Thread 96302041

I found myself reading some guides online and I feel like a fucking alien. They're very nicely formatted but they advocate for the strangest shit. It's almost like people actually play these games just by running face first into the enemies and exchanging attacks until someone dies.
>Power Attack is the best level 1 feat for Fighters because it does the most damage
Like are you fucking kidding me? Why would you ever willingly go into melee? That's like the number one place you never want to find yourself in. So instead of fucking power attack, why not advocate for something that helps you avoid being in such an awful position?

A lot of these guides recognize the Wizard as the best class, and it is, but they praise it for the strangest reasons.
>This spell is good because it lets you win a fight! (Don't pay attention to the fact that it won't always succeed and leaves you in a vulnerable position)

And people praise this stuff! Like is my experience with these games really so wildly different from the rest of the community's? It's not like I just started playing yesterday, I've been going at it for almost two decades now.

extremely vaginal post, i can tell you're a risk-aversive pussy irl

>>96302041 (OP)
>melle bd
>two decades
you know if you were telling the truth you would know that melee is engaged in extremely easily. Although maybe your GM is also a massive pussy which would explain your bitchmade attitude

>>96302041 (OP)
>Write a guide to play a game
>Game's most detailed rules deal with combat
>Write how to deal with combat, pay lip service to other details

Fucking big wonder how this happened chief.

>>96302041 (OP)
>I found myself reading some guides online and I feel like a fucking alien.
you're not an alien, you're just a complete dumbass with dunning kruger syndrome. the reason you're experiencing cognitive dissonance is that you have utterly failed to examine your assumptions about combat

I would ass-rape your whole sissy faggot party that can't engage in melee combat without pissing their pants.

>>96302041 (OP)
Just stick to videogames.

Bait thread
>I've been going at it for almost two decades now.
Obvious lie

>>96302041 (OP)
Fine ill take the bait
Consider hypothetically that not all combats are evadable, and evasion feats lower your combat utility by virtue of not being combat feats
Under such circumstances, its only a matter of time before you fail to evade a combat you cannot win.
Therefore, take combat feats such that you can win those combats, and will not NEED the evasion features
Your risk of injury per encounter may be higher, but your risk of death per campaign is lower

>>96302731
>Consider hypothetically that not all combats are evadable
But in practice, they are.

>>96302745
Well you posted meshi so lets take meshi. Even with four chillchucks, the dragon fight was essential. There is no falin without a dead dragon.
"In practice", you will struggle to find a campaign in any game system without at least one fundamentally unavoidable combat encounter

>>96302756
Meshi is not a game, why did you think this would make for a relevant example?

>>96302760
You're reading guides online and think all combats are avoidable. You clearly dont know any games, but MIGHT know an anime.

I said it was bait when i started and i havent forgotten. Single sentence denial is boring and not worth my time to reply to, if you want more (you)s you'll have to come up with something worth replying to

>>96302789
Well what am I supposed to do when you bring up shit like anime when I'm trying to talk about games?

>>96302041 (OP)
>Why would you ever willingly go into melee?
Because melee damage is weapon+strength, ranged damage is just weapon. Melee is better because a dead enemy can't kill you.

>>96302789
>this doesn't line up with my experience with games
>ok, but take for example this anime...
Like what the fuck did you expect after posting something so stupid?

>>96302745
>But in practice, they are.
Not of the DM decides they're not.

>>96302794
Maybe don't start a thread with an anime pic, friendo. He used that anime as his example, on the assumption you were familiar with it.

>>96302871
The DM can decide your character died in his sleep. It's not a hypothetical worth discussing.

>>96302879
The DM is the storyteller, if they want you to fight, you will fight. You cant discard that as it being unworthy of discussion. Make a character that fits with how your DM runs a story, if your allows you to avoid all combat without question then so be it, but in that case what risks are you running?

>>96302937
The DM can do whatever he wants, including teleporting your character into a sealed off 5 foot cube and having you fight an enemy with infinite HP and AC.

But this is still not worth discussing.

>>96302874
Man no, dont let him get a reply out of you just by being a rude cunt. Its a bait thread, of course hes a cunt, but he should at least have to try harder than lazy insults to get a reply.

>>96302874
Maybe read what is actually getting posted next time instead of hyperfixating on an image.

>>96302879
My dude, you're making my argument for me. Because the DM having that arbitrary power, means there is absolutely no such thing as all fights being avoidable. Hell, a good DM wouldn't even give XP for a fight you don't even engage in, you prevented the encounter, thus no XP for it. Let me guess...New Vegas? Deus Ex? Where'd you get this ideas from?

>>96302961
You chose the image, dingus.

>>96302965
Really not interested in engaging in endless nogame hypotheticals with a blithering retard.

>>96302972
All fights being avoidable, IS a hypothetical.

>>96302937
>>96302965
>>96302871
>ackshually nothing le matters because the DM can just le kill you

>>96302952
But that DM wouldnt have any repeat players anon. One that runs a more grounded campaign, including combat, will. Also you seem to be forgetting that you tend to play with other players who might actually want combat in their game.

