Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Heretic296 05-28-07, 04:11 AM	Been working with 3.5 for a while but have noticed a disturbing trend with skills and feats at about 10th level. You'll find that they tend to be far to advantageous for the players..hence the term broken..I understand that the characters are heroes but there needs to be some challenges..It's just an observation and I'm hearing some positive approaches to this problem from the New Edition of Star Wars D20 (limiting ranks to 20 max)..Looking for feedback
HighDarkTemplar 05-28-07, 04:22 AM	Not really, for lower CR enemies it is quite powerful but the higher level you get the more powerful enemies you have to face. That is also the reason for spells gaining much more power when you advance some levels. Try giving it a shot :-) Try running a short adventure with some higher level characters once. Against lower level opponents they are terrifying but against equal monsters it should not be any difference. -HDT
Witch 05-28-07, 04:31 AM	Been working with 3.5 for a while but have noticed a disturbing trend with skills and feats at about 10th level. You'll find that they tend to be far to advantageous for the players..hence the term broken..I understand that the characters are heroes but there needs to be some challenges..It's just an observation and I'm hearing some positive approaches to this problem from the New Edition of Star Wars D20 (limiting ranks to 20 max)..Looking for feedback Challenges change by the levels. A maximum of 20 ranks is arbitrary and blocks progression. Things don't get broken by 10th level - you simply need to find new ways to challenge them. If you can't handle those, then don't play above 10th level.
Derren S. 05-28-07, 04:54 AM	against equal monsters it should not be any difference. It should, but it isn't. The higher the PCs get and the more additional books are allowed (the newer, the better as those tend to be more powerfull) the PCs can optimize more and more so that normal encounters, even of equal or higher CR become a cakewalk. Reasons for this: 1. Power Creep: While it could be worse, a power creep does exist. That means the newer the book is, the more powerfull the stuff in it is. 2. Broken Stuff: Nearly every book does contain overpowered stuff. And when DMs do not ban this stuff (happens rather often because they think they have to allow every book which comes out or think that as long as the villians use it too everything is ok (totally wrong)) things get messy. Example for this would be the Thought Bottle or Shivering Touch 3. Specialization: In Core D&D dragons, for example, were terrifying foes. But thanks to specialized dragon hunting PRCs (Dragon Hunter, Dragonstalker), Feats (Dragondoom), Items (Ring of Dragon Friendship) and Spells (Antidragon Aura, Earthbind) they are now a lot easier to defeat then before. Generally when the PCs have time to prepare and access to many sourcebooks they can now kill everything easily even with a CR +2 or even higher when there are books which contain materials to specifically kill this kind of creature. 4. Removing of defenses: Thats especially true for things like SR. In core, SR is a usefull defense against magic and many monsters do use it as one of their primary defenses. But additional splatbooks have made SR a joke with no real effect at all. It started with "Lower Spell Resistence" (later "Spell Vulnerability") which is a bit awkward to cast but removed SR nearly entirely. Then the broken Orb spells (AKA Orbs of Dragon killing without logic) and Assay Resistence came out which dealt the death blow to SR which is now more of a joke as a usefull defense as it can be bypassed very easily. 5. Monsters limitation to one book: Monsters in the different books only use material from that book, core and maybe a specialized related book. The PCs on the other hand can use much more material from various books and thus have a very big advantage 6. The authors can't build monsters: Yes, its true. Most designers have no clue how to build effective monsters. They are mostly an assortment of randomly chosen abilities which have no synergy at all. Thats especially true for NPCs. Every PC of equal level, even from a relativly new player, will be more powerfull because the player planned the advancment or at least has a strategy how to develop his character effectively. Conclusion: As you see, splatbooks are a major factor which makes high level play broken. Disallow splatbooks and only allow material on request (only single items/spells etc., not whole books) when you are sure that they fit and you are comfortable with them makes the PCs a lot less overpowered compared to monsters/published NPCs. The other thing you can do is to redesign monsters/NPCs with materials from all books the players have also access to. But that is very time consuming. The best thing you can do is proably a combination of those two things.
Venenum 05-28-07, 08:58 AM	I second the above. We tend not play iwth spell casters though, for both sides, and in low fantasy, so monster problems arn't really a problem for us.
Heretic296 05-28-07, 10:53 AM	Very well thought out Darren. Lots of stuff to think about there. I had never considered the consequences of splat books as they apply to monsters until now. High end combats have been a problem as they often lacked challenge and quite honestly I do not enjoy anticlimactic battles. SR's do not tend to be a problem as my players tend to be combat specialists and not spell casters but I can say that I'm not a huge fan of that mechanic. (percentiles seemed more effective) The Culture of min-max is difficul to get around with the character generation system. In some ways I cannot blame players for wanting to be the best they can be which eventually translates into broken characters. In many ways I miss the element of randomness in character creation. (Some of the more enjoyable games I have played were called iron man games..3d6 straight down the sheet with no rerolls)
Lina_Inverse 05-28-07, 03:22 PM	and quite honestly I do not enjoy anticlimactic battles. D&D doesn't do climactic, it does tactical. The orc hits you, you die is about as climactic as. the dragon full attacks you, you die. SR's do not tend to be a problem as my players tend to be combat specialists and not spell casters but I can say that I'm not a huge fan of that mechanic. (percentiles seemed more effective) d20 system, ring a bell? d100s need not apply. More importantly, since spell resistance was always in 5% increments there was never any reason whatsoever not to use a d20 for spell resistance. The Culture of min-max is difficul to get around with the character generation system. In some ways I cannot blame players for wanting to be the best they can be which eventually translates into broken characters. In many ways I miss the element of randomness in character creation. (Some of the more enjoyable games I have played were called iron man games..3d6 straight down the sheet with no rerolls) Ah i see, your just filled with nostalgia. So lets bring some blunt truth. It was never better, it was much much worse. You just sugar coated your memories.
