Thread 96017587

For discussion of D&D 3.0 and 3.5e

> Tools
https://srd.dndtools.org
https://dndtools.one/
https://d20srd.org
https://www.realmshelps.net/

> Indices
> 3.5
https://archive.burne99.com/archive/4/
http://web.archive.org/web/20080617022745/http://www.crystalkeep.com/d20/index.php
> 3.0
http://web.archive.org/web/20060330114049/http://www.crystalkeep.com:80/d20/rules3.0.php
> Book PDFs
https://mega.nz/folder/GMMUDLCK#1IXzJk1_yxlgNmPABGjcyw
> Dragon Magazine Index
https://www.aeolia.net/dragondex/
> Web Articles Orbital Flower Index PDF
https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/91811106/#91824954
> Errata
https://web.archive.org/web/20201111205827/http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/errata

>3e Resource Index Version 2024-04-17
https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/92491374/#92530275
Previous thread: >>95898738
Thread Question: Have you ever played a session outdoors or in another odd location?

>>96017587 (OP)
>Have you ever played a session outdoors or in another odd location?
Yeah, my group tends to do some sort of trip together at least once a year. One of the guys has a lake cabin so either we'll stay there or go somewhere else and rent one. Go hunting/hiking/kayaking during the day and then board games or rpgs in the evening. Not always 3.5e but at least a few times it has been.

And I don't know if it really counts as an odd location but there was a group of guys at my high school who played outside pretty much every lunchtime when the weather was good. Never spoke to them but I remember seeing the 3.5e books they had stacked up on the grass.

>>96017587 (OP)
>outdoors
Once in the backyard doing bbq but the wind was a nuisance.
>odd location
2 players were doing PhD and so had access to a lab room at the uni, we played a lengthy 3.5 campaign there, at some point the lab also got a 3d printer so we had minis printed for the PCs. It was pretty rad. Unfortunately at some point the lab was needed for its original purposes during our scheduled time so we had to go play elsewhere.

>>96017898
we tried once in uni but it was something of a disaster. it was at a picnic table after a short hike but people kept getting distracted by nature, the uncomfiness and switch up in setup. It was also more than 10 years ago when digital reliance for dming wasnt a thing. I shudder to imagine someone trying it today without the right group of people.

>>96017587 (OP)
>Have you ever played a session outdoors or in another odd location?
A veteran's cemetery, because it was cooler outside than in the FLGS. We rolled the dice in the hands of a life sized status of Jesus that was in supplication. Also let Jesus hit the blunt.
Also for at a meadery a friend of mine owns, and we still do from time to time.
Ran a one time VtM quasi larp at a friend's cabin property, some 40 acres of land studded with all types of stuff (and I suspect his stash of drugs, guns and ammo, possibly explosives).

>>96017587 (OP)
The most outdoors-y place I've played was in my apartment's patio (is that what it's called?).

>>96017898
>there was a group of guys at my high school who played outside pretty much every lunchtime when the weather was good
Oh man, that's cool.

>>96018071
A Cemetery? That's fucking hilarious holy shit.

>>96017587 (OP)
>Have you ever played a session outdoors or in another odd location?
The things that immediately come to mind are:
My friends and I used to play on the back porch of his parents house. It was great unless it was windy out. I hate that later on he became a stoner and that was the primary place he'd smoke. (I hate playing with stoned players 'cause in my experience they can't stay focused.)
Later on, I ran a game at my local park. There's a place near here that's a small park in the middle of the city. I'd tell my players to meet up there, and we'd play as long as it wasn't rainy or gross out.

The weirdest place I've played in is the laundry mat. My friend and I had to do laundry, and neither of us had a laundry machine. So we'd play an hour long session, twice a week while we did our laundry. We got a lot of funny looks.

The craziest thing I've heard is that there's a group that meets up biweekly at a local Hardee's. They usually get really loud and have to be told to quiet down multiple times whenever they show up.

I'm currently running Keep on the Borderlands (ported to 3.5/PF1e, if it matters but I don 't think it will).

In the Chapel of Evil Chaos, there are four artifacts that turn anyone who touches them and fails a save chaotic evil. Thare are supposed to be a shallow bowl, 2 goblets and an ewer.

However, in developping a PC backstory, I've indrotuced a story arc with a noble looking for genealogy records, heirlooms, crests and other tapestries. My PC so far have recovered 2 of those for him, one even being a magical tapestry that can display anyone from a specific family and that can verify that someone pronouncing the proper command word belongs or not to the family.
I'd like to rework those artifacts to fit this idea. So that they can be of some importance in the local politics, mainly through genealogy and heraldry. I also want to keep the cursed aspect. I'm fine with turning a PC's alignement around (my players are aware we are playing old modules and these sort of things can happen), but I'm also open to other ideas.

Anyway thanks to anyone helping me out,
Have a great day or night and even greater games !

>>96021678
one thing that comes to mind pretty fast would be to have someone in the direct noble lineage portrayed with one of the artefacts

records show that he was pretty far down the line in succession and all the ones who were above him had violent deaths.

What's a good idea for an endgame weapon, could be a sword, or a sort of psionic attack, etc.

I always thought manipulating something weak and making it somehow uniquely strong was a good one, like having destructive internal wood attacks

>>96022409
I'm not sure I get what you mean.
Are we talking about a player character, a BBEG, an artifact that exists somewhere in the world?

>the SRD hypertext
how much is in there compared to how much is missing?

>>96025084
You mean compared to the totality of 3.5e?
Even ignoring technically valid 3.0 stuff, a lot.
All the environment stuff (sandstorm, frostburn, etc), cool sub-systems (ToB, Incarnum, Binding, etc), miscellaneous things like the stuff from the Stronghold Builders Guide, content tied to campaigns and adventures, things released on WotC's website back in the day, etc.
Hell, the spell compendium and magic item compendium alone have a lot of content not in the SRD.
3.5e is truly huge.

>>96025296
damn, that sounds like a lot of stuff.

My group have been talking about the limits of 5e and what we want out of D&D - the issue being, 5e is massive and makes a lot of our shit easy by basically being accessible through 5etools and the like.

god I want to move away from it but I get the feeling theres going to be frustration that move for no other reason than just because. Anyway, I was looking for 3.5 or even 4th edition tools and saw the SRD.
>bastard sword
how I long for thee. 5e has fuckin nothin' for one handing two handers, and it's a shame because I think it's something that really marks a character out as being A Big Guy.

4th edition already has the slander in our little group as the MMO edition which is already a mark against it because they have no idea what that means in gameplay except cooldowns and abilities which yeah, but as far as i know the thing with 4e is that it has a lot of encounter abilities which is where the MMO part come from since they reset at the start of the encounter?

idk. fuck 5e.

>>96025778
All of the shit I mentioned, and even some stuff in the SRD, is additional stuff you don't really need to play.
Plus, there's 5e tools equivalent (if a little clunkier) on the likes of https://srd.dndtools.org (and the other links in the OP) that are not really the SRD, most of the shit I mentioned is in there.

>5e has fuckin nothin' for one handing two handers, and it's a shame because I think it's something that really marks a character out as being A Big Guy.
There are ways to do that in 3.5e, both using items and feats, IIRC.
If you are trying 3.5e, you probably want to download the DMG and PHB PDFs and go from there.

>>96025084
>>96025296
>>96025778
>>96025845
Iirc, the srd hypertext link is exclusively things covered by the OGL agreement.
So that means PHB1, DMG1, MM1, and Unearthed Arcana.
If you want a more complete website, I use
>srd. dndtools. org/

>>96025875
>the srd hypertext link is exclusively things covered by the OGL agreement.
Exactly. Hence why it doesn't have flavor texts and the like.
It's quite literally the actual SRD content.
Websites like the myriad dndtools are basically the equivalent to 5etools.

>>96025845
>If you are trying 3.5e, you probably want to download the DMG and PHB PDFs and go from there.
Premium Edition ones preferably, they include all the errata like the rework of polymorph effects + swift/immediate actions becoming a formal thing

>>96025778
>how I long for thee. 5e has fuckin nothin' for one handing two handers, and it's a shame because I think it's something that really marks a character out as being A Big Guy.
Exotic Weapon Proficiency (bastard sword) is basically only getting you +1 damage, which is really weak for a feat.
Worse, wielding a weapon in two hands increases your bonus damage from Str by +50% and from Power Attack by +100%, so if you're not using your other hand for a shield or something then "two-hander in one hand" is a downgrade that you pay for.

There's also the Monkey Grip feat which lets you wield a weapon one size larger in exchange for -2 on attack rolls, but that generally caps out at +3.5 damage for a greatsword (smaller weapons get less), and again Power Attack lets you turn -2 atk into +4 dmg while being way more flexible.

The half-giant, goliath and eneko races, on the other hand, have the Powerful Build trait which lets them count as Large for a few purposes, including the size of weapons they can wield. Goliath is a solid bruiser, the others are more niche.

>>96026365
There's also the notoriously badly-written Titan Bloodline, which gets the titan's Wield Oversized Weapon ability at high levels. The text of said ability being "the titan can wield a Gargantuan warhammer in one hand".

>>96026375
Which is a real downgrade if you're already colossal, but hilarious if you're smaller than huge.

>>96026365
There's also the Strongarm Bracers from MiC that let you wield one size larger.

>>96026365
>Exotic Weapon Proficiency (bastard sword) is basically only getting you +1 damage, which is really weak for a feat.
yes, but it is cool.

>>96026375
You say "badly written", I say that's fucking metal as hell and anyone who disagrees is the fun police.

>>96026505
seconded

>>96026365
>Dreamscarred Press writing an einhander class and just saying "fuck it"
>Strength of Arms (Ex): At 1st level, a landsknecht learns to deliver maximum power with his one-handed weapon. As long as the landsknecht only attacks with a single weapon wielded in one hand during a round, he adds 1-1/2 times his Strength modifier to damage instead of his Strength modifier, as if he was wielding the weapon in two hands.
https://libraryofmetzofitz.fandom.com/wiki/Landsknecht

>>96026127
I had no idea.
Good to know.

>the 3.5 tier pyramid
I have heard horrible things. is it as bad as people say or only an issue for level fuckin, idk 15-20 where its already bonkers or what?

>>96028459
Depends. At lv1 wizards have Color Spray and Sleep which are extremely deadly against low-level opponents (plus Grease as backup), but they don't work on everything and things can go wrong easily.

General consensus is that there's a power spike around lv7 when 4th level spells start coming online, which is why E6 exists.

>>96028459
>>96028886
I think it's fair to mention that a wizard and other similar casters have a much lower floor than a cleric or a druid, at least in my experience.
By that I mean that a lvl 10 wizard that isn't writing new spells to their spellbook beyond the ones it gains on level up, has a crappy spell selection, and uses meh spells in combat, is probably going to do a lot worse than a cleric or a druid being played at the same level of "mastery", because their chassis (bab, hp, equipment, abilities) are better, they know their whole spell list, they have spontaneous conversion, etc.
More than once have I seen our "primary casters" try to spam evocation spells against high SR enemies, not try to target weak saves, etc.
It can be kind of a shit show.
Granted, its a lot harder to fuck up nowadays with so many online resources like guides and the like, but it's not impossible.

I'm getting back to 3e, except obvious read all books advice, where exactly should I start so I can learn all the lore and rules?

>>96030700
>rules
DMG + PHB.
Or the SRD for the basic (as in minimum necessary) version I guess.

>lore
That'll depend on the setting.
The default setting for 3e is Greyhawk, kind of. I think. But there's tons of FR material, a decent amount of Eberron, some Ravenloft, etc.

>>96030700
>>96026127

>>96025778
>5e is massive
5e is fucking tiny. I started with 3.5 and my group migrated to 5e and one of the things that has always itched is how little content was ever released for it. When WotC announced their 2024 books, we took it as a sign to cut ties, write our own revision, and begin filling it out by porting in more 3.5 concepts and content. We've already practically doubled the size of the system.

>>96034002
>, and begin filling it out by porting in more 3.5 concepts and content.
Oh fuck. I thought of doing something like that to begin introducing that stuff to my 5e group.
You wouldn't happen to have a document or wiki somewhere would you?

>>96034083
Unfortunately, we play strictly in paper, with no computers or phones allowed at the table, so it's all in a binder currently. I keep thinking I ought to type it up, but then we change something else and I fall into the trap of thinking that we'll surely be done THIS time after we finish playtesting.

>>96034109
I don't envy you on that front, in my experience any adaptation of 3.5's flat bonuses to the advantage system is a nightmare. After an afternoon of tinkering my conclusion was not to bother with 5e at all but it wasn't my playgroup, I was just giving advice to the DM.