>>96302041 (OP)
Link the guides retard

>>96302286
Based and about-to-end-up-on-r/rpghorrorstories-pilled

>>96302952
Why would I ever do that to my players? This is the most retarded shit I've read.

>>96302041 (OP)
If a game doesn't combat then surely its just IRL Simulator with a fancy skin?

>>96302041 (OP)
What game do you play most often and what is your character build? As a DM I'm mildly curious.

>>96302041 (OP)
>>96302998
Just take a photo or screenshot of your character sheet anon, I can work from that, dont have to make it into a big deal to post. : )

>>96302998
>>96303004
>INB4 excuses as to why they can't quickly post a character sheet of their non-combat character in any game system

Gonna be honest, I don't know how people get satisfaction from wizards in DnD 3.5. Assay spell resistance is a huge game changer, but you still have to get past their saves, and since monsters having enough hit points to stand up to 4 characters often results in their hit dice being far higher, it makes it very frustrating to get a monster to fail it's save.
Turn invisible? Monster has blindsight or truesight.
Fly? Monster has reach, or breath weapon, or flies itself.
Orb spells really feel like the only option sometimes because there's no save or SR. Yeah it's only damage but at least it's progress instead of throwing the dice on a SoD that has like 1 in 4 chance to work.
Or better get buffing your allies. Or buffing a summoned monster if you don't have a party meathead. But summoning takes a full round so if you get ambushed get fucked.
I've played 3.5 up to level 20 twice and I just don't know what I'm doing wrong since /tg/ seems to have one experience and mine is very very different.

>>96303035
Most enemies do not have all good saves, nor do they always have all those features. Most monsters don't have SR worth talking about.

>>96302041 (OP)
Gotta agree with OP. If you regard DnD as a numbers game only, single big melee hit is pretty much the least efficient use of a turn.

Though personally I mostly play 40k TRPGs, where melee is usually the safest place of the battlefield.

>>96302041 (OP)
What an awful thread. Just delete jt.

>>96302041 (OP)
20 years of being incompetent means you're not learning. It's easier for enemies to engage with you than it is for you to avoid them. Playing coy with melee for the entire party goes straight to shit the moment you deal with outsiders with infinite Greater Teleport uses.

Who is this bitch whining about every non-general on this board? It's so obviously one guy.

>>96302041 (OP)
>I've been going at it for almost two decades now.
Then let's hear how you somehow avoided a game where every single fighter in every single game you played was an archer and never played sword and board. I'm sure you have lots of stories of the games that you obviously played, right?

>>96302041 (OP)
does MArcille CUM Hard when you suck on her ears?

>>96303035
>here are more than 6 spells in 3.5e
>no mention about spell resistance piercing feats
>ragebaiting to simulate conversation
Can't fucking wait for the day of the rope once we get proper mods

>>96303004
>Just take a photo or screenshot of your character sheet anon, I can work from that, dont have to make it into a big deal to post. : )

WHERES YOUR CHARACTER SHEET OP? ITS BEEN HOURS.

>>96302745
>But in practice, they are.
To engage with this genuinely, you are absolutely right. All combats are avoidable. However, to do so is to engage with the game in a way that is antithetical to play. Not every dungeon (or equivalent) will have a path you can take to get to the objective without fighting. In this instance, your option is now to pack up and leave. Ambushed during travel? Run away. Get caught trying to steal something? Cut your losses and run.
It just requires you to be obstinantly set on not engaging the game and the scenario the GM sets up.

>>96303886
That's not true. Even if your objective is specifically to kill a monster you can still do it without running into it and ramming your weapon against it until it's dead.

It's baffling how nobody here seems to understand that.

>>96303909
Now consider how many classes there are where that's the most efficient option.

>>96302041 (OP)
There is no such thing as a ranged option for the Fighter that's equally as good at killing as a simple 2H Power Attack Fighter, and in melee there's no such thing as a more efficient method of disposing of enemies for them. Dead enemies don't inflict damage or conditions.

>>96303909
Yes, I too have used poison, traps, and the good ol' Unaware/Sneak Bonus Damage to hunt priority targets / monsters. I have also seen these plans not go the way I want because sometimes the monster/person doesn't fall into the trap or discovers us. At which point, most of us are willing and ready for Plan B: Kill it the hard way, unless its just something we can't fight at all.
100% avoiding combat requires everything to go your way or a soft GM.

>>96303781
Other than spectral hand / shivering touch and some other shit though it just feels like an uphill battle to target monsters with spells. Maybe my games jsut have too many undead and constructs I dunno.

>>96303212
Almost all the monsters in my 3.5e game lately have had spell reistsance. Even with greater spell penetration it's a significant failure point. And a lot of monsters besides undead and caster types have awesome fortitude saves, mediocre reflex but then it's just damage, and then will saves half the time the monster is straight up immune to whatever condition you're trying to inflict. Yeah you wanna git gud and pick the right spells, but as a fighter you can just hit anything and power attack it down. Not saying fighters are better, just less frustrating to play.

