3.5 overpowered [Archive] - Wizards Community

3.5 overpowered [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
priest of blipdoolpoolp
03-05-07, 06:15 PM Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions?
WayneTheGame
03-05-07, 06:16 PM Not this subject again :rolleyes:

No.
Giant_Moth
03-05-07, 06:19 PM In my opinion, D&D 3.5 is a ****ed up system. Too many holes, too much rules lawyering. In fact, it's almost as if D&D was created by lawyers, because there's so many ways to bend and twist everything to your favour, regardless of the systems original intent!

Now it is a good system, very generalised and broad. But hell, it's messy. They need to sit down, make everything straight, and do a 4th edition. There's too many things in D&D that just dosn't add up.
DaidojiTaidoru
03-05-07, 06:27 PM Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions?

Heh. That's a good one.

Things were just as broken back then. People might have noticed it less, because you rolled up a new 1st level character when you got one shotted by the dragon, but high level fights still came down to "who wins initiative."

Only real difference I see is Clerics are now more broken then Mages, and Bards are back to being middle of the road instead of invincible masters of destruction.
Deekin
03-05-07, 06:44 PM http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w247/kolboldbard/11514628073367xe-2.jpg
Seeker95
03-05-07, 07:43 PM Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions?Nope.
Raymond_Luxury_Yacht
03-05-07, 08:43 PM Can a Fighter still deal 1d100 damage? No? Well, then no.
Solaris
03-05-07, 08:46 PM Breaking news: Dungeons & Dragons is overpowered.
Azar_of_Faerun
03-05-07, 08:49 PM http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w247/kolboldbard/11514628073367xe-2.jpg

:clap:
twad
03-05-07, 08:49 PM Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions?

Nope.
KurenaiYami
03-05-07, 08:51 PM Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions?

Not really, no.
SS_Panzer_Officer
03-05-07, 09:12 PM Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions?

Nope, not at all friend.
AngelofCthulhu
03-05-07, 09:18 PM Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions?

Only the smart ones. Then I outsmart them. DM - u441nfne8u3 PCs - 0
Wolf_Boy
03-05-07, 09:44 PM Wait, what? How so? In 2nd edition I can remember killing great wyrm white dragons in one round of combat with an eleventh level fighter...
Singer_of_the_Song
03-05-07, 10:03 PM Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions?

If you allow the PCs access to every splatbook and accessory possible without a little planning and caution.
angryman
03-05-07, 10:11 PM The only real test of balance and overpoweredness is the balance within the group. If the fighter becomes redundant because the druid is dominating melee combat and casting etc, then the druid is overpowered. If the wizard is performing all the trap springing, unlocking and so on, the rogue may feel useless.

If the whole group is of equal power, it doesn't really matter how powerful they are. Take In Nomine. By default, you play angels & demons, who can make themselves "unkillable" without much effort. Even if you do die corporeally, you can be given another body. Overpowered? No, that's not the point of the game.
Solik
03-05-07, 10:14 PM Personally, I do.

I mean, my D&D group can beat the crap out of my Dragon Warrior 3 party. What's up with that? My fighter could probably solo Link, and fighters are the weakest!

D&D is overpowered. It's time to bring everything back down a few notches.
Fencerboy
03-05-07, 10:19 PM Face it people:

D&D is overpowered, underpowered, broken, mangled, unbalanced, slaughtered, smashed, bashed and banged up.

Well than why do you play it?!?! If its so horribly destroyed and ruined then switch to playing Candy Land and allow us who enjoy D&D as it is to continue to have fun and make good experiences and memories.

I'm not saying that we can't fix little problems we find, add or change rules, homebrew and houserule stuff, but to constantly keep telling everyone else that things are broken is just dumb!!!

So please don't keep forcing this repeated trash down everyones throats, or just spamming the boards with it!!!

Please!!
johnkretzer
03-05-07, 10:38 PM Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions?

No....not really. Actualy the funny thing if you look at speciality priest from 2nd edition compared to a 3.x cleric it isn't even funny how powerful they were.
priest of blipdoolpoolp
03-05-07, 10:39 PM If you allow the PCs access to every splatbook and accessory possible without a little planning and caution.

