TRPG General Chat

Lord_Gareth

7:13 AM

I LIVE!

BESW

@Lord_Gareth [pitchforks and torches]

I mean, hi!

Lord_Gareth

^_^ How's it goin'?

BESW

Well! Busy. But well. Yourself?

Lord_Gareth

Decent enough, been fighting a migraine on and off all day. Trawling through the threads I commented on earlier; only one's really got a reply, and I can't comment on aforementioned reply (not enough rep) so I'm sorta chillin'

Trying to write a bit.

Still trying to get used to the concept of a community outside of Paizo's own home forums that plays 3.5 heavily and yet does not seem to comprehend the fundamental realities of the system >.>

BESW

Yeah, that monk question's got some focus on a different answer right now, probably gonna have to cool down before people look at anything else over there.

Lord_Gareth

7:17 AM

<.<

Nah, I'm not concerned about /my/ answer getting upvoted

BESW

@Lord_Gareth What do you see as 3.5's fundamental realities?

Lord_Gareth

Keep in mind that I speak solely mechanically at this juncture, in the full knowledge that each group has its own preferences, houserules, and optimization point(s).

3.5, as a system, is hideously imbalanced. It's not a /little/ imbalanced, it's not /fixably/ imbalanced. Its balance has been shredded as if by massive claws and forced to watch its organs forcibly removed and eaten in front of it, and when the balance finally died of blood loss and shock the mechanics reanimated it as a wight so that they could torment it further.\

And the biggest causes of this imbalance are as follows:

BESW

@Lord_Gareth Now, see, there's a guy here who would say you're being unreasonable and that 3.5 never had balance to get gutted in the first place.

[grin]

Lord_Gareth

:p

It's true that the most broken books in 3.5 are Core

But the reason I use the 'gutted' imagery is that it was SOLD as being balanced

And despite Monte Cook's backpedaling the books stubbornly insist on not bothering to mention that one option is worth less, or possibly MUCH LESS, than others

And honestly, aside from "The designers didn't know what they were doing until near the very end of the run," the biggest reason for 3.5's imbalance problems isn't numbers, it's /options/.

The most powerful classes are those with the most options

If I'm making sense at all?

BESW

Aye.

We've had discussions much like this in the last few weeks here.

Lord_Gareth

7:25 AM

I was, ah, sort of seeing that when I upscrolled.

I'm sensing, as though through prophecy, that I shall have great conflict with Mr. Hobbs

BESW

I... don't have a horse in this race, but I'm fascinated by what I see as Wizards' attempt to twice change horses in midstream, if I may mix my horsey metaphors.

Lord_Gareth

By all means, please elaborate.

I do apologize if responses are slow, I've got action-romance to write.

BESW

@Lord_Gareth I doubt it. He's not defending the post. He was trying to clarify an RPG.SE policy issue.

Lord_Gareth

I'm sensing conflict because he made the post in the first place.

And good things have not happened when I've started interactive relationships with folks who manage to be so eloquent, yet incorrect on every possible point you could be wrong on.

BESW

....which post?

This one?

Lord_Gareth

7:28 AM

-1

A: Optimizing a D&D 3.5 Monk

Assumption: All 3.0/3.5 and all 3rd party material authorized by wizards are available and the DM is going by DMG CR against the party of 4. When I speak of a monk I mean a character who utilizes its core class features as the basis for the character. No optimizing, just not being foolish. Obj...

BESW

-1

A: Optimizing a D&D 3.5 Monk

Assumption: All 3.0/3.5 and all 3rd party material authorized by wizards are available and the DM is going by DMG CR against the party of 4. When I speak of a monk I mean a character who utilizes its core class features as the basis for the character. No optimizing, just not being foolish. Obj...

Lord_Gareth

No, that one

Ah

BESW

Yeah, he didn't.

Lord_Gareth

so yes, same post

BESW

He edited it for formatting.

It's Noctani's content.

Lord_Gareth

7:29 AM

Ah.

