>>98747690
None, because that's a fucking stupid idea.

>>98741964
>serpentir
Love these monsters. I threw one at my party and they were fucking terrified. Was one of our best fights!

Human fighter 18/monk 2

Billhook Focus/Specialization/G Focus/G Specialization, Improved Crit
>Billhook = Guisarme
Expertise, Imp Trip, Imp Disarm
Quick Draw, Blind-fight
Power Attack, Cleave, Great Cleave, Imp Bull Rush
PBS, Far Shot, Precise Shot, Imp Precise Shot
Improved Unarmed Strike, Improved Grapple, Combat Reflexes

This is the best core fighter I can design (so far). Could go dwarf with no blind-fight.
Spiked chains are objectively superior, but are gay and cheap.

>>98748030
spiked chains rule, what's the problem?

How much would upping HD to d12 and BAB to full effect monk?

So uh... is there a timescale for how long a half-dragon takes to gestate?

>>98749121
I am quite certain there isn't, but despite Races of the Dragon talking about their generally very slow maturing rate which(can take decades to reach adulthood) that does not by itself imply that gestation is also much longer.
The book even goes so far as to compare the longevity of half-dragons to elves, and from Races of the Wild we know that Elves also only take 9 months gestation.
So I'd probably go with that for most humanoid half-dragons.

Maybe make an exception for those with fancier ancestry.

>>98749211
Thanks. I just had a really degenerate plan in mind so I won't subject you to it.

Still the best rpg system.

>>98748281
If nothing else I think it becomes a default 1st level dip. Two bonus feats you can wash into something else, +1 BAB, +2 to all saves, and 12 HP is a lot. Still probably worse than fighter on the whole but at least 20/20/20/15/10 flurry of blows isn't a complete embarrassment.

File: 1790636248616133.jpg (43 KB, 400x312)

43 KB JPG

>>98753558 >>98753620 >>98753680 >>98818380

>>98747183
>Have you ever used/had monster PCs in your games?
>How did it go for you?

>>98748030
Wasn't archery the best fighter in core? I remember a discussion about that.

>>98752729
doubt it

>>98748030
If your goal is the best Fighter, you want the mounted combat feats, not a few more combat maneuvers. Spirited Charge is pretty useful in a core context.

If your goal is the best core martial with the stipulation that it needs a large amount of Fighter levels, nix the WF tree and some of the combat maneuvers - take, in this order, Ranger 2 (take TWF because unarmed strike or armor spikes still apply when you're using a fuckoff big 2hander, and can be used for combat maneuvers if you don't care about the damage, also the skill points are nice), 2 Barbarian, 2 Fighter, 1 Ranger, 1 Horizon Walker (Desert for immunity to fatigue), 2 Monk(imp. grapple combat reflexes), 4 Fighter, 5 Horizon Walker (first 4 are fluff, last one Shifting), 1 Barbarian. Gets you saves of +19 fort +11 Ref and +9 will in exchange for the lost bonus feats.

>>98752729
No, core archery blows massive dicks when it's not spamming tailored slaying arrows, and against real threats they have immunity to that or too high saves for it to work. It's OK at best when it's got alignment and tailored Bane arrows for the problem.

Not exactly broken, but it occurred to me you can use planar bind to transport people who are already your allies across planes if they're outsiders.

>>98752278
monster PCs is cringe snowflake typical of 5e leftists that like daggerheart and other faggot systems
if you play as a tiefling is enough to get towns to hang you in my table
25 years strong going

>>98752278
We had a minotaur in one game. He was pretty chill.

>>98753558
The allowance to play absurd bullshit is one of the crucial distinguishing features of 3.5, Tieflings are so low-brow as to be a joke for the exact opposite reason.

>>98752278
Do half dragons count?
We have a warblade half-gold dragon.

>>98753620
We had a minotaur in a 4e game that had fire resistance for one reason or another so we'd just light him on fire and have him tackle people as our fight opener.

>>98747657
What does Tome and Blood offer that isn't in the Complete Arcane/Divine?

>>98753680
i think it counts but its a more common common monster pc template from my understanding.

any books you recommend to get hardcover?
im in a spending money bender and I wanna have a shelf full of various edition books that I can just open randomly for inspiration
monster books and "Adventure helpers" like Frostburn etc preferred, but I could take anything that has a decent amount of good stuff in it

Yes I have all the pdfs thats not a problem, im just looking for recommendations of printed stuff

>>98754856
Paper's always nicer for flipping through. One thing I wish I had was more than one copy of the PHB. People tend to level up around the same time and it gets cluttered.

>>98754856
I love the Draconomicon so much I had to get a hardcover of that.
I also got the rules compendium.
The MiC and SpC I got as soft covers.

Opinions on this home brew ruling?

Purpose is to make PCs travel normally more, enforce downtime and most importantly, explain why the material plane isn't being terrorized by the multitude of at-will teleporting fiends that can be called in at a paltry cost of a 6k gold or more for weeks at a time. ie shut down the murderhobo babau on the loose

These rules apply to all long range teleportation and plane shift magic with the exception of Gate. Spells intended to be included are Teleport, Greater Teleport, Teleportation Circle, Plane Shift and all other variants or spells serving the same purpose.

Purpose is to keep teleportation widely available and yet justify why all worlds do not run on teleportation and are not entirely conquered by the various creatures with such capability.
Universal justification: Teleportation is dangerous because it destabilizes the physical essence of the creature being teleported.
>Rule 1: Everyone can be teleported once without noticeable ill effects. This gains them the Destabilized condition.

>Rule 2: A creature that teleports while under the destabilized condition gains a level of Instability.

>Rule 3: Each level of instability reduces HP by 5 and applies a cumulative -1 penalty to save, skill, ability and caster level checks. The creature's effective level is reduced by 1 for all relevant resolutions including determining its Base Attack Bonus. The creature loses its highest level spell slot or one periodic use of its most powerful spell ability if applicable. Hit points from Instability levels cannot reduce a creature below one full hit dice of HP. The effects manifest as a sense of sickness or inherent yet unpalpable wrongness within one's body, impediment of senses and control.

>Rule 4: Destabilized condition and levels of Instability cannot be cured by any means aside from a Wish spell which can cure only one level of Instability at a time. It cannot remove the Destabilized condition.
1/2

>>98757047
2/2

>Rule 5: Destabilized condition is cured naturally after some time passes without teleporting. The time span required is 1 day per Hit Dice. More powerful creatures require more time to stabilize. If the Destabilized creature has incurred any levels of Instability after such time span passes, one such level is cured instead. Any long range teleportation magic or Plane Shift resets the clock.

>>98756106
>I love the Draconomicon so much I had to get a hardcover of that.
what's good about it?

>>98757047
>>98757052
It seems fine but the issue is you're trying to solve two issues at once; mechanical, which only impacts the party, and thematic. As far as thematic reasons, there aren't endless teleporting demons because at the end of the day people powerful enough to do that kind of thing tend to have better ways to spend their time. 6k gold is more than the average tradesman will see in a lifetime. Things do happen, but "this village was wiped out by a demon summoning and now it's rampaging through the countryside" isn't a fail state of the game, it's an adventure hook.

The mechanical one is thornier. You have harsh penalties for repeated teleports, but the party will still be able to get to wherever they need and get back to safety to recuperate while ignoring the system. If they rest for a week or a year that's just words unless there's timelines and structures that force them to make other decisions. If downtime isn't a natural part of their pace of play, why do you feel the need to enforce it if it's not what the players enjoy? If it is something they do, why do you feel the need to enforce it?

