For discussion of D&D 3.0 and 3.5e> Toolshttps://dndtools.net/https://srd.dndtools.orghttps://dndtools.one/https://d20srd.orghttps://www.realmshelps.net/> Indices> 3.5https://archive.burne99.com/archive/4/http://web.archive.org/web/20080617022745/http://www.crystalkeep.com/d20/index.php> 3.0http://web.archive.org/web/20060330114049/http://www.crystalkeep.com:80/d20/rules3.0.php> Dragon Magazine Indexhttps://www.aeolia.net/dragondex/> Web Articles Orbital Flower Index PDFhttps://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/91811106/#91824954> Erratahttps://web.archive.org/web/20201111205827/http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/errata>3e Resource Index Version 2024-04-17https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/92491374/#92530275Previous thread: >>92727646Thread Question: Across all your characters, what's your usual weapon of choice?
>>92793157>Across all your characters, what's your usual weapon of choice?Greatsword, it's the most narratively versatile. Also:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjRD13kj-KQIn other news, that mass combat game I mentioned a few games back is shaping up well, if slowly. Players are working on figuring how to meet the class requirements for what counts as army-focused, looking for a balance of mass buffs and personal power. Which is fine with me, I'm using the time to refine the map, faction histories, and world events the PCs can have an impact on.
>>92793157I have a longsword fetish.My current character wields one in two hands, even.Between the war domain, that holy warrior reserve feat, and the gloves that give an extra bonus to the deity's favorite weapon, he's doing pretty well.
>>92793157>>Across all your characters, what's your usual weapon of choice?a 18-20 weapon and a x4 weapon, the former if only 1 is feasible.
>>92793607Holy Warrior reserve feat is so obscene. Espescially if you've got Ordained Champion or just Spontaneous domain ACF which means you don't even have to prepare a War Domain spell to qualify.
I'm planning on DMing my first 3.5 campgaing, I've played/mastered BECMI, 4e and 5e, what changes shouuld I do to the cores system, some anon suggested using the Pathfinder skill system, feat progression table and grappling system, are this changes good?, what other changes I should consider?.Also, what Supplements or books I should really read?
>>92793157Greatsword, would go even bigger but a divine favored weapon's gotta be martial for War Domain to autoproficiency/focus it.>>92793928Those sound fairly solid. You making your own setting or using a premade?
>>92793953my own but gonna be honest, the Eberron books are making me reconsider that, never played an Eberron game and looks pretty good.
>>92793984It's an interesting place for sure.
>>92793157>>92793178I think this general will be fine. Worst case, one of us makes a new thread a few hours late. We have more traffic than /gengen/ did. Other 3e argument threads still crop up from time to time even, like that recent Bo9S thread.
>>92793577Sick. My wilderness exploration town building faction sandbox is slowly coming along too, but still in the prep stages.
>>92793157>Question1. Metamagic rods2. Longbows.
>>92793928Pathfinder's combat maneuvers are crap because they're locked behind deeper feat trees and shit CMB/CMD math that scales way more on defense than offense.Extra feat slots are fine.I think the pathfinder skill system is shittier than 3.5's, but some people like it. 1 for 1 pricing is fine but no cross classmax ranks was a mistake.t. Currently Converting GURPS skills to 3e>what other changes to consider> Eclipse feats (6pt abilities) and Martial Arts for skill points.> PF1 favoured class.> Challenging Challenge Ratings ECL formula for playable creatures instead of LA+RHD (ECL=CR–1).> Background skills.> Quest-Based PRC Prerequisites instead of build based.> Strongholds and Dynasties if they want to build forts or guild halls or what have you.> PF1's Ultimate Magic Spell Design rules.> Look at UA and Mongoose Games Designers Companion for optional subsystems.There are many 3e mass combat systems, but I haven't tried them any to have suggestions.
>>92793157SKR's ramble about many changes he thought were pointless or wildly mishandled in the 3.5 update, expanding on Monte Cook's comments on the same.https://web.archive.org/web/20200211201534/http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/opinions/3point5comments.htmlHe's got another rant about all the people whose names should have been in the credits for the books that they cut out.
>>92794950His old website also included lots of commentary on 'known' errors and clarifications that for whatever reason management didn't bother to include in errata.
>>92795000Here's a fun excerpt that shows you what the original Archmage PrC was.https://web.archive.org/web/20200211123715/http://seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/prestige/ZZZoriginalarchmage.html
>>92794950Huh, even the 3e designer advises on using piecemeal 3.5. That's a fun fact.Also I hadn't realized 3.5 was already a Hasbro thing.
>>92795191Even 3.0 was a Hasbro thing. Hasbro bought them part way through 3.0's Development.
>>92795191Hasbro started cocking up the D&D design in 2002. Before that they were less hands-on.https://web.archive.org/web/20210126132139/http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/gaming/forgottenrumsstory.htmlI think this is much of the reason I generally prefer the 3.0 books, and when I run a non-houseruled "3.5" it's still mostly 3.5 Corebooks with 3.0 Splatbooks / Setting Books.
>>927951913.0 was a good game. I didn't buy the first printing of the 3.5 core books, my existing 3.0 core books were fine. I do think the 3.5 core books were more improvement than not, but only marginally. I like the 3.0 covers better too.
>>92795486>I like the 3.0 covers better too.Yeah, same.My party mostly used the core 3e books, but the DMs usually allowed us to mix it randomly, like picking Rangers and Bards from 3.5.
>>92795663That's exactly what I did back in the day."I'm not buying the 3.5 corebooks. I'm not made of money, and the money I do have is going into other books I want more.""If you want to use a thing from a book I don't own, you'll have to show it to me, and if I okay it, you can photocopy those pages and give them to me so I can see what you're using and how it works." 3.5 Ranger and Bard got photocopied by someone and handed to me for my GM binder immediately.
>>92795309It was published after the Hasbro acquisition but likely before any influence had been felt at all. 3.5E was planned from the day 3.0 dropped in anticipation of the usual sales cycle of core books, but the Hasbro influence was felt more in its development.
>>927960073.5 was supposed to drop in 2005. Hasbro rushed them and moved it up 2 years. They started meddling more in '02 as mentioned in >>92795327.But Hasbro owned them before 3.0 came out.
>>92793157>Across all your characters, what's your usual weapon of choice?The bastard sword. Two hands, Final Destination. They also look good whilst rocking out to classic rock like >>92793577 >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkGjQIh8J6A
>>92793928I would just run it as is for a while so you understand better what to change (if anything)
>>92796007>>92796020 was not a disagreement, just pointing out that by the time of Release, Hasbro was the one getting the profits and looking them over. I agree Hasbro hadn't started ruining things yet. They started doing that around the release of Silver Marches, before the rest of the inherited TSR employees began to jump ship, going by SKR's rant.