So it'd be Noctani that I need to be watching for, then?

BESW

Possibly.

We're pretty good at being cordial though.

Lord_Gareth

Mm, I suppose I misrepresent my concern.

I'm not worried about Noctani going off on me.

BESW

Haven't seen him on chat anyway.

Lord_Gareth

I'm worried about me losing my head and going off >.>

BESW

Heh, good self-awareness then.

Lord_Gareth

7:30 AM

Nerd raging is, alas, a deeply held vice of mine

And I swear to you

The only parts of that post that are correct in any sense

Are right at the very end when he explains that becoming bigger increases your damage

If he tried to be more wrong he would actually be less wrong

There's no way to be more wrong than he was.

BESW

I'm pretty sure he could've suggested dual-wielding level 1 halfling commoners.

Lord_Gareth

And he would have been less wrong.

BESW

The attack penalties alone would be brutal.

Lord_Gareth

But compensated for by having the halflings make attacks!

Sweet freaking zombies did someone break up with Pandora Radio or something? It's like Emo day on ALL OF MY STATIONS.

BESW

I think you may be exaggerating, but at any rate it's not very constructive.

What systems do you play?

Lord_Gareth

7:36 AM

I played 3.5 for the longest time but a lack of IRL group has stalled that quite a bit. I played oWoD for a couple of years and play (present tense) nWoD, as well as Scion. I dabble in Shadowrun 4e and am in the middle of learning Legend (Rule of Cool's, that is, not Mongoose)

BESW

Cool.

Lord_Gareth

I got into 3.5 back when it was 3.0 - I made the leap from 2e

BESW

I started in D&D 3.5 just as it upgrade from 3.0, dabbled in Mage (one session before the group fell apart), am currently immersed in 4e. Have minor experience in DitV, MLWM, SG-1 (d20 Modern), a couple others. Probably gonna run DFRPG next.

It really all depends on what my group wants/needs/likes. My first group was a very good fit for 3.5. yes.

My current group chafed under 3.5, and finds 4e refreshing.

Lord_Gareth

I remember more innocent days when I thought Monks were overpowered and that sorcerers needed a power boost. Sometimes I miss those days. I get PTSD from some op discussions >.>

BESW

Most of them are leaving island soon though, so my next campaign will probably be Dresden Files because it suits a group of 1 or 2 players better, and the specific remaining players have play interests that fit FATE while the other players we have now... maybe not quite so much FATE material.

@BrianBallsun-Stanton Heyo.

Lord_Gareth

7:43 AM

I've heard bits and snatches about FATE but I've never even so much as seen the front cover for it. I suppose I'll have to hunt it down one of these days and get some reading done on it.

BESW

There's a lovely Kickstarter for the FATE Core system up right now. For $10 you can get the core system book and a TON of extra content goodies in pdf, including downloading the beta of the Core now so you can give them feedback before it's published.

Lord_Gareth

As much as I'd love to support that kind of thing, I'm broke. And no "lolramen" broke. I'm the kind of broke where I'm 30k in debt, supporting a family, going to college, living with the in-laws, and avoiding the doctor's office because I can't pay the 15$ fee that the discount clinic charges. The bottom of the barrel is above my financial grasp. The poverty line seems bedecked with wealth and influence from where I stand.

BESW

Gotcha.

Lord_Gareth

And as a result, in addition to living like a wretch well beneath any pretense of human dignity, I have no cash to throw around.

Brian Ballsun-Stanton

@BESW yo

Lord_Gareth

7:49 AM

Heya Brian, 'sup?

Brian Ballsun-Stanton

@Besw, @kyran could you frame for me how a single, constructive, comment explaining the inaccuracy of the answer would read? It's likely the academic in me, but I find it hard to imagine how it would read within a single paragraph.

@Lord_Gareth entirely too bloody warm and busy.