Put another way, if there's a mechanical penalty for doing it, there needs to be a plausible situation where incurring that penalty is an interesting/useful/the correct option. Otherwise it's faster to say "you can't" and avoid a bunch of bookkeeping.

>>98757123
Thematically I am trying to have my evil be competent and not stupid and the same for the good NPCs. We are playing a mix of 3 big adventures that all involve combating major branches of the cult of Orcus (Slumbering Tsar, Rappan Athuk and Splinters of Faith) - a ton of demons, high level evil casters all over the place and not much to explain why they aren't ruining everyone's day and butchering every village and minor settlement across the planet.

And mechanically I want to preserve the grit and danger of these adventures and not have my party use teleportation as an easy means to bypass all the cool stuff on the roads to and fro. These adventures are all scaled for mid to high level play, but not really the planar hopping kind.
The designers mostly just ignored that teleportation is a thing and focused on plopping down cool encounters all over the place. There is no inherent time pressure in the adventures either. Its 3 megadungeons meant to be explored at leisure, but with really high risk of death. There are magical effects in play to make rest and recovery risky, so the designers presumed the PCs would actually have need to rest inside these dangerous locations.

Except at those levels, they obviously don't by RAW

I don't really want to forbid teleportation entirely and neither to turn it into mother-may-I kind of play. Aside from the thematic stuff, what I want to prevent most is players teleporting to the dungeon having their day of adventuring and bouncing back home.

I thought this rule would shift things to a kind of risk balance:

A) players can do the teleportation bounce thing, but if they've rattled a nest of evil and didn't finish them off, bad guys are quite likely to teleport after them and bring the fight home

vs

B) but why aren't they doing that anyway? because its risky for them as well. They too are motivated to keep their ability to either flee or strike in reserve until a time of dire need or great opportunity.

>>98757123

>>98757349
part 2
reread my post and realized I didn't actually answer the question
>plausible situation where incurring that penalty is an interesting/useful/the correct option

option (a) take the normal travel route to the dungeon, incur its risks but preserve the option to flee by teleport without weakening yourselves. if the bad guys come after you, at least you are not any worse off

option (b) teleport to the dungeon, skip initial risk, but if you have to flee by teleport, you are all now at 1 negative (Instability) level if/when the bad guys mount a counter attack

And same considerations for everyone else in the setting who can teleport. At least that's the intent

>>98757349
Your line of thought is reasonable, but you do have to balance that urge with the inevitable RAW terrors like Locate City Bomb or the Portable Hole/Bag of Holding warhead. Or even sillier shit like the peasant railgun. Or full Tippyverse.

There's no mechanical reason why an evil lich wouldn't take their time scrying every potential hero decades into the future and snuffing them in the cradle if they'd be a threat. There's nothing stopping a wizard from making a permanent gate to the elemental plane of water and undermining an entire city or indeed flooding a megadungeon to drown anyone inside. Even with your Destabilization, summoning a creature and teleporting it will still get the job done if you do it every day from the other side of the planet; stat nerfs to any one enemy mean fuckall if they're all fodder, which also means this is primarily going to impact the party and not really harm their enemies.

Have you tried talking to your players and just straight up said "hey if you fast-travel everywhere this is going to be boring as hell so be judicious with it and don't pull any Rope Trick horseshit and I won't nerf it until it's useless". Yes verisimilitude is great but ultimately the idea is to have fun with real people. You can have any reason you want that the bad guys aren't wiping out towns; divine retribution, unstable teleportation, lack of interest, desire to conquer and rule over something other than craters, whatever. It's the players you need to work with on this.

>>98757496
locate city bomb is a bit questionable RAI. But the portable hole and bag of holding bomb is literally how the game is supposed to work.

File: file.png (61 KB, 580x420)

61 KB PNG

>>98757737 >>98760280 >>98766261 >>98842505

>>98757526
I meant specifically the doohickey

>>98757540
that costs at least 22,500 gp per arrowhead.

https://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#portableHole
https://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#bagofHolding

>>98757737
Often worth it for trivial attack roll no-save-just-get-lost-forever AoE.

>>98757778
Also useful as a siege instrument given the hardness/HP of a lot of materials. Sure 20k for "epic-level knock" is steep but it'll get the door open.

>>98757778
shouldn't there be a save?

File: file.png (100 KB, 415x153)

100 KB PNG

>>98766238 >>98842505

>>98760162
Nope. Get in the bag, Nebby.

>>98757540
>small bag of holding
Huh?

>>98760280
They come in different sizes, what's the concern? They aren't infinite, just big.

>>98757080
NTA but it's a cool book about dragons. Some of my favorite splats are ones like the Draconomicon or Drow of the Underdark (which I frequently forget is not literally called the Drowconomicon) that really explore a narrow facet of the setting. Stuff like the Manual of the Planes is close but it's cool when a book straddles the line between fictional encyclopedia and rulebook.

>>98765266
just woke up and read
>its a cook book for dragons
and went "huh" for a momment

>>98760238
Where does that say there's no save?

File: hole.png (52 KB, 571x420)

52 KB PNG

>>98766292

>>98757540
>>98757526
If the portable hole is flimsy enough to be rolled up into a tube, it must have a structure like a piece of paper. In which case collision would just bend the tube, not send it down the shaft and into the bag of holding.

>>98766238
I'll turn that around on you - where does it say you get a save?

>>98766261
I don't think that's the hole itself, it's a shaft containing the rolled-up hole.

File: PHBSaves.png (27 KB, 563x119)

27 KB PNG

>>98767594 >>98772190

>>98766283
In the rules for saving throws themselves. This most certainly counts as unusual or magical so most reasonable DMs would do so. If a pit trap grants a save this certainly does.
>>98766292
Does putting a portable hole inside of a container in a bag of holding produce the effect?

>>98766332
"you generally get a saving throw" doesn't mean "you get a saving throw." With a pit trap, you can react to the trap door opening and reach out for a ledge. If a dimensional gate opens in the same space you are, how could you react and evade / resist it?

>>98766332
>Does putting a portable hole inside of a container in a bag of holding produce the effect?
It's a similar but for some reason markedly different reaction

>>98767594
>If a dimensional gate opens in the same space you are, how could you react and evade / resist it?

you get a reflex save for fireball.

>>98767594
>>98774389
NTA, but to wit, the rules do not mention a save, and explicitly says 'sucked in to the rift'.
The DM could declare a save, but the text does not offer one, and there is plenty of precedent in that 3.5 is a permissive game that tells you what you can do, and generally disallows what you are not stated to be able to achieve.
That said, by the time such an item is available, the enemies generally have either the personal ability or allies to render it a non-issue, and the Astral is not an inherently hostile plane.
It's a meme for a reason.

>>98774410
The Astral was considerably more hostile when it was introduced and a lot of the resident entities behind that are still there even though the encounter tables aren't, and there's still "dumb beatstick" targets lacking planar travel or connections with sources thereof even into Epic. Gets more situational, certainly, but so's Gate's use as an ambush tool.

>>98776017
How was it hostile? I know there were gith raider skyships but I as I recall the biggest issue was it was big, empty, and all but impossible to navigate.

>>98749304
Proof

>>98753884
>What does Tome and Blood offer that isn't in the Complete Arcane/Divine?
It's been a while since i read them, but I remember there being a few things here and there that were changed or not reprinted.

Off the top of my head, I think candle caster, a prestige class for magic users that centered around magic candles was not reprinted.

>>98747657
>> Web Articles Orbital Flower Index PDF
maybe add this link to the OP:
https://orbitalflower.github.io/rpg/wizards-3e-archive.html

>>98788115
oh shit, nice

>>98788115
BPIT

anyone ever use epic spellcasting?