>>96303941
Even literal cavemen figured out the benefits of ranged combat yet somehow the concept eludes the average D&D player.

>>96303965
>when something doesn't work we throw a tantrum and just ram ourselves into the enemy
Not a very compelling case.

>>96303969
Ranged combat IRL is not inferior to melee combat. Ranged combat in D&D 3.5 is.

>>96303966
Reflex saves are not just damage.

>>96303976
It was when cavemen started doing it.

>>96303986
No it wasn't.

>>96302041 (OP)
>Like are you fucking kidding me? Why would you ever willingly go into melee?
..... because you're playing a two-handed wielding fighter or barbarian and want to hit stuff in melee because that's the entire reason you picked up a great sword?

Enemies in 3rd edition end up with 200+ or more flight speeds and many outsiders have at-will dimension door or personal+50LBs teleport abilities, if they want to get close to you and bite/stab you they're gonna do it, you not wanting melee combat to happen does not mean melee combat won't occur.....and if melee combat is occurring, Power Attack is a gold star feat

>>96303966
Yea when I last played high level 3.5 eventually the party almost entirely stopped targetting monsters with spells that allowed SR (still used orbs and that sort of shit).
I always ban shivering touch anyway, retarded spell.

>>96303983
Entanglement okay fair but what really truly takes the monster out of the right otherwise?

>>96303976
There's that sub-neanderthal comprehension level.

>>96302041 (OP)
Combat is a big part of the game and people do find enjoyment in plain combat.

Even if you do everything to avoid combat, its going to happen eventually since any trick is bound to fail and put you in a position you can't run away from.

For example, in one of my games, my party was exploring a cave and raiders came. Failed any attempt to intimidate them and was forced to fight our way through.

Sounds like you're used to playing with a very lenient DM with games playing out like Adventure is Nigh.

>>96304042
Can ranged weapons cripple you in D&D? Yes or no.

>>96304125
>But I LIKE turning my brain off and just hitting the enemies!
Okay, but why would you write a guide about it?

>>96304125
How is a GM who lets you get away with autoattacking enemies more lenient than one who doesn't?

>>96304143
>Who would write a guide about good combat feats to pick in a game centered primarily around combat?

>>96304143
Some people like insight on how to effectively hit enemies better.

>>96304153
What's the point of an optimization guide for an inherently suboptimal playstyle? If you're just doing shit for the lulz and your DM goes out of his way to accomodate you, just do whatever you want.

>>96302041 (OP)
Have you tried not playing DnD?

>>96304161
I dunno. What's the point of playing anything? What if it ends up becoming a case where melee combat actually is the optimal play?

You sound like a bitch who crabs about anybody who doesn't play like they're a clone of you.

>>96302879
Something that happens in 99% of games is not a hypothetical.

>>96304168
>oh well nothing matters!
Whatever retard.

>>96303909
>It's baffling how nobody here seems to understand that.
Because that's not how it happens in actual games, as you would well know had you ever played one.

>>96304185
Spoken like someone who knows they've lost the argument

>>96304161
I really want to see how you play your games where you grovel and run away anytime you're confronted by enemies.

>>96303990
Ranged combatants were pretty much only useful for harassment until guns became a thing.

>>96302041 (OP)
It's been a little while since one of these bait threads went up. It seems like OP is still a faggot with AIDS and miraculously his communication skills have actually gotten worse over time.

>>96304206
Is that the only alternative you can conceive of?

>>96304246
Sounds a lot closer to how OP plays their games, even if it's very unlikely they're telling the truth on that end

>>96304207
Holy Dunning-Kruger, Batman!

Okay, I guess it really is common for people to run into monsters head first and the DM just letting them get away with that.

Don't see how that could be fun for long but to each their own.

>>96304040
Viscid glob
Bands of steel
Resilient sphere/telekinetic sphere

>>96304314
You've still yet to give an alternative, and especially not an alternative for the Fighter. What do you think a good Fighter looks like?

>>96304207
a rock thrown at your head will kill you.

>>96304324
I don't know what the alternative is for fighter, that's why I looked up a guide. Didn't find anything actually viable though. We're just going to continue not playing them.

>>96304340
Then clearly, you're a moron

>>96304341
You just keep slashing that monster little Timmy. As long as you're having fun.

>>96304152
Sometimes I just hit the orc with my sword. I don’t need to describe my swinging technique every turn.

>>96304350
No, as in you've clearly never actually seen real life combat before, or understood why people invented the pointy stick at all. But keep pretending your ignorance of actual history is worthwhile.

>>96304358
Was this post AI generated? What the fuck are you on about?

>>96304361
I'll translate it for you: You're an idiot

>>96304366
Thanks ChatGPT, keep up the good work.