Lord_Gareth

I don't think Kryan is online, my friend

Wait, wait, are we talking about a single constructive comment detailing the hideous inaccuracy of that post in the monk thread, because I can swing up to the bat on that one.

BESW

Left side of your post lines has a drop-down menu with an "edit" option that lasts for... I think 90 secs?

Lord_Gareth

Ha, brilliant!

BESW

@Lord_Gareth If you could drop the info in this chat, that'd be a lovely resource.

Lord_Gareth

7:52 AM

And now the evidence is GONE FOREVER!

'Kay, gimmie a second or three to look over the grapple rules again. Like many players I try to avoid using them if at all possible since they're, you know, horrors of lovecraftian proportions

Though admittedly

Much better than the horror show that was 2e grappling

BESW

It's a sensitive enough topic that I think a gestalt answer submitted to the mod for dissemination is the best approach, and we'd be honored to have you in the gestalt.

Brian Ballsun-Stanton

@Lord_Gareth I'd love to see it

BESW

@Lord_Gareth "Balance through complexity" is a phrase we've used to describe 3.5 grappling before.

Brian Ballsun-Stanton

But yeah, remember: 1 paragraph, within the character length of a comment.

Lord_Gareth

It would probably help if I knew what that character length was.

BESW

7:55 AM

@Lord_Gareth Seconded.

Lord_Gareth

Incidentally, Kryan had left a helpful comment on my post, and it (and my acknowledgement of it) both seem to be gone

I'd had an error of fact he corrected

Brian Ballsun-Stanton

@Lord_Gareth and did you edit it into your answer?

BESW

@Lord_Gareth If you edited it into your post, then the comments are no longer needed.

Lord_Gareth

Ah, alright

I'm new to the site, so I dunno the steps to this dance just yet.

Brian Ballsun-Stanton

@Lord_Gareth ::nod, nod::

Be welcome, and glad to see you on chat.

BESW

7:57 AM

@Lord_Gareth Yeah, it's a different kind of beast from most sites.

Brian Ballsun-Stanton

Comments are ephemeral

Lord_Gareth

....Yep it's emo day on Pandora. Papercut (Linkin Park) just showed up on my Pink! station.

Brian Ballsun-Stanton

They exist to provide guidance to the answerer, or inform the public of resources that, in some way would not belong to the answer.

BESW

Yes! It's lovely to see someone new to the site on chat. Took me more than a month to wander over this way, and I probably would've been less confused if it hadn't.

Lord_Gareth

@BESW - Kryan was bragging your chat up when he invited me.

So I thought I'd check it out.

BESW

7:59 AM

Well, glad to have you.

Lord_Gareth

'Kay, grapple rules read, checking a detail on Monk

I suppose the trouble here

Is that I could make a comment, and it would be polite, but one paragraph is only really enough room to tell folks that the answer is /wrong/.

I'd need an entire new answer to explain how it is, and I wish I was exaggerating, literally factually incorrect in every possible way.

BESW

yeah.... we'll work on that. Just give us the content for starters.

I dunno, he was right about evasion. [grin]

Brian Ballsun-Stanton

@Lord_Gareth And thus my question.

Lord_Gareth

Well, I think I can get a constructive comment by focusing less on the actual details

Brian Ballsun-Stanton

try, as a community here in chat, to construct a discussion of the problems of the answer.

Don't by the way, post it, work on it here in chat.

Lord_Gareth

8:03 AM

And more on the opening paragraph describing the monk's role

Brian Ballsun-Stanton

I expect a number of questions to emerge from this, TBH.

BESW

I'm out of 3.5 too long to have a lot to say about the mechanics of it, but I'm familiar enough to contribute and I'm pretty good with the tact when I try.

I read through that answer and I know a lot of it's funky, but most of it I couldn't say why.

Lord_Gareth

So: our intrepid poster paints a picture of the Monk as a striker tasked with taking out 'potent' foes and eliminating single high-value targets such as spellcasters and, presumably, buffers/debuffers and the like.