xanadu 05-28-07, 03:31 PM	Give the dragon leap attack + item/spell/feat pounce.
arjomanes 05-28-07, 04:01 PM	Do not limit ranks in skills to offset this perceived power creep. All that will do is penalize the skill-based characters (rogue, bard, ranger) without hurting the ones who don't need skills (druid, cleric, fighter, wizard, barbarian, sorceror). Your best bet to make things more difficult for the players is to bring out monsters with spell resistance, damage resistance, high skill points (sense motive, spot, etc). Consider adding more class levels and prestige classes to your villians, and play them smart and ruthless. Keep in mind though that the CR system is designed to let the PCs win. They aren't supposed to get TPK'ed becasue that isn't fun for anyone. If they're defeating the villians, then that's what they should be doing. As long as it's challenging and it uses up some of their resources, that's how it's supposed to be.
Lalkin 05-28-07, 04:31 PM	I agree that power creep is starting to get out of hand in this game. Especially in the last year. because of it you in general can't use stock monsters at higher level. You must customize every encounter to use newer books or the monster will get demolished.
Goreg Skullcrusher 05-28-07, 04:39 PM	I second the above. We tend not play iwth spell casters though, for both sides, and in low fantasy, so monster problems arn't really a problem for us. I'd like to second this sentiment. Our games started degrading around mid-levels as well, until we ultimately decided to remove spellcasting from both sides. Thus far it's eliminated most of the issues surrounding high-level characters.
Pentar 05-28-07, 04:41 PM	Then frankly you suck. High levels make it much easier to challenge the PCs if your decently intelligent. D&D doesn't do climactic, it does tactical. The orc hits you, you die is about as climactic as. the dragon full attacks you, you die. d20 system, ring a bell? d100s need not apply. More importantly, since spell resistance was always in 5% increments there was never any reason whatsoever not to use a d20 for spell resistance. Ah i see, your just filled with nostalgia. So lets bring some blunt truth. It was never better, it was much much worse. You just sugar coated your memories. Wow. Is someone having a bad day? Anyhoo... to the OP, there is always a power-creep with any game system, D&D 3.5 is no different. However, I have not had any issues challenging my players at level 12-13. Remember that monsters aren't the only challenge; the situation is important too. A group of lower CR creatures placed in the right situations against the PCs can be just as challenging as a high CR creature in a face-to-face fight. I like to use things like terrain, traps, weather conditions, pre-laid traps, etc. to challenge higher level players. However, I do find that entering the sub-epic levels (18-20), things are a little ridiculous. It feels like I'm playing Magic The Gathering, rather thna an RPG at that level, so I tend to avoid those campaigns. You lose the story in everyone's mad rush to be uber.
EvilVegan 05-28-07, 04:50 PM	It really depends on how you structure your fights. If you're throwing single monsters of their CR at them they should defeat them easily while expending 1/4th of their resources, probably less in most cases. But you can "switch it up." An EL 10 encounter could be 1 CR 10, or 4 CR 4 and 1 CR 8. Instead of throwing one giant at them, try throwing 4 polar bears backed up by one 8th level druid/wizard/cleric. 8 CR 3 Rogues is only EL 9, and while they'll die by round two or three they could conceivably (if they win initiative, which they should) deal 16d6 the first round, and if the party is walking in a standard formation, they could get surrounded and flanked quickly, for another 16d6 the next round. 56 average damage to one target first round is a huge chunk of resources (typically). A fighter is going to have on average 120 hp at this point. If a character is separated from the party by even a small margin (20') a small troupe of low CR creatures can do a lot of damage, especially if its rogues surrounding them. (My party thinks every NPC in my world has at least 1 level of rogue, which is mostly true for non-casters they've faced). If you don't like dealing with EL 10 and want something more challenging go up to EL 13. Can a 10th level party of 4 easily handle 8 dire lions backed up by a 9th level bard and a 9th level druid. I threw bard in here because he's typically seen as under-powered, but in conjunction with 8 pouncing dire lions, each getting +2 (probably more) to hit and damage because of the bardic music it adds up. If it's not a poorly built NPC (standard issue in most modules, but you should probably correct them) it should be adding at least +4 to attacks and damage with bardic music. That's a potential increase of 160 damage from bardic music alone per round (5 possible attacks per lion, they pounce). Lets say his buddy is a druid. And this buddy likes casting animal growth. Thats 4 huge dire lions, possibly all 8 if he's got a bonus 5th level spell. Thats an additional +2 to hit and +4/+2 to damage (plus die increase which works out to roughly +1). For a total increase of another potential 160 points of damage per round, and the lions are tougher to kill (still only CR 5 though). If things are still too easy at this point you would want to make sure there is interesting terrain around, cliffs and crevasses, trees for line of sight blocking. This is for land-based encounters, I could design something using flying or swimming creatures too. Just make sure you don't throw single CR equivalent creatures at them and keep in mind the other rules for designing encounters, keeping the encounter level in line with what they can handle, but making the fights intersting by selecting varying creatures. And make sure you take into account all your players abilities. If you have a climactic encounter with the BBEG