>>98790397
No.
But maybe in 5 or so years.

>>98790397
Only in fuckabout oneshots that were pretty structureless, no actual campaigns

I have to wonder if the designers of 3.0/3.5 knew about the various exploits around wishing for magic items (like candle of invocation) and chain gating efreeti for more wishes.
It's stuff that could easily be patched, so I have to wonder why they didn't.

I know its not mentioned in the faq on the web, but did they ever mention it anywhere else? like in interviews, or in dragon magazine?

>>98792755
Ultimately every game's run by a person, not a computer. If you're in a group where that's the vibe and your DM lets you RAWdog your way through life, great! If your DM smacks you upside the head and deliberately craters your wish for being greedy, that works too. The rules are a framework and a starting point, not something that needs to be watertight.

a tool to help search for D&D 3.5 resources: https://imarvintpa.com/dndLive/index.php

>>98792794
The DM can fix it isn't an argument for the rules not being flawed.

This exploit doesn't rely on questionable reading of the rules, unlike some exploits. And it's definitely not one of the tricks that are intentional misinterpretations (like drown healing). It's a situation where one genuinely has to wonder if this is broken usage of RAI features.

>>98792755
wish and miracle are the source of half the actually offensive bulshit in this game.
also no, you re talking about the guys that playtested the cleric as a healbot, the wizard as an evoker spamming magic missiles and the druid as a melee frontliner and all that up to level 5 at best.
to their defense any self respecting dm shouldnt allow that shit. they were naive enough to think that people would approach the game with good intentions and reasoning and not as the letter of the law used for whatever bulshit one can cook up.
This has given 3.5 it's staying power though, with powergamers and theorycrafters galore, even though the reason i personally like it is because it's the most soulful version of dnd (along with 2e)

>>98794130
>wish and miracle are the source of half the actually offensive bulshit in this game.
Miracle is stronger than Wish in some ways. But Miracle is also less gamebreaking than wish.

Unlike wish, it doesn't have an XP cost for emulating other spells (unless the emulated spell costs XP). You can do that automatically. So Miracle has a lot of utility that doesn't require burning 5000 xp, so you're more free to use it.

Unlike Miracle, one notable thing that Wish can always do is make magic items and treasure. That's what makes Wish Broken.

>>98794130
>the druid as a melee frontliner
This is what the druid is good at, but from what i heard they weren't using wild shape and were just dual wielding.

>>98793770
I want to say the DM can just have your character be raped in-world by a death squad teleporting in and that's probably how Gygax would have wanted it, but clearly they didn't do any serious testing at high levels

File: 50174.jpg (110 KB, 400x414)

110 KB JPG

>>98798624 >>98802224

>>98796681
>I want to say the DM can just have your character be raped in-world by a death squad teleporting in and that's probably how Gygax would have wanted it, but clearly they didn't do any serious testing at high levels
So a bunch of Quaruts (Fiend Folio) teleport in and start attacking you?

A Quarut pictured on the right. They are a type of inevitable.

>>98794130
God the druid story always gets me. Apparently their playtest druid was playing him as a melee frontliner dual wielding scimitars and they kept buffing druid because that's quite literally the worst way to play the class. It's genuinely hilarious that the guy doing their playtest managed to, likely entirely by accident, play the class in the least optimal way. I can only wonder if the guy was doing it before or after the dual wielding spec for ranger was added to the game.

>>98793770
IIRC wish explicitly says that it's up to the DM on if a wish works or not. And using a fucking efreet for a wish is just doubly asking to be screwed over.

>>98796645
Yeah, they were basically just playing druid as ranger IIRC. I do wonder if the dual wielding stuff had been added to ranger at that point, or if they dumped it in there later to get the guy to stop playing druid that way and actually try casting spells.

>>98796933
Pretty much, though Varakhut may be a better fit specifically. Or if you gate in a Solar, whichever deity is their direct superior investigates and sends another Solar to retrieve them (and, depending on the circumstances, pancake the caster).

>>98798624
You could also have them accidentally poke a hole into the far realm and have the party deal with pseudonaturals/half farspawn.
Or if you wanted to be really mean, have them summon a Dream Larva, Phane, or some other fun thing from the ELH

>>98798624
Eh, Gate's limited to one single task taking 1 round/CL if you don't pay, and returns the Called entity directly to you upon completion of more involved tasks to collect. Quite possible for the selection criteria to end up under a "de minimis exemption" of sorts for the "normal" applications of such.

As with most hyping up of Calling abuses, it's not nearly as bad as the "COULD do anything" scare-mongering makes it out to be, because most of it is well covered by explicit statements in the spells restricting their scope. I generally prefer looking at them as express delux hirelings accordingly, with issues being those of ready access to large hireling volumes.

>>98798753
Still if you suddenly and without an announcement pluck an important high ranked servant or, god forbid (literally), use something as lowly as a candle of invocation to bring the solar for some literally fucking nothing task like fighting an ancient dragon, the deity has the right to be pissed off.
At least with the good-aligned deities you're likely getting away with an angry
>Don't you DARE ever summon our Lord's Solars ever again unless you're fighting OVERWHELMING forces of evil.

File: Base_Class_Tiers.png (217 KB, 1140x1103)

217 KB PNG

>>98801854 >>98802020 >>98802050 >>98802100 >>98802116 >>98802449 >>98803048

do you agree with this tiering?

>>98801801
It's not terrible but honestly if you sort classes by the number of spellslots they get it's roughly in the same order. It's also doesn't take into account classes that are useful platforms for strong PrCs but that's a level of fidelity that's hard to convey.

>>98801854
>It's also doesn't take into account classes that are useful platforms for strong PrCs but that's a level of fidelity that's hard to convey.

Any specific examples?

>>98799485
The selection criteria caveat would be that the spell only Gates Solars not presently in-transit or actively doing something. Combine with the time limitation on "they'll just do it" and it would simply not be able to be a serious disruption to their duties unless rather extreme long-term afflictions or outright death is involved.

>some literally fucking nothing task like fighting an ancient dragon
Ancient Chromatics are CR 18-23, which is notoriously an under-estimate, so this is a really bad example because it's exactly the power-band where a Solar is merely a solid direct contributor rather than an overkill sledgehammer or mook.

>>98801801
The extremity of campaign pacing reliance for Artificer to twist the game remains in excess of the hoops for a Wilder to bin their breadth limitations.

>>98801801
Erudites are massively overrated. The Spell-to-Power variant isn't even interesting since Secrets of Sarlona lets any psionic character invent powers with the same mechanics as a given spell (or, in other words, to directly translate spells into powers), and unlike other psionic powers who have to jump through hoops of varying difficulty to gain new powers, an erudite will never ever be able to manifest more than 11 powers per day no matter how many he knows.

>>98801801
Swap trunamer and expert. Expert getting an absolute fuckload of skill points in any skills they want makes them surprisingly useful, and Truenamer's math is broken so it actually grows weaker as it levels up

>>98801801
Beguiler and Warmage are only that good if they get off-list spells. Core only Sorceror is NOT T3 under any reasonable definition, and neither is Factotum T4, both of them have access to too much cheese to belong there. Core Ranger isn't T4, it's T5.

>>98796933
>>98798624
>Varakhut
for those who don't know, varakhuts are the blue one on the left

I have to wonder how many undiscovered rules abuses there still are in 3.0/3.5 edition.