>>96034124
Oh, we didn't try to adapt 3.5's flat bonuses--that clusterfuck was actually one of the major reasons we moved to 5e in the first place. We ended up adopting something closer to SotDL's boons/banes system

>>96034109
Got it.

>>96034185
That's how I'd do it too.
The main thing I'd want to port are classes and PRCs, templates, stuff like incarnum, and a couple of spells.
Plus the odd rule, of course.

>>96034002
>>5e is massive
>5e is fucking tiny.
In terms of market share, so the fan content and support and talking shit about it on reddit or whatever it's massive - it's The Thing. whether it deserves that or if you like it or whatever, it's still massive. that's what I meant

My party of four 3rd level characters (elf druid, elf rogue, human monk, halfling cleric) will shortly be entering a dungeon with a 7-headed hydra boss at the end. I understand that is a large CR difference. The boss room has volcanic pools of sulfuric acid and there will be a follower NPC with a large number of glass jars, and I will put some sundering and bladed ranged weapons throughout the dungeon so they should be able to assemble the tools to succeed, but I'm mostly worried about them attempting a head-on fight before preparing those things and being unable to safely withdraw and regroup.

>>96034526
You're kind of asking for a TPK. Unless they go into the dungeon knowing there's a hydra at the end and they need to cobble together an arsenal/plan to beat it, they're going to end up screwed especially since they don't have a frontline fighter that can use a medium-sized metal sword.

It has 10ft reach and can attack 7 times in a full attack, and assuming average rolls for damage and player HP it will only take three licks to get to the center of any particular tootsie pop. Sundering provokes an AoO and an opposed attack where the hydra is at +7, and even if they do land a sunder it gains new heads unless they splash it with acid, IF they know to splash it with acid. Especially with your party's DPR they're not going to be able to outpace it's healing, so dealing with the puzzle-boss aspect is the only potential path.

>>96034604
Would it make a difference if it's only a 5-headed hydra or is this party just completely incapable of beating any hydra at all?

>>96034687
More the latter, honestly. If their muscle was a barbarian or fighter it'd start to put it into "bad idea" territory rather than "hopeless" but a monk's d8 hit die and inability to use a sword really put the party on the back foot, especially when the cleric is a halfling. Hydra's are one of those monsters like the giant scorpion where if everything goes according to plan they're fairly straightforward but a single round where it can use a full attack spells disaster.

Like I said, if they know going in there's a hydra in the basement and the entire dungeon is figuring out what they're going to do about that, a five-headed hydra would be a real fucker but not insurmountable as long as they were smart and didn't get unlucky. Anything less than that metagame level of prep and discipline (and I'm talking constant abuse of readied actions to sunder/throw acid while spreading out and playing extremely defensive), and they're going to get demolished - this isn't a foe they can whittle down and no one in the party is well-suited for wading in close against it.

>>96034802
They are going to have a degree of forewarning that there is a "multi-headed reptile" guarding the vault, and the intention was to have them find and identify it before using the dungeon resources to kill it. I've been trying to think of environmental props they could use to sneak off a head or two before fighting in earnest, like an old portcullis or something like that. The NPC follower is mostly a guide for the area so it can deliver relevant info without requiring metagaming. It's also an entirely optional fight, they can and probably should avoid it, but I don't want them to get locked into a TPK the second they aggro it. That's part of why I wanted to do 7 heads in the first place, they're more likely to actually try fighting 5.

>>96034526
>>96034687
>>96034904
The party is going to ignore any and all warning signs, hoard the given resources without realizing you've placed them for a reason, walk in confident in their ability to "Win" at this "Game" you're all "Playing" and then pick every single worst possible option, at which point you either GM fiat to save their asses or play it straight and watch them die

>>96034904
It's possible I'm being overly cautious in my advice, but in my experience players tend to over-assume that anything they encounter is a scenario that's either winnable or navigable with very little consideration for immediate disengagement, and DMs tend to overindex of what's possible for the party to do if they play 'correctly' and find all the breadcrumbs without leaving enough insurance for mistakes or poor rolls. If this is the sort of campaign/party that can accept two or three people getting munched before everyone else flees that's one thing, but for the average romp you need to hedge on the worst case scenario which in this case is very much that unless the in-character party knows what to do and the players know mechanically what to do, they're going to lose and lose too fast to tell that this isn't viable.

>>96034975
>>96034997
One thing our DM likes to do is, when he sees that we are maybe going on a path with a little too much confidence, he informs the character with the most intelligence, wisdom, or the relevant skill about how challenging the situation seems to be. A direct poke/steer, so that we, as players, are crystal clear that our characters would understand the degree of dire the situation is.
Usually involving a easy-ish dice roll for some relevant skill.
It doesn't happen much, but he's done that a couple of times in the last couple of years.

>>96035043
It's a brute-force tool but it's definitely one of the tools in the toolbox, and leaning on a character's experience to tell them "your intuition doesn't feel good about this" is just as much a part of scene-setting as the color of the floor or the texture of the walls.

>>96034975
this post made me remember these players aren't random idiot teenagers at the local game shop. I've been playing with these players for over a decade and they're not that kind of group thank god.

>>96034997
The campaign is intentionally open-ended and free, it basically started as "go wherever you hear something interesting is happening" so I don't want every encounter to be perfectly CR matched. This monster is here regardless of their level when they find it. I can crank up the warnings and add more environmental tools but I don't want to just scale it down to a crocodile or something.

>>96035058
Exactly, it's a blunt force instrument that's still diegetic in nature.

>>96017587 (OP)
>Thread Question: Have you ever played a session outdoors or in another odd location?
Yeah my brother ran his 3.5 campaign for us at the campsite across the street from Herkimer Diamond Mine in New York almost 13 years ago. I played a monk and a healer. God I was stupid back then.

>>96024871
depends, you ever feel a custom artifact is good?
Also I'm in for BBEG that can just...make shards of wood or crystals destroy your insides from a single little sliver of crystal going into your lungs.
or a hero

5etools but for 3.5 when

>>96042569
The closest you'll get are the myriad dndtools out there.

What are the templates that give an SLA progression that's kind of like full casting?
Stuff like half-celestial, half-fey, etc.

>>96043731
https://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/monsters/phrenicCreature.htm

>>96045246
I suppose Psionic counts.
I also found Radiant creature, which looks hella cool, and half-farspawn.

>>96045758
I remember one that turned the creature into a plant.
Woodling? Something like that.

What monsters are the most fun / most effective to advance? I know for the most part that advancing monsters sucks, cause they're not really getting anything new, just a buff to some stats, that don't even measure up to level. I know some monsters in later Monster Manuals got extra stuff for advancing them. And of course loads of Monster Manuals had advanced versions of the monster right there to use. But what ones are the coolest or underrated monsters to advance?

>>96052274
Something that's close to going up a size category I imagine would be good at least for the beatstick types.

>>96052274
The Mindstealer Drone from one of the web articles has "Advancement: By absorption", referring to its Absorb Abilities (Su) Special Attack:

>As a full-round action, a mindstealer drone can absorb the abilities of a creature it has drained of all memories. Add the absorbed creature's Hit Dice, hit points, base attack bonus, base save bonus, skills, and feats to those of the mindstealer drone. The mindstealer drone uses its own speed and its own ability scores or those of the absorbed creature, whichever are higher. If the mindstealer drone and the absorbed creature have the same skill, add the absorbed creature's skill ranks and racial skill bonuses to those of the mindstealer.

>If the mindstealer drone uses the absorbed creature's form through its change shape ability, it gains additional abilities, as noted in the change shape section.

>...When using an absorbed creature's form, a mindstealer drone gains all the features and traits of the absorbed creature's type and also gains all the absorbed creature's speed, natural weapons, natural armor, special attacks, and special qualities.

It takes very, VERY nearly everything from nearly anything (the "drained of all memories" requires an Energy Drain ranged touch attack).

>>96017587 (OP)
Making a character, not sure where she should go, into a comic or story or even D&D.

>>96052534
Explain.

>>96054327
I had an idea for a character and am in the process of drawing her up. I've hints of a personality, but no idea what she should do. Should she have her own story, should she be in a comic or novella, should she be in D&D - Decisions decisions, they paralyze me.

>>96058778
If you're not settled on using D&D yet, I suggest you do the preliminary questions in >>96042773.

>>96058801
I shall do so immediately. Thank you Anon.

>>96025778
>Saw the SRD.

There's more than the SRD. Check the index in the OP.

Crystalkeep Indices, dndtools.net, realmshelps, or the "Stormseeker Bibles" all compile it pretty well, though nothing quite reaches the convenience levels of 5etools.

>>96028459
Its noticeable, but in my experience most players are not optimised enough for level 15 as endgame to be unplayable unless they are following a cheesy cleric or druid guide. I've always found wizards to be a bit overtuned, but most people don't play them in a way that will break your campaign (though, they could, with good spell selection, albeit not as easily as druid/cleric).
Anyways. My favorite 3.5 gameplay is level 9-14, as a player and GM, and I like wizards for that purpose. YMMV, but it's not universal doom and gloom.

>>96045246
>>96045758
Spellstitched does that IIRC.

>>96061149
Doesn't that just give the one spell and you'd have to re-stitch after gaining more HD?

>>96061149
>>96061275
Oh seems I am very wrong it has a whole chart. Weird that spells total is based on Wis but they cast as a Sorcerer thus using Cha.

Where the fuck can I find this Brown Dragon >>96061142?


>>96062238
>spells total is based on Wis but they cast as a Sorcerer thus using Cha.
Huh, I hadn't noticed that either.

Which edition has the best Forgotten Realms materiel?

>>96063402
>Brown Dragon
Monster Compendium: Monsters of Faerun p. 38

>>96064641
What a goofy ass looking motherfucker.

>>96064641
2e.

>>96034904
>>96034687
>>96034526
Depends how much you're attached to their characters. If you're not too attached to them in particular, only your campaign, then let 3 of them die and don't attack the 4th and if he doesn't run away then your DnD group is terminally retarded anon I'm sorry.

Just had an evil (and fun!) idea for a monster that my players can fight. An undead ooze that splits when attacked (like other oozes), and instead of dealing acid damage, drains one negative level one the next turn after constriction. Thoughts?

>>96062238
>>96063402
I think they want the mindless 1-cha 10 wis Skellies and zombies to be at least capable of a basic spell when the necromancer orders it if you were to say port pathfinder undead rules I'd just make it all scale on cha.

Speaking of undead templates would making various fixed-stat undead like Ghouls and Wights into templates that care about the original creature make "Create (greater) undead" too strong?

As it is it kinda gets outpaced by Animate since that can be used on strong base creatures and keep many of their stats.

>>96052431
Horrifying.

>>96068460
If you want good multi-purpose undead, there's the Gravewight template from the Standing Stone module, and there's also the Withered template from the World of Warcraft 3.5e port.

>>96069357
Oh sweet.

>>96068171
Stacking energy drains as the monster splits does a good job of upping the stake of the fight if the party doesn't have Death Ward or anything similar. As long as the monster doesn't hit too often or have too many hitpoints, its seems like it would be a memorable miniboss encounter.

>>96034526
>>96034975
>>96034997
>>96035342
>>96034604

Leaving is always an option, and the hydra's speed is only 20ft. It's also huge, so there are likely thin passageways that the players can hide in and throw stuff at it. The hydra has an AC of only 17 but a to-hit bonus of +10 (which will likely give it a +18 bonus to opposed sunder rolls due to size differences). Even though the hydra has fast healing 17, it's probably easier for them to kill it with chip damage (or just make it helpless and coup-de-grace)

If you want to give them a tool to beat the hydra easily, try allowing them to harvest/buy poisons: https://www.realmshelps.net/stores/poison.shtml
Since the hydra is an unintelligent magical beast, simply throwing poison-filled meat at it and running away could conceivable deliver an ingested poison (ingested poisons are underpriced due to being extremely difficult to deliver to intelligent targets).

Some potential choices (for reference, the hydra has a fortitude save of +10, note that fear and sickened reduce this by 2 each):
Cave terror (200 gp, DC 20, confusion and 1d4 int damage 1 minute later, for reference the hydra has an int of 2)
Giant wasp poison/Huge centipede (210 gp, DC 18, 1d6 dex/1d6 dex, just before the immediate spike in centipede poison prices)
Oil of taggit (DC 15 which is only 20% but it's only 90 gp, and it causes unconsciousness which enables a coup-de-grace or further planning such as restraining the hydra)
Note that the DC to survive a coup-de-grace is 10+ the damage taken (which just becomes damage taken when the fortitude bonus is taken into account, meaning that if the rogue manages to deal over 20 damage with a sneak attack and critical hit, the coup-de-grace will be a guaranteed instant kill on the first try. Also note that the hydra only has fast healing, not regeneration)

In conclusion, try encouraging planning.