>>92793928If you're considering running it as-is for a bit before changing shit as >>92796508 suggests, I would recommend giving 3.0 a thorough read if not run it itself before 3.5.Otherwise, >>92794484 are my conclusions on the game sytem after 24 years of running variations thereof.
>>92795327The map crammed into the back of Marches didn't do the binding any favors either. The hardback releases could usually get away with that without it ruining the book.
>>92797652Yeah, but by the time the binding failed, Hasbro already knew that good setting-centric books wouldn't get the sales figures they demanded, even if they made a decent profit.
>>92798524Was there any comparison made public about which 3.0 & 3.5 series did the best in terms of sales? Not just campaign settings, but any line such as the Complete series, region-themed supplements, races, Expeditions, or psionics books.
>>92799912Only one I know of is that books full of character stuff sold more copies than campaign books and adventures, and Hasbro was not satisfied with "that's why campaign books are priced higher". And the only source we have is one of the disgruntled 3.0 employees who left a few years after Hasbro bought WotC. (SKR).
>>92799912>>92799945I recall people being pissed about Dragon Magic, one of the late books, because the thought process was "books with "Dragon" and books with "Magic" in the name sell better".
>>92797490>>92794484>>92796508Thanks you, it helps a lot
>>92793157>Across all your characters, what's your usual weapon of choice?Every time I run 3.5, it's always a gauntlet of bullshit centered almost entirely around combat, so the most effective weapons, IE, Greatsword, Greataxe, or Spiked Chain.Daily reminder; you ARE allowed to give the players challenges that test their skills or stats and reward them with XP for them...
>>92800174You should also read this commentary on 3.5 from two of the 3.0 designers. It's some useful commentary to consider.
>>92800194>Daily reminder; you ARE allowed to give the players challenges that test their skills or stats and reward them with XP for them...There's even straight RAW about XP for dealing with traps, which can easily be assembled into more meaningful encounters.
>>92800194>Daily reminder; you ARE allowed to give the players challenges that test their skills or stats and reward them with XP for them...Absolutely. Just don't give XP is a caster beats the encounter with one spell that prevents the encounter from happening.
>>92793928I would allow pure martials like Rogues, Barbarians, and Fighters the ability to pick a wider variety of feats by removing all or most of the requirements for them, maybe only having the requirement be a previous feat if it's part of a feat-chain progression.
>>92799912The monster manuals probably sold the best, which is why there were a dozen of them.
>>92800278You can judge it by the resource allocation as a lower-Challenge encounter with the appropriate XP. An 8th-level caster single-slotting a CR 1 encounter with almost anything they feel like is pretty expected, but there's "supposed" to still be a 200 XP award for that by DMG table 2-6.
>>92800194Alternately, "you get 25% of a level's worth of xp every 4h session, rounded to the nearest whole number at the end of each session. Time spent shopping or fucking with your character sheet because you didnt level up when you were supposed to doesn't count."
>>92800278That's stupid.
>>92800562>Don't ever feel obligated to give out XP for an encounter that you don't feel was much of a challenge.
>>92800572The point of an encounter is to drain resources. If it drained resources, it accomplished its job.
>>92800602No, the point of an encounter is to challenge the players. If your encounters are not challenging your players, then you don't get experience, because nothing was learned.
>>92800614>No, the point of an encounter is to challenge the players.It isn't, because an equal CR encounter doesn't actually challenge them. It just drains resources. That's their stated intent.
>>92800332Agreed, that was a huge chunk of why I recommended using the Eclipse for feats and quest based PRC prereqs. The prereqs in 3e are way too onerous and fiddly. Most should be removed and the few that are left should be stripped down to their bare essentials.
>>92800632Agreed. An equal CR encounter is (almost) equivalent to 1 PC. A 4v1 match between martial artists of equal skill is a foregone conclusion. That's the degree of "challenge" expected. If you want it to have a chance of winning, try 4 enemies of equal CR. That's a little better than 50/50 odds for the players, and they have to fight smart.
>>92800278>>92800562 is right. The caster used one of his abilities to beat the challenge. He had to spend a spell slot or money on the magic item and get ready ahead of time. He had to choose the right spell to use at the right time.>>92800194They could at least have left a table with some challenge ratings and all, set some precedents. Looking for other types of hazards like quicksand or other types of encounters can be a bit of a chore to figure it out.
>>92800632>an equal CR encounterThen you adjust the encounter to make it challenge. What are you not getting?
>>92800810What are you not getting about the part where the exact intent of an equal CR encounter, which is very much intended to reward XP to the tune of XP to level being 13.33 of them consistently, is to drain about 20% of the party's resources?
>>92799945>books full of character stuff sold more copies than campaign books and adventuresI can believe that. Published adventures were the books I always skipped years ago and now I find myself wanting physical copies (especially 3.0 ones) just to have them. >>92800055I remember getting that just for huitzils and new invocations. The habit of pasting chromatic & metallic dragon bits everywhere really soured me on intelligent dragons. That was a trend long before this book, though.>>92800386The fourth one felt like only half a book. Almost a third of the space was spent on encounters instead of new monsters. That was the only 3.5 book that pissed me off just flipping through it.
>>92800882Who said anything about an exact CR rating, you dense mother fucker?
>>92801559I did because it was relevant. You're laboring under an impression of what 3E considers challenging that's wrong.
>>92801577> You're laboring under an impression of what 3E considers challenging that's wrong.Except I'm not. "Exact Challenge Ratings" is not a rule listed anywhere in any rulebook ever made in the entire history of D&D, you rancid-turd fuck-wit. Check back with me after you touch grass and pull the brain-drain dipshit rot you have festering in that thick-shit cow skull of yours.
>>92801652Wrong
>>92801721Cope.
>>92801749Still wrong. That advice is also shit.
>>92801770Still wrong, but that does nothing to support your argument. Your argument was the CR rating of encounters, not the definition of a challenge. Secondly, your post doesn't justify anything. It just says that an encounter equal to the PC's level is one that should expend about 20% of their resources. It doesn't say whether or not a party "should" or "should not" encounter higher or lower CR values.Keep coping.
Where's the bit about orcs dropping rocks from hang gliders? I distinctly recall it being an overt example of increasing the CR of an encounter based on the situation's advantages to nominally lower CR constituent elements.
>>92801770You realize you just supported his argument, right? Based on the assumption challenge rating is based on how much resources it drains, then he's completely correct in saying that a higher CR level should be encountered if a CR level equal to the party is not draining equivalent resources....
>>92801407>The fourth one felt like only half a book. Almost a third of the space was spent on encounters instead of new monsters. That was the only 3.5 book that pissed me off just flipping through it.Was that the one where a ton of monsters were just regular-ass humanoids with some added template or class levels? Instead of MAYBE adapting more stuff from mythology or past editions
>>92802084No I didn't, the game explicitly laid out what an equal CR encounter is expected to do and it's not what he says it is.