BESW

I wish @KRyan were here for this now. The two of you would probably create some kind of anti-monk-propaganda nexus that would cause the entire class to implode.

Lord_Gareth

And the trouble with this statement goes right back to what I said already about Monk being antisynergistic. Even at low levels when Monk is "stronger" he already has this problem. If he moves like a striker, he can't deal his damage. If he flurries, he's not moving, which means that a monk's ability to deal damage is 100% in the hands of the enemy.

If they move, the monk must move

And if the monk moves, he can't Flurry

Brian Ballsun-Stanton

8:06 AM

Yes, so where are the linchpins of the problems of this answer?

Which assumptions are wrong? Which statements are unfactual?

Lord_Gareth

The initial statement comparing Flurry of Blows to Two-Weapon fighting implies factually incorrect statements about TWF (namely, that it doesn't take a full-round action - it does) but that might just be nitpicking. Uno momento, por favor

Brian Ballsun-Stanton

Yep.

Please, take your time on this. It's in no way urgent.

BESW

@BrianBallsun-Stanton I'll try to extrapolate generalities from @Lord_Gareth's specifics.

Brian Ballsun-Stanton

Cause re-reading the answer? He doesn't actually answer the question.

But again, let's frame this in one paragraph.

Lord_Gareth

Okay, first assumption that is causing problems is that the author is assuming that armor class is the only defense the monk is going to face. This is wrong on two levels

The first is that tactical movement and battlefield control are common defenses that everyone uses in the form of five-foot steps, withdraw actions, and attacks of opportunity, with supplementary support from spells, reach, class features, flight, and burrowing.

The second is that non-AC defenses come online at level 3 with Mirror Image and, having established their superiority to AC, continue to make armor class irrelevant. Many monsters have natural non-AC defenses such as miss chances, concealment, SLAs, or straight-up spells

Not to mention quirky things like the Gadacro's defensive teleports

BESW

8:11 AM

From my minimal understanding (I never got into theory when I was immersed in 3.5), the fundamental flaw lies in underestimating the role of magic in D&D. Specifically statements like "monks don’t need to put as much money into weapons or armor" and "spells that have no saves or spell resistance [...] are few and far between."

Lord_Gareth

High AC is a problem facing monks w/r/t flurry, but it's a SOLVABLE problem

@BESW - Also accurate. Like all melee classes monks need items in a bad, bad way. If a DM told me no items or no feats for a monk, I'd ditch the feats.

Items are THAT irreplaceable

BESW

This confusion about magic ties into your points about defense.

Lord_Gareth

"No Save" spells show up at level one with Magic Missile, and SR: No spells at the same level with the Orb line. In core-only environments they are delayed until third level when Acid Arrow comes up

But it should be noted that SR: No only waits two character levels to rear its head even in /core/

He also suggests that the monk carry utility items in his hands. Now, on its bare face this is not actually a bad idea.

However

BESW

Regardless of how few spells there are that bypass a monk's strengths, it is the powerful difficult-to-resist spells that the casters will pick, thus making their rarity in the books irrelephant to their prevalence at the table.

Lord_Gareth

There are no mechanics for combat uses of manacles, which makes them moot. Nets require a proficiency that monks do not have, which eliminates that use. Smoke powder hurts the monk more than it helps, and after that we get into alchemical items which, while legitimately helpful, are sort of, well, not a Monk thing

yes your monk can be useful throwing flasks of acid

But Bob the Farmer can too

And if the monk is just carrying potions for the party to use at-need, then hiring a minion - or building one, or re-animating one, or planar binding one - is much cheaper than sacrificing a share of the XP and loot

BESW

8:16 AM

But okay, I'd like to suggest we back up.

Lord_Gareth

@BESW - It's not just that the spellcasters will pick the powerful, difficult-to-resist spells. It's that those spells are common. They appear EVERYWHERE.

BESW

Can we look at his question and go through and identify places where his points are demonstrably Rules-As-Written wrong, regardless of playstyle, GM choices, or the like?