>>96304374
Sure, you keep pretending that only a bot could disagree with your sub-iq takes

>>96303966
Undead and constructs have utter shit saves. Exploit that.

>>96302041 (OP)

I honestly do not believe you actually play tabletop.
Assuming you're playing something d&d-adjacent (which you are, no one makes guides for rules lite or indie stuff) you're going to get into a fight eventually even if you're trying to avoid them, and you're going to fight things that want to get up close and slap you around. If you do not have anyone in your party who excels when placed into that position, then you have a party of wizards who can't cast shit without eating attacks of opportunity and rogues with no sneak attack partners and no frontliners that can pin an enemy in place to let your ranged characters do their thing unmolested.

>>96303975
Other way around, dumbass. If something doesn't go your way, the enemy now knows you're there and attacks you. Or is your DM willing to let you try as many times as you want with no consequences? Your perspective makes more sense if you have a soft GM who lets you try and fail whatever you want as many times as you want with no consequences for failure.

>>96304334
No, usually it'll just miss, and by the time you've picked up another rock to huck at the charging caveman you'll be on your ass dead or down from getting smashed with a club.

>>96304464
>when something doesn't work we stand still and let the enemy ram themselves into us

>>96304478
And I'm sure that works well until you run into a dead end, or to the edge of a cliff, or in front of a fast flowing river, or into enemy reinforcements, or right into a pack of wild animals that were agitated by your arrival, or into a bunch of bandits who are looking for a bunch of easy marks too focused on running to notice they're about to be ambushed

>>96304423
>If you do not have anyone in your party who excels when placed into that position, then you have a party of wizards who can't cast shit without eating attacks of opportunity
Spells don't cause attacks of opportunity nogames, and Casters are objectively better tanks than martials.

>>96304478
kek

>>96304519
Unless you make a Concentration check they do.

>>96304478
Welcome to the combat rules, retard.

>>96304161
>What's the point of an optimization guide for an inherently suboptimal playstyle?
Are you retarded? Those are the playstyles that need optimization guides THE MOST. If you want to play a fighter because it’s the concept you want to play, you need to be squeezing out every advantage that you can so that you’re merely trailing the cleric, as opposed to being truly dead weight.

>>96304519
>Spells don't cause attacks of opportunity nogames
Yeah they do. You can mitigate that by casting defensively, but baseline rule is that casting a spell provokes.

>>96304519
What fucking system are you playing where casting spells in melee didn't at least force a check to avoid an attack of opportunity? 5e does, pathfinder/3.5 does. I'm not familiar with 4e but I can't imagine it doesn't.

>>96304654
5E does not unless someone has the Mage Slayer feat and monsters aren't built like PCs, so practically it doesn't happen. 4E does but you can take Staff Expertise and use a staff to get around it, if you're able to.

>>96304478
>when something doesn't work my DM says it's okay, your failure didn't give the enemy any kind of advantage, don't roll initiative, it's okay you can just run away and try again I'm not going to punish you :)

>>96304674
>just walk forward and fight every enemy you see, you don't need to do anything else to beat my super hard game :)

>>96304686
You're a disingenuous retard. Obviously avoiding combat is optimal. The point is that it is also guaranteed to eventually fail and if you are not prepared to face it when you are forced into it you will die. If you are never forced into combat, your GM is babying you.

>>96304671
Well guess the couple games I've played 5e my group's been playing it wrong then. That's utterly retarded but I guess that fits for OP's game of choice.

>>96304590
Nope, they still don't.

>>96304647
>Yeah they do
No they don't.

>>96304654
>What fucking system are you playing where casting spells in melee didn't at least force a check to avoid an attack of opportunity? 5e does
5e doesn't lmao.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but NONE of you have ever played the game and it shows. Opportunity Attacks only trigger when you move out of a creature's reach without using Disengage. That is it.

>>96304775
This isn't a 5E thread retard.

>>96304872
Every thread on /tg/ is a 5e thread.

>>96302041 (OP)
>I feel like a fucking alien
That's because you are. Now get off my fucking planet.

>>96304883
I didn't know all those 40k generals were stealth 5e D&D threads

>>96304775
OP mentioned Power Attack, which also doesn’t exist in 5E, so the only logical assumption is that we’re discussing 3.5. And, in that case…
>If you want to cast a spell without provoking any attacks of opportunity, you must make a Concentration check (DC 15 + the level of the spell you’re casting) to succeed. You lose the spell if you fail.
Now, before you try to say something retarded like “but this was a side conversation and ACTUALLY not related to OP,” I’ll draw your attention to the fact that >>96304519 specifically uses the term “attacks of opportunity”. That is indeed the terminology in use in 3.5, but NOT in 5E—instead, 5E refers to them as “opportunity attacks”.

So, to summarize, you came into a thread about 3.5, acted retarded in a specific reply chain that was about 3.5, and are now giggling and snorting to yourself about how you’re so clever because you brought up 5E for no reason. There’s no merely pretending here—you’re honest-to-god retarded.