>>92802147He wasn't arguing what an equal CR encounter is expected to do, he was arguing about using higher CR encounters in order to challenge the players, and if a challenge basically boils down to how much resources a fight is supposed to drain, as per your little screen-cap, then it entirely supports his argument. I'm confused how this is somehow eluding your.
>>92802186>>92800602
>>92802113That's the one. This is what you get with MM4: 4 pages of drow with class levels or templates3 pages of githyanki with class levels5 pages worth of gnolls with class levels7 pages of a fucking lizardfolk tribe5 pages of ogres with class levels and encounters6 pages of orcs with classes and/or templates4 pages of yuan-ti with class levels before another two page new yuan-ti variantThe worst offender, though, was the Spawn of Tiamat monsters soaking up over 30 goddamn pages. What are they? Chromatic dragon abilities stretched over conventional monsters. There's also a random two page dungeon entry with map, because why not.They pulled the same stunt with MM5, but it was nowhere near as egregious as this one. I would love to know how much negative feedback they caught for MM4.
In my latest horrible abuse to guidelines, a mechanical trap launching 17 Small Shuriken at each of "several" targets can be free and CR 1 given DC 15 Search and Disable Device checks and no cost-increasing options. The purpose of this is to load it with +1 Explosive Shuriken so a device of negligible cost horribly annihilates the entire hallway.
>>92795125>PrC geared towards spellcasters>nukes your spell progressionarcane archer tier, literally.
>>92802186Who is arguing that if the same-CR challenge doesn't drain ~20% of party resources it should give XP appropriate to the resources actually drained? That sounds too fiddly to me, but it would seem to support the spirit of >>92801770 if not the RAW of the CR rules.I would rather just give flat +1/4 APL-Next Level XP each session and throw stuff at them until it feels like they're roughly earning their XP. That's 3.25 Equal-CR Encounters worth per session, for anyone wanting the conversion to number-of-encounters. I don't want to nitpick XP over which encounters they face and how. Doesn't sound fun to me, but you guys do you.
>>92802660Ehh. If you pick it up after you have 9th level spells it's probably okay. I don't normally think of Arcane Archer as "this is primarily a prestige class for epic level characters".
>>92802731The problem with that approach is that it severely punishes efficient and intelligent play and rewards shit play. If a PC shuts down a serious encounter with no resources spent by doing something like, say:Walking into the enemy's face and past to provoke an AoO and dodging it with mobility/wall of blades/etcGrabbing them after the AoO's spent so they can't AoO a grapple attemptPinning them and letting the rest of the party murder them cost-freeAnd then the DM is afterward like "less XP gained lmao" because no spell slots or HP was spent...While the dumbass party who dumps Sound Burst and 2 Scorching Rays and Grease gets full XP because they expended their resources needlessly like idiots? Yeah, that's a bad rule.
>>92802874>And then the DM is afterward like "less XP gained lmao" because no spell slots or HP was spent.Not that anon, but I played in a campaign ages ago with an AD&D-to-3.0 DM who did something similar. The amount of experience gained was affected by the amount of "effort" each character expended. Only full BAB classes & monks got full xp, rogues got 3/4 xp unless they took damage from traps or spent ammo on ranged attacks, bards got 3/4 xp unless they used bardic music or cast a spell, and full casters got 1/2 xp unless they used a *third or more* of their spells. Additionally, bonus xp was awarded based on the amount of health lost.He dropped this after we started attacking each other just to stack some damage near the end of combat. Probably the third DM/GM I played with that was just obsessed with Morrowind and this was his particular attempt to recreate that.
>>92803235It's like people don't understand second-order effects of their rulings at all.
>>92802874Reasonable take. Personally I still like my "3.25 Encounters Per Session". If they're more intelligent, they will achieve their goals easier / get better paydays more often / use fewer consumables.
>>92800602The point of an encounter is to be fun, and give XP. Challenge is fun, hence the CR system. It's that simple.
>>92793984Eberron I feel is the most 3.5 DnD setting of all the settings. It does a good job of baking the editions ubiquitous magic into it with house Cannith being the magic mart. Also it has a decent approach to the kitchen sink of stuff in all the supplement books with exotic stuff coming from the far off continents.
>>92802634Yeah... I remember pirating this one and sorta wanting my money back.
>>92802634Probably nowhere near as much as they caught for MM2 and its completely fucking insane math and CR ratings.
>>92805461>>92802634This is why I mostly prefer the pf1 bestiaries.
I kind of want to use the Hooded Pupil template because it looks really cool, but I don't think it's worth the massive +4 level adjustment. It doesn't give any con either so you're down so much hp. What race/class do you guys think would get the most out of it?
>>92802637I feel like the shuriken themselves are part of the cost, no?
>>92809047360 GP per 1d6 Fire (DC 14 Ref negates) in a 10 ft. radius does add up quite quickly, but unleashing so much ammo for area qualities to add up is usually very difficult, not a matter a 200 GP box of murder.
>>92805461MM2 were cool though. With an adjusted math they were inspiring. MM4 ones are lame, albeit I have a soft spot for small and large lizard people to complement the standard ones.
>>92802068Page 167, DMG
>>92793928>some anon suggested using the Pathfinder skill systemI suggest using it with this change: cross class still cost 1 but you can max them at 1/2 level. This helps protect skill monkeys in their niche.>feat progressionYeah, do it. Consider giving bonus feats to martials in general, in proportion (say no dead level for the fighter but only 2-4 for the barbarian across 20 levels).The true glaring issue of PF maneuver beside the feats that should be collapsed back (consider also collapsing in 1 Vital strike) is that in PF you cannot trip flyers while in 3.5 you can if they use mechanical means like wings.Do as 3.5 does.
>>92793157I almost always have a shortbow at hand if I'm playing a class with at least 3/4 BAB, at least for early game where a good crit or 2 can be your end.Outside that, I try for variety, but my favorite weapon is a falchion.I'd love a weapon finessable greatsword for funsies.
>>92809781Elven Courtblade?
>>92809797Closest thing, really, but just not the same.>half elf landschnekt ahoy
>>92800194Uhhh what about falchion? Pretty sure with improved crit it outclasses greatsword / greataxe.
would someone be interested in a "3.5 on a diet" hack.
>>92801770You're wrong, gay, and also stupid, and the advice you posted is faggot-retard-dogshit.
>>92802731Mmmmm, no. His argument was that an encounter should be equal CR, "because" it was designed to drain exactly 20% of the party's resources. If it doesn't drain 20% of the party's resources, then he is actually supporting the argument that would be in opposition to his regular statement, IE, higher CR encounters should be used, in order to "challenge" the players.
>>92800647what's the Eclipse?
>>92814130"Eclipse: the Codex Personae" is a 3rd-party book breaking 3.X character generation down into point-buy.