I think that's my main issue:

The players routinely combine accessories and create ubber characters.

So I limited resourses to WOTC published stuff, but they ended up mining/maxing again to the point that it's gotten ridiculous.

I'm at the point I may need to limit them to the core books.
Singer_of_the_Song
03-05-07, 10:42 PM I feel for you, man. One of my campaigns was badly mangled by giving the PCs access to every book. They slaughtered absolutely everything that came up against them. All of my NPCs and monsters came across as weak and ineffectual.

One of the problems with the wealth of accessories available is that the PCs are working on one thing...their PC. The DM is doing hundreds of NPCs. He doesn't have the time they do to shop through hundreds of books to find lethal combinations. So if he uses mostly core and they use everything under the sun...they will be too strong.

You may find it helpful to 1) review extensively what powers the PCs will get from their different classes/items/spells so you can prepare accordingly 2) give NPCs some of the flashy PrCs and such detailed in the splatbooks 3) or restrict to Core. Restricting to Core is the easiest, but you have to make sure your players won't hate the game.
Merryadocc
03-05-07, 10:46 PM During the transition phase from 3.0 to 3.5 I was quite happy with the d20 Dungeons and Dragons game. Now that there are heaps of extra books coming out that are targeting the player alot more than there are books targeting the DM the game has had abig power creep infecting it. Whenever extra rules or options get introduced all the things that get used on the DM side of the screen are heavily weakened. Take the Tome Of Battle, all the CR's for monsters in the Monsters Manual where created using the game balance of the core 11 classes from the PHB, so when adding this book to the game the balance goes out the window because the MM was not designed with the ToB classes or abilites in mind. Where is the advanced Hobggoblin NPC in the MM that uses ToB rules, or why don't any of the monsters in the MM that could make good use of the Practiced Spellcaster feat do so? I look at some of the feats given to the monsters in the MM and start changing them because of how much they would get owned if I didn't. I almost never use my Monster Manual anymore, to keep up with all the extra goodies the players get I have to continually rewrite the monsters, usually just feat, skill, and spell selection, but it adds up. I opened my Monsters Manual for the first time in months during the last session I ran, usually I just rely on print outs of monsters I have had to customize. If I where to take all the pages I have printed out and stick them together I would have a book almost as thick as the MM itself.

Players (and too often DMs) often forget that rules are double edged swords, they cut both ways and are there to benefit everything in the game.

DMs too often run there monsters/NPCs as weak, stupid, or they just don't run them properly at all. I remember once reading a thread that said "My group of level 4 player characters think mindflayers have too high of a CR and are nothing more than a speed bump"... my jaw hit the floor when I read that.

At the end of the day it's all about how you play the game. Put a lot more time into it and you can turn around the power balance. A Dragon from the monster manual enhanced with the Practiced Spellcaster feat along with some other choice feats and spells from books like Draconomicon, Races of the Dragon, Spell Compendium, etc, and all of a sudden the tables turn on all the overpowered PCs.
Singer_of_the_Song
03-05-07, 10:48 PM At the end of the day it's all about how you play the game. Put a lot more time into it and you can turn around the power balance. A Dragon from the monster manual enhanced with the Practiced Spellcaster feat along with some other choice feats and spells from books like Draconomicon, Races of the Dragon, Spell Compendium, etc, and all of a sudden the tables turn on all the overpowered PCs.

A lot of DMs really don't have the time to look up all those unique abilities and such for their NPCs, especially if you want to do the story. You can do it, certainly, but I felt like it was making D&D way too much like a math crunch game of finding combos.

Even if you are more of a "Roll-playing" sort and like mathematical/strategic wargame approach, it can be a nightmare for the DM, and can also backfire when he optimizes too well.
Solik
03-05-07, 10:48 PM One of the most uber characters is a pure Core Druid. Seriously. You can cheese it with Planar Shephard and a few non-Core feats, but that's just gravy.

You have a people problem. You're not going to fix it with rules. Fix it with communication.

Most likely, your players all want to play a high-powered game. You should either indulge them or let someone else DM that sort of game.
Merryadocc
03-05-07, 10:49 PM No....not really. Actualy the funny thing if you look at speciality priest from 2nd edition compared to a 3.x cleric it isn't even funny how powerful they were.