>>98747657
>>Dragon/Dungeon Magazine:
>https://mega.nz/folder/7N1XVahA#SsO9HsJ3glqRQFzZ8WiQ2A

The pdf in there is only 1 of the adventures in Dungeon 152:
Here's the rest: https://web.archive.org/web/20090601231344/http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dutoc/152

File: 88268_620_75.jpg (263 KB, 400x456)

263 KB JPG

>>98802412 >>98803188 >>98826465 >>98826638

How are you supposed to deal with this kinda monster? This is allegedly CR 11. I'm aware this book was notorious for bad challenge ratings.

https://www.realmshelps.net/monsters/block/Juggernaut
>Spell-Like Abilities: At will - forcecage, grease, hold monster, magic missile, slow, wall of force, web. Caster level 18th; DC 13 + spell level.
It's also got damage reduction and fast healing. It can just trap you in a force cage and magic missile you to death.

>>98802392
>shittily designed MM2 monsters
Yeah that checks out. Weak to orbs and has zero concentration, so ready to smack the shit out of it when it tries to SLA you and it will auto-fail instantly.

>>98801801
>>98802100
Playing truenamer typically relies on tricks to pump your truespeak skill really high.
I think it usually involves a greater amulet of the silver tongue, and the item familiar feat if allowed.

>>98802449
That's part of my argument as to why they should be in the bottom tier of classes. In order to play one "Normally" you HAVE to resort to doing things that would be considered optimization in other classes. And even when you minmax the damn things, they still have an incredibly low ceiling.

>>98801801


For reference, here's the classic tier list:
https://minmaxforum.com/index.php?topic=658.0
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?269440-Why-Each-Class-Is-In-Its-Tier-(Rescued-from-MinMax)

and a more recent look at it again:
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?600635-Why-each-class-is-in-its-tier-2019-update

>>98802020
>The extremity of campaign pacing reliance for Artificer to twist the game remains in excess of the hoops for a Wilder to bin their breadth limitations.
I mean, anon...
Don't you know about non crafting artificers just abusing infusoins?
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?427628-Disregard-Money-Acquire-Buff-Spells-Artificers-without-the-Artifice

>>98802392
MM2 is full of this shit. I posted about the Corollax last adventure, a CR 1/2 with color spray at will
Adamantine Horror is probably the most egregious

>>98803188
The damn rainbow parrots even have DR 5/cold iron per the update, and SR 12.

>>98803188
>>98803196

good news is
>Corollaxes are not aggressive and do not attack unless someone attacks or harasses them first.
https://www.realmshelps.net/monsters/block/Corollax

there's also some rules for training those as pets in the actual book (page 51 of monster manual II)

>>98803211
>>98803214
My next pirate boss will now have a pet corollax she trained to rainbow her enemies.

File: 88268_620_19.jpg (200 KB, 400x367)

200 KB JPG

>>98803249

>>98803188
>Adamantine Horror is probably the most egregious

For those who are unfamiliar with the problem:

>Spell-Like Abilities: At will - disintegrate, implosion, Mordenkainen's disjunction. Caster level 14th; save DC 15 + spell level.

The book claims this is Challenge Rating 9.

>>98803226
>MM2 is the worst
>MM5 is the best
they really were figuring it out as they went along huh?

>>98803249
In fairness, MM2 was published in 3.0, so they didn't have a lot of experience with the system, and some of the rules changed. Case in point, the Adamantine Horror is not only supposed to be a unique creature (it will not be encountered in groups), it also is supposed to be encountered with an honor guard, whose CR is not included automatically and has to be added together manually in 3.0 rules (consulting the book, it actually is intended to have between ten and thirty minions).

Are there any cursed items outside of the Core books?

>>98798517
>IIRC wish explicitly says that it's up to the DM on if a wish works or not.
There's a list of effects that always work. Notably one of them is "Create a magic item, or add to the powers of an existing magic item."
https://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/wish.htm

>And using a fucking efreet for a wish is just doubly asking to be screwed over.

This is how the fluff of them is supposed to be.

>>98798517
>>98803778

From what I remember, the interpretation is something like the Efreeti is under your control using gate and won't be twisting your words. There's probably been debates about this online, but I'm not gonna bother trying to find them right now
Here's the relevant part of the spell anyway:


>A controlled creature can be commanded to perform a service for you. Such services fall into two categories: immediate tasks and contractual service. Fighting for you in a single battle or taking any other actions that can be accomplished within 1 round per caster level counts as an immediate task; you need not make any agreement or pay any reward for the creature’s help. The creature departs at the end of the spell.

>If you choose to exact a longer or more involved form of service from a called creature, you must offer some fair trade in return for that service. The service exacted must be reasonable with respect to the promised favor or reward; see the lesser planar ally spell for appropriate rewards. (Some creatures may want their payment in “livestock” rather than in coin, which could involve complications.) Immediately upon completion of the service, the being is transported to your vicinity, and you must then and there turn over the promised reward. After this is done, the creature is instantly freed to return to its own plane.

https://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/gate.htm

I am considering running a 3.5 West Marches game. Due to the constraints of running online I would only allow people to make characters using the core SRD rules. Would this be something you would play in?

>>98803285
Speaking of funny CRs in 3.0 books I significantly nerfed a lesser pack of cranium rats (CR 2) from Fiend Folio to avoid a potential accidental TPK at level 5.

>>98798517
>>98803778
If you wanted to be exceedingly autistic and ridiculous about it, iirc in theory the efreeti stat block says he grants 3 wishes as a SLA, and not that he casts the Wish spell as a SLA.
>>98803793
Fortunately
>longer OR more involved form of service
allows the DM to consider granting wishes a more involved form of service and require a suitable payment.
Gating in Efreeti for wish abuse also sounds like good grounds for a visit from the City of Brass litigation team.

>>98803877
>Due to the constraints of running online I would only allow people to make characters using the core SRD rules
Weird.
What are these constraints and why would they lead you to only allowing people to make characters using the SRD rules?
But sure, I'd play it.

>>98803249
Now that you mention it, what's you people's tier list of MMs?

>>98806073
1>4>5>3>2
honorable mention to the sword and wizardry monster manuals introdusing old monster that didnt make the transition from Adnd

>>98806073
1>5>3>4>2
the 40 pages of draconians in 4 really bring it down

>>98805461
A couple reasons:

1. I would be running it using Foundry VTT for the automation benefits, but the 3.5 module only has the SRD content due to copyright reasons. Any additional content would have to be added manually by me, which would put a lot more work on me as the GM.

2. A West Marches game could potentially have a player pool up to 20-40 players and if I allowed more books I would have to learn far more content and rules interactions than a game where I had just 4-5 players with a few classes between them. Again, way more work on me at the GM.

3.5 is very useful as a game system for a West Marches game because it requires less DM arbitration. The ruleset is very black and white for the most part, so players know what they're going to get when it comes to skill rolls, etc.

>>98808670
>A West Marches game could potentially have a player pool up to 20-40 players
ouch.

https://web.archive.org/web/20081218233351/http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drfe/20080428

what do people think of the epic destiny feats?

>>98802412
it should have a decent chance of getting force cage off before anyone gets close.

>>98808997
I guess you'd need a decent ambush, or try greater invisibility + flight gorilla warfare.

>>98806475
Speaking of draconians, I believe one of the DL books talked about a platak or platyl draconian somewhere. Does anyone know where it is?

>>98808997
With -4 initiative and zero exotic senses plus a total lack of intelligence? How? You could beat it just by leapfrogging Silent Images forward, because it would never get a roll to disbelieve. Hell, cast Entangle or Web and the thing is instantly Helpless from 0 Dex, no save.