where you want him to get away after a certain amount of time, make sure he actually has the correct way to get away (and that it makes sense within the rules). For instance, if you have a tank BBEG he wouldn't teleport out under his own power unless he had magic items, and if your party is highly mobile (monks, mounted, teleporty) then you can't expect him to get away on foot, so make sure he has the leadership feat and an invisible cohort wizard who can teleport. If you have a caster BBEG, make sure he has a contingency or crafted contingency to get away and you may want to make it dependent on someone casting dimensional anchor. I've lost a few long-time villains due to my players figuring out ways around my BBEG's escape plans, much to my disappointment. And they have the habit of destroying the bodies and consecrating/scattering the remaining ashes. . . Stupid PCs. I don't think things get broken for the CR system until level 21. At that point it's all just stupid wonkiness (which I've ripped out of my system).
EvilVegan 05-28-07, 04:52 PM	Wow. Is someone having a bad day?Nope, that's how he/she normally speaks to people. Please try and view it as constructive, non-trolling criticism. They've been around for a while, so they can get a bit snarky.
navar100 05-28-07, 06:46 PM	It's you. :P It's not a crime for player characters to be really good at something, whether it be 1st level, 10th level, 20th level, or epic. Certain aspects by themselves or with synergies can monopolize the game to unplayability, but it is a fault of those indivudal aspects, not the particular level the characters currently have. Some people like Divine Metamagic Persistent clerics, others do not. Some people like wizards polymorphing, others do not. You're not even at 10th level yet.
Alyss 05-29-07, 10:07 AM	Been working with 3.5 for a while but have noticed a disturbing trend with skills and feats at about 10th level. You'll find that they tend to be far to advantageous for the players..hence the term broken..I understand that the characters are heroes but there needs to be some challenges..It's just an observation and I'm hearing some positive approaches to this problem from the New Edition of Star Wars D20 (limiting ranks to 20 max)..Looking for feedback If you stick the PCs in a pitch black room surrounded by monk/rogue/assassin vampires then I do not believe they will survive. And that's past level 10
wonlee76 05-29-07, 10:55 AM	I would guesstimate the game starts breaking down around level 14+ and I run epic games. When I say "break" I mean the CR rules start breaking down. To be quite frank, any powerful PC can be countered by a DM. Toss out a mirror of opposition if you're super lazy and use the exact tactics/abilities that the group has shown against them. In other words, with more and more options available to PCs (which make them more powerful of course), the weaker the monsters are in your standard MM. The problems I've noticed is that the game becomes an arms race when it comes to feats, spells, prestige classes, etc. Sure, the players are favored when fighting standard monsters. But when you start customizing monsters, giving monsters class levels, developing standard race enemies instead of monster enemies, etc. etc. the CR rules start breaking down. You need to start to eyeball the CR's by "feel" moreso than just following the equations set forth in the MM. Maybe that monster is not a CR 11 anymore due to all of the feats and spells the players use. Make it a CR 10 or 9 instead. Nice and simple.
Vegepygmy 05-29-07, 12:21 PM	As you see, splatbooks are a major factor which makes high level play broken. Disallow splatbooks and only allow material on request (only single items/spells etc., not whole books) when you are sure that they fit and you are comfortable with them makes the PCs a lot less overpowered compared to monsters/published NPCs.Excellent post, Derren. I couldn't agree more.
Heretic296 05-30-07, 04:36 AM	Well now that I understand that I suck and that everything old sucks as well I guess I should just go be decrepit and silence myself....umm no. Lina, I'll take the high road and present positive approaches and persepectives on what is a legitimate problem with the system. It needs to be understood that I am not all about making my players suffer countless defeats at the hands of my monsters. I have merely noted that there are issue with some of the challenge levels for mid level groups. Skill ratings tend to become ludicrous and while I would like things to be fun there need s to be some challenges..yet I can think of few valid reasons for a difficulty 35 challenge..The problem is that by mid level players who min/max tend to have such high end ratings. I do not wish to trivialize skills but by mid level they often do. Combat which is supposed to be fun finds itself being tedious when the standard fare monster represents little threat to the players. Feats appear to not be in balance with the core of the game. Monsters can be modified to make it more challenging but it becomes a problem when it's time to figure out how far you should go. Overcompensation for the power creep becomes nothing more than the creation of incredibly overpowered monsters that have the capacity to wipe parties. This is not a desired outcome. Yes, I am old school and I do enjoy some old style rules. As far as your persepective on the old way things were done...well let me put it this way. When I started playing D&D out of the first three basic rules set it was more like a collection of ideas rather than a game. Those ideas were fleshed out by people like myself who enjoyed roleplaying games. It was undiscovered country which we explored with our imaginations and it was damn fun. I have seen how things have changed for the better and some for the worse. Yes the rules have been developed to make the game more playable and enjoyable for us all but that doesn't mean they're better. That would merely be your opinion.