>>96070493
>fast healing 17
>probably easier to kill it with chip damage
A level 3 party? What are you smoking my dude

>>96064641
2e but 3e does have some gems too

>>96072822
You ignored the fact that they likely will not be able to survive attempting to cut off it's heads (which can't be done with a thrown weapon without houserules)

dead edition

>>96081472
I'm playing it.
In fact, our poor DM is now reading the stronhold builders guide because a returning player made a wizard with leadership and the landlord feat so that he could have a stronghold and use the busines rules from the dmg and have his artificer cohort amass power and money in the background while he travels for his planet (moon actually) level ambitions.

>>96082276
That sort of nonsense can work if the campaign is about it but leadership is a meme feat for a reason.

>>96082503
The Rogue also has Leadership and he has his own nonsense happening in the background with all of his followers. The main crew of our flying pizza slice is manned by his cohort and highest level followers.
It doesn't play an active role in the game for the most part, but it does intersect with some things here and there and the character's own personal desires and official responsibilities and such.
The Rogue is also probably never again getting another class level (for the foreseeable future at least) since he turned into a fucking wererat as a level 14 or 15 character, I'm not quite sure.

>>96082561
That's just as well, every rogue level past 13th is essentially flavor text.

>>96082683
I say Rogue, but he's a Ranger, Rogue, Assassin thing.
And rat, now he's a rat.
He also has sold his soul.
Multiple times somehow?
That was before I joined the table.

>>96082723
I could've guessed because every person who would play as a wererat is the same type of player, and I'm one of them. Props to your party member for fighting the good fight.

>>96082751
He's by far the most amusing character in the party, I fucking love the shit he gets himself into.

A wraith's attack is listed as
>Melee incorporeal touch +6 (1d6 negative energy plus 1d6 Con drain)

if the target has Death Ward on, and all of the negative energy damage is reduced to 0, does the 'plus 1d6 Con drain' still happen?

Or would this rule block it too

>A creature with immunities takes no damage from listed sources. Immunities can also apply to afflictions, conditions, spells (based on school, level, or save type), and other effects. A creature that is immune does not suffer from these effects, or any secondary effects that are triggered due to an immune effect

>>96082886
adding a detail to this question
Wraith has this as a separate ability listed
>Constitution Drain (Su)
>Creatures hit by a wraith’s touch attack must succeed on a DC 17 Fortitude save or take 1d6 points of Constitution drain. On each successful attack, the wraith gains 5 temporary hit points. The save DC is Charisma-based.

Would this wording, which makes no mention of negative energy damage but only of the touch attack hitting, imply that the constitution drain is a separate thing from the negative energy damage? Or are there other precedents where there is such wording but the effect is known to be blocked by reducing it to 0?

>>96082886
>>96082954
Drain usually implies negative energy, and is thus negated by death ward and the like
>are there other precedents where there is such wording but the effect is known to be blocked by reducing it to 0?
Damage reduction
>Whenever damage reduction completely negates the damage from an attack, it also negates most special effects that accompany the attack, such as injury type poison, a monk’s stunning, and injury type disease.
>Damage reduction does not negate touch attacks, energy damage dealt along with an attack, or energy drains.

>>96083970
>Drain usually implies negative energy
I thought 'drain' in 3.5 system translated as any kind of injury that inhibits your ability scores and will go away on its own. (as 'ability damage' heals naturally)

could be a disease has ravaged your body and left your with a sickly constitution before it was cured - that would also be a constitution drain, wouldn't it? Illithids do ability drain without negative energy involved.

regarding the 'usually' part - would you rule that all ability drain attacks by undead are implied to use negative energy?
what of a case such as the allip?
https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/allip.htm
The touch attack here doesn't have negative energy damage, just ability drain.

>>96082954
different anon but I have a question. What does
>The save DC is Charisma-based.
mean exactly? Don't the players roll fort save for it anyway?

>>96086721
It means that the DC goes up and down with the Charisma stat of the attacker. So if you cast Eagle's Splendor on that Wraith to give it +4 to charisma, the DC goes up by 2.

>>96086743
Oh, gotcha. Makes perfect sense now. Thank you.

>>96086692
Ability damage and Ability drain are two different things

>>96086845
mistyped, meant to say
>I thought 'drain' in 3.5 system translated as any kind of injury that inhibits your ability scores and will NOT go away on its own. (as 'ability damage' heals naturally)

Ed Greenwood is a youtuber now?
What the hell?
Yeah, I know, tangential to 3.5e, but still.

>>96088025
I've not watched him. Is he apolitical or another case of entertainers using their platform to push their politics?

>>96088536
I have no idea, I haven't watched his videos either, but I was surprised enough to see that he was livestreaming Baldurs Gate 3 that It got me to comment here.

>>96088584
>livestreaming Baldurs Gate 3
going to have to give it a watch just to see if he had any lore to add. Like the Owlcat games more but the Forgotten Realms setting is just comfy due to all the lewd fetish stuff in the background.

>>96088630
>Like the Owlcat games more
>but the Forgotten Realms setting is just comfy
I couldn't agree more.

hey there fa/tg/uys, are there any books in 3.5e that expand on the gem dragons? more specifically on their powers, lairs, or other things outside of the monster manual 2 from 3e

>>96090096
The Draconomicon has
>pic related
There's also the Dungeons and Dragons 3.5 Update Booklet, page 32, although that might be redundant with MM2 pg 81, not sure.

>>96090096
Did some poking around, looks like the MM2 entries were mostly a consolidation of various bits from Dragon Magazine and some books in the 90s. Other than snippets in the draconomicon they haven't really come up since then unless you're desperate enough to see what 5e did to them.

>>96090152
>>96090137
i see, thank you very much for the help

>>96090137
>>96090160
I forgot to mention, there's also this
]>https://web.archive.org/web/20161101184547/http://archive.wizards.com/dnd/files/Psionics_enhance.zip
But that is probably redundant with the other stuff.

Thoughts on this shitbrew:

>Psionatrix, Cognizance
These "base" psionatrix are formed from four separate crystals joined by a silver frame, similar in many ways to a Cognizance Crystal. Instead of giving an Enhancement bonus to save DC, they form a circuit with other psionatrix in the stack to form a shared pool of Power Points, which may be drawn from to manifest powers of the base psionatrix's Discipline at ML 9, either from the wearer's Powers Known or from powers granted by the psionatrix in the stack. The Cognizance Psionatrix itself can store 9 PP, and each other psionatrix in the stack may store PP equal to its Manifester Level, and generate the same each day.

PP drawn from the stack is drawn from Psionatrix in order of their addition to it, and Psionatrix of other Disciplines or that have run out of PP have their effects disabled.
>Varies, ML 9; Craft Universal Item, Craft Cognizance Crystal; Price 35,000 GP

if someone is striking an incorporeal undead with a magic holy weapon would the bonus damage from the Holy property be reduced by half, same as the base weapon's damage?

>>96095791
Before I can tell you if it's dumb or not, I need to know:
Are you trying to solve a specific problem, create a bespoke item for a PC/NPC, or just trying to make something cool?

I've worked on a collection of martial-oriented feats. Basically an expansion on the mechanics of "trade attack bonus, do effect".
Haven't met major issues on my table, wouldn't mind some outside feedback though.
I'll post the link to the pdf.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_qek3v9Dh2yQq609VCRud4tPDfYMTLQz/view?usp=drive_link

>>96096461
Mostly the third. I understand that it's horribly fiddly text and the entire point of "relatively cheap extra PP" is a massive danger-area.

>>96097766
Ooh, I like the idea.
I also like the idea of explicitly sacrificing Full Attack Attacks for specific abilities.

Are there any seldom spoken of or underrated healing spells?
I remember thinking that extended seed of life was one such spell, but that's all I can recall.

>>96101404
Other than Vigor stuff which is pretty well done and works well when extended or persisted.

>>96096090
I would say no.

Also wait isn't it 50% miss chance rather than half damage?

>>96096090
You are referring to pathfinder rules.

>>96101957
>>96103471
didn't realize this was changed in pathfinder. I wonder why they changed. the 3rd edition ones make more sense to me thematically because they explicitly include positive energy.

I guess on a weapon with the Holy enchantment the 2d6 from Holy would always work on an evil spirit even if the rest of the strike misses?

>>96106966
That's how I would rule it. It always irked me that certain spells and enhancements, such as Flame Strike or Holy weapons, don't properly categorize the damage, so I just houserule it to "Holy" damage (I think 5e does that iirc)

>>96097766
>First feat is "inflict permanent blindness if you hit at a -5 penalty"
This does not bode well for the rest of the doc

Is the SRD acting up for anybody else?

>>96101566
Vigor is not really underrated, I think. I've seen it mentioned often in online discussion.
I suppose that it being core helps.
It is a decent spell, although I'd rather persist mass lesser vigor.

>>96108989
Blindness/Deafness is available to a Level 3 Wizard.
The spell is permanent, targets one living creature, and has a DC of 16 (12 + INT Modifier, which I assume 18 for a Wizard who knows what they are doing).
The Wizard does this by virtue of his class.

The hypothetical Fighter gets this feat, at best, at Level 6.
He targets one creature, and he must hit with a bonus of +6 (+6 bab, +4 str, +1 weapon, -5 feat). With a 10, that's 16. For a CR 6 monster, that is mid.
Even if he hits, there's a Fortitude Save at DC 16 (10 + BAB).
The fighter does this by virtue of taxing one precious feat slot.

What's the issue?

>>96109705
I would also like to add that Remove Blindness/Deafness is available to a Cleric at Level 5, one level prior to when the Fighter gets this feat, hypothetically.

So again, anon, what is the issue?

>>96109705
To add to your point from another angle, it's also perfectly appropriate that mundane means to blind an enemy would exist and that one could train to add that to its fighting style.
I wonder if it would be cool to instead of using a simple attack roll, the character would roll a knowledge (something) skill check.

>>96109134
It's acting up for me too.

>>96109768
Well. Gods bless the Wayback Machine.
And all the god damn .rtf files that are the original SRD release I guess.

Can you actually stack nightsticks to get more turning for divine metamagic? That doesn't seem like RAI.

>>96110437
It's absolutely not RAI. If your DM allows it he's a meme.

>>96109705
>spell slots are infinite

>>96110482
Spell slots are not fixed, and you may prepare different spells each day for the occasion.
A feat is fixed and cannot be changed unless your table uses retraining rules, which cost money.

The Level 6 Fighter with the hypothetical Blinding Attack is supposed to fight CR 6 monsters.
A few examples.
>Babau, AC 19, Fortitude +10
>Chain Devil, AC 20, Fortitude +8
>Ettin, AC 18, Fortitude +9
>Annis, AC 20, Fortitude +6
What is your argument exactly? That an attack made with a +6 (which literally misses on an average roll of 10) and has a high chance to fail anyway at DC 16 (because they all make the save with 10 or less), somehow breaks encounters because it is at-will?

I'm remaking D&D 3.5's character options, and I'm making good leeway into all the classes (sans NPC classes) and some classes are more involved than others. One of those classes is the Wu Jen, and I'd like some help clearing up its base mechanic: Wu Xing.

Wu Xing deals with the five movements of Chinese thought between the five elements; Wood, Fire, Earth, Metal, and Water. The movements between them are Creates, Destroys, Insults, Overacts, and Weakens.

The Wu Jen will be interacting with this system on top of what other spellcasters deal with; spellschools, elements, SR, etc. The Wu Jen just has another method of counters and support for other magic that no other spellcasters have, so that they don't have to treat a spell that deals Fire damage like a Fire spell, but rather as an Earth spell due to its place in breaking down the base state of the body of the other. Tree Shape can also be Water due to its capacity to change your look into something completely different.

I'm going to include a system of class resources to interact with it but that's not what I need help with. What I need help with is how to express all Spells into a general class of five different elements.

I'll give a summary of what I have in the next post due to character limits.

1/?

>>96111120

The Spell is Wood, if…
- It “grows” the current state of the thing while also providing a greater range of functions than before as a result of it (Buffs, etc)
- It “reduces” the current state of a thing while also taking away a greater range of functions than before as a result of it (Debuffs, etc)

The Spell is Fire, if…
- It adds a new function to the thing (Makes a creature that can’t normally fly fly)
- It removes a function from the thing (A door that could once open or close can no longer do those things).
- It provides novel things and information, real or illusory (Summoning, Divination, etc).