Lord_Gareth

Yes!

BESW

What can you provide citation for?

Lord_Gareth

There's a few places, lemme fetch them.

BESW

8:17 AM

(Obviously this is not going to make it into the single-comment-long thing, but I think it's a firmer place to start from.)

Lord_Gareth

1. You cannot Flurry of Blows while grappling, because you can't make a generic full-round action while grappling. There is a very specific list of things you can do in a grapple, to which 'purely mental actions' was added and specific exceptions such as Still Spell exist.

Flurry of Blows INVOLVES attacks, but it's not an attack, it's a full-round action

And to attack in a grapple is a specific standard-action maneuver that requires a successful grapple check.

d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#grapple <-Relevent text all up in here.

BESW

Because this isn't character assassination. The goal of this site is to provide good information, and our purpose here is not to root out a Bad Contributor but to help everyone including him recognize and provide Good Answers.

Lord_Gareth

"Ex.) A Monk with haste and 4 levels in the kensai prestige class can potentially boost strength to +32. On the following turn he can move to his opponent, then make a full round attack with FoB. A monk synergizes with haste (his superior movement), and strength (full Str damage) more than any other fighter." <-This example is also incorrect in terms of the action economy. I can't confirm or deny on Kensai, but it's wrong in terms of how a character can and cannot spend their turn

In 3.5 you have 1 Swift, 1 Move, and 1 Standard action every turn. You may forgo your Move and Standard in favor of a Full-Round action at your discretion

Movement expends 1 Move action

Which means that a monk attempting to use their superior movement cannot Flurry that round, because Flurry of Blows is a Full-Round action

And you just spent the Move you would need to fuel that

If the Monk has a method of moving as a Swift action (such as Anklets of Translocation) then that tactic works.

Brian Ballsun-Stanton

Hrmmm

Lord_Gareth

(Alternately, a method of gaining another Move or Standard action, such as a Belt of battle)

BESW

8:23 AM

@Lord_Gareth I'm not finding, technically and explicitly, anything that says you can use a full-round action while grappled and I did find a statement that implies you can only use the listed actions while grappled.

Brian Ballsun-Stanton

Welcome to the site! I'm finding it a little hard to see how your answer shows us how to build a better monk. While your comparative ratings are excellent, perhaps we could trim your answer down a bit to where you provide specific build advice based on stated rules?

Can we work on that as the basis of our constructive comment?

Lord_Gareth

@BESW - The one exception to not being able to full-round while grappling is spellcasting. Note how it says you can cast a spell if you make a successful grapple etc? Some spells take a full-round action. The grapple rules don't make any exceptions for them.

Or

I misread like a boss

And now I look like a moron

>.>

BESW

@BrianBallsun-Stanton That's a great start. I'd make it "cited" rather than "stated," and actually it could hit the ground running.

Lord_Gareth

But yes, the lack of full-rounds means you can't Flurry in a grapple

Brian Ballsun-Stanton

like I said, improve it :)

Lord_Gareth

8:25 AM

IIRC there's a few feats that let you make iterative attacks in a grapple, but I can't name them off the top of my head.

Alright, the fast movement bonus section isn't actually incorrect, though it sorta ignores teleportation as a movement mode and doesn't address aforementioned action economy issues. Passing by that one for the moment.

'Cause we've got some mild errors of fact and assumption on the AC bonus bit.

Which is sad because this is the feature that makes anyone take Monk levels at all.

BESW

"Welcome to the site! I'm finding it a little hard to see how your answer shows us how to build a better monk. While your comparative ratings are excellent, perhaps we could trim your answer down a bit to where you provide specific build advice based on cited rules? Feel free to join us in <chat> to workshop it."

Lord_Gareth

@BESW - That seems quite welcoming and friendly, yes.

BESW

I agree, focusing on not actually answering the question may be more appropriate at this stage.

Lord_Gareth

Probably.

I'm just over here waxing poetic on a nerd tear, don't mind me.

