Post/Author/DateTime	Post
vladamere 11-06-05, 05:45 PM	was magic severly powered down when they switched to 3.5? I mean, some of my favroite spells frankly stink in the new edition! examples: eyebite is now evil? bladebarrier 15d6? (not 20) bulls strength, cats grace 1min\level duration? fly 1min\lvl duration? shield only 4 points? symbol "broken" into indivdual symbol spells? magic vestament +1 per 4 levels (not per 3) true reserection 25000 gp of diamonds? haste sucks! etheralness\jaunt increased in level? heal\mass heal broken? the list goes on and on, here and there there are positives like: righteous might got better regenerate cures more things holy word works on level vs HD My spellcasters just seem weaker in 3.5, does anyone agree\disagree?
sandskimmer 11-06-05, 05:51 PM	Agreed. Many peoples complained about "nerfed" spells upon the release of 3.5. It is all done in the interest of game balance and the changes are probably for the better, but I really hate the new Time Stop. Using it the old way was my favorite way to destroy all in my path, either as DM or PC. This should probably go in the Spells and Magic board though...
Tyler Do'Urden 11-06-05, 05:59 PM	Oh, wah wah wah. Look at me, I'm not a god anymore. I don't automatically win every fight by just thinking really hard. I'm on more or less equal terms with my peers if they make most of their saves, wah wah wah. *cough* Relax. You still win. You just have to plan a little farther in advance, that's all.
Vaalingrade Ashland 11-06-05, 06:01 PM	3.5 *spells* suck for anything but mindless combat. Spellcasters are still potent though.
Rocketboy13 11-06-05, 10:53 PM	Hasn't this been complained out already? :thinks: If you don't like some stuff, just house rule some other stuff in and *poof* it is fine again. :rolleyes:
WizO_Cat 11-06-05, 11:31 PM	Moved to Magic and Spells.
solandras 11-06-05, 11:42 PM	No spellcasters are still the ones who rules the day, regardless of if they got weakened at all. But all in all I think they got strengthed by the addition of many 3.5 splatbooks that adds to their spellbooks.
Wizard 11-06-05, 11:45 PM	was magic severly powered down when they switched to 3.5? I mean, some of my favroite spells frankly stink in the new edition! examples: eyebite is now evil? bladebarrier 15d6? (not 20) bulls strength, cats grace 1min\level duration? fly 1min\lvl duration? shield only 4 points? symbol "broken" into indivdual symbol spells? magic vestament +1 per 4 levels (not per 3) true reserection 25000 gp of diamonds? haste sucks! etheralness\jaunt increased in level? heal\mass heal broken? the list goes on and on, here and there there are positives like: righteous might got better regenerate cures more things holy word works on level vs HD My spellcasters just seem weaker in 3.5, does anyone agree\disagree? I wonder why they were your favorite spells? Eyebite as evil makes sense. I only wish bestow curse had followed suit. Blade barrier is a cleric spell on the cleric's base spell list. I think 15d6 is quite enough, thank you. The animal buffs could be used as substitutes for gauntlets of ogre strength, etc. Now, they're just that---buffs. Fly tended to be a problem for *every* encounter. The problem wasn't that the spell won battles all the time---after, all, DM's could give bows to foes---but that it won battles all the time. By limiting the duration to 1 min./level, it saves the DM from being forced to provide a ranged attack to every enemy. Symbol was one of my favorite spells, too---but that was mostly because of its versatility. Now, at least, the lower-level ones are, well, lower-level and easier to cast. Magic vestment? Excuse me? Clerics wear armor (usually w/a better bonus than the vestment would provide), and arcane casters have mage armor. I mean, who really cares? As far as I'm concerned, true res. and its ilk could cost 1,000,000 gp. Has any classic fantasy story involved a res.? The only cool (not classic) res. story I've seen is in the Scarred Lands Dead God trilogy. Haste gave Quicken Spell for less, in wandable format. For that matter, quickened haste could do ridiculous things. Trust me...spellcasters can still do good stuff. I do feel your pain, though. My poor boots of striding and stepping and spider climbing... :(