I remember the 2nd Ed specialty priest of Mask for the Forgotten Realms, the rogue in the party wouldn't stop yelling at me for how useless I made him feel. :)
TheDarkLord
03-05-07, 10:53 PM If I remember correctly, we were slaughter kings in 2nd Edition as well.

I myself as a DM let anything in that coincides with my campaign world (which means no Oriental stuff). I have no problems with balance and party sharing, and I run a very tactical oriented (Read combat heavy, rp Lite) type of game.

I'm beginning to think I deserve some kind of medal... or at least a cookie.
Merryadocc
03-05-07, 10:59 PM A lot of DMs really don't have the time to look up all those unique abilities and such for their NPCs, especially if you want to do the story. You can do it, certainly, but I felt like it was making D&D way too much like a math crunch game of finding combos.

Even if you are more of a "Roll-playing" sort and like mathematical/strategic wargame approach, it can be a nightmare for the DM, and can also backfire when he optimizes too well.

I am too often one of those DM's that "don't have time to look up all those unique abilities and such", so I fully feel for those that never have the time to do so as their games will always feel broken to some extent. It does make the game "way to much like a math crunch game of finding combos" but the players have to put less effort in to find them and have more books from which to do it, along with access to more players whose experinece they can draw from.

I hate the "roll-play" approach and I have killed a party of munchkin min max players with my ability to do the same better, they hated me for "taking away their ability to roleplay"... go optimizing too well.
Raymond_Luxury_Yacht
03-05-07, 11:15 PM Average PC power has gone up. But average monster power has also gone up, often by even more. So it all balances out.
LuckyDragon
03-05-07, 11:24 PM Yes. It is.
Daydreamer
03-05-07, 11:26 PM power is a flavor issue. i personally would not have minded heros in d&d...all versions...being a bit weaker.
MerlintheTuna
03-05-07, 11:38 PM Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions?I often find PCs overpowered in 3.5 compared to what I'd like them to be. But compared to earlier editions? Eh. At least we're past atrocities like Chromatic Orb.
Khementari
03-05-07, 11:42 PM You basically have three choices.
1) Continue gaming in the chaos of whatever books players get their hands on,
2) Decide to put limitations on your game whether or not little Timmy bought 4 new books this weekend with his paper-route money,

or

3) Throw out all your books and rewrite the entire game to be setting specific.

I chose option 3.
Stormonu
03-06-07, 12:35 AM Put a 2E elvin F/M-U 5/5 (an equivilant 6th level character) in against a 3E elf Fighter 3/Wizard 3 and see who wins.

Also, Monsters got WAY tougher in 3E. Overall, I'd say power has gone down from 2E to 3E. You want an example? Pit a 2E party against some trolls. Then a 3E party. I bet the 2E party can trounce the trolls at a much lower level than a 3E party.
johnkretzer
03-06-07, 12:36 AM Also let us not forget the monstorsity that was 2nd ed strength bow. Also Skills and power anyone? Or the Complete Bard Handbook and beyond?

There is alot more infomation and options in 3.5 but for the most part their balanced. Atleast I never had a problem with challenges players who have had access to all the books primarily using core. While all the bell and whilstels are cool a 20th whatever is still just as dangerous.

I think one of the problems is that some DMs find it harder to adapt to 3.x.
GhostStepper
03-06-07, 12:47 AM I think this conception (perhaps misconception) stems from the fact that most DMs simply cannot comprehend the sheer multitude of options and combinations available so when players come to the table sporting esoteric builds using 6 different books their abilities seem a little overwhelming regardless of whether or not the PCs are actually balanced.

Take ToB for instance. I can imagine a DM being intimidated the first time he runs an adventure for a party with martial classes as they bust out all kinds of unusual, exotic attacks and use unfamiliar abilities. The DM may think they are overpowered since all the PCs' strange new abilities are totally alien to him when in fact the core set of monsters can easily pose a challenge to them if only the DM knows which ones to use and how to use them.
malisteen
03-06-07, 01:08 AM No. Not really. In fact, I remember it being distinctly worse in the 2nd ed days.
TheSubtlePenguin
03-06-07, 01:09 AM The characters themselves are fun. Choosing your abilitys is wonderful, you have options for everything. Characters, thanks to all these options, can be completely unique without having to dip into homebrew.