>>96304892
Every thread on /tg/ is also a 40k thread.

>>96304914
Does anyone even like the fifth edition 40k rules?

>>96304904
No, the logical assumption is that he was talking about pf2e. Nobody plays 3.5e except for gameless grogs past their prime.

>>96304904
>OP mentioned Power Attack, which also doesn’t exist in 5E, so the only logical assumption is that we’re discussing 3.5
Nogames detected. Nobody is looking up 3.5 guides in 2025, they're talking about Pathfinder (2nd edition since you probably don't know that exists lmao), where spells also don't provoke Opportunity Attacks.
>because you brought up 5E
The first post that brought up 5e was >>96304654 retard. Try again.

>>96304935
Pathfinder was bad enough that we stuck to 3.5 instead of letting Paizo break the game further. I shudder at the thought of how fucked up 2e must be.

>>96305015
Oh it's this autist again, nevermind bro 3.5e totally wasn't a dumpsterfire that got overtaken by pathfinder and nearly killed DnD we all agree with you for sure.

>>96304954
Maybe you could've been less of a retard and just added what edition you were talking about to OP, then.

To answer your question from the OP, it's because you're playing the dumbed down sequel to a game system in which the previous edition usually required some level of combat efficiency to avoid dying and the people who were dumb enough to move to 2e were too retarded to realize that the game now lets you do whatever the fuck you want and get away with it. Congratulations, OP, you've beaten the pf2e intelligence bell curve and landed on midwit.

>>96305057
I never replied to OP retardo, learn to read.

>>96304935
If he was talking about PF2E he would be extra retarded because that's a game where the Fighter unga bungaing someone's ass is actually the optimal strategy on a party level and evading combat or playing keepaway with enemies is extremely difficult.

>>96305133
>He would be extra retarded
So we're in agreement that OP was talking about pf2e then?

>>96305157
No, because noone says the Wizard is the best class in PF2E.

>>96305168
They might, if they were extra retarded.

>>96304315
I know bands of steel but not the others really thanks.

>>96304904
If we're talking about 3.5 it's moot because at least one of the casters will win initiative and then the fight is over.

>>96305223
Except the OP said that taking encounter deleting spells is dumb so he's retarded even in that case

So we've established that
If OP is talking about pf2e he's retarded because fighters tearing through enemies is more optimal than using wizards
If OP is talking about 5e he's just nogaems baiting because power attack didn't exist in that system
If he's talking about 3.5/pf1e he's retarded for saying wizards shouldn't take encounter-winning spells
No one plays 4e
And if he's talking about any other system he's lying about reading guides

So regardless of the circumstances OP is a fag as usual.

>>96304935
power attack doesn't exist in PF2E anymore and it's also largely considered one of the worst feats in the game since it takes double actions but only adds one damage die. No guide would consider it the "best" level 1 feat over something like Sudden Charge or Double Slice. Whereas Power Attack IS the best level 1 damage feat a 2-handed martial can take in both 3.5 and pathfinder 1e

And EVEN THEN attacks of opportunity still exist and are triggered by casting spells or using ranged attacks in melee. Not every enemy has them, but the most dangerous ones still do (including every single dragon and dedicated """boss""" monsters as well as elite humanoids) so that's a moot point. And Pathfinder 2E is practically a tactical combat boardgame, so the idea you'd be "avoiding" combat at all is a pipe dream, noncombat situations in PF2E are just pressing a canned """"exploration mode"""" button that gives a minor bonus until you roll initiative and get into a fight. There's not a soul on the planet playing a non-combat PF2E campaign.

>>96303909
Here OP reverts to his "melee is bad" argument, backtracking from "you never need to fight" because he realized that one was retarded.

>>96303969
Consider it tactically. If you don't engage with the enemy, and they don't engage with you, both sides can shoot every turn. If the party is outnumbered this is bad for you. Every enemy can fire at the same PC. But in melee, a PC is only fighting a few, maybe 3 at most unless you're getting surrounded, and other enemies that are shooting at you do so at a disadvantage because their allies are in the way. Thus, you are in less danger in melee.

>>96304161
Optimal combat is whatever kills the enemy faster.

>>96304519
And here we go, the answer all along was, you're playing the game wrong.

>>96303909
This thread is like the /tg/ equivalent of Tau being baffled and condescending towards Imperium's emphasis on melee combat and chainswords until a portal rips open directly behind them and a bunch of Bloodletters with greatswords jump out and murder all their tanks and riflemen led by a giant daemon prince wielding an axe made out of his twin brother
>Haha, silly gue'la, why not simply shoot the enemy before he reaches you?
>I am a genius.
>OH NO

>>96304519
Any game that has "Power Attack" in it as a level 1 fighter feat also has spellcasting provoke attacks of opportunity.