Lotus Crane 05-30-07, 04:51 AM	Skill ratings tend to become ludicrous and while I would like things to be fun there need s to be some challenges..yet I can think of few valid reasons for a difficulty 35 challenge..The problem is that by mid level players who min/max tend to have such high end ratings. I do not wish to trivialize skills but by mid level they often do. Well, this is still internally consistent with all the other supernatural and often superheroic phenomenon possible in any standard D&D setting. Need some legitimate DC 35+ challenges? How about climbing a sheer cliff with an inverted slope? Swimming in a stormy sea after being bull rushed off the ship? Jumping across a ravine after a fleeing enemy cut the rope bridge down? Bluffing a dozen witnesses into believing that you didn't just kill the man whose blood is still on your hands? Intimidating a dragon? There's nothing wrong with 10th level characters automatically succeeding at the small stuff, like climbing a normal brick wall, swimming across a castle moat, or intimidating 1st level orc warriors. Why should superheroes (even medieval fantasy ones) be distracted by such trivialities?
RSB 05-30-07, 05:45 AM	To the OP: Being a DM is not easy. If you would like to be one of the DMs that does not prepare material for his game, and just grab monsters out of the ol MM3.5 without rhyme or reason, then you sir have failed your players. If the players in your game are min-maxxing, they are putting a lot of time into character creation. You too should put a lot of time into campaign creation. As a DM of a campaign where the characters started at level 10, I can tell you I put a great deal of time creating each session; always to the ratio of 1:1 or greater. Sure, there should be several encounters where the party's strengths allow them to walk over challenges placed in front of them (notice I did not say monsters, as RP encounters and traps, etc are challenges as well), but there should also be several encounters which you design where their strengths are useless. Got problems with spellcasters? Throw golems at them. Orbs a problem? Change his natural armor bonus to deflection. What is that cheating? Put your players in their place, if they want to min-max, then when it comes time their max doesnt work, and they have no backup plan, they will die. Don't like killing your players? Either they give, or you do. Simple as that. If you can't find something in a book to challenge your players, make something up. Although I have never had problems with any sort of spellcasting player in the long run. Just think that if that warmage/sorcerer/whatever is going around blowing up everything in his path with one or two spells, people are going to see him as a way to prove themselves. Have a rogue/sorc team, greater invis the rogue up to him, and gank him. He will get an easy 4 attacks on him, (imp twf +5d6 sa, maybe even flaming weapons) that should be enough to drop him, and if not, make him easy prey for round 2, or his caster buddy sniping with spells hidden 400 ft away. And then there are always the non-combat solutions, which are as infinite as your imagination. But really, I do not understand how you could have problems dealing with min-maxxing power gamers. They only have one max, and there are so many mins to exploit. I always get ****** at posts like this and need to type a lengthy reply. It just screams, "I SUCK AT BEING A DM, WOTC PLEASE PRINT ME ANSWERS!!!" duh..ever read MM3?
Derren S. 05-30-07, 06:11 AM	But really, I do not understand how you could have problems dealing with min-maxxing power gamers. They only have one max, and there are so many mins to exploit. I always get ****** at posts like this and need to type a lengthy reply. It just screams, "I SUCK AT BEING A DM, WOTC PLEASE PRINT ME ANSWERS!!!" duh..ever read MM3? If you are ok with a PC limiting your choice of variably encounters by 50% or more because everything, for example, with less than 4 legs and smaller than huge gets destroyed easily. But some DMs are not. They do not want a single PC to dictate what monsters are still a viable encounter and which not. Also using the min over and over again is very cheesy. As is arbitrary changing natural armor to deflection without reason just to make a spellcaster less effective. And beware organized MinMax duos where ones min is the others max.
Ruike 05-30-07, 07:39 AM	Its not neccesarily the culture that encouages min maxing its the group setting. People may dabbel but quite frankly i'd rather have the bomb disposal guy whose soul purpose in life is to disarm bombs try it than the guy who can but failed 2 out of 5 tests and passed because he made a 60% (D for diploma). Quite frankly the thing that makes parties do well is that everyone is there for a reason and that reason is usually different from everyone else in the party. If every can do everything but no one can do it well then people are only there to spread out the damage.