>>92809295>MM2 were cool though. With an adjusted math they were inspiring.Yeah, I have a soft spot for MM2 because my first exposure to TTRPGs was looking through it in a book store and thinking the monsters in it were so cool.
>>92813797Probably someone. Personally, no. JA's L&L kickstarter flop makes me think "not a lot of people".
>>92813797I'm fine with 3.5e as is I think, but what do you have in mind?>>92814150Eclipse on the other hand is a cool ass idea.
Going through all the old adventure modules released for 3/3.5 has been such a pleasure to be honest. This is what soul looks like, if you were wondering
>>92817571lmao where is this from
>>92817664
>>92815279I also use the a banshee that is closer to the one there, but with the anti-low-level-silence featured in the PF1e one
>>92817692Thank you anon, this is adorable.
>>92817759You're welcome, all of these published adventures are documented pretty thoroughly but actually finding some of them is a pain in the ass
>>92817777Yeah, a bunch of great stuff has been "lost to time", it seems. A whole bunch of the web articles published before 2003, for instance, aren't on way back, and I don't know where else to look for them.>>92816617It's a good book. Very versatile. He has a blog where he shows example builds going back to 2007 or so.
>>92817950I've been compiling a lot of the ones that at least appear on the wikipedia list of published adventures. Were there any in particular you were looking for and haven't been able to find?
>>92817950Dunno if these are what you want, but here's what I have : https://files.catbox.moe/29dcle.001https://files.catbox.moe/2ualtc.002https://files.catbox.moe/fa01bx.003
>>92818114Got it. Thanks anon. I will see if the ones I was looking for are in there.
>>92817571*holds up spork*
>>92820137KekSeriously though, its nice to see some light hearted fantasy content that isn't just 10 shades of freakshit races holding hands singing kumbaya. Genuine storybook stuff is sweet and fun.
What is the highest stat any creature has in all of 3/3.5? How high do these numbers go? Assuming no infinite stat cancer or stacking buffs. Just a straight raw base stat that is high as fuck.
>>92793928>Pathfinder feat progression tableEither you talk to a retard who thinks having more feats for less ability is good...Or you have retarded power gamer who is trying to trick you into giving them more 3.5 feats.
>>92821280There's a lot of very reasonable build paths that are obnoxiously feat-starved, and many a PRC fucked by asking for too many. Kinda why Flaws and Fighter dips come up so much.While there have been efforts at consolidating some of the problem areas, it's generally less volatile to just chuck extra feats at the players instead of navigate the prerequisites on all the dozens of offshoot feats.
>>92793157That is a great book
A question for the DMs. How much do you guys acknowledge classes in character?For example, our DM will sometimes have an NPC refer to my character as cleric, paladin, knight, or crusader, because that's the general way the character presents himself in the game and the fact that he is in fact a sanctioned Cleric within the religions hierarchy. The barbarian meanwhile he'll have NPCs call berserker, since I guess that's a more general term for a guy that gets really fucking mad to fight, and he never had anybody call the rogue rogue, only charlatan, silver tongue, etc.I imagine that's a pretty normal approach.>>92821417What's good about it?
>>92794484>Quest-Based PRC Prerequisites instead of build basedI like this idea, are there established guidelines for it or do you just wing it?
>>92821852Yeah I think class names are a metaphysical knowledge largely inaccessible to peoples within the game universe. It may happen by coincidence once in a while, and more often for some classes than for others in fact. A wizard is probably more likely to be referred to as a wizard than a fighter is a fighter. Same is true for Druids presumably.
>>92821852I've done it differently in a number of settings and campaigns. My most recent, somewhat in-depth campaign setting had an organization of some sort that was the origin and main group of any one given class. I had to go look up every 3.5 class I could find, then went through the PF1e set.There was a Lot of overlap in some parts (PF1e Slayer and Factotem were from opposing boarding schools that both scouted potential Assassin students, Actual Assassin PRC for one, and Chameleon for the other.)So while they might not always get called their class title exclusively, there was a measure of understood skills and abilities due to each organization's trade secrets, education, and so forth. In the Kingdom of Guilds where a lot of them were centered, apprenticeship was expected as a kind of public educational path.
HEllo! I've been trying to get _all_ ther articles fron the WotC archives, similar ot the one attaches. I can go one by one trhough the Internet Archives, but is there a compendium?I'm talking about those "Rules of the game" articles, the "Vicious Venues", the "Steal This Hook!", all of them rather interesting, in PDF format (it's possible to get them in htm, but they're bloated with pictures).Do you know where they can be? I can provide a list of every article available, but not the actual files.
>>92822575I posted >>92818114 earlier. Maybe there's something of interest in there.
>>92818114>https://files.catbox.moe/fa01bx.003Yess! this is (What's more, the PDFs are aggregated! Awesome)Now I have to figure out how to get the contents of the 2nd and 3rd part, since my Unzip only got the fiert file and nothing else X-)
>>92822706It's a split zip made with 7zip if that helps.lzma2 compression I think.
>>92821903From UAhttps://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/campaigns/testBasedPrerequisites.htm
>>92821903I would set the challenges to be ones attainable at the right character level to qualify via prereqs, but like, they could take on the job a bit earlier, so they can get it done by the time they would qualify, and then they have a trainer.
>>92822706You have to Rename them to have the same filename with different extensions then 7z can handle it.
>>92822706>>92822954Shit, right, catbox fucked the names.For reference, the original names were >Wotc website archive_SPLIT.zip.001>Wotc website archive_SPLIT.zip.002>Wotc website archive_SPLIT.zip.003
>>92822970I send you gratitude from a small town in Argentina, kind stranger ^_^
>>92823149And here was I thinking I was the only south American in these threads.Anyhow, I'm the anon that was talking about scraping online forums for transcripts of PBP sessions.Well, I managed to put that off until now.I'm pretty sure the script is almost done too. It's running now, and if the result if good, I might as well post it here for you guys.
Bump
So in 3/3.5 there is a Psionics Handbook, Expanded Psionics Handbook, and the Complete Psionic. What is the difference between these 3 books? Which one should I start with?
>>92831380XPH has revisions of the psionic handbook classes. The designer of the 3.5psionics books also published two more psionics books through Malhavoc press.Dream scarred Press made their own revision and expansion of xph for PF1, and a psionic bestiary
>>92831380>Psionics HandbookWonky 3.0 bullshit based on the psionic rules from older editions. I don't think I've ever seen anyone actually use this.>>92831380>Expanded Psionics HandbookThis is the 3.5 version which completely replaced the 3.0 rules with a more reasonable system, which what's listed on the SRD and used by every subsequent splatbook. If someone refers to "psionics" in 3.x without qualifiers then these are the rules they're talking about.>Complete PsionicAdds more classes/powers/etc. based on the XPH ruleset. They made a few odd balance and flavor decisions but it's easy to pick and choose which parts of it you like.