The Spell is Earth, if…
- It keeps the thing in its base state (Healing a creature or repairing an object or construct).
- It breaks the base state down without degrading functionality (Damage, etc).
- It reverts a thing back to its basic form and state (Dispelling, etc)

The Spell is Metal, if…
- It improves or hinders the capacity to perform its functions. (Diseases, etc)
- It hones or dulls the function of the target, even if the effect is done at a cost of the other functions of something (Buffs and Debuffs dealing with flat modifiers, etc).

The Spell is Water, if…
- It utterly changes the thing or the thing’s perspective (Polymorph, Mind Control, etc)
- It changes or disguises the thing’s look or function (Disguise, etc).

I included examples in my word document, but not here due to character limits.

What I am troubled with is the ambiguity of some spells. Metal and Wood both are similar, but Metal is about honing and bettering/worsening the quality of the thing, while Wood is about growing it.

Do you guys have a better idea in how to categorize all the spells in 3.X to fit Wu Xing than what I'm doing now?

Thanks in advance.

2/2

>>96111131
>Metal and Wood both are similar, but Metal is about honing and bettering/worsening the quality of the thing, while Wood is about growing it.
Perhaps Metal spells could be
those that modify numbers directly (Magic Weapon, Recitation) while Wood spells are those that modify stats (Bull's Strength, Elation)?

Is there a statblock structure for Monsters and NPCs w/player classes that people likes? one that showcases all needed numbers for smooth play in an organized way?
I don't want a template, as I can lay out that through scribus (want to experiment)

>>96112480

That's kind of where I'm at, actually. The question is, how to word it. How can I word the bonuses from Magic Weapon as being different from Bull's Strength in terms of Wu Xing? I'd rather not have to comb the whole spell list to attribute a new quality to each one as I do want to be fast and loose with it.

>>96112635
This is how I format things in general. I use .txt and ditched interactive sheets a long time ago.

[Character Name]
Overview: Race & Alignment, Class & Level, Template & Subtype if any. If it's a monster, list HD and Type instead.
Traits: Racial and other traits if any. Immunities, Resistances and other such traits are listed here.
Class / Monster Features: List here. If multiple classes are present, separate them.
Feats: List here.
Backstory / Bonus / Nonstandard Features: List here if any.
Inventory: Main gear, do not include wealth and secondary items.
Scores: List here. If modified, list modified score in parentheses.
Stats: HP, AC (List sources), BAB / Grapple, Speed / Initiative, Fortitude / Reflex / Will.
Attack: List attack forms here, put attack bonus and damage in parentheses.
Skills: List only base ranks for trained skills.
Spells Known / Spell-like Abilities: List here if any. Put Caster Level & DC in parentheses.

[Example Cleric Guy]
Overview: True Neutral Human, Level 5 Cleric
Traits: Human bonus feat & skill point.
Cleric: Spellcasting, Turn Undead, Travel & Water domains.
Feats: Improved Initiative, Eschew Materials, Silent Spell.
Inventory: Heavy Mace, Heavy Shield, Masterwork Chainmail, Silver Holy Symbol (Amulet)
Scores: STR 14 / DEX 9 / CON 14 / WIS 18 / INT 10 / CHA 10
Stats: HP 34, AC 16(-1 Dex, +5 Armor, +2 Shield), BAB +3 / Grapple +5, Speed 20 / Initiative +3, Fortitude +6 / Reflex +0 / Will +8
Skills: Concentration +8, Knowledge Religion +8, Heal +8
Spells: All in Cleric List + Domain Spells (Caster 5, DC 14 + Spell Level).

Beside the Deadborn Vulture and Tomb Spider, are there any more Undead-associated Magical Beasts for Totemist [Necrocarnum] Soulmelds? I'm interested in finding at least one decent non-[Evil] candidate before homebrewing around Complete Psionic Stygian powers.

Consulting Realmshelp for Magical Beasts from Dragon Magazine to not merely be spoonfed my request for >>96119355, I stumble across the Beastwraith from issue #357, a CR 3 5 HD Incorporeal Undead with a passive aura that drives Animals and Magical Beasts to attack the nearest creature for 1d4 rounds on a 24-hour timer, a Standard Action 1d4 minute stackable Fear effect, a 1d8 Cold+1 Strength damage Touch attack, at-will Death Knell, and making any Animal or Magical Beast they kill into another of them not under their control. And while purely fluff they also change appearance to an albino version of any local animal.

This is a PERFECT fit for Totemist [Necrocarnum], though I'm unsure on dodging the [Evil] tag on the "aimed squarely at fucks who caused them" basis. The adjacent Bloodlance that directed me to the issue, on the other hand, is most definitely [Evil] as all get-out, defiled demon-summoning unicorn that it is.

Less fitting due to its conditions is the Grey Shiver from #343. Because its whole thing is "lives in Lich skull", upon which its freaking Sorcerer 9 casting is dependent. Nonetheless, Poison with the effect of Dominate and a sense-sharing ability is fun.

>>96119355
>Deathraven Swarm (Book of Exalted Deeds p189)
>Karrnathi Bulette (Five Nations p122)

It's an aberration, but maybe also
>Lifeleech Otyugh (Monster Manual III p119)

>>96088584
the streams are nice, but he's usually distracted by answering chat questions (NDA) and they talk over the in game dialogue, though there's the occasional nuggets.
>the infestation is usually done by ear or mouth instead of an eye

>they
Ed's very tech illiterate so he has a guy handle tech for him, including playing the game while Ed backseats for him over the stream since from the conversations Ed's setup is also prehistorical to go with his tech illiteracy.

>>96119355
Greater Flame Snake (Fiend Folio)

>>96121556
>Deathraven Swarm (Book of Exalted Deeds p189)
Giving Totemist an in for near-Epic divine retribution is rather spicy, and having basically just a Death effect to separate from raw Swarm stuff is both not necessarily justifying [Necrocarnum] and kinda awkward to Soulmeld design. That said, the even higher CR and usually one-per-world Tarrasque flies even worse in the face of the supposed internal functionality, so I guess it can go in the list.

>Karrnathi Bulette (Five Nations p122)
Immunity to Death Effects AND damage and disease on Grapple and Bull Rush checks? That is NICE. And bonus to crafting pit traps specifically is funny, could maybe steal Entomber text for a combat-relevant version.

>>96121582
>Greater Flame Snake (Fiend Folio)
Another "just uses Negative Energy" rather than Undeath in particular, though there's cause for [Evil] without [Necrocarnum] given the "claim to be descended from Devils" lore and doubling damage on a Greater Chakra Bind via Negative Energy admixture is neat.

If I'm counting the Beastwraith, Deadborn Vulture, and Ghost Brute, then the Blackwing all of three MMV entries behind the second would probably still count. Fear effect on Charge with a pseudo-Rake if the save fails and if you get two in 30 ft. they can pop a 100 ft. AoE.

>>96017587 (OP)
I used to play outside a lot with my friends. Sucked when you lost a die in the grass though.

The most depressing fucking thing in the world is seeing how much player created content for this wonderful game has been fucking lost to dead forums & communities. How many handbooks, guides, etc have been destroyed? I can't seem to find much of any of the old discussions online anymore outside of what has been preserved on Giantitp.com

>>96129051
Tons of old forums are dead, most official wizards shit is dead, good fucking luck finding/archiving a 3.5 discord... Say what you will about OotS as a webcomic but GiantITP is a godsend of a resource even if half the shit old guides link to is now dust in the wind.

>>96129079
I think a lot has been preserved in the min max forums, no?

Alright someone explain to me how this works. If you have Bite of the Werebear, among other things it gives you a bite attack (1/2 strength bonus) and two claw attacks (full strength bonus), but it says
>You can attack with both claws at your full attack bonus, but your bite attack takes a -2 penalty (as if you had the Multiattack feat). Each claw deals 1d8 points of damage + your Str modifier, and your bite deals 2d8 points of damage + 1/2 your Str modifier. If your base attack bonus is +6 or higher, you do not gain any additional attacks.
(Particularly concerned about that last line.)

If my BAB is +7/+2,
1) and I'm not wielding any weapons, what are my attacks?
2) and I am wielding a weapon in both hands, what are my attacks?
3) and I have a Mouthpick weapon, wielded in my mouth, and a weapon in both hands, what are my attacks? (And at what strength modifier?)

Text of Mouthpick weapon:
>This may be placed on any melee weapon, allowing creatures of the appropriate size who have a bite attack to wield the weapon as though they were using their hands. This does not bestow proficiency automatically, and the creature must somehow be proficient in the weapon to wield it without penalties. This grants a creature iterative attacks for a high base attack bonus as normal, and all natural attacks become secondary as per usual when wielding a weapon.

>>96132244
1) and I'm not wielding any weapons, what are my attacks?
Claw full attack bonus Claw full attack bonus Bite full attack bonus -2 at 1/2 STR. Same as it would be for any BAB.
>2) and I am wielding a weapon in both hands, what are my attacks?
2H? +7/+2 with weapon, 1.5x STR, +5 bite.
>3) and I have a Mouthpick weapon, wielded in my mouth, and a weapon in both hands, what are my attacks?
This would run into two-weapon fighting or multiweapon fighting, so it would depend on your feats and which weapon you're designating as your primary.

>>96132425
So I do get the bite attack as well? It wasn't clear since it said I didn't get additional attacks.

No feats of note, other than the comment in BotW about "as if you had the Multiattack feat", weapon-in-two-hands as primary.

>>96132554
That means additional attacks from BAB. Iteratives.

If I:
>cast a spell (or equip something) that gives me a natural armor bonus or an enhancement bonus to natural armor
>cast Scintillating Scales to turn it into a deflection bonus
>cast a spell or something to get another source of natural armor/enhancement bonus to natural armor
Do I then have both? Or does the third overlap the first and I just get the better of the two?

Text of Scintillating Scales:
>This spell transforms your natural armor bonus to Armor Class into a deflection bonus to your Armor Class. While your overall Armor Class might not change, the deflection bonus applies to melee touch attacks and ranged touch attacks, including incorporeal touch attacks. If you have no natural armor bonus, this spell has no effect.

>>96138927
Yes

>>96138927
You apply them in the most beneficial order I think.

Like how if you take 2x damage from cold but also have cold resistance 10, you apply your resistance before it gets doubled.

>>96017587 (OP)
>or in another odd location?
not odd, but there was this building at the local campus called the "swain" building, with this one room that had a huge table with these orange 70s chairs that were pretty comfortable

since it was a classroom? I think, in a school building, we called it the mem*brain*, so we'd say we were playing in Swain in the Membrain

>>96028459
its generally overblown, but yes its much worse at higher levels, and its worse the more splat-content you allow

like the other anon said, in the first six levels everything is basically fine

>>96028459
Meh, I've never seen it be that much of an issue in practice, though you will have a lot more issues if you choose a class that isn't well supported, or if you don't look through your options and choose good options.

>>96025778
> the issue being, 5e is massive

5e is the smallest version of D&D except maybe OD&D, and only if you use a modern cutoff for that (if you read the AD&D 1e handbook, it basically opens with patchnotes, because it was a continuity to them, the same game- Gygax even talks about how he nerfed wizards and buffed fighters and shit).

Anyway if you think 5e is massive and want to play it, the solution is to just pick a subset that you like, such as Core + Xanathars, or whatever, and run that. If you like you can even eliminate things that you don't like from core, or buff things, or whatever.

If you are looking for another version, you're going to have to do the same thing unless you pick a deliberately small game (aka not a D&D game, but a spinoff). Even some of the spinoffs will require you to make a finite list, like Pathfinder 1.

Anyway for 3.X you can always start here:
https://dndtools.net/rulebooks/

And the PDFs are mostly on web archive. Ultimately, you should pick a few things you like. Note if you run SRD-only, there's a few big bonuses you get. It's easy to search, available anywhere, no takedown drama, no PDFs, and it's finite enough to understand it very fast.

You can, of course, add specific things, or entire books to that. The entirety of 3.5 is crazy huge.

But if you do want to run 3.X, be sure to read the DMG cover to cover. It lays a lot of groundwork assumptions that forum retards ignore, especially about prestige classes and optional things.

>>96130510

Yes, minmax forums has a lot, and a lot via the BG archives in turn.

>>96028459
It depends on the group. If it's a bunch of meatheads it doesn't show up as much on the table.
Of course, classes like Clerics and Druids have really good basic statistics in addition to spells that are "easy to use" so to speak, so you can play them like buffed barbarians and still easily come out ahead.