Seeker of Undeath 11-06-05, 11:51 PM	was magic severly powered down when they switched to 3.5? I mean, some of my favroite spells frankly stink in the new edition! examples: eyebite is now evil?Hrmm...duh? How is it not evil? bladebarrier 15d6? (not 20)And? Think about what level the spell is. It's more appropriate. bulls strength, cats grace 1min\level duration?In battle that's a long time. fly 1min\lvl duration?That's a long time. Not having it in hours/level prevents people from burning one and never needing another all day. It keeps the spell meaningful. shield only 4 points?Hope you enjoy the tower shield that you don't have to carry. symbol "broken" into indivdual symbol spells?I can't say I like this so much, but it makes sense. As it was 3.0 Symbol simply had way too many possible functions. magic vestament +1 per 4 levels (not per 3)Apparently the spell saw a lot of use and the numbers got too big too quickly in someone's opinion. true reserection 25000 gp of diamonds?I think that's kinda cheap too. haste sucks!Whatever. etheralness\jaunt increased in level?Are you surprised? Given the travel potential and the occasional combat use, it can be rather potent. heal\mass heal broken?No. It was broken. Now it's a legitimate tactic, not a first turn finisher.the list goes on and on, here and there there are positives like: righteous might got better regenerate cures more things holy word works on level vs HD My spellcasters just seem weaker in 3.5, does anyone agree\disagree?Spells are less out of control since the 3.5 upgrade. Casters on the whole are about the same thanks to the influx of new spells. About anything in the Complete Series alone rounds out gaps. On the other hand the 3.5 PHB doesn't leave many.
a_psh 11-07-05, 12:05 AM	My first double post. Please delete.
a_psh 11-07-05, 12:12 AM	I actually prefer the 3.5e haste. Why? Well, it's no longer the spell that you always have to cast at the beginning of every battle, but now it buffs the whole party. I've seen mages do some great, great things with the new haste. It still influences a battle even more than a Maximized fireball. Likewise, true res should cost lots of money. You're paying for an entire level, after all! Blade barrier? Note the spell level. Symbol? A sham to see versatility reduced, perhaps, but clerics know all of their list anyway and now you can prep the crappier ones at much earlier levels. A second level spell slot should not replace a 16,000-gp-valued item on a near-permanent basis. Heal/harm no longer being stupid hp resets is a great boon to the game. Previously, you could basically construct a high-level hero or villain who had near-instant access to many times his actual hp by virtue of having repeated heals or harms (if undead) available. I think it really adds to the game to see these spells modified to a reasonable level, as now I get to see them used when it counts rather than always. This actually makes me respect these spells now, as they only come out when tactically viable rather than at the beginning of every fight, and really, really still do shine when people do use them.
Ocrus of Wessek 11-07-05, 12:51 AM	I tend to agree with everyone who is supporting the 3.5 spellcasting system. I play a drow mage (chaotic nuetral), i solo a lot, with usually no more than one NPC under my control during combat. but the point is, my mage is level 15 now, and using what are in your opinion broken spells, such as haste, i have managed to survive everything my sadistic DM (and he is sadistic) can throw at me. I won't list all of my exploits, but a few hightlights are as follows: at 5th level: took out three magical clones of myself, equipped as i was, at once... at 6th level: took on two 14th level celestials, and a bevy of thier gaurds, with the help of two ettins whose loyalty i had gained, i was forced to flee, but not before i was able to kill at least one of the 14th level npcs, and reduce the other one to like 1hd. at 8th level: killed 53 halflings half of which had class levels in rogue, the other half with warrior levels with absolutely no help and none of my items, got ridiculously lucky of course in that they were all occupied and i hadn't used any spells the previous day. and the list goes on, i did all of that crap well within the rules of 3.5 and the spells i was using. i mean come on, if you can't still be mad powerful as a mage in 3.5 then you are just a complete moron who relied on the ridiculous power of 3.0 damage dealing spells. a good player doesn't need to rely on his maximized, twinned, fireball to take out his enemy. o and most recently; 14th level, one demon, and one devil, at once. so in my opinion there is nothing wrong with the new spell rules, i mean 1 minute in combat is 6 rounds isn't it? correct me if i'm wrong... it's late at night... but at any rate six rounds is a long time in combat. thats my opinion on the subject.