I've been using Sandstorm for a 5e game and it's been a blast. Just checking in with you guys. Highly recommend this book if you are running any kind of desert/scrubland game. The cursed cold ones threw my party for a loop. It was hilarious when they flame sphered them and gave them all temp hp. I probably got two more rounds of combat out of it for that reason alone.

>>98810008
Yeah, the environment books are sick.

>>98808973
>epic destiny
Oh, so that's where the Dungeons and Dragons Online game got those from? I thought they were just incorporating 4e ideas.
I guess it's a bit of both.

>>98809930
>>98809451
it can cast web at will from further away than the pc's at its supposed CR.

>>98810740
You can't cast web into air, hence the flight. With greater invisibility it wouldn't even know where to cast it anyway.

>>98810740
It's also got a Spot of only +4 and no Listen ranks at all. A bare ass +0 hide and move silently gets you within 240 feet of it every time, and has a better than even chance of getting you within the 160 feet needed to move at full speed and cast Web on it with a whole CL of 3. If fighting it at-CR so you have a range of 240 ft on Web, it has zero chance of spotting or hearing you before you can cast. Entangle flat out outranges its senses if applicable.

>>98810865
It's plus +6 spot, since it has 15 wis.

>>98810064
>Oh, so that's where the Dungeons and Dragons Online game got those from? I thought they were just incorporating 4e ideas.
>I guess it's a bit of both.
they back ported it from 4e to 3.5 according to the article

when did 3.5 drop off in popularity? I remember it getting a lot of discussion even when 5e first came out.

>>98813447
Pathfinder 1e stole a lot of its thunder (and playerbase), but then after they developed their own 2e that split the base even further as doing that pissed off all the people who wanted a 3.5-type system and not a 4e-type system. Now everything is in disarray and even 5e floundering its player base doesn't cleanly send its players in one distinct direction whenever they screw up.

>>98808946
>ouch.
Do you not understand the concept of a West Marches anon?

>>98813447
>when did 3.5 drop off in popularity?
Anecdotally, if you're not counting Pathfinder as 3.5 and for a given value of "drop off", then it happened when Pathfinder came out. If you're including PF1E under the 3.5 umbrella then I'd say 3.5 dropped off a bit when 4e came out but remained more-or-less the default because 3.5 had an ungodly amount of supplemental content that people had been loading up on for 5+ years while 4e's supplemental content was the equivalent of a wet fart in an empty room. "Hey guys, 'member Dark Sun? That setting that probably came out before you were born?" I'm honestly surprised that they didn't fuck up even harder by adding other 2e hot garbage like Birthright or Council of Wyrms or trying to resurrect Dragonlance. Again. Also the guy who was designing their in-house VTT - which was supposed to be a pillar of their business model - decided to do a murder-suicide so they never managed to get the ball rolling for that either and that hurt them. Anyway 5e was when 3.X really got taken out behind the woodshed; as far as I can remember, pretty much everyone I knew at the time who was still playing it jumped ship to 5e.

>>98814139
Birthright and council of wyrms was awesome tho

>>98812132
Right, I forgot because it has no skill ranks. That's still a 50/50 shot of getting caught on the last move if you end up fighting this piece of shit at 3 if you have no Dex and no Hide or Move Silently at all, and still invulnerability to being seen before a level 11 Wizard can frag it with moving and casting Web.

>>98814139
>everyone I knew at the time who was still playing it jumped ship to 5e.
Because it had 3.5 paint on it.
I lost a lot of respect for the guys who decried 4e, having never played the game, but jumped on 5e because it used the same language scheme as 3.5. Idiots got absolutely suckered, and I sneer at their complaints about 5e because they judged a game by how the book explained mechanics, not the game in practice.
I have never played 5e, not even read the phb, and I am proud of having not nor ever doing so.

>>98815176
You didn't miss much. Really is the worst edition of the game I've played.

>>98815176
The true path of the hater comes through understanding. I have a passing familiarity with 5e from friends playing/running it and that's given me an informed disdain. It's like 3.5 if every bonus or penalty was just advantage/disadvantage (with no reward for combining them) and if two-thirds of the rules were removed and replaced with "have the DM guess".

>>98815650
I'm in a similar situation but i've come to understand that the vast majority of potential new players are going to bounce the fuck off of 3.5 if it's their first experience, 5e and specially 2024 are way better at onboarding them and prep them for the eventual 'hey do you wanna have WAY more options?'

>>98815779
You say that but in terms of mismatched expectations I think there's far more damage from people expecting their campaign to be like a let's play podcast rather than 3.5 being too crunchy for them. We all fell in love with it as middle schoolers, it's not that hard.

>>98815802
>We all fell in love with it as middle schoolers

That's kind of a survivorship bias anon. We don't know about all the teenagers that bounced off 3.5 because, obviously, they wouldn't frequent these circles to tell us about it, but I can tell you me and my group almost bounced off it during out first attempts and it wasn't until like 3 or 4 years later that an already existing group took us in and taught us

>>98815833
I'm not saying that community doesn't need to be fostered or that people don't need to be acclimated to a system that's 1/3rd RAW and 2/3rds decades of communal interpretation. It's moreso that I've talked to people who tried 5e and were put off by its shallowness and lack of options. I also think it's a sucker's game trying to aim for mass appeal. I want to play 3.5 with people that like 3.5, I don't want 3.5 to become something the vast majority of TTRPG players will like because a game like that doesn't exist.

>>98813841
>Do you not understand the concept of a West Marches anon?
i guess i hadn't heard of it before.

>>98753884
>>98786453
I actually found a web article that goes over what stuff didn't get revised in 3.5:
https://web.archive.org/web/20211118120255/http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dnd/20050110x


it seems that in Tome and blood that aside from candle caster, it's mostly just some spells that didn't reappear.

>>98816092
So nothing of value was lost. Complete Arcane is probably my least favorite of the seires anyways.

>>98810791
>>98810865
>>98814888

I think a lot of things depends on what environment you fight stuff in.

>>98816548
In tight quarters with a lot of cover like a normal dungeon, it's completely useless because of -4 initiative. In completely open areas without cover, it's less useless because it can maybe bring its SLAs to bear, but that's if its opponents can't exploit its weaknesses. In open areas WITH cover it's completely fucked.

>>98816092
>>98816141
candle caster might have weird potential. it may let you use longer casting time spells as a standard action, unlike scrolls

>>98816637
That's not even a 'may' it straight up says it. Lighting a candle is a standard action with a tindertwig, the spell takes effect next round, and then there's a feature to boost the activation to immediately upon being activated. Not great, because your DC is still determined by the minimum stat if relevant, but better than nothing.

File: RealGaladrielFuckAmazonLa(...).jpg (50 KB, 705x353)

50 KB JPG

>>98817695

>>98788115
Well Done, Anon.

How do I plan around my players having 'dump hundreds of damage on an enemy' buttons? Like, say, a maximizing wand

>>98814469
No, they really weren't. They were far from the worst products that TSR ended up shitting out in the 2e era but that's an incredibly low bar; 2e core was honestly closer to "AD&D 1.5e" with all the flavor sucked out of it than a new product but the majority of everything outside of PHB/DMG/MM ranged from "ehhh, it's alright I guess" to "buying this book is paying to make your game worse".

>>98817232
Depends on what the spell is and who they're using it on but globes of invulnerability are always a pretty safe bet.

>>98816689
Even aside from save DC, there's a lot of spells that have a long casting time, but would be useful if you could get them off in a single round

>>98817232
Easiest way around it is to avoid situations where there's one big motherfucker and if the players blow him up the day is saved. As far as surviving an alpha strike, things like Contingency go a long way.