>>96110437
It's Extra Turning's effect as an item, which stacks with itself, so probably RAI but not written down anywhere. Probably shouldn't allow it though.

>>96156883
It's funny how up to interpretation these things are.
I read it completely different. The feat goes out of its way to tell you not only that you can take it multiple time, but it explicitly and clearly tells you that the effect stacks, then clarifies yet again what that means.
That the item doesn't even alludes to the idea signals to me that the RAI is for it to not stack at all, although I can see how you'd come to the opposite conclusion too.

Well, I had nothing better to do the past week so here's a collection of all my homebrew rules on D&D 3.5e.
I'd say it's more akin to a 'personal patch' than just a few intricacies at my table.
I like to kid myself that I write these things for my own players, but they are not the kind of people that require a 36-page "revision" for D&D 3.5e. They just kinda like to tell me what they want to play and I have to figure out the rest.
What this includes:
1) RAI and not-so RAI responses to notorious RAW cheese.
2) Core Class Revisions.
3) A selection of feats (most of which I have already posted around the net, including here, now a part of this collection).
4) A revised epic system (again something stand-alone which I have posted, now a part of a single document)

Here's the link to gdrive, since I know there's at least one anon here that reads my crap.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1e8OdpTFBAcBrC0TkG1KPHLD07xSVLVch/view?usp=sharing

>>96159079
Interesting design, a little overindexed on shoring up martials but given every fucking splat adds 50 spells that's not the end of the world. I do worry that a lot of the structure is trying to bring martials up to the worst transgressions of spellcasters rather than keeping things level, and it still doesn't solve for the fact that fightingman is only good at fighting. Skills could've definitely used some love and consolidation.

Also, Rogue's Crippling Blow seems a smidge overtuned, though I suppose by the time the rogue has landed 3-4 sneak attacks (presumably through flanking) whatever they're fighting is more likely to be dead than paralyzed from 0 dex.

>>96159347
I was considering touching skills, consolidating them as you said (Perception instead of Spot/Listen etc). Then I realized that whatever DM wanted to use this would have to 're-skill' whatever classes his own group uses, as well as having to momentarily 'adjust' monster blocks each time they appear.

>Fighting Man Fights
That is something that sadly the pdf won't change, yes. I had mentioned it in a previous pdf (now part of this), but the main scope was making them actually 'decent' at their field (combat), instead of being a secondary option to just summoning in something.

>>96159079
Bard is a bit too simplified for my tastes and Neutral seems objectively better than Good or Evil. Could've used a secondary track of abilities. Functional class though.

I think it's objectively better for Fighter to give up their armor and shield proficiency, even if they want to use them. If it's a Fighter dip you'll get them back from somewhere or may not even want them, if it's straight Fighter, if you don't care about them, masterwork bucklers/light shields and darkwood heavy shields get you shields and mithral breastplate gets you medium armor, if you do, buying Medium and base shield proficiency back gets you every capablity you lost in the long run, with mithral and hide shields standing in for heavy and tower shields, for free AC and saves.

I'll touch on more when I have more free time.

>>96160654
I was considering rewriting a few things for this but:
>Short-term sacrifice now, be rewarded later.
Sounds mighty fine to me, considering it will go over my players' heads long enough to realize it's actually a good strategy.

>>96159079
i am afraid your homebrew rules take things in the exact opposite direction of what i feel is needed.
>>96159347 like anon said, this feels entirely like trying to bring martials up to the level of casters.
The problem is that casters should never be there in the first place and any homebrew that leaves them and their power untouched really isnt gonna help people have a better experience with 3.5.

>>96160695
I have provided revisions for Casters as well, just saying.

>>96160695
Also, sorry for the double-post, but the overwhelming majority of Section 1 is dedicated to reining in things Casters are notorious culprits of.

>>96159079
>metamartial feat
Funny. I will also have to pass on your houserules, however.

>>96159079
>Every caster gets spontaneous casting
>And sorcerer, whose only saving grace was spontaneous casting, now takes damage if it tries casting all of it's CANTRIPS
bro

>>96161570
I believe you missed the part were
>Cleric actually has to follow commandments.
>Druid actually has a hippy code, including the fact he needs to recharge in nature.
>Wizard does not automatically learn spells by leveling up.

>>96161570
Also you forgot the part where the Sorcerer now casts his spells as quasi-spell-like abilities.

>>96161628
>including the fact he needs to recharge in nature
now that is a particularly neat idea

>>96161684
This is the infamous revision.
I would highly appreciate if people read the actual entry, instead of what they want to read.

>>96161705
I dont understand your arcane reserve rule; why limit sorcerers to a handful of spells per day without damage?

>>96161874
Because they can dip one Level in Fighter and suddenly walk around in armor (and shield) with no effect on their casting.
I needed a "spell fatigue" rule to keep the above in check, which is an option I otherwise don't mind at all.

>>96161903
it means straight sorcerer kinda sucks though
I dont think you realize how fast that damage would add up for them

>>96161903
...Or you could just not give them automatic Still in the first place, which would not have been a concern had you not ripped out the massive chunk of balancing factors in spell preparation.

>>96161929
To be honest, I can't argue with that.
My players are notorious Multi-Classer so HP pools might be a bit screwed to me.
You can reduce that to 1/Level or even just straight up just a "fatigue" condition for your own table's needs.

>>96161903
>>96161929
why dont you make it so that the spell fatigue only happens if they are wearing armor, and the heavier the armor the worse the spell fatigue is (either in damage or in how few they can cast before taking damage)

>>96161934
The Sorcerer requiring magic jutzus for his "innate" magic did not sit well with me.

>>96161952
I whole-heartedly agree that the rule is too much as-is in hindsight, but I won't clutter the thread with constant updates.

Three five archive guy, will you eventually do something like spell guides?
It would be sick to have a reference that takes into account splats and such.
Would be an absurd amount of work, probably.
Maybe just a top 10 coolest underrated spells or the like.

>>96161961
Why not?
I say, do it. It's not like the thread is brimming with discussions.

>>96161971
Perhaps I will then, at a later time when I have sufficient feedback on more things. At the moment There's a Bard fix and reducing the Sorcerer's backlash rule.

>>96161971
Okay so...

1) I added a heads-up at the start of Section 2. Class features scale with Class Level, not Total Level (The possibility of making false assumptions like you get the full Combat Insight progression with just one dip in Fighter was troubling me).
2) Noted on the Barbarian's section that Rage does not work if you do not have a Constitution Score. If you cannot 'feel' things, you cannot 'feel' rage either.
3) Fixed the Bard's two song variants because I was meaning to make them alignment-gated but 'strong' options. My original wording made them cheat options for a Neutral Bard instead.
4) Added a note that Bardic Metamagic CAN be used in conjunction with other spellcasting classes.
5) Added a Synergy Bonus for the Paladin/Blackguard. Your Grace bonus is added to your Caster Level if you have any Cleric Levels (it does not allow you to cast spells you couldn't normally cast however). Also Turn/Rebuke attempts are pooled, naturally.
6) Ranger and Druid Levels stack for the purpose of determining all your Animal Companion aspects (I honestly can't find what the case is for RAW).
7) Sneak Attack is d8 instead of d6 if you make it against a Favored Enemy. If you combine it with Marked Blow, the DC is +4.
8) Made the caster universal rule (all are spontaneous) available at the discretion of the DM, not by default.
9) And Arcane Reserve was renamed to Arcane Fatigue.

I would happily ditch the entire concept of it being backlash damage (and sticking to actual fatigue, or some other condition), but I have to account for UNDEAD sorcerers.

If it was 1999 and you were to replace Monte Cook and his Rolemaster obsession.
How would you implement Feats, Skills and Prestige Classes?
All while keeping the unified D20 core.

>>96164903
Prestige Classes : Shadow of the Demon Lord style. Every class has 5 levels. Base classes have no requirements, prestige classes do.
Feats : Each feat has its own isolated effect with some scaling to it. Feats might interact with other feats, but no requirements between them.
Skills : Not sure. On one hand, my first thought was something more open ended. On the other, not having specific skills like the different knowledge X means not having specific mechanics tailored to them.
Probably break them down into categories and have different classes able to choose at least one from each category? Something like that.
I'd keep the skill points since I enjoy the feel of having some level of granular control.

>>96164903
i so dearly wish 3rd edition was more like rolemaster

>>96164903
consolidated skill list, cutting the skills to less than half.
certain skills get demoted to secondary and turned into a proficiency of whether you know how to do it or not for things like swim
Simple progression of 1 skill rank per level for class skills.
more skilled characters in general.
Feats: Condense combat feat chains like the archery feat chain into combat styles granted to characters through their classes.
Make feats important and special and not shit like toughness, dodge and power attack.
These are things characters should be getting naturally.
Prestige classes: consolidate the base classes to fewer levels and have all characters after a certain level enter into a prestige class that they fill the requirements for basically like warhammer fantasy 2e does tiers for professions since this is the way the 3.5 playerbase uses them (despite the game occasionally trying to sell it as having very specific campaign tie ins etc)

>>96161628
Cleric was always supposed to follow his fucking religion's edicts, blame decades of DMs for ignoring that requirement.
Druid was always supposed to preserve natural environments, that's what the fucking druidic society is there for, blame decades of DMs ignoring that component of the class. I'll give you a point for the rest requirement tho, that's good.
Wizard was always supposed to find spells whilst playing to expand his repertoire, with the level up spells being from research done during the downtime level up period, which was reduced, ignored and eventually dropped between editions; blame WotC for that.
>>96161641
ah, yes, let's look at that
>Can't use arcane scrolls automatically anymore, have to emulate the "Spells" class feature
>Still trigger AoOs
Counterspelling has been in the game since day 1 and yet the amount of times it happened correctly and not with a ready action dispel is close to fucking NIL, this upside is worthless
>Get eschew materials for free, a feat made redundant by FIVE GOLD PIECES
>The materials you WOULD need are now much more costly (3.5 gold translates to XP at a limit of roughly y=x+(y*0.2))
You can now take metamagic feats without wanting to die, wohoo
>YOU GET NO FAMILIAR
>YOU KILL YOURSELF BY TAKING ADVANTAGE OF ONE OF SORCERER'S ONLY GOOD POINTS, THAT BEING HIS INCREASED BASE SPELL SLOTS COMPARED TO WIZARD

again,
bro

>>96165279
You forgot:
>Casts all spells without verbal components.
>Casts all spells without somatic components.
And you also forgot:
>There are class changes across all four spellcasting classes, which you conveniently ignore in your assumption.
And:
>You have no reason to have a familiar, something traditionally tied to casters who make pacts.
The Sorcerer in this revision is not using some crutch for his magic, he IS magical.
I cannot argue with you in good faith when you assume things you want to assume, while disregarding everything else.
You are also under the assumption that:
>They were always 'supposed' to be like that.
Is the same with:
>Steps were taken NOT to make these 'supposed' things entirely optional in the head of the DM.
Which is clearly not the case, because such neglect would not fucking pile up like this over the years.

Regardless, I thank you for the time and effort you spent writing all that, but I can't say it has helped me. It just solidifies it to me that casters are sacred cows and not meant to be touched unless I invoke the incessant bitching of certain people.

>>96165279

I'll attempt to put things into perspective one last time.

Old Cleric
>D8 HP, 3/4 BAB, Proficiencies
>Forbidden Spells are, as I understand it, only tied to alignment descriptors.
>Has the option of literally being an 'atheist' cleric not tied to any deity.
New Cleric
>D4 HP, 1/2 BAB, No proficiencies. He has to sacrifice one domain and lower his skill points to be a 'War Priest'.
>It is an EXPLICIT requirement that he must abide by at least three commandments that will dictate the 'how' and 'why' of him losing his spellcasting.
>Spontaneous Casting has been removed/made optional because I'd rather not argue online about it.
>Forbidden Spells expanded. A Good Cleric will not be casting Enervation for whatever fucking reason.
Old Druid
>D8, 3/4 BAB
>He loses his spellcasting if he 'reveres' nature, 'teaches the druidic language', or changes alignment.
>He can otherwise wild shape into ANY animal within his size limits.
>He can recharge his natural magic EVERYWHERE for some reason.
>He gets an Animal Companion as if he even needed the fucking thing.
>A bunch of class features nobody gives two shits about.
New Druid
>D6, 3/4 BAB
>If you want an Animal Companion, that's lowered to D4 and 1/2 BAB
>He still needs to prepare his spells.
>Code is explicit.
>He cannot fucking recharge in the middle of a city or dungeon.
>He must actively, IN GAME, study animals to wild shape to them.
Old Wizard
>Gets 2 spells out of his ass, which cfor no reason whatsoever.
New Wizard
>If you want that Forcecage, you better go fucking find it in game. I'm sure your DM will definitely not make it an entire fucking quest just for that.
>If your Familiar is killed, you are even more fucked.