At the same time, I think characters are a great deal more powerful than they were intended to be at the launch of the edition. Wizards seems to have adopted a 1/2 level to full level d6 attack as the standard for damage,and monsters really dont seem to last that long in direct combat.

If anything, I would prefer to see the monsters reworked, rather than the players. And not in the MM4 format.
Dragonteuthis
03-06-07, 01:10 AM All games everywhere are overpowered. Totally.

Seriously what does it mean when you say that "all of this aspect is overpowered?" Wait waitwait? If all of one particular aspect is equally overpowered, doesn't that means, maybe the game is intended to work that way? Woah woah woah? The players are supposed to slay the monsters, rescue the helpless victims, and get hefty rewards for this?

Must be overpowered cheese...

I don't know that sounds like basketball is overpowered. Because you know. it just is. You can, like touch the ball with your hands. Go back to an earlier edition, the way the Aztecs did it, smaller ball, knees and elbows only. Geez what edition of basketball are we in? It's overpowered.

Footnote: I actually don't recall which central-american culture played that crazy hard-looking game with the vertical hoops and no hands. "Aztec" is an awesome word. And yeah the game did exist.
Solaris
03-06-07, 02:47 AM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesoamerican_ballgame
Black Kitten
03-06-07, 03:14 AM Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions?

Just as overpowered as you make it.
Mr. Master
03-06-07, 04:06 AM I've never played with AD&D,so I can only compare D&D 1st edition with 3.0.
They are 2 different games in many things,but,if we take the things they have in common,I think that 3.0 PC are a bit more powerful,but just because all the powerful things have been prepared for them.With some careful planning,even 1st edition classe could be very powerful.And don't forget that you can customize your game (= house rules) and that the DM is free to change how many rules he wants to,if he feels that it would be good for the game to do so.

In my 3.0 campaing,I've realized that some spells/feats/prestige classes were a bit too powerful.So what?I've changed them.Moreover,if I think that a monster needs to be empowered,I do so.
Just to make an example,I once created a dragon with the Spellcaster Prodigy feat,just because I wanted him to be a powerful spellcaster.Moreover,when I feel that players are getting too powerful,I give my monsters their max amount of Hit Points and give them some extra advantage (good terrain,spellcasters casting powerful spells on them,etc),not to mention that,since I roll my dice behind the DM screen,I can "adjust" the result.

By the way,I still feel that,given some house rules,3.0 is a bit less powerplayered than 3.5.
The White Sorcerer
03-06-07, 04:47 AM Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions?

I don't know, since I've never played the older editions.
However, I did pit a 2nd Edition fighter against a 3rd Edition fighter. They both kept hitting each other with every attack. It would appear that a 3E fighter has no problem hittin AC -5, which can also be said about the 2E fighter and AC 30. The 3E fighter won because he had more attacks per round.
So yeah, I guess 3E is overpowered.
Archangel62
03-06-07, 04:49 AM To be honest I have to ask overpowered compared to what? Previous editions were just as bad, if not worse. The game is more streamlined now and many of us have a bad tendency to look back at the good old days and think about how wonderful things were and how bad thigns are now by comparison.

The system is more streamline and the game is easier to understand, if anything that makes cheating a lot harder and it also means that DMs are less likely to screw up with the rules as long as they don't go in over their heads.
Carmath The Pure
03-06-07, 05:03 AM D&D, any version, is as over- or underpowered as the DM allows it to be. End of story.

It seems like most of the time this topic comes up it's because the players are coming up with more optimal builds and the DM can't or won't take the time to beef up their opponents accordingly. If the PCs have access to all (or even some) supplements and you run them up against an unaltered monster from MM1, it'll get hosed. badly.