Ruike 05-30-07, 07:42 AM	Keep in mind for example that just because something doesnt' result in at least 2 party members diabled doesn't mean a fight wasn't challenging if things had gone different or if it was a different group. Challenge isn't always deadly. A group that works well together and knows each others strengths and weaknesses and works together to keep everyone on the strong side is going to have an easier time of it than a random free for all where everyone is fighting on their own hoping for the lucky die rolls.
RSB 05-30-07, 04:05 PM	Ruike just summed up in 1/10th of my words what I said a little while ago. Somewhere in campaign construction it says like 40% of encounters should basically be pushovers, draining resources. Not every encounter needs to be a do or die deathmatch. Your players should feel like they are powerful. But then again, if the MM doesnt give you challenging monsters to throw at your party, make something up that will make them think. For an example, there is no reason why you cant remove a natural armor bonus and change it to a deflection to make the golem's touch AC to be stupidly high. The fighters wont care, it will be the same overall AC. But arbitrarily changing it? Perhaps someone needs to look up the definition of the word. It is NOT arbitrary, it is changed for a REASON. That reason is to make the players solve the situation in another way besides their max. (aka their crutch) You can pull their crutch from under them, and either they will use brainpower and overcome the situation in another way, or they will flee or die. But if you are afraid to do that, then you can continue to post on the forums that D&D 3.5 is broken. But please make it in another section of the forums, and label it "I am a DM without a spine" D&D is NOT broken. Just like someone else posted up near the top, D&D is merely a framework, its NOT set in stone. You may think this is untrue with all the books out now, which make rules for every situation you can think of...but its still a framework. You can choose to work within the framework to customize your campaign for your party. Lets face it, the devs cant make new stuff and check every other book out to make sure there arent broken synergies. There will be powerful combos. If your players pick one of those combos, you need to find a way to counter it enough times that his character feels that there are bigger fish than him. And again I have found myself with another small book.
Heretic296 05-30-07, 04:48 PM	RSB wrote: Lets face it, the devs cant make new stuff and check every other book out to make sure there arent broken synergies. Umm no, see thats the reason why we have 3.5 becasue of the inadequite playtesting of 3.0. I do expect a product to go through some changes but I also expect development to look at the implications of the rules to ensure that they work. This means looking at the possibilities and implications of what we can call adaptive behaviors.(ie min/max) This is probably not a D&D issue as I reflect upon it. It's more of a systemic issue which means D20. I posted here because this is where the bulk of my experiences comes from, D&D play. I completely understand that anything can be modified. Trust me I can downright midevil if I choose to be. The flaw lies in the core of the rules. Standard encounters should present a challenge without significant tweaking. This doesn't mean that the players should cower in fear when a Troll comes out but they should be concerned and it not become a dice rolling exercise. Perhaps the essence of this is that people min/max. As a DM I find this aggrivating as it becomes more about winning than playing the game but as a player I see no reason to not work towards my strengths. Experiential play is fun but I want to test my numbers some times. Numbers are nice but they mean little without context. Philosophicly both side have their merits but there must be a balance. So, where do you draw the line? How do you achieve that balance? Yes, call me old school but I often miss the element of randomness that seems to have been replaced by new "equality rules". Not all heroes are created equal and it was the players means of adapting to their weaknesses which made for an enjoyable experience. Unfortunately this is kind of hypocritical if I'm striving to have a balanced core rules set then these "equality rules" become the foundation of my game. I'm not saying the whole foundation is broken but look past the variances that you suggested and you'll see the cracks.
LeuktheSavior 05-30-07, 05:07 PM	the higher the challenge, the more thought you need to put into it. You can pit them against a pit fiend without any planning or preparation, but by CR 16, those monsters are gonna have the brains to find a way to equal the playing field. Grapple, greater teleport into a bed of lava, then teleport back. Intelligent fighting. If by level ten you cant find an adequate challenge for your players, perhaps you need to start reading into the books and get a better idea for what you are trying to accomplish in your campaign. Limit the books they can access if you cant find a way to counteract their new stuff. Play against your players as well. you arent supposed to play to make it all fun and easy. Upset them. pit them agaisnt the monster immune to their sorcerer's blows, who taunts their characters and kills their cleric before departing. Make it dirty and personal for their characters (not the players), the more the players are into the story, the easier it is for you to whip out bigger challenges.
Derren S. 05-30-07, 05:17 PM	If by level ten you cant find an adequate challenge for your players, perhaps you need to start reading into the books and get a better idea for what you are trying to accomplish in your campaign. A good advise. You should do that to as your Pit Fiend tactic of grappling and teleport does not work ;)
RSB 05-30-07, 06:41 PM	Umm no, see thats the reason why we have 3.5 becasue of the inadequite playtesting of 3.0. I do expect a product to go through some changes but I also expect development to look at the implications of the rules to ensure that they work. This means looking at the possibilities and implications of what we can call adaptive behaviors.(ie min/max) 3.0 was not really all that bad to tell the truth. And if you think the devs will catch every broken combo out there, you are delusional. Frankly, I don't think you could do anywhere near as good a job as they have to this point. So stop your whining. Just admit you suck as a DM and move on.