BESW

@Lord_Gareth The Fairy Nuff gestures in a conciliatory fashion.

Lord_Gareth

8:31 AM

Monks are one of those subjects I'm prone to go on and on and on about, not because I love or hate them but because I've had this argument so many times with people that I sort of leap into it and try to get as much information in as I can before they have a chance to stonewall me >.>

....Did you just Xanth reference me?

Brian Ballsun-Stanton

@Lord_Gareth yeaaap

Aaand this is why we don't like comments to be.... well... this.

Lord_Gareth

<.<

>.>

BESW

@Lord_Gareth Not all bad puns are from, or originate in, the diseased mind of Piers Anthony and his fans.

Lord_Gareth

Hey now, my diseased mind liked that book.

BESW

Anthony's creepily adult children's books are neither relephant to this chat nor conducive to civil language.

Lord_Gareth

8:34 AM

Frankly I'm half-tempted to start a thread trying to explain common fallacies in the 3.5 community that cause grief and heartbreak but I'm not entirely certain how this community'd treat them. I've been on forums where folks act like it's a slap to the face instead of friendly advice.

"At high levels a monk should have enough magic items to make up for most of his deficiencies and you have more survivability than any other melee class going up against a caster, with the possible exception of ToB classes." <-OhgodwhatwhydidInotnoticethatbeforewhhhhhhyyyyyy

Brian Ballsun-Stanton

@Lord_Gareth Okay, and can you actually deconstruct that?

because that sounds like a good self-question if you can provide a well cited and well based question

Lord_Gareth

I really, really can.

BESW

@Lord_Gareth Probably workshop that in here. This chat is pretty civil and open to debate rather than argument, so we could help vet that kind of thing and make it informative rather than argumentative.

Brian Ballsun-Stanton

Good, then pose it as a question, and work up an answer.

That absolutely does not belong as a comment, but a link to it may not be bad as a comment.

Lord_Gareth

Now, to be clear Brian, are we talking about my 'fallacies' thing or the 'oh god why why why' thing?

BESW

8:37 AM

@Lord_Gareth Pretty sure he meant the keening wail of existential despair.

Brian Ballsun-Stanton

@BESW yes. But I do encourage you to discuss the question and answer here in chat. You've chosen a ... challenging topic... to open with.

Lord_Gareth

Well, I suppose if I were to speak more generally

I would be asking, "Why do these fallacies about melee continue to exist after 10+ years of 3.5?"

Which I could then break down further into the individual thoughtlines

Because honestly the quote that shriveled my brain is not unique to Monk

It's a consistent problem that plagues any discussion that includes 3.5 and melee

BESW

@Lord_Gareth If you do a chat search for the word "overlay" you'll find my uninformed speculation on the shortcomings of martial classes and their fundamental roots.

I'd be interested to know how your experience might inform it.

Lord_Gareth

Not too far off what I think the mark is, but missing just a bit of out-of-game knowledge.

Part of the problem was that the designers legitimately did not realize they'd made a brand-new game when they made 3.0

BESW

@Lord_Gareth [blink]

Lord_Gareth

8:42 AM

Part of the problem was that the testing team for quality control was mechanically incompetent in the extreme.

BESW

"People keep moving my silliness benchmark."

Lord_Gareth

And part of the problem was Monte. Freaking. Cook.

BESW

@Lord_Gareth This, I have been able to extrapolate from cases.

Lord_Gareth

Are you familiar with the concept behind Iron Kingdoms at all?

BESW

My current group (and we're in 4e, mind you) regularly makes jokes about the adventure designers' crack habits.

No.

Lord_Gareth

8:44 AM

Iron Kingdoms is a D20-based system that Monte Cook spearheaded and wrote most of. It was designed to be a martially-focused D&D variant for low-magic worlds like those seen in, say, Conan.

Where fighters and people like them were the "spellcasters".