>>92831556So the XPH just outdates and replaces the PH, that makes sense. Where does the Complete Psionic fit into this?
>>92831671>>92831669Ahh okay, thank you
>>92831669I grew up playing 3.5 and after having played multiple other systems it is still my favorite. Are there any 3.0 books that are largely considered compatible and viable books when playing 3.5, or are they really entirely separate editions that should never be mixed and matched?
>>92831717They're very similar. Basically the only book that you shouldn't use is the Psionics Handbook. Anything else needs minor tweaks at most.
>>92831717They're mostly easy to mix and match. I started with 3.0 and never stopped using my 3.0 books I liked. Some stuff showed up again in 3.5 books, some didn't, and some was worse in the 3.5 version.Notably the FRCS, Manual of the Planes, sometimes Book of Vile Darkness, and Magic of Faerûn, I often use the content in them instead of the 3.5 alternatives scattered across who the fuck knows where. Stronghold Builders Guidebook is still fine too (and still overpriced), but I generally prefer Mongoose Book of Strongholds and Dynasties.
>>92831671Complete Psionic is a splatbook of further Psionic character options like the rest of the "complete" series, with three new base classes that include two "Divine" Manifesters learning Domain-like lists and a mountain of feats that's mostly race-specific, the largest by far being for Githyanki.It also "updates" a few things like Astral Construct that are mostly horrible nerfs, in that case being making it so you can only have one at a time which completely bricks several otherwise compatible 3.0 Mind's Eye options.
>>92831928Also, if you're going to be making use of them, grab the old D&D web enhancement archive, as theres an abundance of material that had to be removed from the printed version due to page count.Some really useful content & fluff to add back in.
>>92831958The best to me is Ectopic Ally, as it makes for much more functional 3rd-level Divine Minds from having a creature under their control to keep in the then-miniscule area. Should have been Steed-like instead of spam for a FULLY functional Creation mantle (the Aura needs a Construct lasting hours early on, so unless you're a Warforged...), but oh well.You can also trade Divine Grace for Paladin-grade Turn Undead, which with Devotion feats is seriously worth considering even if you don't houserule Domain/Mantle transparency (I doubt there's RAW to construe into this) to trade the granted power for extras.
I'm reading a lengthy article about Necromancy in 3.5, and the person who wrote it keeps referring to classes having these hard limits on how many levels you should bother putting into them. Fighter and Wizard being classes that are "6 levels long". This person seems like he has the level of system autism where he knows what he's talking about. What gives here? Why are these classes a trap past 6 levels invested?
>>92832272Mostly because Prestige Classes I imagine.
>>92832272To be more specific, it's that PRCs are better than the bonus feats that are the only thing the base class gives you, as there's very few things needing more than three Fighter bonus feats and getting more value than a single feat in 5 Wizard casting PRC levels is trivial.
>>92832272>clerics & necromancersEvery time I think about this topic, it's like the floodgates open. I have no idea what that guy's on about regarding levels past 6 being traps, but clerics have always been bullshit and I'm glad it gets discussed. Beg at an altar for spells that just happen to be usable in heavy armor and available at lower levels than arcane casters? The divine-undead connection is probably one of the stupidest things about D&D without broaching the idiotic idea of priests casting spells. I can see why people get worked up over this issue and the more you think about it the angrier you get. The arcane-divine split was always a mistake and psionics just muddied the waters.
>>92832873The Arcane/Divine split goes back to very first release of D&D, where the healing magic was on a lower casting progression with worse than Fighting Man but hardly impotent attack ability, restricted to significantly worse weapons.The game design purpose of this is to separate essential recovery magic from more situational utility magic while also ensuring a "second line" to protect the Magic User should a lone Fighting Man prove insufficient.The underleveled spells are probably left over from accelerating the casting progression, or are a horrible mistake in WotC's wave of bribing people to play the healer as was a historic problem for the niche.The functional differences of Psionics readily justify their existence by supporting a very different campaign structure where the question of "magic" support is a more general "how often" than an exact "which thing". Which handling entirely by variant rule would be rather tedious and do horrible things to inter-table character operability that spent several decades as the core of the community.
>>92832994>The Arcane/Divine split goes back to very first release of D&DI know it's a legacy problem. Even distant relatives such as ACKS suffer from it. Every time I come up with a temporary system for different campaigns it's like swimming upstream at the base of a small waterfall. Up until within the last decade, every version of D&D couldn't conceive of a party without magic priests and heroic stereotypes that also required healing and restoration.>The functional differences of Psionics readily justify their existence by supporting a very different campaign structure where the question of "magic" support is a more general "how often" than an exact "which thing". Which handling entirely by variant rule would be rather tedious and do horrible things to inter-table character operability that spent several decades as the core of the community.I'm talking about the flavor differences of psionics, not the mechanical differences (see what I meant by "muddying the waters?"). Every time I've used psionics, I adjust them to powers-per-day and then work them into the spell recharge variant that every other caster uses.
>>92833198>I know it's a legacy problem. Even distant relatives such as ACKS suffer from it. Every time I come up with a temporary system for different campaigns it's like swimming upstream at the base of a small waterfall.>the spell recharge variant that every other caster uses....Then why the fuck are you posting in a D&D thread if you keep attempting to rip out the class distinction forming a huge chuck of the resource paradigm and play with what is by default one of the most tedious yet horribly exploitable UA variants? This is not "d20 heartbreaker general", this is SPECIFICALLY "D&D 3.5/3e general". At that point you have less in common with the standard game rules and campaign dynamics than even core 5e.>Up until within the last decade, every version of D&D couldn't conceive of a party without magic priests and heroic stereotypes that also required healing and restoration.It's almost like the franchise has an identity. Stick to the homebrew generals to talk about your heartbreaker instead of dragging it into a D&D thread. It doesn't have to be for everyone, fuck off somewhere else instead of dishonestly trying to portray your shitbrew as "D&D 3.5".>I'm talking about the flavor differences of psionicsHow exactly does "mostly internal power of one's own mind" muddy the waters?
>>92833297>attempting to rip out the class distinction forming a huge chuck of the resource paradigmSpells per day is silly, so I changed it using alternatives provided within the official books as a basis.>and play with what is by default one of the most tedious yet horribly exploitable UA variants?That's why you don't use the default recommendations, but rather something the table is comfortable with. Recharge in an hour or one hour per level? Recharge in a few rounds based on level? It depends on whether players are screeching about it or not (haven't had my groups complain about that in over a decade).>It's almost like the franchise has an identity.I'm talking about options, not defaults. I expect most games with D&D dna to ship with ridiculous things like cultists praying to get spells, but it does not hurt to offer alternatives somewhere in the back of the books, out of sight if need be.>How exactly does "mostly internal power of one's own mind" muddy the waters?Initially, I took this >>92832994 to refer to the point system alternative being "tedious" and capable of "doing horrible things", but to answer your question: "internal power of one's own mind" is simply magic. Trying to describe psychic magic as not-magic muddies the waters.
