as well as extinguishing candles, altering chandeliers, and other nifty tricks were all axed from the possibilities. Call Lightning also received a serious facelift - in 3rd, it resembles Fireball more than the original Call Lightning - which could do a ridiculous 10d8+ damage faster than a Fireball could hit 10d6. Wishes also received a massive change, particularly Limited Wish. For one thing, age was taken as payment, as well as points of Con. Third changed it to exp, which can be easily regained, but losing exp for doing your job makes no sense. |
|
|
rolleyes
|
|
|
|
Spells are pretty evenly balanced in 3.5 because their affects can be incredible. Stoneskin and polymorph are both spells that where too awesome. polymorh lets you completely change the form of another creature!
|
|
|
Avocado Avenger12 Spells are pretty evenly balanced in 3.5 because their affects can be incredible. Stoneskin and polymorph are both spells that where too awesome. polymorh lets you completely change the form of another creature! And? If you look at the fundamental concept of fantasy magic, then it does one thing, no matter the world: it defies the laws of physics. As such, anything that can break the rules of our reality ought to be far more powerful than anything that cannot. This leads to the natural conclusion that mages must be the most powerful class. So why can't they change the shape of a critter? According to 3.5, then animate matter is far more resistant to change than inanimate matter - ya know, because cell membranes are certainly less malleable than crystalline latices. Oh well, physics out the window, right? It just doesn't make sense to me. Spells like Stoneskin are often necessary for survival, but now, you better use it darn wisely, because it won't be around for long. Spell effects are supposed to be incredible - that's why mages have the lowest hit points of all the classes. Because they're the glass cannons. Not that it matters much, because a Fireball isn't necessarily going to do as much as a Great Cleave with a standard Sword can. |
|
|
|
LiaThistle Avocado Avenger12 Spells are pretty evenly balanced in 3.5 because their affects can be incredible. Stoneskin and polymorph are both spells that where too awesome. polymorh lets you completely change the form of another creature! And? If you look at the fundamental concept of fantasy magic, then it does one thing, no matter the world: it defies the laws of physics. As such, anything that can break the rules of our reality ought to be far more powerful than anything that cannot. This leads to the natural conclusion that mages must be the most powerful class. So why can't they change the shape of a critter? According to 3.5, then animate matter is far more resistant to change than inanimate matter - ya know, because cell membranes are certainly less malleable than crystalline latices. Oh well, physics out the window, right? It just doesn't make sense to me. Spells like Stoneskin are often necessary for survival, but now, you better use it darn wisely, because it won't be around for long. Spell effects are supposed to be incredible - that's why mages have the lowest hit points of all the classes. Because they're the glass cannons. Not that it matters much, because a Fireball isn't necessarily going to do as much as a Great Cleave with a standard Sword can. Wizards always screws things up. Any real mage would carry 15 black lotuses and 25 lightning bolts. rofl |
|
|
Designer Genes LiaThistle Avocado Avenger12 Spells are pretty evenly balanced in 3.5 because their affects can be incredible. Stoneskin and polymorph are both spells that where too awesome. polymorh lets you completely change the form of another creature! And? If you look at the fundamental concept of fantasy magic, then it does one thing, no matter the world: it defies the laws of physics. As such, anything that can break the rules of our reality ought to be far more powerful than anything that cannot. This leads to the natural conclusion that mages must be the most powerful class. So why can't they change the shape of a critter? According to 3.5, then animate matter is far more resistant to change than inanimate matter - ya know, because cell membranes are certainly less malleable than crystalline latices. Oh well, physics out the window, right? It just doesn't make sense to me. Spells like Stoneskin are often necessary for survival, but now, you better use it darn wisely, because it won't be around for long. Spell effects are supposed to be incredible - that's why mages have the lowest hit points of all the classes. Because they're the glass cannons. Not that it matters much, because a Fireball isn't necessarily going to do as much as a Great Cleave with a standard Sword can. Wizards always screws things up. Any real mage would carry 15 black lotuses and 25 lightning bolts. rofl You're still not gonna win first turn with that. No, no, carry around 15 Black Lotuses, maybe 10 Contracts from Below, and then 15 Bolts. You'd better hit them all then. |
|
|
|
Oh LiaThistle, why must you be so ill-informed?
Listen, the wizard have spells that are stronger than the entire fighter class. This is not to be debated, that is fact. And for one who dislikes the standard approach D&D has to everything, you sure do think inside the box. Why the hell would a wizard use stoneskin when he can just cast a spell or two that makes hitting impossible, fly away (Or just fly about 15 feet up and start the bombardment), summon a buttload of critters, or just bomb the dude to smithereens? Fly is a level 3 spell that completely invalidates the fighter as a factor, unless he carries around a ranged weapon or two, but if he switches to that your teammates should be able to have a go at him. (If you are alone, your summoned critters, and defence against arrows will do the same thing) Glitterdust blinds the guy, that makes him move at half speed and gives him a -4 to attack, that should allow you to pwn the guy pretty thouroughly, that's a level 2 spell. |
|
|
Because.
I like role playing and rolling dice and I like the d20 system. |
|
|
|
LiaThistle Designer Genes LiaThistle Avocado Avenger12 Spells are pretty evenly balanced in 3.5 because their affects can be incredible. Stoneskin and polymorph are both spells that where too awesome. polymorh lets you completely change the form of another creature! And? If you look at the fundamental concept of fantasy magic, then it does one thing, no matter the world: it defies the laws of physics. As such, anything that can break the rules of our reality ought to be far more powerful than anything that cannot. This leads to the natural conclusion that mages must be the most powerful class. So why can't they change the shape of a critter? According to 3.5, then animate matter is far more resistant to change than inanimate matter - ya know, because cell membranes are certainly less malleable than crystalline latices. Oh well, physics out the window, right? It just doesn't make sense to me. Spells like Stoneskin are often necessary for survival, but now, you better use it darn wisely, because it won't be around for long. Spell effects are supposed to be incredible - that's why mages have the lowest hit points of all the classes. Because they're the glass cannons. Not that it matters much, because a Fireball isn't necessarily going to do as much as a Great Cleave with a standard Sword can. Wizards always screws things up. Any real mage would carry 15 black lotuses and 25 lightning bolts. rofl You're still not gonna win first turn with that. No, no, carry around 15 Black Lotuses, maybe 10 Contracts from Below, and then 15 Bolts. You'd better hit them all then. Butbutbut my list looks easier to do. Honestly, if you think that casters are underpowered in 3.5, you should look again. Level 3 fighter is a class feature for level 1 druids. Clericzilla is fairly insane in melee, much more so than any actual melee class, Rogues get most of their "awesomeness" from being able to UMD well (as with bards), and Wizards can metamagic anything to godly levels by level 6. Or just Exploding Runes/ purposely failed dispel magic spam everything. Or Shrink Item/ Fly for meteor rains. Just because the numbers and durations appear bad doesn't mean they are. In practice, magic in 3.5 is way overpowered. Even the "saves" become near impossible DCs, as they can go up much faster and dramatically than bonuses, and scale very poorly by class progression. Hell, things like Power Words have no save at all. |
|