>>98817081
>filename
kek

>>98817232
Have damage sharing or damage displacement effects. Allow the spell to do something substantial but not instawin the encounter.

>>98817232
For these situations i wish 3.5 had a way to have 'boss phases' or something along those lines

File: 5bspvizthkb81.jpg (661 KB, 2048x1536)

661 KB JPG

>>98817761 >>98817790 >>98817872 >>98817874 >>98817916

Alright, this is the West Marches anon here again. I have set up a discord for those who would be interested in playing a D&D 3.5 West Marches game. If you're not familiar with West Marches campaigns, read here: https://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/78/grand-experiments-west-marches/

The limitations of this campaign are as previously stated: >>98808670
And as follows:

1. The game will be run using Discord voice chat and Foundry VTT for automation.
2. Only content that exists in Foundry’s 3.5 module (SRD content) will be available.
a. Exception: Monks will not be playable.
3. Instead of the normal XP for encounters, XP will instead be based on 1 GP to XP basis and the Wealth By Level chart will act as the determining factor for new 4. levels.
5. PVP is permitted, however, this action will have consequences both among NPCs in town and with any PCs that discover the act, so weigh your choices 6. carefully. PKing is generally unadvisable unless you want to become a pariah both IC and OOC.
7. All new characters will start at 1st level. You may have multiple characters, but only one may be played during a session.

I am debating adding a house rule that whoever reaches 10th Level first will be declared Margrave of the march, but this might be difficult since non-human races wouldn't be recognized by the crown for this purpose. Maybe some other kind of reward.

Anyway, if you are interested in playing add my discord f377t4m3r translate from leetspeak
Do be warned it might be a couple weeks until I am prepped enough to run.

>>98817750
Ah shit, fucked the formatting up when pasting. Whatever, you get the idea.

>>98817750
What if we add custom .json's/already have them made for whatever options we're looking for?

>>98817790
That would be acceptable. Would still require approval of course depending on what it is.

>>98817750
Why no monk? is it too weak?

also at first i thought that read something like feet tamer.

>>98817750
I wish you the best for this. Also, why aren't monks playable?

>>98816580
what about a well lit long dungeon corridor?

>>98749121
>So uh... is there a timescale for how long a half-dragon takes to gestate?
>>98749211
>>98749231
if this is in faerun, you could probably ask ed greenwood about it.

>>98817872
>>98817874
Doesn't fit the style of campaign setting I'm going for. This is going to be a very Western European fantasy setting. Arthurian legend style. Fey and misty isles, knights and mysterious witches, wizards, etc. Think like Dolmenwood. Monks just clash too much thematically.

>>98817897
I forgot about that. Cheers.

>>98817750
Am I retarded or is this supposed to be fetttamer?

>>98817916
My bad those are supposed to be L's

>>98817897
>>98817908
it depends on how you flavor things, but i definitely get what you mean. The default themes around their powers is this mismash of asian martial arts stuff.
>Monks are proficient with club, crossbow (light or heavy), dagger, handaxe, javelin, kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, siangham, and sling.
>Monks are not proficient with any armor or shields
Half of their weapon proficiency are asian ones: https://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/monk.htm


Though the other half of those weapons would fit in and are all found in western european fantasy. In stories about Robin Hood he has a duel with his friend Little John using quarter staves (this is how they meet). Slings were used in every culture.

How would one fix soulknife?

>>98818071
6th level manifesting off the psywar list.

>>98817310
I won't argue with the flavor being sucked out of it but some interesting and fun campaigns could be drug out of both Birthright and CoW pretty easily. Some of my CoW characters are still alive and kicking ass.

>>98818071
Full BAB, mindblade enhancement remotely aligned with WBL progression rather than getting +5 at level 20, psychic strike as a swift action with a PP cost or something other than a goddamn move action, wider range of special abilities that can go on the mindblade, and let them summon a glock.

>>98752278
I'm currently playing a thri-kreen warblade and it's a lot of fun.

>>98818179
>I won't argue with the flavor being sucked out of it but some interesting and fun campaigns could be drug out of both Birthright and CoW pretty easily. Some of my CoW characters are still alive and kicking ass.
The main problem with those two isn't so much that they're bad in a vacuum (and to be clear there's a lot of 2e content that's IS in fact out-and-out bad whether it's in a vacuum or not) so much as that they're way outside of the mechanical and thematic scope of AD&D just like the MI in BECMI and the game mechanics get so strained and re-worked that they end up effectively being different, smaller games bolted on to the core rules - and god help you if you try to make these assorted overhauls play nice with each other. D&D was hacked together as a game system with the intent that the average game would revolve around a pack of easily killed grave-robbing murderhobos trying to get rich and at most you'd end up controlling a small kingdom or something before retiring as the mechanical foundations of everything happening at the table started to get shaky.

Wizards doubled down on the supplement-heavy approach for 3e, but with considerably more success because 3e sacrificed the dungeoneering focus for modularity that allowed them to bolt on whatever the hell they felt like much more easily.

>>98817897
i think that it would be very easy to make a western themed version of monk available just by removing the asian weapons, making flurry of blows and the damage increase to be used with a quarterstaff instead and basically base the class around the quarterstaff instead

>>98818083
IMO, they fit better as a Sneak Attack replacement for Lurk *or* PsyRogue to give the two better distinction from eachother.

>>98818309
>Full BAB
Only if they stay without Manifesting past PsyRogue.

>mindblade enhancement remotely aligned with WBL progression rather than getting +5 at level 20
There's a separate Special Ability budget, net +5 equivalent is at 12th. I'd actually push the raw pluses before +5 back another level to more exactly fill for the accuracy of full BAB in the event of staying 3/4ths BAB.

>psychic strike as a swift action with a PP cost or something other than a goddamn move action
I'd rather keep the Move Action dynamic but make it partially Psionic Focus transparent, letting you trade down plusses (and equivalent special abilities) for more than one extra Mind Blade to "bank" more instead while "naturally" roping in stuff like Deep Impact. Especially if you're bolting on preferably-low Manifesting to HAVE PP to spend.

>wider range of special abilities that can go on the mindblade
Giving a "true" Manifester variant baked-in Psychic weapon special ability would be a fitting reference to the 3.0 PRC's dynamics, and further the idea of trading off between "properly" at-will combat performance and actioning your utility options.

>>98818309
>Full BAB
yeah.
>and let them summon a glock.
so basically merge the soulbow prestige class with the soulknife base class? I've had thoughts like that.

>>98820586
>so basically merge the soulbow prestige class with the soulknife base class?
NTA but I've seen that idea floated before.
Wonder if it's a common fix.

Yesterday I found out that there was errata for Complete Psionic (including the Erudite), but it just never got posted on the WotC website: https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/123698/is-there-a-complete-psionic-errata-document

Someone had got it from the author of the book and shared it online though.