The difference between psionics being magic vs not is pretty straightforward. Its a different kind of magic unaffected by dead magic zones and wild magic zones.Its not about whether its realistic mundane reality its about which countermeasures shut it down.
>>92833485>Spells per day is silly, so I changed it using alternatives provided within the official books as a basis.Play characters using Invocations, Soulmelds, Maneuvers, Vestiges, or even Utterances if you want otherwise instead of contorting the magic made for the standard campaign pacing. It's how such things are done in this system.>That's why you don't use the default recommendations, but rather something the table is comfortable with.Further distancing yourself from the actual game.>I'm talking about options, not defaults.What you are asking for is what killed TSR, the publication of lists of options instead of single handlings of specific situations divided the community as both players and customers with fuck-all way to tell how prevalent a given setup was. If you want options, play other games, do not insist one game mutilate itself into a do-anything formless soup.Unironically, have you tried just not playing D&D altogether? Not homebrewing yourself to a barely recognizable >I expect most games with D&D dna to ship with ridiculous things like cultists praying to get spellsIt's never just praying. Ceremonies create a rich field of Divination queries to locate probable agents, and giving them magic to do the job makes them much more useful at accomplishing task at little risk to the source. Setting up a long-term line of communication so they can request specific spells to answer specific challenges is just optimizing for long-term use of said agent.There's an explanation for Clerics that involves zero inherent power to prayer, just the beings prayed to wanting to get shit done remotely.>Trying to describe psychic magic as not-magic muddies the waters.Magic A is not Magic B, and at a certain point keeping "magic" as the only word for supernatural powers straightjackets design because a single off-the-cuff generalization can turn into a horrible clusterfuck of rules arguments.
>>92833754NTA, but not everyone cares about purism. UA is full of although stuff, some people mix 3.5 and PF1, some mix 3.0 and 3.5, some use third party books, some people use "spheres" magic, some use Eclipse. I think there are a lot of us not trying to run "RAW; Hasbro Only; Errata'ed; Standardised a organised Play Rules 3.5" 24 years after initial system release. There's a huge volume of cross compatible material for this discontinued system.
>>92833902The issue is that the mentioned changes are specifically WANTING to rip out parts of what make that cross compatibility work, in EXACTLY the fashion that killed AD&D proper. It didn't work for the community then, it still doesn't work for that community now going by my occasional skimming of /osr/, and the version of it that happened in this community back in the day was the sprawling mass of separate d20 games rather than individual games packaging massive transformations of basic systems in their core rules.No Psionic character in those campaigns will ever work vaguely similarly in another campaign. People introduced to 3.X by this person will need to learn what is functionally an entirely new system with many critical campaign drivers working more like 5e than the "3.X" they played, because that anon pointedly LOATHS the usage scheme and historic tie of healing magic to a second-line combatant.
>>92834030If I make a homebrewed 3.x frankenstein system, and it doesn't look like 3.5 anymore, I may still be able to leverage monsters, magic items, spells, feats, races, - something, even if other elements are not cross compatible.I would agree at that point it's not 3.5 anymore, you've changed too much. Unlike the typical "mix of 3.0 and 3.5". But if you don't mislead your players into thinking thats raw 3.5, I'm missing how that's a problem.But "yeah its 3.5 with UA spell point casting and I homebrewed custom psionics to be the same resource mechanic as regular magic" - the players will know which parts are not from 3.5 and wouldn't carry over to other 3.5 games. It may otherwise be pretty close to RAW.
I really want to play a fighter man of some kind. Are there any actual martial classes that stand out besides the ones in the Tome of Battle? Weaboo fightin magic is cool and all but I am hesitant to go that direction for various reasons.
>>92836120Man they sure bloated the basic classes
>>92836331And they are still all worse than clerics druids and wizards somehow
>>92836120How do you feel about 3pp classes? Monte Cook's AE/AU has a take on revised martials.And a bit more afield, there are some more unusual martial 'classes' on the ruscumag blog built in Eclipse, like the 'wuxia adept'.>>92836331Yeah, most of them are pretty redundant too. I have only seen a handful of those actually get played.
>>92836120>Are there any actual martial classes that stand out besides the ones in the Tome of Battlewell the samurai class stands out because of how shit it is
>>92836508Aren't there like, 4 classes named samurai?
>>92836120I like ToB. I wouldn't play a 1 to 20 initiator, but I love it as a system to make a character a little more interesting.Also, martials multiclass well.A character with only fighter levels can feel alright with a good feat selection, you can nab a couple of gimmicks here and that, but I'd much rather start with a level of rogue, then nab a couple of levels of fighter, than a level of warblade, for example. It would be a much funner character to play as in my opinion.
>>92833754>instead of contorting the magic made for the standard campaign pacingI don't run standard campaigns (that much should be obvious) so that pacing issue only matters if I borrow published adventures.>Unironically, have you tried just not playing D&D altogether?Yes and regularly do, but this system has more that I like than I dislike. Contrary to what you might imagine, I've not ripped clerics and deities out of the game (mostly due to the work involved), but I will complain about their existence every opportunity I get.>It's never just praying.It always involves deities and a character's submission to them. It really is repulsive that many of the best spells are locked away behind a class that forces a character to submit and bow and scrape just to access basic abilities. Eberron really had the best solution for deities. Religions make for nice background elements and add detail to the world, but the insistence on using incorporating deities into the mechanics is irritating.
If I was attempting to build my own magic system for an rpg I was trying to write, would either of these books be a good source to draw inspiration from? What are the strengths and weaknesses of each?
>>92836967Expanded Psionics handbook has a magic system where the power of your spell is related to how much mana you pour into it.I'm not familiar with the magic in incarnum. I've never read it.
>>92836120>Are there any actual martial classes that stand out besides the ones in the Tome of Battle?My favourite non-ToB martials would be either barbarian or wildshape ranger (into master of many forms).Barbarian is good because they're powerful in combat (whirling frenzy + lion totem pounce + shock trooper etc, or you can make a decent battlefield control build instead) but they also have more skill points than fighters and can get some out-of-combat utility through trapkiller (use survival to disable traps) or the various feats/class features which build on intimidate (imperious command, intimidating rage+immediate rage).Wildshape ranger is similar - great in combat if you shift into a giant or a hydra but plenty of utility too (turn into a street dog to sneak after someone, a cryohydra if you're expecting to take cold damage, a dragon hawk if you need to fly your party somewhere, a rustic monster if you need to break into a vault, etc).Even then I often dip ToB or spend a feat on Martial Study (Iron Heart Surge has a lot of style, letting you shrug off poison or fatigue through pure willpower, the Shadow Hand teleport manuevers give unparalleled mobility, etc)
>>92836929>It always involves deities and a character's submission to them. It really is repulsive that many of the best spells are locked away behind a class that forces a character to submit and bow and scrape just to access basic abilities....Player's Handbook page 30:>Some clerics devote themselves not to a god but to a cause or a source of divine power. These characters wield magic the way clerics devoted to individual gods do, but they are not associated with any religious institution or any particular practice of worship.Even setting aside all the other classes accessing the Cleric list, there is no need for strings attached to a specific entity, only standing by and pursuing SOME set of principles.