The Sorcerer is the only class explicitly allowed to pull spells out of his ass with no code, ethic or God. He can refuel everywhere. He gets one mechanic to limit his trigger-happiness.

>>96165408
Oh i didn't forget about them
>No verbal/somatics don't mean much due to spell-like abilities still being explicit actions, but i guess it's a nice flavour change
>I didn't mention the other caster changes because i find them good, i wanted to point out the murder of the worst fullcaster in core
>Familiars are immensely huseful, not being able to have one sucks
I am talking about things from a mechanical angle. Sorcerers were added to 3E as a way to ease new players to the magical side of things, and as such they have ONE good feature (The spell list) and nineteens levels of NOTHING interesting

Now that i wrote this, i realized that in your doc sorcerers WOULD get free level up spells, huh. I guess that's why you felt they were powerful enough to cripple everywhere else, i can see that. Not the way i'd have balanced it, but it makes sense

>>96165549
Since you bothered, you may also read the analysis I posted.
And yes, my entire REASONING is that they are the only ones allowed to pull spells out of their ass with no limiting factor other than their own "soul" reserves.
He is the only one of the four who is also free to walk in full plate with one dip, while the others need to shoot their leg or use exotic armor.

>>96165548
Bard.

>>96165575
Yes a Bard gets to cast spells out of his musical ass too, but I don't see why I must limit him when he is Tier 3 at best, with supplements.

>>96165549
By the way I have already changed how the backlash damage works.
Here
>>96164113

>>96161954
If the point is that it "feels" too close to SLAs that lack the component, then consider the mechanisms actual SLA-based classes use instead of ignoring a large chunk of the overhead responsible for the opportunity costs intended to balance Fighter multiclasses. The cases of the proper utility breadth of the Wizard niche at top level spell being available as full SLAs out of a class are limited for very good reasons.

>>96165408
>The Sorcerer in this revision is not using some crutch for his magic, he IS magical.
Doesn't stop the long list of racial spellcasting ancestry options from needing components. They are just part of how magic works, SLAs not being subject to them is a matter of being specific exotic abilities in a sense thoroughly incompatible with spell slot fungibility.

>It just solidifies it to me that casters are sacred cows and not meant to be touched unless I invoke the incessant bitching of certain people.
It's that you glaringly obviously don't think through the precedent before making wild changes in large part on thematic preference grounds, relying heavily on DM dictatorship to spot-veto and whitelist instead of actually cutting off the problem-cases.

>>96165548
>Cleric
The class's purpose (as well as the Druid's) includes second-line combat so that the "archetypal" party of four has more than one guy keeping heat off the Wizard.

>Druid
Inability to recover spells in dominant use-cases makes countermeasures world-breakingly trivial, and if Animal Companion being a freebie is so insulting it was a spell back in 3.0 roughly analogous to Undead minions needing you to find the animal with honest intent of befriending.

>Wizard
Use the training times from DMG pg. 190, verisimilitude breakdown solved by correlation with spell research. And you can already target the spellbook.

>>96165600
If you're relying on a lore argument in one area, it's expected for setting coherence that it be maintained in others.

>>96165707
>you can already target the spellbook
I've always found this argument so silly. As a player, you're never going to bother destroying an enemy mage's spellbook unless it's done for manipulation purposes over a longer period; a wizard is likely to have all his spells for the day already memorized, they have no need for it in combat, you'd just be renouncing possible loot for yourself. As a DM, targeting a player's spellbook feels like a dick move in 90% of cases, bumped up to 99% if the enemy you're controlling is supposed to be smart since they would rationalize the first part themselves (the 1% is the suicide play intended to hinder the party from stopping their associates)

>>96165707
The Cleric/Druid being a full-caster and somehow also a front-liner is not something one can call objectively 'balanced'. The fact this role has been removed or limited from the Cleric/Druid is substituted by the martial classes being much more capable at doing their intended front-lining.

I would happily accept an example of how one can trivialize the Druid's natural rest need so I can make the appropriate changes.

I checked the DMG pg 190 you referenced, it is the page for the Horizon Walker PRC. I don't see how this helps me.

I have no vested interest in altering the Bard more than I have already so that I can satisfy a design-need for him to mirror the approach I took with the Sorcerer. You may call this hypocritical, it is, and you are justified. I won't however.

I definitely think through the precedent, and I make these wild changes in the anticipation I can receive adequate feedback, whether good or bad. However, the feedback I receive is not something I find helpful nor meaningful beyond what I perceive as "bitching".

I would also like to add that I have no intention of answering or elaborating on everything else you said, because I do not see how I can provide any meaningful answer. I will not pretend I understood what the underlying point you were trying to make was at the beginning of your post.
If it has any relevance to what you wanted to hear, I did not write my homebrew rules with what the greater 'setting' of 3.5e has in mind for how magic works, why components are needed, and why SLAs work the way they do. My intended audience does not care, which is not a part of this general. I post on this general in the hope I can get feedback from people that are better than my casual table and so that I can improve my revisions.

Regardless, thanks for the post I guess.

>>96165548
>>D4 HP, 1/2 BAB, No proficiencies. He has to sacrifice one domain and lower his skill points to be a 'War Priest'.
I didn't read the document, but I really like this idea. Making the Cloistered Cleric (Priest?) and the Warpriest (Normal Cleric?) even more distinct is awesome.
I'd leave the domains but cut the normal spell slots in half instead.
Or hell, fuck it. Have it chose more domains but the domain spells are the only spells it can prepare.
I'll read your stuff when I wake up tomorrow, but sounds pretty alright at face value.

>>96165781
And what you give applies just as well to the Familiar loss penalties.

>>96166106
>The Cleric/Druid being a full-caster and somehow also a front-liner is not something one can call objectively 'balanced'.
The balance is that the "full" casting is SUPPOSED to be narrow and previously stopped short.

>The fact this role has been removed or limited from the Cleric/Druid is substituted by the martial classes being much more capable at doing their intended front-lining.
Only in a narrow corridor able to be held by one dude. Anywhere else, converting them from a holding dude to a squishy caster fucks the positioning.

>I would happily accept an example of how one can trivialize the Druid's natural rest need so I can make the appropriate changes.
...What's being trivialized is COUNTERING the Druid because you've made ANY activity in an urban center a slog, thus crippling its ability to pressure them on behalf of nature.

>I checked the DMG pg 190 you referenced, it is the page for the Horizon Walker PRC. I don't see how this helps me.
Goddamn hyper-pixilated PDF page numbers... Can't exactly rely on the browser's counter with the offsets. The relevant text from apparently-page-198:
>This training requires one week per every two levels, rounded up. Training requires a character to train with a character of the same class who is higher in level and costs 1,000 gp per week.

>However, the feedback I receive is not something I find helpful nor meaningful beyond what I perceive as "bitching".
It is not "bitching" to point out that the basic premises are in the thing you nerf instead of what wanders away from it.

>If it has any relevance to what you wanted to hear, I did not write my homebrew rules with what the greater 'setting' of 3.5e has in mind for how magic works, why components are needed, and why SLAs work the way they do.
Then you'd probably be better served presenting it to the Amateur Game Design thread next time it's up as an independent d20 hack.

>>96166250
The guarantee of healing spells is pretty central to the campaign pacing function, so any reduction to that would have to commensurately increase the per-cast recovery to maintain "standard" pacing. Unless you're wand-spamming, I guess, but since the strategic freedom on that is honestly worth taking Craft Wand and tracking down reagents anyways I don't see THAT much downstream trouble. The Cure values are a leftover from way less damage, anyways.

My own take would be pruning the core Cleric list of combat-relevant spells to force them to rely on their second-rate martial performance for that and problem-solving spells outside their core recovery role to force them to rely on Domain spells for that, making sure any given Domain is only good for 1-2 problems. Then ACFs and PRCs can give them back Wizard-competitive problem-solving at the cost of their combat ability, including locking the chassis-replacement buffstacks in enough Domains to be mutually exclusive.

>>96166250
I'd like to add that, if you do read the document, some grey points have already been switched up a bit from previous feedback (said changes have also been posted if you scroll up a bit).

>>96166319
>Amateur Game Design
Actually I have posted on Amateur Game Design before, but it has yielded no results. To be perfectly honest, I have more to gain and even prefer trying to shuffle through and understand your purple prose than posting on that thread. I get more feedback from people that actually (or at least pretend to) play 3.5e than among a sea of amateur game designers (which I'm not) trying to present entirely independent game systems.

I WOULD contain myself and my homebrew there anyway(no matter how faulty), if it wasn't for the simple fact that at least we are actually discussing something here instead of rocket-tagging icebreaker posts to keep the thread from dying every 2 days or so.

>>96111120
This doesn’t quite correspond to wi xing. It’s more about the subject that is affected according to the five cycles: create(nurture), control, overact(destroy), insult, and weaken. Water destroys fire, so if a spell effect destroys something fire-related, you could class it as a water spell. If instead it nourishes or creates fire, you could class it as a wood spell.

>>96165008
How so?
I don't remember a thing about rolemaster.

Is there anything in the way of a consumable in an item set? Stuck away from my PDF hoard and thought it could be a neat implementation for a permanent item made of "regenerating" materials to be needed for single-use "offshoots".

Okay so... for those still interested in the Homebrew Revisions, I have updated the pdf with several things.
>Fixed wording and ambiguity errors.
>Synergy bonuses/suggestions for classes.
>Someone asked for a 'revised turn/rebuke undead' function so that's in.
>A slight edit on how the Barbarian's Rage scales.
>The aforementioned Sorcerer fixes.
>Generally a lot more clarifications that are in their own section now.
>A few new feats, two of which are there to let you replicate lost 'monk' features, because someone complained about that.
I have also provided the link to the .docx itself, so you can just directly take the document and do your own alterations without much fuss.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1eylK1_uY7FhyhcJcjdhSGTLh7G-GkydE/view?usp=drive_link

>>96180418
>5. Polymorph Any Object
>...
>You may not polymorph into hypothetical or non-existent forms (“me, but better”),...
>“me, but better”
Had a chuckle out of me. Is that something that's been argued in a table of yours or something?'

>>96180659
Yes.

>>96180690
>Yes.
That's so god damn surreal holy shit.
Hilarious.

>Spell Revision
I'm surprised that the Spell Revisions section is so small.
I know the document is not meant as a all encompassing thing that fixes all problems of 3.5e with all content on the table, but it would be cool to have a section on Metamagic stacking and reduction.

>Paladin
I really like the idea of giving Paladins SLAs fueled by Turn or Rebuke Undead instead of a proper spell progression.
That's pretty clever.

>Ranger
Kind of wish you gave the Ranger SLAs like the Paladin too, since I see these two as kind of pairs, but I get why you didn't.

>Metamartial feats
My favorite use of the Tome of Battle is using the feats to get a couple maneuvers or just dipping instead of using a Martial Initiator as the core of a character, so I really love the Metamartial feats.

>Sorcerer
Have you considered giving them the same spell progression as the other 3 core casters since its spellcasting is now limited by Arcane Fatigue?
Also really like that you got some PF Bloodrager in there by making the Sorcerer compatible with Rage.

>>96180232
>"regenerating" materials to be needed for single-use "offshoots".
If I understood that correctly, it sounds kind of like PF 2e's Alchemist that gets a bunch of free crafting materials every day to make Alchemical items.
So this Permanent Item would have a similar effect to that?
If so, no, I'm not aware of anything like that.

>>96180918
>That's so god damn surreal holy shit
It was, and we all laughed. I allowed him to do it 2-3 times and then we decided to pull the plug (one time was "I polymorph to myself, but as a Gestalt with these maneuvers which are all conveniently and technically extraordinary special attacks so yeah" and another it was a flat "I polymorph to myself, but with my STR/DEX/CON/INT to 50").

>The Ranger
I've heard several complaints that 'Rangers are given a bunch of magical bullshit nobody asked for", so you can perhaps understand why I opted to instead focus on his Favored Enemy mechanics. I've provided a synergy bonus with the Druid, but I can't honestly say how big of an incentive that is for a Druid/Ranger magical "wildman" (if it even is one).

>Metamartial Feats
People either love them or hate them, there's no inbetween from what I've seen here and around the net.