I've played first edition, second edition, third and 3.5. I've played OD&D. In all cases there have been times I felt overpowered by the bad guys and there have been times I felt like it was a cakewalk. Either way, though, I had fun. Which, IMHO, is the point of playing.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
priest of blipdoolpoolp 03-05-07, 06:15 PM	Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions?
WayneTheGame 03-05-07, 06:16 PM	Not this subject again :rolleyes: No.
Giant_Moth 03-05-07, 06:19 PM	In my opinion, D&D 3.5 is a ****ed up system. Too many holes, too much rules lawyering. In fact, it's almost as if D&D was created by lawyers, because there's so many ways to bend and twist everything to your favour, regardless of the systems original intent! Now it is a good system, very generalised and broad. But hell, it's messy. They need to sit down, make everything straight, and do a 4th edition. There's too many things in D&D that just dosn't add up.
DaidojiTaidoru 03-05-07, 06:27 PM	Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions? Heh. That's a good one. Things were just as broken back then. People might have noticed it less, because you rolled up a new 1st level character when you got one shotted by the dragon, but high level fights still came down to "who wins initiative." Only real difference I see is Clerics are now more broken then Mages, and Bards are back to being middle of the road instead of invincible masters of destruction.
Deekin 03-05-07, 06:44 PM	http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w247/kolboldbard/11514628073367xe-2.jpg
Seeker95 03-05-07, 07:43 PM	Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions?Nope.
Raymond_Luxury_Yacht 03-05-07, 08:43 PM	Can a Fighter still deal 1d100 damage? No? Well, then no.
Solaris 03-05-07, 08:46 PM	Breaking news: Dungeons & Dragons is overpowered.
Azar_of_Faerun 03-05-07, 08:49 PM	http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w247/kolboldbard/11514628073367xe-2.jpg :clap:
twad 03-05-07, 08:49 PM	Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions? Nope.
KurenaiYami 03-05-07, 08:51 PM	Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions? Not really, no.
SS_Panzer_Officer 03-05-07, 09:12 PM	Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions? Nope, not at all friend.
AngelofCthulhu 03-05-07, 09:18 PM	Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions? Only the smart ones. Then I outsmart them. DM - u441nfne8u3 PCs - 0
Wolf_Boy 03-05-07, 09:44 PM	Wait, what? How so? In 2nd edition I can remember killing great wyrm white dragons in one round of combat with an eleventh level fighter...
Singer_of_the_Song 03-05-07, 10:03 PM	Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions? If you allow the PCs access to every splatbook and accessory possible without a little planning and caution.
angryman 03-05-07, 10:11 PM	The only real test of balance and overpoweredness is the balance within the group. If the fighter becomes redundant because the druid is dominating melee combat and casting etc, then the druid is overpowered. If the wizard is performing all the trap springing, unlocking and so on, the rogue may feel useless. If the whole group is of equal power, it doesn't really matter how powerful they are. Take In Nomine. By default, you play angels & demons, who can make themselves "unkillable" without much effort. Even if you do die corporeally, you can be given another body. Overpowered? No, that's not the point of the game.
Solik 03-05-07, 10:14 PM	Personally, I do. I mean, my D&D group can beat the crap out of my Dragon Warrior 3 party. What's up with that? My fighter could probably solo Link, and fighters are the weakest! D&D is overpowered. It's time to bring everything back down a few notches.
Fencerboy 03-05-07, 10:19 PM	Face it people: D&D is overpowered, underpowered, broken, mangled, unbalanced, slaughtered, smashed, bashed and banged up. Well than why do you play it?!?! If its so horribly destroyed and ruined then switch to playing Candy Land and allow us who enjoy D&D as it is to continue to have fun and make good experiences and memories. I'm not saying that we can't fix little problems we find, add or change rules, homebrew and houserule stuff, but to constantly keep telling everyone else that things are broken is just dumb!!! So please don't keep forcing this repeated trash down everyones throats, or just spamming the boards with it!!! Please!!
johnkretzer 03-05-07, 10:38 PM	Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions? No....not really. Actualy the funny thing if you look at speciality priest from 2nd edition compared to a 3.x cleric it isn't even funny how powerful they were.