>>92817692>>92817664>>92817571True story: I ran this module for my brother and told my dad about it and he got kinda sad because he said he had been planning to run it for us. It was perfect for his world, too, which was full of gnomes and goblins and fairies and was just very low-key fantasy that reminded you of Wizards (the movie) and the animated Hobbit...one of our adventures was helping a firbolg recover his lost sheep that kobolds stole. I felt really bad about "stealing" that adventure from him ever since. I still play D&D with him but he hasn't DMed his campaign in years.
>>92841628Yo.Tell your dad everything about him sounds awesome. A true old-school fantasy D&D bro.
>>92836929You're retarded, and talk like an underage retard at that.
>>92841126We've all seen that bit of fedora pandering but I've never actually seen it allowed in a game.
>>92844682He just speaks like someone with a university education. But his butthurt at clerics and deities, I will grant you, is a bit retarded, given >>92841126.
>>92841126This never happens. Most DMs don't demand this out of druids or rangers, but I've never had nor heard of one willing to do the same for clerics. The closest I've seen was a DM that allowed a player to run an archivist with a grimoire instead of a prayerbook (Cthulhu mythos connection implied as well).
>>92847781>This never happensSure it does. I've played with a couple of deity-less Clerics.
>>92846807>>92847781Given how >>92836929 is the one running the campaign, this is invalid as a counterpoint.And even then Ur-Priest, Archivist, and to a slightly lesser extent Favored Soul and Heretic of the Faith exist. The Cleric list isn't locked to mandatory pseudo-Christcuckery.
>>92847781Guess it's a your-DMs' problem. It's been an option since OD&D.
>>92847781I've played a concept cleric before. But if you're in a position to homebrew the crap out of things, you're in a position to make concept clerics the norm, and just have the magic be concept / domain based, and he gods aren't actually doing anything for you even if you do worship them.You can't play 'le helpless player' card and the 'homebrew GM' card simultaneously.Also "The GM uses house rules I don't like" / "The GM uses a setting I don't like" are completely different positions than "3.5 forces someone to play a servile bitch-cleric". Holy moving the goalposts batman.I'm all for homebrew, but I take it back, >>92847464 maybe you really are retarded. Or maybe you're a cunty manipulative sophist. Retarded would be a more respectable explanation than "deliberately manipulative piece of shit".
>>92850366Oh. Okay. This explanation is better. >>92848677. Maybe >>92847781 is someone else, and they just didn't bother to read the thread.
I wonder in general how to portray divine servants like low level archons in the game. Whenever I try to world build and think of how celestial realms and infernal realms interact with the mortal plane, both my angels and demons end up coming out a bit like spooks from a Cold War spy novel with a supernatural twist to them.I try to dress them up with different morals, archaic languages etc... but I can't seem to break out of that paradigm - bunch of supernatural 'security' agencies fighting for control and influence among mortals.
>>92850449Why do you feel that's a problem?
>>92850449Have you tried looking into how historic spymasters operated very differently from modern intelligence agencies? Or Gnostic and Hermetic autism to make prerequisites out as required personal revelations?Could also try focusing on Channeling and Possession with widely understood direct action, where the only reason it's not legions of Celestials and Fiends fighting field battles is transit problems, then deliberately frame as trial-by-champion instead of special forces.>>92850570I assume that it's not wanting literally all religious activity to ultimately reduce to glowops.
>>92850449As bound creatures forced to serve mortal factions is another option.You could also have them not acting as agents at all, and operating in their own interests running their own factions, as outsider immigrants who wanted more independence.They could be bound to a place but not to service, like Myth Drannor.Or they could be open representatives of powers operating as diplomats rather than spies.There are other ways you can use them besides as cold war spies.
>>92850449>both my angels and demons end up coming out a bit like spooks from a Cold War spy novel with a supernatural twist to themIt makes some sense. Ghaele Eladrin, for instance, inspire good mortals but can't reveal their true nature or else they can't come back for 1,000 years (I don't recall if that applies to other celestials).
>>92842892I will. Watching him get "redpilled" on 3.5 was a bit sad but he took it in stride and with a proper amount of healthy denial, and now he is trying to play an Arcane Thesis wizard to oneshot everything he can.
>>92852884NTA - so you are just sniping here
>>92853356What?
>>928528843.5 has its issues I got ired of as well. Got me to try 5e. 5e had many more, worse issues, but 3.5's issues didn't just vanish. There's still a lot of good stuff to use even if you house rule the crap out of it to fix the bad parts. Unlike 5e where once you fix the bad parts you have empty books with some maps.
>>92853398>once you fix the bad parts you have empty books with some maps.Maps which I'm not sure even fit D&D lore, if I recall 5e Ravenloft.
>>92854002Oh. I meant maps to use generically with no expectation that those maps were "right" for a given setting.
>>92850570this anon has it right. >>92851143I went into it trying to use the rules for bargaining with outsiders from the Planar Ally line of spells and trying to be careful about tracking those payments but trying to wrap them up a bit as something a bit more than just straight transactions - have them come up magical items with minor ritual blessings, collect information regarding mortal contacts with infernal forces, go out of their way to vanquish an evil cleric and his tiny cultA few months later into the campaign, players are basically trying to deal with all outsiders like they just another kindom's spy /special forces network. Feels like I failed to capture the magic of it all. Its really hard to balance those costs with the things players want and need when they do turn to that kind of aid. So far the aid came in the form of scouting, mapping dangerous terrain and info dumps.>They could be bound to a place but not to service, like Myth Drannor.I've not read much of the DnD related novels, whats the deal there?
what material plane servants would a djinni have, and what would his goals in realspace be?
>>92856697as a bit of a follow up - how well equipped should outsider NPCs be in general?Its frankly a real bother to come up with an equipment list for every such NPC, but on the other hand I have a hard time coming up a plausible in-universe paradigm that would justify why your standard HD 6+ immortal outsiders would not have PC levels of gear on them. They surely have plenty of time and opportunities to collect it
>>92856710Simple avarice.In lore Djinni seem to have a love for lavish surroundings, exquisitely crafted everything and those riches, resources and labor do have to be sourced from somewhere.So extending trade networks would probably be common wherever they visit.Other common tropes:>Generational punishment on a mortal bloodline for sins of the past or conversely, secretly lavishing benefits for services of the past>Imprisoning other Djinni or EffreetI use this in my game setting - the premise is that past wars between elemental planes have come close to destabilizing the universe. Peace is now maintained by very strict accords bound by magical oaths - straight up murdering each other is forbidden, arranging deaths is heavily frowned upon.Instead the norm for in-fighting, feuds and the like has become convoluted plans to trap opponents with curses and oath bindings with heavy manipulation of mortals to do unto others what the Djinn are themselves forbidden to.