Unrelated but I fucking hate players who keep trying to disable every combat encounter by some cheesy way, usually involving real life physics etc. Its fun occasionally, but becomes a fucking bore when the same dude tries to cheese every fight with some shenanigans and never lets us just play the fucking game and use abilities and spells.

O powerful wotsy, greatest and most terrible among rpg behemoths, thank you for continuing to shit out content every few years so that retards like this are bound to its confines

>>96305869
Don't award XP for fights that don't happen.

>>96304519
Oh no, I dropped my screencap from page 170 of the Player's Handbook, could you hand it to me OP? But be careful, if you actually read that it might cause severe butthurt.

>>96305891
You're literally supposed to award XP for bypassed encounters.

>>96302041 (OP)
Not everyone is a minmaxing faggot like you OP

> 3.5 thread

Yes, power attack is one of the best things you can take on your fighter unless you have some weird build rigged for something else. Not like you'll have any noncombat skills as a FIGHTER. This is 3.5, baby. You signed up to be a DPS blender that doesn't cost party resources. This is your entire thing. This allows others to focus other things and conserve spendable resources for other, actually dangerous, stuff that can't be solved just by reducing it's HP to 0.

Playing a rogue or bard instead is a valid choice if you don't like it.

>Save or Dies/Suck
Yeah, a lot of the classic 3.5 stories about casters being OP revolves around enabling casters to be that way by ignoring rules, coddling them, and glossing over all the times the one spell doesn't quite do the trick. Being a wizard is particularly inconvenient by RAW, and it was always druids that were offensively OP in a casual way. That said, wizards are supposed to be a more technical class for a reason. You're supposed to understand what save or suck you use depending on the situation. If you prepare wrong, you're hosed. That's the point. It's ironically the weakest of the full casters despite the classic claims otherwise.

If you want easy OP, play a druid with a powered up pet and lean in to shape shifting. Or a well built cleric will do. I think their more esoteric restrictions is supposed to balance them, but they're not that hard to deal with.

>>96306161
Surprised people forgot about the threat of CoDzilla so soon, frankly

>>96305961
Oh man, now I dropped my screencap from page 36 of the Dungeon Master's guide! Bypassed =/= defeated. No XP.

>>96306177
Keep reading.

>>96306203
You mean the example of the minotaur and the vault? False equivalency, the XP is awarded for achieving the goal of getting into the vault, not sneaking past the monster. I'm still right.

>>96306171

A properly managed game shouldn't have this be an insurmountable problem, but also build your fighters properly. 3.5 does punish you for falling for fake build options pretty hard while the intended ones over perform. Fighters are particularly punished for this. You have the one true path build kinda thing going on. Just accept you are doing it. Your entire job is to be free DPS with no strings attached. Accept it. If you cannot be set to blend, you are the one who is wrong. Well, I like playing dumb weird stuff too, but it's easier if we just accept how things work rather than belly ache about how bad our characters are. Having done it for years, it's not worth it.

Don't use two weapon fighting unless you got it for free. Melee characters should only be built for strength/con. Don't fall for the weapon finesse meme. Yeah that includes monks. Don't build monks for anything but strength and con. Throw spare points in to dex and wis split for a bit of ac but it's whatever. Monks actually are pretty fun done this way rather than pure abject suffering. Trusting dexterity is for geeks, losers, and bow users. You want to obliterate your enemy from the earth and have enough HP to tank the sheer inevitability that is damage. Dexterity builds are false hope incarnated in to a TTRPG. Strength rogues are also very effective and great fun. Consider it. You want to be more of a swashbucklery guy or something? Strength/Con and fake it. I'm sorry. That's just how it is down here. You'll be miserable trying to get weapon finesse to work. This is the game's one big dirty secret of building martials. It can't test your AC if it's DEAD.

Noting, people can nitpick edge cases and quote builds that take a different class every single level, but whatever. Building a powerful but reasonable character doesn't have to be a pain unless you insist on it.

>>96306218
Nope, you're not. You get XP for overcoming a challenge. Defeating a monster is only one way of overcoming a challenge. Negotiating to stop combat is explicitly called out as giving rewards that are at least equal to the full encounter.

>>96306171
There's way more wizardwank in 5e while druids lost more features than some entire classes have, people bitching about wizards in 3.5 is largely 5e kiddies retroactively applying their view to 3.X as a proxy for spellcasters in general, or they're actually bitching about Pathfinder shit like Pact+Exploiter Wizards and Paizo's giga buffed Arcane School features and wizard exclusive Arcane Discovery feats, but none of that is 3.5 or WOTC it's literally a different company entirely.

>>96306277
No, 3.5 Wizards still have plenty of fucked up shit like Abrupt Jaunt, PrCs, and unholy OP versions of polymorph.

>>96306266
Yes I am, because the existence of non-combat encounters changes nothing. For example, using a Wall of Stone spell to block off a squad of goblins so the party can just walk past them, is avoid a *combat* encounter. No combat, no XP. Avoiding a challenge is not overcoming it.

>>96306283
Also Simulacrum, Contingency, Forcecage, etc.