Heretic296 05-30-07, 08:41 PM	3.0 was not really all that bad to tell the truth. And if you think the devs will catch every broken combo out there, you are delusional. Frankly, I don't think you could do anywhere near as good a job as they have to this point. So stop your whining. Just admit you suck as a DM and move on. Well I'm not going to bite on the insult. Obviously we have a difference of perspective and I'm not going to debase myself to "In my opinion you're wrong so you suck and need to shut up." The purpse of the message boards is to have a frank and open discussion not to gratify your ego. I'll just clarify some points to clear up any misunderstanding then I'll let this one die because it's become trollbait. I didnt say that I could do a better job. There are problems with d20 system( especially with skills and feats) and if you can't see them you're in denial. No game company should have to create a 3.5 edition of anything, tranistion should go to errata then the next edition. Finally, anyone that takes the time effort and energy to become a DM deserves serious props for trying to do something constructive and getting others involved. Thanks for the dialogue. See you next post.
Geogoose 05-31-07, 01:49 AM	I'm not going to deny power creep. The designers feel obligated to put out X new feats and spells in each splatbook, which tends to allow for more optimization. With core, let's say there are 6 feats to allow a character to hit things with a stick better, at which point even the most min-maxed character must start selecting different themed feats. As splatbooks come out that same character need never stop selecting feats(PrC's, etc) to hit things better with his stick and becomes much more specialized for it. That said, nothing is stopping a DM from integrating older monsters and NPC's with the new rules. Core monsters with crappy and/or core only feats could be redesigned with some new stuff. NPC's can sling the new spells around just like the players. With respect to skills: characters are supposed to get better as they level. Entirely new challenges need to be presented. Hiding from the town guard or crossing a ravine are supposed to be easy for high level characters. Quite simply, if if you cannot design challenges high level characters, don't play at high levels.
EvilVegan 05-31-07, 09:25 AM	What stops the powercreep from ocurring on both sides? Why can't monsters take all these "overpowered" skills and feats? If you need specific assistance challenging your party at a given level, provide their classes, races, and feats, specifically those feats/abilities that are giving you trouble, and we can help. You dont' have to design your encounters to specifically defeat the party, but you do have to design your creatures to specifically survive encounters with anything they may encounter. "Monsters" don't exist in a vacuum. If adventurers are running around as frenzied berserkers with power attack, leap attack, shock trooper, and pounce, then the monsters would evolve to be able to resist this, either with "Large and In Charge" feats (knockback on AoO against charging foe) or with a level or two in classes for survivability. Also if you run modules you need to change the feats on some of the NPCs. I ran a module and one of the "villains" was a sorcerer with Exotic weapon proficiency (hand-crossbow), scribe scroll, and toughness. Also her spell list was horrid. I left her as written and she did exactly nothing to challenge the PCs except for one fireball (from a scroll, wasn't on her spell list) and a lightning bolt (again from a scroll). So it seems that the module developers don't take this alleged power-creep into account. I think this may be more to make sure everyone will be able to run the module (if they dont' have Complete Warrior it would be hard to use complete warrior feats).
Steely_Dan 05-31-07, 09:44 AM	I think the main problem with the game at levels 11+ is the presence of the silly 6th+ level spells that start being thrown around. The magic system is antiquated and clunky and needs a complete overhaul from the ground up. Almost every aspect of this game has evolved and moved on, except for the Gygaxian magic system.
AllisterH 05-31-07, 09:53 AM	I think it is more a problem of the magic system than the skills & feat systems. Seriously, by 13th level, what combination of feats (other than [divine] metamagic) are as unbalancing to the game as the 7th level spell effects.
Steely_Dan 05-31-07, 10:08 AM	I think it is more a problem of the magic system than the skills & feat systems. Seriously, by 13th level, what combination of feats (other than [divine] metamagic) are as unbalancing to the game as the 7th level spell effects. Exactly. If you run a party without a character that can cast high-level spells, it makes for a very different experience (usually better, IMO).
EvilVegan 05-31-07, 10:20 AM	3.5 Psionics corrected the gygaxian/vancian system. Maybe not in the way you wanted it to, but it did help. Also one of the Ex-Developers for 3.x (forgot which) has stated his dislike for save-or-dies and was working on a system of varying degrees of disables and status effects.
Steely_Dan 05-31-07, 10:28 AM	1.) 3.5 Psionics corrected the gygaxian/vancian system. Maybe not in the way you wanted it to, but it did help. 2.) Also one of the Ex-Developers for 3.x (forgot which) has stated his dislike for save-or-dies and was working on a system of varying degrees of disables and status effects. 1.) It was better, but I would prefer something per encounter based, ala ToB. 2.) Yep, love it; use it: http://boards1.wizards.com/leaving.php?destination=http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/variantfewerabsolutes1.html http://boards1.wizards.com/leaving.php?destination=http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/variantfewerabsolutes2.html
EvilVegan 05-31-07, 10:51 AM	Ah yes, it was Monte. Couldn't remember his name!