>>98802050
>an erudite will never ever be able to manifest more than 11 powers per day no matter how many he knows.
It's interesting that the erudite in it's original printing in dragon magazine #319 was a bit stronger than the version in Complete Psionic. It actually got separate unique powers per day for each of it's psionic power levels. At level 20 you'd have 4 unique powers per day for each of the 9 levels of powers. 9 times 4 is 36, which is the same number of total powers known that the psion had at level 20: https://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/classes/psion.htm


The Complete Psionic's version of the erudite had the nerfed 11 power per day limit at level 20. That's the same as the wilder's total number of powers known at level 20: https://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/classes/wilder.htm

>>98820876
Here's the parts of the errata which are directly relevant to the erudite:
>p. 153, Variant Psion Erudite, Class Features, Unique Powers Per day, 2nd sentence:
>“[….] an erudite is limited to manifesting a certain number of unique psionic powers of each level per day from the repertoire of powers he knows […]”
>Fix: delete the words “of each level”

>p. 155, XP Cost, 1st sentence:
>“[…] expend 20 experience points per erudite level, which […]”
>Fix: replace “erudite” with “power”

>p. 156 Erudite starting package, Powers Known:
>Fix: delete ‘primal fear*,

>>98818833
All of the other abilities of the class are still very Eastern fantasy themed. Slow falling, faster movement, timeless body, etc. This is all Taoist cultivation fantasy.

You can make a more thematic pugilist type character by just making a Fighter and taking Improved Unarmed and similar feats.

>>98818833
So basically Friar John?

>>98818071
Free makeovers to look like Psylocke. Even the men.

>>98822017
Yeah for western monk I think you're better off styling after a pankration gladiator, though then you run into the issues with 3.5 grappling.

Werewolf LORD elf chad reporting in.
The crazy mutant we were gaoling bravely sacrificed his life detonating the macguffin, creating a tactical nuke on the island we were on.
Having survived due to distance, we closed in and crushed the remaining foes and their giant worm servants.
14 months the game was played, and heroics beyond count.
I wished to die gloriously, and it was stolen from me by the most unlikely member of the party.
Farewell, Fluffmodious, I still considered you a friend, even at the end.

>>98802392
>How are you supposed to deal with this kinda monster?
Stand off to the side, since, as my group pointed out when I ran this monster during a city siege, it can't turn. It can only roll in a straight line. Whoops.
>forcecage
Now that is a problem.

>>98802392
I've probably killed at least 20 characters with this thing so far. I'm going to do it again real soon.

>>98813447
>when did 3.5 drop off in popularity?
2015 to 2016 when 5e really sank in as the new edition and normalfags flooded the hobby from stranger things and critical roll.

>>98826638
Is this who MMII was designed for?

>>98827858
Now I'm mulling over whether I'd rather have a monster manual curated for player-antagonist DMs or munchkins looking for transformation targets.

The Sylph and Spellweaver have spellcasting that scales off their HD, are there any other monsters that do this?

>>98817880
That's when you use Silent Image. It no longer has LOS to cast. Make a wall inbetween the two of you that'll let you get close enough.

>>98831365
Phaerimm and cranium rat swarms do it without saying they do it. And obviously dragons have a similar mechanic.

>>98831365
Phaerimm from Monsters of Faerun do, their spellcasting is also unusually potent since they can cast all spells as spell-like abiliies, meaning no verbal, somatic or material component, maybe not even XP.

>>98831543
Awesome, I'll jsut need to find a way to add Phaerimm to a summon monster spell, then. Maybe through Fiendish Summoning Specialist.

>>98831652
I kind of doubt any half-sane DM would allow you to do it at any level low enough for it not to be useless

>>98831652
the phaerimm seem bonkers. in the sense of balance and their personality.

>>98831543
>>98831652

You don't actually need to get the monsters of faerun book for the phaerimm. They gave them entirely new stats in the free 3.5 update with stats for each age category like dragons:
https://web.archive.org/web/20161101150215/http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20040313a

On page 8 of the pdf.

>>98831365
>>98831531
the way thats described seems a little different than how dragons are described. i'll go double check though.

>>98838284
Dragon spellcasting is based on their Age Category, not their HD directly. Granted, some types will have those two numbers correlate, but not always.

>>98834043
Thanks.

I was mainly asking because Cosmic Descryer allows me to add HD of advancement to monsters summoned with Summon Monster X and I suddenly thought that being able to shit out multiple spellcasters with full complements of level 9 spells would be fun.

>>98838420
are are there any summonable monsters that have actual spellcasting?

>>98838642
Pretty sure there's a PRC that lets you add Aranea to Summon Nature's Ally.

>>98838642
Lillends cast spells as level 6 bards and they're SM 8 or 9. Problem is that their caster level is fixed and doesn't go up when you add advancement HD. Meanwhile sylphs and the like cast as sorcerers of HD +X.

were there any spells in 3.5 that immediately let you heal to full hp?

>>98838862
No, none that I can remember.

>>98838862
Heal used to do that in 3.0, now it's capped at 250hp at CL 25.

>>98838920
https://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/healMass.htm
mass heal has 250 cap.

regular heal only has 150:
https://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/heal.htm

>>98839071
Bah, it's worse than I remembered.

>>98838862
I was thinking of some cheese strats with changing to a monster that would heal at a different rate than the target but "Fast healing does not increase the number of hit points regained when a creature polymorphs." i.e. because Polymorph heals you as if you had a full night of rest (1HP per character level).

If I was a relative D&D newbie (only played a single campaign before, in 3.5) and was thinking about DM-ing my own game, what resources would I need to make shit easier aside from all the handbooks, and should I bandwagon onto 5e with normies or is it worth it to stick with 3.5, which i'm more familiar with?

The DM I'd run with goes crazy lore intensive, everyone's got sheets, everywere has maps, I was wondering if there's programs to make it all easier

>>98839692
domt bite more than you can chew and start simple.
are you playing online?

>>98839692
>, what resources would I need to make shit easier aside from all the handbooks, and should I bandwagon onto 5e with normies or is it worth it to stick with 3.5, which i'm more familiar with?
Core only 3.5e (+ the rules compendium I guess) is surprisingly approachable compared to the game's reputation.>>98839692

>>98839692
It's unintuitive but precisely because 3.5 is so dense with rules, as long as you can handle the mechanics of running a game (organizing players, pacing encounters, improvising, etc) then any actual questions you have on how something should resolve typically have an answer. 3.5 also has a wealth of pre-made adventures for any level range, so with just the player's handbook, dungeon master's guide, and an adventure you'd be off to the races. You'd probably want the monster manual and any splats that strike your fancy but those are additive, not mandatory from that foundation.

>>98839877
Gonna try in-person at least for now, if I can wrangle a bunch of autists together for a regular group
>>98839926
Honestly idk if it's cause the DM I'm playing with is good and has been playing 3.5 for 20 years, or if it's because I actually know how to read, but I haven't found 3.5 to be too bad. I appreciate the depth and nuance. The math can be a little tiresome but it is what it is. I think if I'm DM-ing I might just handwave a little bit of the more tedious stuff and just ballpark things for dramatic effect
>>98840808
Are there any programs or sites for easy plug-in character sheets or anything like that?

>>98841083
>easy plug-in character sheets
They're a dime a dozen, none I can specifically recommend unless you want to fully lean into the Roll20/Foundry ecosystem (which doesn't make sense for in-paper play). You run into issue where there's so many feats/skills/spells depending on what books you're including that a comprehensive list of options doesn't exist and so anything more complex than 18 Dex -> +4 modifier is a crapshoot.

>>98841083
3.5 isn't that bad. It just has a shit ton of options and splats.
Since you aren't exactly a newbie i would recommend something reasonable like core+ (core 3 + the complete books) or core and some regional and racial books you feel like using.

As far as setting go if you use a pre existing one obviously you will get a shit ton of material + good maps ready for you.

What are you thinking about your campaign for now?
Starting at level 3 is the most common newbie friendly option keeping the first 2 levels as npc tier

>>98841269
Starting at level 3 can be a little daunting for spellcasters though, there's a lot of options. Probably better than fighting rats for a month of sessions but there are tradeoffs.