Now, this is the bit that convinced me that Monte Cook was the #1 problem with magic in 3.0's early run (Sean K. Reynolds being the number 2)

The two spellcasting classes in Iron Kingdoms, DESPITE risking and suffering huge penalties and/or death for doing magic, are still the most powerful parts of that system.

This pattern has held for 100% of Monte's work where he was permitted design lead.

BESW

Are they Vancian?

And are they an overlay?

Lord_Gareth

Psuedo-Vancian. They're close enough for government work.

But they were supposed to represent outcasts and ostracized hermits performing dangerous arts well away from civilization

BESW

Because as you said earlier, I think one of the biggest problems with magic is the problem with 3.5: options. Magic adds good options without taking away good options.

Lord_Gareth

Indeed. And magic itself has options within in the form of metamagic feats and spell memorization

A fighter is his feats 24/7, for all of his life and most of his death

A wizard changes his class features every morning

BESW

What balance 4e has achieved (and I'll be the first to admit it's not perfect, or even always great) is based on the idea that one choice should remove another.

Lord_Gareth

8:48 AM

4e also achieved balance by making the systems for each class fundamentally similar.

And while that leaves a bad taste in my mouth personally it's not a bad way to do it

it certainly makes playtesting a damn sight easier

BESW

@Lord_Gareth I was so happy about that. Not least because it means a player can change classes without re-learning a whole subsystem of the game.

Lord_Gareth

Yep.

Legend took a different tack on that with the Track system

But yeah, that's one of 4e's big strengths

And you won't find me saying it wasn't a brilliant move

BESW

And in most cases they managed to use class features to make the classes interestingly different anyway. I was impressed.

But yeah, magic as an overlay is... problematic at best for earlier systems.

Lord_Gareth

So the trouble with magic in 3.5 is partially the out-of-game thing, and then there's the overlay problem both in terms of having a sub-system to itself

AND in terms of the fact that most canonical political leaders in 3.X campaign settings are

Mages and clerics

And with the amount of HEINOUSLY DEADLY SHIT wandering around various campaign settings, paranoia combat becomes more and more likely

BESW

Where does that come in?

Lord_Gareth

8:51 AM

Well, the thing is

If you could make magic rare, or misunderstood, or hard to combine, you might be able to curb a bit of what optimizers do with it.

BESW

A Dark Sun type deal.

Lord_Gareth

Instead, 3.5 paints worlds OVERRUN with magic, where spellwork and magical powers bleed out of cracks in reality like gibbering infections and whelm any old thing that will let them in.

And widespread organized study of magic - like, say, with large numbers of wizards existing - leads naturally to the justified in-character idea that you have some ability to DO this crazy crap you came up with.

Because your character has access to a massive knowledge base of OTHER PEOPLE experimenting with these heinous powers over reality.

BESW

So you see irresponsible world-building as part of the issue?

Lord_Gareth

A massive part of the issue, since what worldbuilding there was for Oerth informed a lot of the starting mechanics for 3.5 and THEN informed further mechanics in splats and CS books.

Which is why spellcasters get more spells in every single non monster manual book printed

Literally EVERY, including the adventures!

And certainly designer incompetence was part of that as well. They didn't understand, and then when the community understood they refused to believe

BESW

I think it's worth noting that due to the nature of polymorph type spells, the monster manuals are spell books.

Lord_Gareth

8:55 AM

Also Summon Monster ^_^

BESW

I ran a level 30 anythinganger once. I retired it because it made the rest of the epic-level party feel useless.

Lord_Gareth

By the time 3.Xs designers decided to listen to the community the system was too far gone to save.

Remind me to tell you about Martini Mage sometime.

martini mage was funny

BESW

And I shall tell you about the 4e leader who spent most battles flat on his back in some bushes.

Lord_Gareth

Oh, and if you ever get into Legend makes sure to ask Valixes about The Guy In the Earpiece

Anyway, I think I'm supposed to be workshoppin' some kind of 3.5 fallacies thread?

Transcript for