Vegepygmy 05-31-07, 12:25 PM	What stops the powercreep from ocurring on both sides?The DM's limited amount of time. Why can't monsters take all these "overpowered" skills and feats?They can, if the DM has time to re-stat every encounter. But the players, having only a few characters that they have to "build," can spend much more time than the DM can poring over the rulebooks, finding just the right combination of abilities to create game-breaking synergies, etc., etc.
AllisterH 05-31-07, 12:40 PM	Then again, there's the problem that many of the MM creatures have some sub-optimal choices for feats with just the core PHB. For example, Alertness seem to be the default for a lot of creatures AND then there's the problem that the core PHB lacked high level feats meaning, the high-level monsters themselves don't have the best options.
Someone 05-31-07, 01:32 PM	Its what happens around levels 5-7 that makes levels 10+ tricky. Somewhere around 5-7, you qualify. (you also start growing hair in funny places and begin liking girls :P ) At lower levels, you're still working up to whatever feat/PrC/class ability is to characterize your PC at and above 10th level. With PrCs, its fairly obvious, as they (usually) have prerequisites that can only be met by a 5th-7th level character. But even with core classes, stuff like a druid's wild shape, a paladin's special mount, a ranger's second combat style feat, or even a wizard's 3rd level spells only show up at that point. Simply put, higher level isn't when things get "broken", its just when the better stuff become available, or that the stuff you've had for a while improves. Of course, there is such a thing as too much better...
EvilVegan 05-31-07, 01:48 PM	The DM's limited amount of time. They can, if the DM has time to re-stat every encounter. But the players, having only a few characters that they have to "build," can spend much more time than the DM can poring over the rulebooks, finding just the right combination of abilities to create game-breaking synergies, etc., etc. How much time does it take? If a monster has a crap feat and qualifies for something (anything) better you swap it out. Takes about 1 second. Personally, I can do it on the fly. I don't even typically plan adventures before I get to the table, just plot points and NPC basics. For instance last session I had the group get commissioned by a local smuggler to catch a dire lion cub. I knew the smuggler was higher level than the party and a were-rat and that he floated (for some reason, I just wanted him to look like a little Baron Harkonen). Beyond that I had 0 stats for him (because he was going to have only pleasant social interactions with the party). But the party druid decides that after they deliver the dire lion and get the information in trade that he's going to free the gnome's menagerie. I didn't plan it beforehand, but the gnome now needs stats and becomes a 9th level swordsage (with the stance that lets you float, btw), and his feats are in line with what a 9th level smuggler swordsage would need (weapon finesse, shadowhand feat, two-weapon fighting, greater two weapon fighting). He's got mostly shadow hand and tiger claw disciplines, with a few stone dragon. He's got better equipment than a standard NPC because he's rich and moves a lot of goods in person. Had the party not interacted with the gnome at all he wouldn't have been statted ever (my initial plan was making him a priest), and won't be used in the future unless the party comes back to this region for some reason (which isn't part of my plans, but they could). I can re-stat him as a higher level swordsage in the future, again with no problem. When it comes to "random encounters" I plan what EL encounters the party should face, sometimes I get their treasure ready before hand (for intelligent creatures that use their gear), but usually I just jot down the creature they're going to face, pull out the correct MM and adjust on the fly. I can do this because I know how to build characters and I spend a lot of time on the boards learning how to optimize. If you know how to build a character or min-max at all, revamping a poorly designed creature's feat selection shouldn't even be a blip in your running the game. Also it doesn't hurt that the majority of character creation themes works just as well for npcs. What items would a 10th level character have? Well, ring of prot +1, Cloak of resist +2, Amulet of NA or Con +2, armor +2, weapon +1, maybe some boots of S&S. What feats does a 9 HD "bruiser" have? Power attack, leap attack, improved bullrush, shock trooper How about an arcane spell caster? Sudden Empower, Sudden Still, Reserve Feat, Heighten Spell How about a divine caster? Extend spell, Persistent Spell, Divine Persistent Spell, Extra Turning. Radiant Servant of Pelor? Domain Spontaneity (:P) A rogue? Deadly Precision, (TWF/Point Blank shot), (Greater TWF / Rapid Shot), (Weapon Finesse / Many shot) A fire giant? Take out great cleave, improved overrun, and iron will, replace with improved bullrush, shock trooper, combat brute, or maybe a weapon style feat group or knockback, awesome blow, or leap attack. An aboleth? Take out alertness, combat casting, and iron will (all of their feats are lame), replace with Ability Focus (Enslave), Brachiation, and Skill focus (craft: Origami). A dragon? Knockback, Flyby Attack, Metabreath feats, Combat Expertise, Improved Trip, Power Attack, Leap Attack, Improved Sunder, Combat Brute, Improved Bullrush, Shock Trooper, Large and In Charge, Combat Reflexes (with +Dex item), Hold the Line. . . It isn't hard!
Derren S. 05-31-07, 01:56 PM	I spend a lot of time on the boards learning how to optimize. What was that about it doesn't take much time? And how much time did you need for statting out the swordsage including his equipment? Either you have all feats & equipment memorized, do only have a few feat/equipment templates which you rotate on your NPCs or it takes long enough to stall the game. Which is it?