>>92856710Skilled laborers, scholars with an intensely wide network of contacts, and people with novel sources of power. When thinking about what a djinn wants or can't do itself, look at the wish spell and look at what it can't make (or isn't worth 5k XP).Normally this means nonmagical items above 25000 GP, but there's also more esoteric things like access to interplanar areas that are barred from teleportation or access to high-level divine magic.
>>92856989>>92857087ok thanks guys, this helps.
>>92857087Using the Wish spell as a guidance shouldn't really apply here>Some djinn (1% of the total population) are "noble" and can grant three wishes to any being (nongenies only) who captures them.>(nongenies only)In 3rd edition, genies can't grant wishes to themselves or each other. Most DMs (myself too) extend that restriction to such easy bypasses as using mortal proxies to wish for stuff the genie wants because it would be pointless to have that restriction otherwise. And it is rather important to place this kind of restriction on any creature that can throw Wish around because otherwise almost all scarcity stops making sense in a universe where an entire race can do Wishes at a whim.It is better to go the opposite and have an in-universe justification for why Genies could not be diplomanced into doling out Wishes>who captures themis very important in that regard. it implies that the minimum standard cost of having access to three wishes is to make an enemy out of a noble genie. The existence of genie lamps also implies that many of those powerful enough to capture such a high ranking Djinn, choose not to make those Wishes so as not to free it.
>>92856697>what's the deal with Myth Drannor.A bunch of devils, demons, and yugoloths were summoned by arrogant wizards as servants.They escaped, were led by some powerful fiendish generals, and destroyed the elven empire.But the fiends ended up trapped in the area (I believe they're constrained by the empire's mythal).They remained in the ruins, and (IIRC) ultimately formed a new faction formed of the escaped demons, devil, AND yugoloths, in spite of their normal enmities.
>>92856710The djinn / efreet / etc had an empire in Calimshan with human slaves. The humans revolted and drove them from the lands.Their humanoid descendants would be the various elemental planetouched.Elemental servants would make sense. And anything else you can find that lives in the elemental planes.https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Genie
Damn it, remind me: is there something in 3.5e that's similar to 2nd editions single weapon style specialisation (see pic related)?
>>92860386I *think* I saw a feat along the lines in dragon magazine. Maybe the issue with all the swashbuckler stuff?
>>92860386PH2Einhander [Fighter Bonus Feat, Tactical]Prerequisite: Tumble 6 ranks, base attack bonus +6,Benefit: If you are fighting with a one-handed weapon or a light weapon and carrying nothing in your off hand, the Einhander feat grants you access to three special tactical maneuvers.Narrow Profile: You can tuck your arm behind your back and offer a narrow profile when you concentrate on defense rather than offense. You gain an additional +2 dodge bonus to AC when fighting defensively or using the total defense action.Off-Hand Balance: You use your off hand to balance yourself while performing acrobatic maneuvers. After you successfully strike an opponent, you gain a +2 bonus on Tumble checks to avoid his attacks of opportunity until the start of your next turn. When you flip and roll out of harm's way, you use one hand to keep your balance and your other hand to keep your weapon trained on your foe.Off-Hand Swap: With a flourish, you flip your weapon into the air, catch it in your off hand, and continue to press the attack. When you use this maneuver, you must first take a full attack action to strike an opponent at least twice. On your next turn, you can make a special feint as a free action, using Sleight of Hand rather than Bluff. Your opponent uses the standard rules for resisting a feint. Once you use this maneuver against a particular opponent, whether it succeeds or fails, you cannot use it against him again.SpecialA fighter can select Einhander as one of his fighter bonus feats.
>>92861047Dragon #301, page 36, Single Blade Style.
>>92861656That's the one!
>>92860386There you go. There are (at least) two.>>92861328>>92861656Probably a third one for PF1.Maybe one for d20 Conan or Arcana Evolved, too.
>>92861735Adapt graceful edge to piercing on-handedGraceful EdgeType: General, FighterSource: Dungeon #128Choose one type of one-handed slashing melee weapon, such as a scimitar or longsword for which you have already selected the Weapon Focus feat. You wield this weapon with an almost unnatural grace.Prerequisite: Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus (any one-handed slashing weapon), base attack bonus +1Benefit: If you do not wield a shield or weapon in your off-hand, you treat your chosen weapon as a light weapon.If you do not wield a shield or weapon in your off-hand, you also gain a +1 shield bonus to your AC while wielding your chosen weapon. When you are fighting defensively or using the total defense action, this shield bonus increases to +2.Special: A fighter may select Graceful Edge as one of his fighter bonus feats.You may take this feat more than once - each time you do, i
...Funny thought: Female Kobold Sorcerer with a somehow-Intelligent Eternal Wand of Greater Mage Hand. Needs to be female for the "standard" weight range to fall under the 40 pound weight limit, which allows the wand to drag her around at 20 ft. per round.
>>92854002>>92853398Honestly if you play 3.5 with boomers who treat it like AD&D then it's okay.
>>92863136my solution was simply to remove character building.Roll your stats, pick a class for them, than roll for your feats. Die, make a new char but get to keep feats from prev chars depending on how high in level you reached.I know this sound like heresy to 'original' players, but the point is to remove the build arguments, remove all potential build abuse and just focus on playing the game. Its fine if all PCs are relatively weak because dying and rolling new characters with bits of the older ones stuck on is basically the real character progression.
>>92863195That does the exact opposite of removing build arguments.
>>92861047>>92861328>>92861656Cheers, anons.
>>92863136I prefer to treat it a lot like it's AD&D (2e) myself. Character building is still overly complex (tedious and laborious, not hard to understand); and tracking WBL is a pain in the ass, requiring character sheet audits to know what PCs actually have at any particular moment. Not an insurmountable problem to solve via house rules, but still a nuisance by-the-book.IMO The amount of daily ability uses is also a bit excessive for anything but a megadungeon.
>>92862759Amazing, make it happen anon
>>92863195or just have players who care more about making interesting and fun characters rather than players who care about "builds"
>>92861656Now that I looked up the issue, this was exactly what I was looking for. Thanks again, anon.
>>92863284how so?
>>92865840The less you have under your control, the more important it is to make better decisions where you can, and because of the nature of the game it becomes about meta decisions. There are usually diminishing returns on build decisions but when you can't reliably get to that point with 7/11 PHB classes because they're dependent on not having a shit feat list...
>>92866109>>92866109>>92866109>>92866109New Thread