>>96306302
Is the encounter no longer a problem? You overcame it.

>>96306353
Wrong

>>96306265
being a 40 strength barbarian ripping through castle walls with your bare hands and blending Cthulhu into chopped calamari is the easiest and probably most fun way to be a martial in 3.5, it's kind of funny that there's been 10+ years of 5e players whining that high level martials feel like just a guy at the gym due to bounded accuracy and attributes hard capping at 20 for PCs with linear scaling. A high level PC in 3.5 can literally be stronger than a dragon and you can shove somebody 30 feet across the room with a big Bull Rush, not five feet hard capped, or Sunder steel plate and walls (although the party will give you dirty looks if you destroy too much loot). 3.5 martials are one-trick pony sledgehammers most of the time but they are legit SLEDGEHAMMERS and in.my experience that's what martial players actually want, they don't really care they can't teleport or raise the dead or the 1000 other useful and bullshit things high level casters can do in 3.5 as long as they're able to smash shit hard enough like Hercules

>>96306359
Sorry, I'm not.

>>96306365
Not to pick a fight with caster players, we're all here to tell OP how retarded he is, but casters always felt like the reddit mods of classes to me. Imagine the party is confronted with the obstacle of a wall with enemies defending it from the battlements, a caster's solution might be
>Transmute Rock to Mud
>Disintegrate
>Passwall
>Fly
>Dimension Door or similar
That feels like the "um ackshully" of gameplay. "Your pitiful challenge is nothing to me, look how easily I," etc. For me, it's infinitely more fun and satisfying to tip the wall over.

>>96306384
Sorry, you are. Because in the given example, those goblins are still alive and able to harass the party later, they haven't been defeated. So, no XP.

>>96306413
>Duration: Instantaneous
Not by the time the party's gone they can't.

>>96306423
An argument that requires massive suppositions. Like the goblins not being able to get through the wall and follow the party. Or take another route. Or do something to raise an alarm. Not defeated, still active, still hostile, no XP.

>>96306441
It's really, really hard for goblins to get through minimum 135 HP and 8 hardness with the sunder rules when you're also allowed to trap enemies with it. You're the one presupposing things.

>>96306483
Oh, did you push your glasses up before busting out the numbers like that? Stop being a fucking baby, you're wrong and you know it. Notice how you pick the one example you think you can argue with but ignore others.

>>96306277
Nah.

I was around for the era of 3.5 and what people acted like. There was way too much praise of edge wizard strats that, as the OP points out, only work 1 in 4 times. Probably from tables that are blatantly ignoring rules to some degree too in a way that favors wizards most of all. While also downplaying how strong druids were. All the weird stories typed before 4E even existed centered around wizards, and even then you could tell it's from people ignoring a dozen different rules anyway. Like scribe times, gold costs, material costs, resting, travel time, delays from the wizard being the wizard, and on and on. All stuff no one liked tracking cause it's cumbersome. And no small amount of wizards who know how to DM the game better than the DM.

>>96306365
I regret every day I ever tried making weapon finesse work. Even monks perform 1000% better going all in on strength with a healthy backing of CON for the inevitable. Besides, if I get hit? I have the move speed of a fighter jet. I also have the ability to ignore AoOs. I am not constrained by your mortal logic of stand and die. No, if I regret my attack commitment, I can be in another zipcode in one turn. It's like they knew the issue and provided for it. Like they are.. game designers or something. Wow. With some funny niche things you can do. Otherwise, just ATATATA people's health away.

Works the same way in Pathfinder 1. Not sure about 2. Haven't looked in to it. But it has the same weapon finesse issue. For the same reason. Turns out dexterity is a shitty stat.

>>96306489
I'm not wrong. You get XP for overcoming challenges. It's not my fault or problem you're too stupid to put the basic ideas the game presents you together.

>>96303991
If they have 200+ move speed, let alone flight; melee combat isn't occurring. Pick up a bow, scrub.

>>96306602
Good luck doing more than scratch damage.

>>96306560
If the enemy is still alive, and able & motivated to oppose you, you've overcome nothing. There's nothing else to say.

>>96306659
Your argument is defeated by the DMG's own example. Is the sleeping minotaur still alive? Yes. Is the sleeping minotaur still able and motivated to oppose you? Yes. Are you still supposed to get XP for sneaking past him? Yes.

>>96306535
>There was way too much praise of edge wizard strats
In my experience, there is no such thing as a 3.5 wizard player who actually keeps track of their spellbook, and acts like they just *get* all their new spells when they level up.

>>96306674
Again, killing the minotaur wasn't the goal, getting into the vault was, THAT is what you get XP for. You're still wrong.

>>96306687
And 'raiding this dungeon' isn't a goal?

>>96306678
They literally do.

Rarely do you see an OP so mind-numbingly retarded.

>>96306353
>kills self
No life, no problems.

>>96306738
They do not. Some casters do, wizards do not.