EvilVegan 05-31-07, 02:12 PM	What was that about it doesn't take much time? I'm sorry, I assumed that anyone who has time to get on the boards and post a question actually has time to get on the boards. I have historically spent time learning how to Play D&D, and I assumed that anyone else would have also spent some time learning the rules. This is not the same as "it takes a lot of time to re-stat an encounter", are you now saying that the DM in question doesn't have enough time to learn how to play D&D? And how much time did you need for statting out the swordsage including his equipment? Either you have all feats & equipment memorized, do only have a few feat/equipment templates which you rotate on your NPCs or it takes long enough to stall the game. Which is it?It took me exactly 1 second of game time that I did in the breath between the sentences: "The [gnome] steps out of his tent looking bedraggled at being woke by the alarm" and "He starts trailing behind [you] sniffing at the ground as he floats along". I don't have to rotate anything, equipment and feats are pretty standard across the boards (no pun intended) for various character archetypes. There's a reason why certain things are featured in almost every build, it works in almost every build. As long as my NPCs are assumed to be half as intelligent and resourceful as a PC, they'll have pretty useful abilities. If it takes you 30 minutes to get a PC ready to go, it should take almost 0 time to plan a minor NPC. So I guess between the two options you gave "[I] have all feats and equipment memorized", but it would be more precise to say "I know how to play D&D and know the most commonly used feats and equipment." And lets not forget that I also have all spells, abilities, and powers memorized as well :rolleyes:
Vegepygmy 05-31-07, 06:47 PM	How much time does it take?In my experience, much more than you think it does.
EvilVegan 05-31-07, 07:23 PM	Then don't DM or find time? I know it's not you that has a problem with it, so that's more for anyone who has trouble DMing. Either figure out a way to not be bothered. I did this through understanding the rules and being a really good liar. Others may need to find more time to plan (I guess). Or find someone else to DM while they figure out what they want to do. I didn't do homework in school, so I'm not about to start doing homework for a game. :P
RSB 05-31-07, 07:56 PM	I can see the OP stopped posting. He must have figured out its not the game that is broken, but just him. I myself often spend more time plotting when im prepping a section rather than making stat blocks. If anyone cant make them on the fly then all that means is you need to do more research and come up with some solid skeletons for each archtype that you can flesh out on the fly. Anyone that says it takes a lot of time expects to have the answers handed to them on a silver platter. I myself spent hours at a time learning the game when I started to DM. Either put the time in to learn how to DM or dont DM. Nothing ruins my week more than joining a new campaign and having a DM try to AoO my 5ft.
parad0cz 05-31-07, 08:14 PM	More and more i see this is one of the iconic things that troubles journeyman(that is, more than novice, less than master) DMs. Including me, until i learned out of it. The ability to adjudicate higher level play. The thing is, it requires a change of paradigm. Most of the time when we think of 'adventures' we think of movies and books. We think, oh, Gandalf must be a 20th level wizard, or epic! I mean come on he's Gandalf! Then you figure out that gandalf is really no better than a 5th-7th level wizard when it comes to D&D. "They are avoiding all my pit traps by flight! They are skipping over all of my wonderful planed random encounters on the map it took me so long to make with teleport! They are ruining all my mysteries with divination! The are circumventing my nighttime ambush by climbing into thier multidimentional mansion! They are getting around my locked doors with Adamantine Battleaxes! This stuff is so bahroken!" Get over it. Thats the game. All that stuff like swinging chasms, locked doors, and sleeping in the wild is low level, and gets left behind as you get more powerful. Once you get to level 9(ie, the level where death itself is merely a setback) you've graduated from the kids stuff like dropping off the unwanted jewelry at the Return Department of Mt.Doommart. Now its time for some TOUGH stuff! Thing is, the game goes 'epic' far earlier than the name suggests. At the mid game, the planes themselves open up to your gaze. The powers of your characters make the vast distances of the world shrink, the city guard a mere speedbump if your character decides he is having a bad day. You are, in short, a MAJOR Player. Characters change as the get higher in level, and you use different monsters as different challenges. But thats only part of it. THe 'world challenges' needs to evolve as well. THey should be things that are impossible for lower levels to achieve. Make them HAVE to use high level divination to get info. MAke a place completly inaccesible unless you have flight. Make it so you need passwall to even start the dungeon. Make them go to the Nine Hells themselves to find the McGuffin, starting with being powerful enough to Planeshift there. Then, your characters can think foundly about old adventures, which would have been SO much easier with thier new powers. How old scary things are now less than nothing. CHuckle how now that you are 12th level you could have finished of that poser Sar...something, what was his name? in an afternoon my windwalking that trinket off to that volcano. I mean, now that i think back, those nazghuls werent that tough! You'd kick thier incoporeal asses now! It'll be like looking back at high school after your working for a living;) No, the game doesnt break. The game changes. ALOT earlier than most people think. The window for LOTR/POTC style play is a lot shorter than people imagine. You got to change up and meet the challenge.
RSB 06-02-07, 03:13 PM	Well stated.