DungeonMaster 11-07-05, 12:53 AM	Eyebite as evil makes sense. How is using a gaze attack evil ? We should make swords evil too. The animal buffs could be used as substitutes for gauntlets of ogre strength, etc. Now, they're just that---buffs. At the high levels - and poor substitutes at that. Fly tended to be a problem for *every* encounter. The problem wasn't that the spell won battles all the time---after, all, DM's could give bows to foes---but that it won battles all the time. By limiting the duration to 1 min./level, it saves the DM from being forced to provide a ranged attack to every enemy. This is nonsense. There's ample similar 3.5 spells such as the craptastic "overland flight" which is the same level as bloody teleport to plain old phantom steed. Symbol was one of my favorite spells, too---but that was mostly because of its versatility. Now, at least, the lower-level ones are, well, lower-level and easier to cast. It also means your wizard needs to scribe 8 spells instead of one, or your sorceror. There's nothing "wrong" with versatile spells. Take dispel evil as an example. Haste/Harm/Heal has long been debated to death and beyond. Consensus is nil. To address the original poster's comments: Yes, 3.5 spells on the whole are less powerful than 3rd edition. For those who care they're not better "balanced" than 3rd edition either, introducing different cheese as in polymorph or entirely new loopholes like 3.5 wish. In my opinion the update to the spells reeks of singular incompetence. My suggestion is simply don't play 3.5 if it bothers you enough.
Wizard 11-07-05, 02:25 AM	Well, as for eyebite, look at what it does---sicken, panic, or cause catatonia. These are all pretty good "curses." I'm not necessarily saying I'd have changed the spell to [evil]---though I might have---but I can certainly understand the reasoning behind it. I believe the principal problem with animal buffs was the ability to empower them. Would you give up one or two 3rd-level spell slot/day for +6 Int? I know I would---and did. As for overland flight and phantom steed, neither are available until 9th level. I know, I know, PS is a 3rd-level spell; but the air walk ability doesn't come into play until 12th level. Symbol wasn't just versatile---it was unbalanced. Not in the gaming sense of the word---just that certain uses were better than others. The split separated an 8th level spell (symbol of death) from a 5th level spell (symbol of pain). Besides, it gave specialized casters (and I use the term "specialized" loosely---even counting clerics as specialized, b/c certain alignment spells are barred them) their own "thing." The spell was just too wonky as written before.
Ehelonna 11-07-05, 04:31 AM	shield only 4 points? But now it protects from 360 degrees... and stacks with cover. But it no longer; helps against touch attacks, prevents attacks of opportunity or stacks with a mithral buckler (no arcane spell failure chance or armor check penalty). A different spell that acts more like a shield. :P haste sucks! Then you aren't using it correctly. :cool: My current group usually has at least two haste spells in memory on any given day... the MASSIVE increase in mobility is wonderful. The added bonus to AC, to hit, and extended full attack actions are nice extras over a mass Expeditious Retreat. Of course 3.0's super spellcasting speed was an interesting variation... but not of much use to my group since we were only level 6 when we switched to 3.5 :angel: If you look back at all versions before 3.0, haste was a buff that really boosted fighters (slightly more than 3.5) but also had a serious side effect of ageing everyone affected by a year. The 3.0 version was a lesser fighter buff, but was suddenly a SUPER spellcaster buff... though that was probably unintentional. 3.5 reset the primary target to fighter (or other meleer) and allowed it to affect the party again. I doubt that the 3.0 version of the spell was cast on very many fighters.
Archtyrant Terevoth 11-07-05, 06:41 AM	bladebarrier 15d6? (not 20) Yeah, because clerics are supposed to be the masters of combat damage. Everybody knew that. fly 1min\lvl duration? Good. As far as I'm concerned magical flight is only a detriment to the game. It takes away the impact of terrain entirely, and makes jump, climb and balance totally useless as skills. Flight: cool for maybe one encounter, then it just gets old. My only regret is that they didn't remove this broken piece of garbage from the spell list entirely. shield only 4 points? Yeah, god forbid you can't create a +5 animated medium shield with a 1st level spell anymore. Anyone with half a brain has to realize that 1st level wizards should be walking around with the equivalent of +5 gear. What an imbalance. magic vestament +1 per 4 levels (not per 3) Why should clerics have to buy magical armor? They should get it for free. IMBALANCE!!! haste sucks! If by sucks you mean 'no longer absurdly broken' then yes, you're absolutely right. My spellcasters just seem weaker in 3.5 Yeah, things have changed for the better.