priest of blipdoolpoolp 03-05-07, 10:39 PM	If you allow the PCs access to every splatbook and accessory possible without a little planning and caution. I think that's my main issue: The players routinely combine accessories and create ubber characters. So I limited resourses to WOTC published stuff, but they ended up mining/maxing again to the point that it's gotten ridiculous. I'm at the point I may need to limit them to the core books.
Singer_of_the_Song 03-05-07, 10:42 PM	I feel for you, man. One of my campaigns was badly mangled by giving the PCs access to every book. They slaughtered absolutely everything that came up against them. All of my NPCs and monsters came across as weak and ineffectual. One of the problems with the wealth of accessories available is that the PCs are working on one thing...their PC. The DM is doing hundreds of NPCs. He doesn't have the time they do to shop through hundreds of books to find lethal combinations. So if he uses mostly core and they use everything under the sun...they will be too strong. You may find it helpful to 1) review extensively what powers the PCs will get from their different classes/items/spells so you can prepare accordingly 2) give NPCs some of the flashy PrCs and such detailed in the splatbooks 3) or restrict to Core. Restricting to Core is the easiest, but you have to make sure your players won't hate the game.
Merryadocc 03-05-07, 10:46 PM	During the transition phase from 3.0 to 3.5 I was quite happy with the d20 Dungeons and Dragons game. Now that there are heaps of extra books coming out that are targeting the player alot more than there are books targeting the DM the game has had abig power creep infecting it. Whenever extra rules or options get introduced all the things that get used on the DM side of the screen are heavily weakened. Take the Tome Of Battle, all the CR's for monsters in the Monsters Manual where created using the game balance of the core 11 classes from the PHB, so when adding this book to the game the balance goes out the window because the MM was not designed with the ToB classes or abilites in mind. Where is the advanced Hobggoblin NPC in the MM that uses ToB rules, or why don't any of the monsters in the MM that could make good use of the Practiced Spellcaster feat do so? I look at some of the feats given to the monsters in the MM and start changing them because of how much they would get owned if I didn't. I almost never use my Monster Manual anymore, to keep up with all the extra goodies the players get I have to continually rewrite the monsters, usually just feat, skill, and spell selection, but it adds up. I opened my Monsters Manual for the first time in months during the last session I ran, usually I just rely on print outs of monsters I have had to customize. If I where to take all the pages I have printed out and stick them together I would have a book almost as thick as the MM itself. Players (and too often DMs) often forget that rules are double edged swords, they cut both ways and are there to benefit everything in the game. DMs too often run there monsters/NPCs as weak, stupid, or they just don't run them properly at all. I remember once reading a thread that said "My group of level 4 player characters think mindflayers have too high of a CR and are nothing more than a speed bump"... my jaw hit the floor when I read that. At the end of the day it's all about how you play the game. Put a lot more time into it and you can turn around the power balance. A Dragon from the monster manual enhanced with the Practiced Spellcaster feat along with some other choice feats and spells from books like Draconomicon, Races of the Dragon, Spell Compendium, etc, and all of a sudden the tables turn on all the overpowered PCs.
Singer_of_the_Song 03-05-07, 10:48 PM	At the end of the day it's all about how you play the game. Put a lot more time into it and you can turn around the power balance. A Dragon from the monster manual enhanced with the Practiced Spellcaster feat along with some other choice feats and spells from books like Draconomicon, Races of the Dragon, Spell Compendium, etc, and all of a sudden the tables turn on all the overpowered PCs. A lot of DMs really don't have the time to look up all those unique abilities and such for their NPCs, especially if you want to do the story. You can do it, certainly, but I felt like it was making D&D way too much like a math crunch game of finding combos. Even if you are more of a "Roll-playing" sort and like mathematical/strategic wargame approach, it can be a nightmare for the DM, and can also backfire when he optimizes too well.
Solik 03-05-07, 10:48 PM	One of the most uber characters is a pure Core Druid. Seriously. You can cheese it with Planar Shephard and a few non-Core feats, but that's just gravy. You have a people problem. You're not going to fix it with rules. Fix it with communication. Most likely, your players all want to play a high-powered game. You should either indulge them or let someone else DM that sort of game.