>>96306678
One big thing that is supposed to balance ALL casters pre4E was this and a host of other issues.

Travel times. Supplies. Who gets to carry supplies. Every single thing you do requiring time to do it. Including walking to your destination. The reality of getting lost in the wilderness and starving to death. A host of mundane daily things you either spent slots to get through or have a guy around who specializes in it (ranger). The guy who can spin and place and kill suddenly looks very attractive, and half casters aren't so bad when you realize they are just that with some practical stuff thrown in to help noncombat issues. When your every moment adventuring is technically crunch time, meandering about isn't such a great idea. Throw in casters needing expensive components who cares about the stuff that may as well be free. we're talking about the 1000gp components or stuff that needs an entire side quest to get as one of the most commonly ignored things. A lot of those stories relied on spells with those kinds of components. Okay, so what if the wizard fudges how they are getting new spells or how long resting takes. How are you fronting a fistfuls of gold per combat? Probably could have just bought the fighter some means to fly with all that instead and fixed >>96306602 permanently.

So casters are legit VERY STRONG, but they don't rule the table over others for no reason. People are allowing it because they can't be bothered to do otherwise, and martial players are criminally guilty of trying to get their one shitty idea to work that will never work. When the casters are throwing out spells that only deal damage to speed things up, you know you're cooked.

>>96306774
>>96306678
Oh and HEALING TIMES.

Yeah you're divine casters really should be converting most of their spells to healing on the fly. Cause healing at 2 hp an aeon is cool. But your DM probably ignored that rule too, and the heal bot is all too eager to not be a heal bot in downtime. They'd rather be doing cool things.

>>96306765
>Wizards perform a certain amount of spell research between adventures. Each time a character attains a new wizard level, she gains two spells of her choice to add to her spellbook. The two free spells must be of spell levels she can cast. If she has chosen to specialize in a school of magic, one of the two free spells must be from her specialty school.

>>96306790
No they shouldn't. They should offload it onto a cheap wand.

>>96306820
Isn't item creation itself a resource use? And requires a feat?

>>96306827
No, not really. The gold and XP cost are so negligible by the time you can craft wands that it doesn't matter, plus you're supposed to refund wealth spent on consumables after they're spent. It costs a feat, but negating HP attrition is so strong that it's one of the best feats you can take.

>>96306812
>two spells of her choice to add to her spellbook
Now go back and read this again: >>96306678
>all their new spells
>all
>A L L

>>96306716
One comprised of many smaller goals, such as encounters. The dungeon as a whole is not a single encounter, anon.

>>96306881
Those are their new spells. I've never seen a Wizard player act like they get every spell available instantly, so why the fuck would I assume that's what you're talking about?

>>96306910
No no, by all, I mean ALL. Hit level 5, ALL level 3 spells are available, instantly.

>>96302121
Fpbp

>>96307095
What, without even putting them in their spell book?

>>96306602
>If they have 200+ move speed, let alone flight; melee combat isn't occurring. Pick up a bow, scrub.
no, the dragon with 200 movespeed is going to crash on top of your backline wizard/cleric and literally swallow him whole to stop him casting

>>96302041 (OP)
Agree. Statistically it is much better and safer to be the guy that hires adventurers than to actually be the adventurer. Only complete retards would actually expose themselves to so much danger. Of course the real trick to this playstyle is to mitigate the threat from your hirelings. The most basic of basics is to check their referrals. Been playing this way for 4 decades btw.

Once I put out my Safety First guide you will finally have something good to read OP.

>>96305869
talk to your players
alternatively tell them physics doesn't work after all it is a unique setting
eg. heavy objects can fall faster than light ones, momentum only carries within a round, gravity pulls people to earth, classical elements apply so no plutonium, illnesses are caused by "bad air" rather than microscopic organisms
It is dirty but it works.

feels like over half the thread is continuing a conversation from somewhere else, what the fuck is going on?

>>96308573
This argument is older than you are and nobody involved needs to actually confirm what any of the points are.

>>96307147
They assume the all spells just appear in the book when they get a new level, without them having to do anything.

>>96302871
Anon doesn't want to fight. That's why he picked a fighter in a game about fighting. To feel clever for avoiding fighting.
Should have just played vtm or something.

>>96302041 (OP)
D&D is about combat. Almost all the rules concern combat and are all balanced around the combat ramifications.
Avoiding combat is not winning at D&D any more than not playing Chess makes you a grandmaster.

>>96303966
>>96303035
I'm about 90% certain this anon never played 3.5e and is actually just referencing the Pathfinder CRPGs.

>>96305358
>No one plays 4e
It wouldn't make sense in 4e either, it's literally a tactical skirmish game with minimal design space for avoiding combat or taking out a select target instantly and then retreating.

>>96307270
Can't wait.

>>96306277
Isn't Moon Druid stupidly OP in 5E

>>96317554
It's just a gimmick.

>>96313356
D&D is about roleplaying, pleb.

>>96304519
THE NI-