runestar 11-07-05, 07:04 AM	Actually, the nerfing of haste might not be such a bad thing. One gripe I had about it was how every NPC mage you met automatically started combat with "casts haste, followed by XX spell and a quickened etc..., then proceeded to unload their entire arsenal on you), while PCs could not enjoy the same previledge because they had to ration their spells. Look at the module "City of the spider queen", and all the various spellcaster strategies. They all begin with haste. :mad: Considering the fact I had haste used against me more than I used it against my foes, in retrospect, nerfing it was actually a good thing.
Seeker95 11-07-05, 08:33 AM	Come on guys. How serious of a response can you give to a post that claims the most powerful classes in 3.5 "suck"? Providing a detailed comparison of spells in 3.0 and spells in 3.5 will also not accomplish anything other than point out who doesn't like the revision. Nobody's going to change DungeonMaster's mind, no matter how reasonable the argument, and nobody's going to get most of you to "go back" to 3.0, no matter how well-worded the pitch.
tarkin 11-07-05, 11:16 AM	There are lots of new spells that were kicked up in power. Yes, the old ABUSES like Haste were removed (Christ, people, did you really think double the number of spells per round was FAIR). But great new things like Schorching Ray were added in.
Nightspirit 11-07-05, 11:36 AM	Yes, the old ABUSES like Haste were removed (Christ, people, did you really think double the number of spells per round was FAIR). not at all...3.5 spellcasters simply requires a spell and a feat or a 9th level spell to get the 3.0 haste effect... Come on guys. How serious of a response can you give to a post that claims the most powerful classes in 3.5 "suck"? :D you're totally right. "Ehy, I'm a 3.5 wizard, I can't destroy the multiverse with a haste and a time stop! I suck!" Come on, 3.5 spellcasters are still the powerful classes, and still a little too powerful(or really too powerful, if you add enough splatbooks) so, you look at some of the nerfed spells(and you don't talk about gate and time stop...I cry when i think about the 3.0 version of these two spells...)...why don't you look at the improved spells? Ray of enfeeblement has no longer a fort save scorching ray is one of the best damage spells, including the 3.0 ones. touch of idiocy otto's irresistible dance has no longer a save shapechange grants you the supernatural abilities of the assumed form and there are many other spells that are much better than their 3.0 counterparts
Wrin777 11-07-05, 12:17 PM	Mmm...I have to agree haste was broken, but I think the buff spells were nerfed a bit much. They should have been changed to 1pt/3 levels and if they did drop the duration then only down to 10min/level. The reason is that they are spells, not items, and can thus be dispelled easily. This makes them match the rules for stat items a lot more closely (you must be 3xBonus caster level to create the item if I remember correctly, otherwise adjust numbers accordingly), renders the empower/maximize tricks unusable and makes a lot more sense. A second level spell that gives you a dispellable bonus once is not anywhere near the same as an item that gives you that bonus for all time and has to be disjoined or destroyed on a critically failed save to go away forever. Of course, somebody CAN try to dispel it for 1d4 rounds, but that's rarely as useful as an area or targeted dispel on the wearer. I think the change to Magic Vestment was a good one. It lines up nicely with the item creation guidelines and seems well-balanced in terms of GP cost for an item vs level cost for a one-time casting. I have always thought resurrection should be reworked completely so that you had to give up HP to cast it and bringing the dead character back at like 5-10% hp instead of taking a level. True res would then be the same thing but the dead character comes back at full HP and the caster sacrifices fewer hp. This makes a reasonable cost without resorting to RP-limited resources like gold. (I know, average gp/level isn't supposed to be RP-based, but it is in many campaigns. Also, once you get to levels 25+, 25000gp is not worth much.)