Merryadocc 03-05-07, 10:49 PM	No....not really. Actualy the funny thing if you look at speciality priest from 2nd edition compared to a 3.x cleric it isn't even funny how powerful they were. I remember the 2nd Ed specialty priest of Mask for the Forgotten Realms, the rogue in the party wouldn't stop yelling at me for how useless I made him feel. :)
TheDarkLord 03-05-07, 10:53 PM	If I remember correctly, we were slaughter kings in 2nd Edition as well. I myself as a DM let anything in that coincides with my campaign world (which means no Oriental stuff). I have no problems with balance and party sharing, and I run a very tactical oriented (Read combat heavy, rp Lite) type of game. I'm beginning to think I deserve some kind of medal... or at least a cookie.
Merryadocc 03-05-07, 10:59 PM	A lot of DMs really don't have the time to look up all those unique abilities and such for their NPCs, especially if you want to do the story. You can do it, certainly, but I felt like it was making D&D way too much like a math crunch game of finding combos. Even if you are more of a "Roll-playing" sort and like mathematical/strategic wargame approach, it can be a nightmare for the DM, and can also backfire when he optimizes too well. I am too often one of those DM's that "don't have time to look up all those unique abilities and such", so I fully feel for those that never have the time to do so as their games will always feel broken to some extent. It does make the game "way to much like a math crunch game of finding combos" but the players have to put less effort in to find them and have more books from which to do it, along with access to more players whose experinece they can draw from. I hate the "roll-play" approach and I have killed a party of munchkin min max players with my ability to do the same better, they hated me for "taking away their ability to roleplay"... go optimizing too well.
Raymond_Luxury_Yacht 03-05-07, 11:15 PM	Average PC power has gone up. But average monster power has also gone up, often by even more. So it all balances out.
LuckyDragon 03-05-07, 11:24 PM	Yes. It is.
Daydreamer 03-05-07, 11:26 PM	power is a flavor issue. i personally would not have minded heros in d&d...all versions...being a bit weaker.
MerlintheTuna 03-05-07, 11:38 PM	Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions?I often find PCs overpowered in 3.5 compared to what I'd like them to be. But compared to earlier editions? Eh. At least we're past atrocities like Chromatic Orb.
Khementari 03-05-07, 11:42 PM	You basically have three choices. 1) Continue gaming in the chaos of whatever books players get their hands on, 2) Decide to put limitations on your game whether or not little Timmy bought 4 new books this weekend with his paper-route money, or 3) Throw out all your books and rewrite the entire game to be setting specific. I chose option 3.
Stormonu 03-06-07, 12:35 AM	Put a 2E elvin F/M-U 5/5 (an equivilant 6th level character) in against a 3E elf Fighter 3/Wizard 3 and see who wins. Also, Monsters got WAY tougher in 3E. Overall, I'd say power has gone down from 2E to 3E. You want an example? Pit a 2E party against some trolls. Then a 3E party. I bet the 2E party can trounce the trolls at a much lower level than a 3E party.
johnkretzer 03-06-07, 12:36 AM	Also let us not forget the monstorsity that was 2nd ed strength bow. Also Skills and power anyone? Or the Complete Bard Handbook and beyond? There is alot more infomation and options in 3.5 but for the most part their balanced. Atleast I never had a problem with challenges players who have had access to all the books primarily using core. While all the bell and whilstels are cool a 20th whatever is still just as dangerous. I think one of the problems is that some DMs find it harder to adapt to 3.x.
GhostStepper 03-06-07, 12:47 AM	I think this conception (perhaps misconception) stems from the fact that most DMs simply cannot comprehend the sheer multitude of options and combinations available so when players come to the table sporting esoteric builds using 6 different books their abilities seem a little overwhelming regardless of whether or not the PCs are actually balanced. Take ToB for instance. I can imagine a DM being intimidated the first time he runs an adventure for a party with martial classes as they bust out all kinds of unusual, exotic attacks and use unfamiliar abilities. The DM may think they are overpowered since all the PCs' strange new abilities are totally alien to him when in fact the core set of monsters can easily pose a challenge to them if only the DM knows which ones to use and how to use them.
malisteen 03-06-07, 01:08 AM	No. Not really. In fact, I remember it being distinctly worse in the 2nd ed days.