>Sorcerer
That is... a change I would make, but I've spent the better part of my week adjusting this document so maybe another time.

>>96180976
That's a separate application of the materials in question (aiming my attempts at crafting Rangers was probably a mistake), this is about diagetic reasoning for needing a pricy permanent item to craft a limited-use one by the standard rules.

>>96181336
>this is about diagetic reasoning for needing a pricy permanent item to craft a limited-use one by the standard rules.
Oh.
Like a caster needing a pricey material component that doesn't get consumed?
Diegetically, I could see it as some sort of extremely specialized tool made from some specific material and the like that's necessary to make these limited use items.
Think like manufacturers have to spend tons of money on "permanent" tooling to make temporary items.

>>96181367
...That is what the Item Set rules from Magic Item Compendium are doing, yes. With the quirk that the permission goes both ways.

>>96180418
>15.To the wargamer
top kek
but also i gotta ask, are you unfamiliar with the basket weaving joke? it's used to refer to 4chan as a whole, not whiteboard/whiteroom practices

>>96181572
You mean the "are you bitching about X in a mongolian basket-weaving imageboard"? Then yeha.

>>96181598
*yeah

>>96180418
Wouldn't the diplomancer change end up not changing anything at all? Those kind of characters end up with bonuses so high that by the time they can add +15/20 to the DC, the PC is hitting a 60 on a negative roll

>>96181617
I attempted to implement some better alternative to how Diplomacy works, but it always ends up being so wildly different that it bothers me.
In the end, I applied said rule (which is basic and at least delays the inevitable somewhat) until I can actually think of something better (that suits my needs).

>>96181572
Basketweaving also refers to a specific joke build from optimization forums (a warforged with ranks craft(basketweaving) who walks into the ocean and weaves baskets out of kelp until its opponent dies of old age). I also think it's funny that that section in his houserules explains that he wants to run a different kind of game, but then closes it out by saying anyone who likes the other game is cancer.

>>96183981
I never said anyone who likes the other game is cancer (even though I am not a fan of the idea).
I called the overall idea of:
>Allowing RAW as-is, with all its implications.
>Allowing Tier 1 Classes as-is, especially in a scenario where the DM is not explicitly trying to kill players.
>Insisting this dumpster fire is the 'true way' to play 3.5e.
As "Your cancer".

>>96184044
It is the true way. Literally, that's the way the game comes. Once you start making drastic changes, it stops being "the game" and becomes "your game."

>>96184065
Particularly when it comes to party structure, like deleting second-line combat from the base Cleric and Druid. Still don't see a response to "keep their broad function set but nerf the casting width until it stops being broken".

>>96184065
The fact online forums consider it the 'true way to play' and the fact I consider it cancer is not mutually-exclusive, you understand that right?
The fact it IS cancer is enforced by the fact literally nobody sane plays RAW, with people flocking to a variety of homebrew (like E6) to enjoy the system better.
You are not supposed to stack +4s in UNO 'RAW', it is not the 'true way', but nobody gives a flying fuck.

>>96184188
The problem is that the "fixes" are highly divergent like you deleting the standard party dynamics, and so online discourse is strongly pressured to take the rules as-is, worts and all, for the discussion to actually mean anything.

>>96184131
I have already covered this with the Cleric's "War Priest path'.
The Druid's 3/4 BAB and D8 HP was kept unchanged, nothing stops him from Wildshaping and taking a battlefield role. I even allowed him to keep his animal companion if he reduces his HP to d6s and BAB to 1/2 (the battlefield role effectively taken by said companion).
I have nothing to respond to when what you suggest is already in the document.

>>96184208
I cannot disagree, it is too divergent.
I might be highly biased, which I accept that I am, but I strongly imply in the document that each section can be incorporated stand-alone.
The fact I have even upload the word doc itself online means I do not even have the expectations the rules will be kept as I present them.
Section 1 can be incorporated without changing established party dynamics.
Section 2 (Non-Casters) can be incorporated without changing the casters.
Section 3 (Feats) can be incorporated without touching the classes.
And Section 5 (Epic) is something I do not expect anyone to even read.

>>96184213
>I have already covered this with the Cleric's "War Priest path'.
Which you made a variant inverting the Cloistered Cleric relationship that costs tangential-to-either utility, as opposed to a targeted nerf to the casting to preserve the originally intended paradigm.

>The Druid's 3/4 BAB and D8 HP was kept unchanged, nothing stops him from Wildshaping and taking a battlefield role.
Except for the part where you make any decent form pure DM-may-I instead of using an opportunity cost in the player's hands.

>I have nothing to respond to when what you suggest is already in the document.
I see nothing about the proposal of nerfs to their standard spell list breadth to clip the overperforming high-skill-floor CoDzilla paradigm without much change to their non-disruptive "canned gish" operations.

My complaint remains that you look at 3.5 and demand deep structural changes to remove the entirety of undesired play-patterns, rather than keeping to targeted revisions just solving the problems.

>>96184288
>I see nothing about the proposal of nerfs to their standard spell list
I suppose you missed the part about Forbidden Spells being expanded, which stops certain Clerics from casting certain spells from their List.

>Which you made a variant inverting the Cloistered Cleric relationship that costs tangential-to-either utility, as opposed to a targeted nerf to the casting to preserve the originally intended paradigm.
I do not see how the fact the 'old' Cleric is now a variant stops anyone from taking said Variant. If the original intended paradigm was "I am a Full Divine Caster with Heavy Armor and the same HD as the Warrior", then yeah, I was never planning to keep it as the default Cleric.

>Except for the part where you make any decent form pure DM-may-I instead of using an opportunity cost in the player's hands.
I cannot argue with that, but I'm not changing it.

>My complaint remains that you look at 3.5 and demand deep structural changes to remove the entirety of undesired play-patterns, rather than keeping to targeted revisions just solving the problems.
It is very clear that you and I seek very different things from 3.5e. It is understandable and I won't be bothering further.

Regardless, I appreciate your arguments and the fact you take the time to respond in a civil way. However, as I said, you are not the target audience. There are people here (and elsewhere) that have found value in the document. Perhaps you can do so well, as some Sections can be implemented without touching the class dynamics of casters.

since we're wanking around with houserules, why dont you check out mine

https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=22405664&postcount=1

>>96184374
I'll give it a look.
Is Cydonia a homebrew setting, the literal region on Mars, or the city state in ancient Crete?
You mentioned 'Cydonian' a lot that's why I ask.

>>96184402
homebrew setting

>>96184442
I see it's a rather old post.
You still have players running around in that sandbox (or it's still WIP)?

>>96184402
To be honest I was half-expecting a Bizzaro Fantasy Mars setting in said Cydonia (with some Dark Sun elements mixed in or something, for some reason, don't ask).

>>96184457
>have players
lol, lmao even
I could wrangle up a group of fellow discord trannies or family members if I wanted to run a game, but Ive found D&D isnt worth the effort of running
I do like to tinker with the system and make homebrew for it still, however

I edit it every so often; its a perpetual WIP

>>96183981
It seems i was the ignorant one here, i must say that's hilarious

>>96164991
>Prestige Classes : Shadow of the Demon Lord style.
>>96165233
>Prestige classes: consolidate the base classes to fewer levels and have all characters after a certain level enter into a prestige class
For anybody in the thread who think they have an inkling about game design, what would be the pros and cons of this approach from a system level perspective?
How hard would it be to retrofit 3.5e into working like that?
I get that there are hundreds to a thousand prestige classes, but there aren't that many base classes right?

>>96190983
The advantage would a more simplified class structure without entering into dips and builds territory for a more average player.
It wouldn't be that hard to implement but it would be tedious.
The simpler way is to choose a few "base" prestige classes for each base class and keep the other campaign and setting specific.
For example rogue gets assassin, arcane trickster thief acrobat etc.
Gaining more class features in fewer levels would certainly increase the power of the characters and not really a "fix" for high power buildfaggotry dnd 3.5 but for a more casual crowd

>>96193828
That's just 5e specializations with extra steps. The mix-and-match buildfaggotry is the entire point.

>>96193828
>Gaining more class features in fewer levels
That was kind of the crux of my question that I forgot to express.
A fighter or a Cleric is simple enough, they don't have class features, so capping these classes at, say, lvl 5 without changing anything is pretty easy.
But what of a Monk, or Paladin? Would their progression be compressed? Clipped? A little of both?
Would PRC with features like "advances monk features" still follow the normal 1 to 20 original class feature progression track?
Etc etc.

>>96193873
probably adding more features to prestige classes that progress the basic class features like smite, and special mount, monks advancements etc according.
If the purpose of this homebrew is to help the weaker classes then some progression could be compressed for some classes and simply clipped for others

>>96193850
not that anon, but not really.
I aint a fan of 5e specialization style prestige classes. I prefer the exact opposite direction of them being special. needing campaign buildup to even be eligible to join campaign specific ones and some better base classes that are the default.
I fucking hate buildfaggotry. that dont mean i wanna play 5e. People cling to 3.5 for different reasons

>>96194089
Now that makes a lot of sense.
There's already prestige classes that advance a sub set of features from most base classes.
Yeah, that works.

Can anyone recommend any lesser known adventure modules or adventure paths out there?

>>96194579
what type of adventure are you looking for?

>>96194579
I used to have a list of Dungeon adventures that were halfway useable but I cant remember now, or where that list is

the first rise of the runelords module is decent, and its 3.5; was before PF actually came out

>can you believe it was published in 2006?
>we had to wait six entire fucking years??
>world of warcraft launched in 2004
>burning crusade expansion landed in 2007 about nine months later
>we literally got walmart branded warhammer before we got psionics
Why do Wizards of the Cuck hate psionics so fucking much???

>>96202331
Probably because it sucked ass in every previous iteration, including 3.0. RNG-based power acquisition and being mostly noninteractive with the rest of the game doesn't exactly make for a good subsystem.

>>96203414
Imagine hating a good system because previous editions sucked.
Just imagine that.
Like, wow. Could you imagine?
If previous editions of the game sucked?

Oi, what's the best 3(.5)e campaign never rereleased in future editions?

>>96204478
Age of Worms
Honorable Mention: Savage Tide

Making NPCs is so exhausting. How do you do it? are there tools to help?

>>96209976
Are you trying to make stat blocks/loot tables, or personalities/schedules?

>>96210013
Stat blocks. I'm good at personalities and goals, but there are so many things to keep track of in making NPCs statblocks.

>>96210015
So, here's the good news: most of those numbers don't actually matter. You can do a lot of quick and dirty math of giving a Level X NPC +X to a roll they're great at (a shopkeeper's appraise skill, a town guard's BAB, a pickpocket's hide skill), +X/2 to something they're okay at, and ignore the rest. You don't need to know the wisdom score, encumbrance, and armor proficiency of every single orphan in the village. Just have enough texture to inform how interacting with them would shape the field of play. If they show up more than a few times then you can consider fleshing it out into an actual roster but beyond that same as how you might jot down that Brok the barkeep has a rough black beard, smiles quickly but doesn't laugh, and can be bribed into local gossip with good sausages; you can pencil in that Jessica the local fence is talented at bluff and forgery, okay at sense motive, and the rest you can either improvise or look up the generic NPC statblocks for a rough number if you're really backed into a corner.

>>96210051
Right, that makes sense. I come from a 5e background where even slapping together a BBEG is a quick process, so making one in 3.5 felt daunting.

>>96210052
It is daunting, but think of it like customizing a hot rod. 3.5 is modular enough with splatbooks, dragon magazine, errata, and homebrew that damn near any concept you can come up with can be made legally. But you're the DM, that's ALWAYS true. That means you often don't need to know the details as long as you know the order of magnitude, and for most NPCs the vast majority of stats don't matter because your party isn't going to be caring what their armor class is.

Another trick you can use if you just need warm bodies is that page 110 of the DMG has a full table of pre-generated NPCs of various classes. That can be helpful in situations when your party does shit like try to attack a caravan you thought they were going to barter with or convinces an NPC to help them in a fight. Where that can break down a little is spell lists for casters but you quickly get a sense what the 'generic' options are at each level and how they all work.

>>96210052
>>96210087
I'm relatively new to 3.5 too. I made my first BBEG in the ssytem as a conversion of a 5e one--Seghulerak, who was actually originally 3.5 that I ported to 5e. It's got so many options but it feels so fun to custom-tailor them to fit your vision.

If a Cleric buffed up by Prayer casts Searing Light , does that +1 to damage rolls apply to the ray spell?