Ozymandias V. 11-07-05, 02:27 PM	Oh no, some spells have been nerfed. Let's fix that by house ruling that Meteor Swarm is a level 1 spell. That should make you happy, right? You need to take a step back and view the entire situation instead of focusing on the changes made to your caster. Yes, he's not as good as before. But he's still freaking awesome. There's really nothing to complain about. You're just reflex complaining because you're used to the additional power so you're getting this feeling that something has been taken away. Perfectly understandable.
vladamere 11-07-05, 10:04 PM	ok. so the consensus thinks that yes, spellcasters are less powerful, and most think this helps game balance. cool. for those of you who responded kindly and politely, I thank you. for those who could not resist dealing an unprovoked dose of sarcasam and rudeness, well.. guess what? congradulations! you've insulted a complete stranger! you win the PRIZE! (and what do we have today Rod?, A NEW CAR!!!) :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:
Seeker95 11-07-05, 10:15 PM	congradulations! you've insulted a complete stranger!Not a complete stranger. You did give us a first impression to go on. :P
KoboldMenace 11-08-05, 05:19 AM	Hrmm...duh? How is it not evil? In 3.0 it wasn't evil, it wasn't even in the necromancy school and it didn't even use waves of evil. In 3.5 it works by striking a creature with waves of evil (I guess the evil waves originater from one of your eyes or stirke the target creature in the eye?;) ) so of course it can't be anything but evil. I don't understand why such a drastic change in flavor was called for. The 3.5 version is more streamlined though, I will give it that. The other changes I like.
cowdragon 11-08-05, 08:40 AM	I actually thought most of them got better! I loved touch spells and range touch spells, now they mostly don't offer saves. I was a teeny bit upset when Symbol was broken into it's components though. It WAS a nice sorcerer spell. :) Also, Acid Splash became core. I love that little spell. Especially with Fell feats. No SR, yippee!!! :cheer: The Cowdragon :mage:
smrtgmp 11-08-05, 09:02 AM	Yes, fell drain acid splash is definately one of the best 2nd level spells in the game.
Nagol 11-08-05, 12:46 PM	I didn't mind the power-downs much, even if I think a few were taken too far. What I object to is the reduction in versatility of the spells. Spells with multiple uses were broken up into individual spells (Flame Arrow into Scorching Ray and Flame Arrow, O's Freezing Sphere into Polar Ray and Freezing Sphere, Fly into Fly and Overland Flight, etc.) and other spells had their versatility reduced by limiting the effects that could be produced (Wall of Force is now vertical only, Symbols are reduced to trap spells, Transmute Rock to Mud can't affect worked stone, etc.). This reduces the advantages of Sorcerors, who I think were weaker than Wizards to begin with. What really gets me going is the reduced versatility. The raw combat ability is still present, but spells are harder to use creatively now. Tactical thinking became less valuable and relies more on having the correct spell available.
Vaalingrade Ashland 11-08-05, 01:21 PM	(Christ, people, did you really think double the number of spells per round was FAIR). Yes. See also Psions, Novas.
Nightspirit 11-08-05, 03:07 PM	Yes. See also Psions, Novas. first: that use of synchronicity is actually under debate, because it is probably not legal :D second, if you want the 3.0 haste: egoist 7: metamorphosis into chocker, with metamorphic transfer wizard 7: polymorph into chocker, with assume supernatural ability Really, I don't think that the 3.0 haste was really broken...it was broken as a 3rd level spell...if it was an 8 or 9 level spell, it was good
Puca 11-08-05, 03:32 PM	eyebite is now evil?I think before you complain about this particular evil spell, you should look at the rest of the "evil" spells and some of the spells that arent "evil." If there was a clear standard by which they were given this descriptor, that would be one thing, but there isnt. It almost appears as though the decision to add the evil descriptor or not was left to the discretion of the individual writers/rewriters and all of them went with their gut instincts. And, clearly, they didnt all have the same instincts. Anyway, as long as I still consciously have to self-regulate what I do in order to keep my DM from slapping my favorite spells with a nerf bat, I cant say that casters have been made too weak.
Moon-Lancer 11-08-05, 03:51 PM	I beleave that casters are still too powerfull in 3.5. especialy divine casters like the druid and claric. I dident know they were THAT powerfull untill i tried one myself. Now i buff the party insted of takeing the thunder from everyone. Works out well enuff. When i need to i lay down the power of the forest and show who is boss. Only if the other party memebers are faceing death though.