TheSubtlePenguin 03-06-07, 01:09 AM	The characters themselves are fun. Choosing your abilitys is wonderful, you have options for everything. Characters, thanks to all these options, can be completely unique without having to dip into homebrew. At the same time, I think characters are a great deal more powerful than they were intended to be at the launch of the edition. Wizards seems to have adopted a 1/2 level to full level d6 attack as the standard for damage,and monsters really dont seem to last that long in direct combat. If anything, I would prefer to see the monsters reworked, rather than the players. And not in the MM4 format.
Dragonteuthis 03-06-07, 01:10 AM	All games everywhere are overpowered. Totally. Seriously what does it mean when you say that "all of this aspect is overpowered?" Wait waitwait? If all of one particular aspect is equally overpowered, doesn't that means, maybe the game is intended to work that way? Woah woah woah? The players are supposed to slay the monsters, rescue the helpless victims, and get hefty rewards for this? Must be overpowered cheese... I don't know that sounds like basketball is overpowered. Because you know. it just is. You can, like touch the ball with your hands. Go back to an earlier edition, the way the Aztecs did it, smaller ball, knees and elbows only. Geez what edition of basketball are we in? It's overpowered. Footnote: I actually don't recall which central-american culture played that crazy hard-looking game with the vertical hoops and no hands. "Aztec" is an awesome word. And yeah the game did exist.
Solaris 03-06-07, 02:47 AM	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesoamerican_ballgame
Black Kitten 03-06-07, 03:14 AM	Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions? Just as overpowered as you make it.
Mr. Master 03-06-07, 04:06 AM	I've never played with AD&D,so I can only compare D&D 1st edition with 3.0. They are 2 different games in many things,but,if we take the things they have in common,I think that 3.0 PC are a bit more powerful,but just because all the powerful things have been prepared for them.With some careful planning,even 1st edition classe could be very powerful.And don't forget that you can customize your game (= house rules) and that the DM is free to change how many rules he wants to,if he feels that it would be good for the game to do so. In my 3.0 campaing,I've realized that some spells/feats/prestige classes were a bit too powerful.So what?I've changed them.Moreover,if I think that a monster needs to be empowered,I do so. Just to make an example,I once created a dragon with the Spellcaster Prodigy feat,just because I wanted him to be a powerful spellcaster.Moreover,when I feel that players are getting too powerful,I give my monsters their max amount of Hit Points and give them some extra advantage (good terrain,spellcasters casting powerful spells on them,etc),not to mention that,since I roll my dice behind the DM screen,I can "adjust" the result. By the way,I still feel that,given some house rules,3.0 is a bit less powerplayered than 3.5.
The White Sorcerer 03-06-07, 04:47 AM	Anyone else find PCs -in general- overpowered in 3rd and 3.5 editions in comparison to earlier D&D editions? I don't know, since I've never played the older editions. However, I did pit a 2nd Edition fighter against a 3rd Edition fighter. They both kept hitting each other with every attack. It would appear that a 3E fighter has no problem hittin AC -5, which can also be said about the 2E fighter and AC 30. The 3E fighter won because he had more attacks per round. So yeah, I guess 3E is overpowered.
Archangel62 03-06-07, 04:49 AM	To be honest I have to ask overpowered compared to what? Previous editions were just as bad, if not worse. The game is more streamlined now and many of us have a bad tendency to look back at the good old days and think about how wonderful things were and how bad thigns are now by comparison. The system is more streamline and the game is easier to understand, if anything that makes cheating a lot harder and it also means that DMs are less likely to screw up with the rules as long as they don't go in over their heads.
Carmath The Pure 03-06-07, 05:03 AM	D&D, any version, is as over- or underpowered as the DM allows it to be. End of story. It seems like most of the time this topic comes up it's because the players are coming up with more optimal builds and the DM can't or won't take the time to beef up their opponents accordingly. If the PCs have access to all (or even some) supplements and you run them up against an unaltered monster from MM1, it'll get hosed. badly. I've played first edition, second edition, third and 3.5. I've played OD&D. In all cases there have been times I felt overpowered by the bad guys and there have been times I felt like it was a cakewalk. Either way, though, I had fun. Which, IMHO, is the point of playing.