If he is casting it a Wraith and the damage would normally be 10d8 does Prayer turn that into 10d8 +10?
I remember reading that Ray spells are considered as weapons, as in Point Blank Shot would apply to them.
Prayer says
>You and your each of your allies gain a +1 luck bonus on attack rolls, weapon damage rolls

ai chatbots are telling only the attack bonus would apply because rays don't deal weapon damage.

What are the ways to buff up damage on spells like this and Spiritual Weapon, Spiritual Ally, Magic Missile etc?

>>96213922
>does that +1 to damage rolls apply to the ray spell?
Shit, this was pretty easy to find in the Rules Compendium.
Neat.
It specifically calls out what damage bonuses can be applied to these spells (Favored Enemy, Precision Damage) and gives examples of effects that don't affect their damage.
>Since a Weapon-like spell isn't actually a weapon, Strength modifiers on damage rolls and magical effects that increase weapon damage don't increase damage from a weapon-like spell unless the spell's description says otherwise.

>>96181572
>>96183981

"Underwater basket-weaving" has also been a joke about useless degrees since before D&D existed, and using it as slang for useless skills in the game derives from that.

>>96214053
thank you. Checked that book
Funny bit here is that the Cleric has Point Blank Shot. That means I should have been adding a +1 on his every Searing Light and Spiritual Blade by default without Prayer anyway.
>Point Blank Shot: You get a +1 bonus on attack rolls and damage rolls with ranged spells that deal hit point damage at ranges of up to 30 feet.

>>96215644
>>96214053
>>96213922
Just keep in mind that the bonus to damage is not per die. It's per attack. You don't get 10d8+10 from Point Blank, you just get 10d8 +1 you see.

Ray spells are not considered weapons. They're considered attacks. There's a difference. They're attacks because you're rolling an attack roll with your normal BAB and dex to hit. They can crit. They can apply sneak attack. But they don't carry things that apply to weapons. You can't Rapid Shot or Power Attack with a Ray spell, for example. Normally people think that's because casting a spell is a Standard, but action economy is not the reason you can't Rapid Shot with Rays.

>>96215879
The world isn't ready for my Spellwarp Sniper cleric

Just came across the Renewal Pact spell. Something that at first glance I thought - oh, every rich person everywhere must have a copy of this one cast upon him. Every adventurer past a certain level wouldn't want to leave the house without it.

Than I read it a bit mre closely... oh you pay 500xp for it and than someone farts in your general direction or you stay up too late drinking one night and your pact triggers and that's 500xp down the drain. Cute spell, but only for one with an extremely leisurely lifestyle where he wouldn't even get ever fatigued.

>>96215879
https://dndtools.net/feats/players-handbook-v35--6/point-blank-shot--2185/
>Benefit: You get a +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls with ranged weapons at ranges of up to 30 feet.
Are you sure its not a per roll? Why would it say +1 to your damage rolls, instead of simply +1 damage?
I always assumed it was per die rolled. Like if your weapon hits for 2d6, it becomes 2d6 +2

>>96217042
>Are you sure its not a per roll? Why would it say +1 to your damage rolls, instead of simply +1 damage?
The RAW structure is that "XdY" is a single damage roll comprised of Y dice of X sides. This is why Power Attack on its own is mostly reasonable.

>>96217042
The Roll is the action of rolling all relevant dice at once. If it's per die it'll say so.

As for the spell one tools site says 500xp the other says 500 gp topaz Weirdly both refer to it as only being from Complete divine not reprinted/rebalanced in Spell Compendium or anything so i don't know how they have two different options.

And Fatigue isn't TOO hard to get immunity to.

>>96217197
>As for the spell one tools site says 500xp the other says 500 gp topaz
My PDF says 500 XP, and the full list of standard triggers is as follows:
>ability damage, blinded, confused, dazed, dazzled, deafened, diseased, exhausted, fatigued, feebleminded, insanity, nauseated, sickened, stunned, or poisoned.
Contingent Heal is damned good, but really does need an assload of defenses to be worth it as a routine-use just-in-case.

>>96217273
I think fatigued and dazzled are the only ones I'd be worried about wasting the spell.

>>96217273
>>96217525
A version that lets the recipient will it down would also be fair. I'd also make the cost either-or.

>>96217042
I don't actually personally know of ANY effect in 3.5 that adds a static bonus *per die*. I don't know of any. At all. That doesn't seem like a 3.5 style of thing at all. I really don't have any idea where you even got that idea.

>>96017587 (OP)

If you combined the 3.0 Monk and Psion into one gestalt class that has all the abilities of both, would that fix both of them to be about the power level of an average core class?

>>96217812
There's literally a PrC that does that. Fist Of Zuoken.

https://srd.dndtools.org/srd/classes/prestigePsionic/psionicFist.html

There's probably more than just that one. It's basically Sacred Fist, so it's got a lot of flexibility on top of raw power.

>>96217808
Magic missile does. But it explicitly states that. I think it might be the source of all these misconceptions.

>>96217842
Uhhhh..... Magic Missile does not add Point Blank damage bonus at all. Because Magic Missile does not have an Attack roll. It isn't a Ray spell. It just does damage. It does 1d4+1 damage per missile, the number of missiles increases with caster level... but you don't get to add any other static bonus damage per missile from Point Blank or otherwise.

Also notice that each missile is a separate damage roll. 1d4+1 is one roll. It's not all lumped together. Like if your caster level is, I dunno, 3? Or whatever it is that gives you two missiles per cast? If your spell launches two magic missiles, each 1d4+1 is a separate roll. You do not roll 2d4+2 and all it all up and apply it as a single instance.

This matters if something has energy resistance against (in this case) Force.

And of course as mentioned, it is not a Ray spell. It is not like Scorching Ray. Magic Missile does not deliver Sneak Attack at all, and it cannot crit.

>>96217808
>>96217842
Improved Toughness does a bonus per HITDIE I suppose. (As would Con itself I suppose.)

>>96217867
That's.... an extremely weird way of interpreting that. It's dangerous to introduce misconceptions like that. It might lead to all kinds of weird misunderstandings. Like some kid is gonna suddenly think you can apply Maximize to it or some shit.

Think of it this way instead: You are not adding your Con bonus to your Hit Die during the roll, think of it instead as a completely separate calculation event of adding a bonus to your hit points. This separate calculation event is like an invocation of a specific function which takes as input your character level and uses that as a variable to do the calculation and then outputs a single number at the end which then gets added to your hit point pool. You don't really roll your hit die all as a lump like you do with fireball (if you're generating level 5 character or whatever, then rolling your hit die is simulating the natural process of leveling up from when you began your career as an adventurer).

>>96217864
It adds static damage as in each individual missile gets a pre-determined +1 damage. None of the other shit applies, you are right, but you can see how this makes people think the same logic applies to other effects.

>>96217825
There's also the Soulknife. Dreamscarred Press (third party for PF1e) has an archetype for it called Gifted Blade (dunno if pure 3.0 / 3.5 has anything like it).

https://www.d20pfsrd.com/alternative-rule-systems/psionics-unleashed/classes/soulknife/archetypes/dreamscarred-press/gifted-blade

>>96217900
Welllll..... this might be a bit of an obscure autistic computer programming type of thing, and it's gonna sound super tedious and pedantic, but I still feel like that's an incorrect interpretation in a subtle way.

Like, the 1d4+1 damage per missile is better understood as (from 2 to 5 damage). Like all as one variable. If you had a d4 that you repainted the labels on and instead of 1 you painted 2 and instead of 4 you painted 5, instead of 2 you painted 3 and instead of 3 you painted 4...

The "+1" notation there is a limitation of how things are written more than how they're conceptualized as far as the engine is concerned (ignore just for right now that it has a long history from the 1970s and that the game's engine is not actually computer code and this isn't a fucking video game). It's not a good idea to think of it as a "bonus". It's better to think of that as part of the "base" damage of the spell. Like if you cast fireball, the base damage is not 1d6 and then all the other d6 are a "bonus" to that. That'd be weird.

Instead try to think of "bonuses" as meaning something more like "extra modifier effects which aren't part of the original spell" come from some external source like a feat or equipment. Not from the spell itself.

>>96217893
I am just trying to understand where the idea came from. Oh there's also damage per hit-dice on the Tribal Warchief prestige class thing.

>>96217808
The War Mage prestige class, Mantle of the Winter Witch item, and the Fiery Spell feat add damage per die to spells.

>>96209976
I learned you can ask deepseek to create a 3.5e statblock, just give tell it the features the npc along a CR limit has and it toss you numbers

>>96217808
craven

>>96217525
for me its half the list. I am thinking of it in terms of long term insurance spell
>nauseated and sickened
eat a bit some spoiled food or just walk in on some awful smell
>deafened, blinded
walk through a festival and noise gets too loud for a few seconds. Someone sets off a flash firework near you.
Having that sort of protection that has so many false positives ready to trigger it, not only does it get expensive but it also becomes a known factor if anyone hostile observes you for a while. At that point it loses most of its values because any assassination plan can account for it

>>96217812
...No, that'd be significantly better than "the average core class" because Psion is already hot on the heels of Wizard, Cleric, and Druid, stapling a resource-free melee routine with form-invariant value is handing them the CoDzilla side on a silver platter. Egoist in particular goes nuts with monster-math stacking and Hustle to Flurry of Blows with non-dogshit accuracy and Natural Weapons on top.

>>96217911
>(dunno if pure 3.0 / 3.5 has anything like it).
There's one that can take Hidden Talent as many times as desired.

y hasn't anyone made 3.5e with advantage? the only thing that makes normies not want to play the edition is having to do all the math, so why not simply just replace it with the one solution everyone praises 5e for?

>>96221699
Because the main thing keeping people playing the edition is the crazy pileup of fiddly knobs responsible for the math.

Though it could work to add a bit more structure to stuff like Circumstance bonuses and Luck rerolls.

>>96221699
>everyone
I fucking hate advantage/disadvantage. Reroll, take better is not a bad mechanic. Replacing granular circumstance or buff bonuses with it is fucking retarded because it cannot do the job of bonuses.

>>96222502
Exactly. I was going to write a huge post about how last time I played 5e an enemy was on the floor, blinded, and under the effect of guiding bolt, and at that point nothing mattered since only a single stance of advantage counts anyway.
I like Shadow of the Demon Lord's Boons and Banes a lot more for that kind of idea.
I could see replacing temporary short lived modifiers with those, maybe capped at 5 d6s or whatever.
Although, in my not exactly expansive experience with 3.5e, calculating modifiers in battle is not really all that hard. A lot of things are pre-calculated and recorded in the character sheet.

>>96220112
Those conditions have actual definitions.

Honestly a version that has a consent check doesn't seem too bad.

Heh.
A dude is playing a wizard for the first time.
At lvl 15.
He took 5 minutes to calculate his spell DC.
After casting Flesh to Stone on two hulking giant bruiser guys.
Not even judging, just reminded me of the times I've done that kind of shit.

>>96217812
Psion doesn't need the buff.
Combine Monk and Divine Mind instead (but delay monk bonus feats by 1 level to smooth out the progression)

>>96224779
Is it their first time playing Wizard, or first time playing

>>96231808
Wizard. The two characters I know he played before were a Monk (I think?), and a iaijutsu focus multiclass thing.
But to be fair, I think there was something in the water or the air that session. The Rogue and Warblade/Knight also took a while to get their turns going.

>>96231835
First time doing high level casting is definitely some choice paralysis, even once you get over the hurdle of chargen and spell selection. I don't envy them on that front but if you're jumping in at level 15 the party should be prepared that no one knows their own kit very well.

>>96231849
>if you're jumping in at level 15
>the party should be prepared that no one knows their own kit very well.
I'm not quite clear on what you mean here.

>>96232047
Characters have a lot of moving parts and if it's a class you have never played before, you might not have an intuition for the basic tactical loops and default answers to common questions in the same way a veteran of a class would be able to intuit how much to put towards power attack or what level spell slot to spend on a given encounter.

Gents, I’m looking for a ring and a source. A ring of what amounts to Dragons Nemesis, as it were. For someone who wishes to fight dragons, chromatics specifically. Any come to mind?

>>96239071
As in you vaguely remember such an item existing and wonder if we remember where? Or you want us to help brew up the item and suggest an in-universe source?

>>96243056
I was looking for an item that exists, but my dm is solving this by taking a helm from an older edition and giving its stats to a ring.

>>96239071
I found this in the Arms and Equipment guide, and I tried to go through a compilation of items from Dragon magazine but as you can imagine Ctrl+F "dragon" had uh... less discretion than I may have liked.

>>96245185
Thank you!

NEW THREAD
>>96245441
>>96245441