>>98841345
A full caster gets 4 first level and 2 2nd level spells. I guess it can be a lot for complete newbies.
Then start them at level 2 at the very least. Level 1 doesnt work when the average cat has a decent chance of killing you 1v1

are there things that people miss from older editions or think newer editions did better?

>>98841749
There's parts of 4e I liked in terms of making all the classes have more agency in combat and ability to contribute consistently, but it was at the expense of class variety, out-of-combat utility, and really any ability to do something other than mid-sized skirmishes. I don't think the juice is worth the squeeze there.

One that I do like is that lair actions for bosses do a good job of stopping raw action economy from deleting an encounter.

>>98841749
spheres from 2e.
divine spellcasters having every spell available to them was one of the worst mistakes made in this edition.
rules for hexcrawling and dungeoncrawling, morale rules for encounters so that not every fight has to be to the death, generally the procedural stuff that the old dmgs had that were removed from 3.5 despite the framework still being there.
4e is irredeemable trash for a million different reasons.
the only think i like from 5e is advantage but used sparingly for very specific stuff not the way 5e shoves it down your throat and completely removes modifier for everything

>>98841749
Dungeon turns. No full attacks. AEDU, though sometimes the abilities weren't more interesting.

>>98841749
I like advantage as a new moving part that other mechanics could fiddle with
I much prefer subclasses over prestige classes
I like simplified skills (no, not THAT simplified, but you get what I mean)
I like martials getting to do more things beyond 'i charge/i full attack'

>>98841749
Concretration as a mechanic is pretty smart, though overly limited in 5e. Currently I'm running a cope campaign where you can at most have 7 positive spells affecting you, but in an ideal system it'd eidther be a certain amount of spells max, or each spell has a score and you can't exceed a given score.

>>98757540
>>98757737
>>98757778
>>98760162
>>98760238
>>98766238
>>98766283
>>98774389
>>98774410

There's actually similar item that you do get a save for: https://new.dndtools.org/items/spiralburst-bottle

It kills people it sucks through the portal, and it's actually slightly cheaper than the portable hole + bag of holding warhead

>>98842505

This is from Book of Vile Darkness:
>This is a sort of magic weapon contained within a glass bottle until it is used. Opening or shattering the bottle (often by throwing it like a flask of acid or alchemist's fire) unleashes the spiralburst. The spiralburst is a portal to the Ethereal Plane that is only about 1/2 inch wide. This portal has an almost limitless amount of pull, sucking a single creature or object through the gate unless it succeeds at a Fortitude save (DC 30). If the bottle bursts against something, the object it shatters against is the target. If the bottle is opened, the opener is the target. The spiralburst only pulls up to 10 cubic feet through, so if the object or creature is larger than that, only a portion of it is pulled through.
>The weapon gets its name because the target drawn through the portal is sucked through in a spiral pattern. For most living creatures, this is a blood-red spiral as their body is liquefied into a spiral-shaped stream, then drawn through the very small portal in a single round. Objects, unless they are extraordinarily malleable, are destroyed. Creatures die instantly unless they are amorphous (such as oozes). Even objects and creatures that survive are lost on the Ethereal Plane. The spiralburst disappears after a single use.

>CL: 20th; Craft Wondrous Item, sympathy, gate; Market Price: 19,000 gp; Weight: 1 lb.

>>98841083
I'm working my lil retard ass off on making a comprehensive one-stop site for everything 3e/3.5/PF1, and everything between. I'm three months into it atm and it's looking like it might take a handful of months more, but it WILL come.

Until then, I can recommend a few things;

- The obvious, d20 SRD has everything core you need
https://www.d20srd.org/index.htm

- This site has a number of attempted updates that took place over years. dndtools.org is the only one that functionally works still, but dnd.arkalseif.info is the most recent attempt and therefor has the best bet for individual pages. You can't filter on it though, so if you find something through dndtools.org and it seems incomplete, change the domain to dnd.arkalseif.info, like so
https://dndtools.org/spells/players-handbook-v35--6/bears-endurance--2783/
https://dnd.arkalseif.info/spells/players-handbook-v35--6/bears-endurance--2783/

- Spreadsheet of all Spellcasting classes
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1oA16AIhgwyzm1x2Z0cWjGZRoX6dVI2zm0G9R4CawU_0/edit?usp=sharing

- This is a massive list containing massive lists, thanks to the autists of Giant in the Playground
https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24411034&postcount=219

>>98842554
Good to know! Godspeed to your little retard ass, you're a gentleman and a scholar. I look forward to seeing what you come up with!

That spellcaster class sheet is wild. There really are a lot of classes, I wouldn't even know how to begin reading it
>Oozemaster
I really gotta learn what's going on in these expansion books

>>98842554
>>98842705
Speaking of, and this goes for everyone; feel free to recommend any features you'd like to see, even if it might've already been suggested like a encounter generator or something.

>>98842554
realmshelps has a very comprehensive monster search function that lets you sort by book, CR, environment, etc.. Some way to search by abilities (Su, ex, etc.) would be nice too.

>>98842513
How much do you think it would cost to create a weaker version of this with a smaller area of suction? Say about the size of an apple. And Ideally it'd be reusable and able to be contained in a jar or somesuch.
I'm asking for a friend.

>>98842554
>>98842836
I will note that realmshelp uses the 3.0 monster statblocks for some monsters.
And some of them had some really big changes between 3.0 and 3.5. For instance, The mindflayer no longer has astral projection at will in 3.5

The succubus no longer can summon a balor (10% chance of success) in 3.5

>>98843555
I mean, I appreciate how hilarious it is, but giving a CR~7 monster a 10% chance to summon a CR 20 one kind of makes it actually impossible to use in any meaningful way. If it was a CR 9 or 10 demon that a Succubus could summon, or the succubus was a CR 17-18 monster, then it could work, but as is, there's just too big of a gap between the CRs for a succubus to be both an adequate challenge for a party, AND to not be instantly TPK'd by the balor

>>98843572
I think it's a holdover from succubi being puzzle monsters. The writers wanted to model it as a girl calling on her big buff boyfriend showing up to take care of the players beating on his girl.

>>98843598
That's fine, but the gap between the balor's strength and a succubus' is too wide for that to work. It essentially just boiled down to every hostile encounter with a succubus being a 10% chance of a TPK. It's REALLY fucking hard to design an encounter around something like that.

>>98843698
Yeah, I'm just saying it's from the era of rust monsters and other fuck you player traps. It should have been removed or replaced with a glabrezu or something.

>>98843716
I'd personally have gone for a Hezrou since the gap between a succubus and a Glabrezu is still pretty wide
Though in the 3.5 MM they do have a more reasonable echo of that ability, since they have a 30% chance to summon a vrock

>>98843725
A hezrou in a tie.
>"Are these guys bothering you, ma'am?"

>>98843160
I was gonna suggest shrink item but that doesnt work on magic objects.

>>98843160
Just slice off a bit of black pudding and keep it in a jar like a normal person

>>98792755
>I have to wonder if the designers of 3.0/3.5 knew about the various exploits around wishing for magic items (like candle of invocation) and chain gating efreeti for more wishes.
>It's stuff that could easily be patched, so I have to wonder why they didn't.
>I know its not mentioned in the faq on the web, but did they ever mention it anywhere else? like in interviews, or in dragon magazine?
>>98793770

One place I'm wondering about is the old wotc forums. There was definitely optimization going on there before they closed down, and sometimes the developers of the game had posted there.

>>98844022
>Hezrou being a succubus's boytoy
Nice

>>98843555
To be clear I do think it's useful to have access to the 3.0 books sometimes, it's just annoying that these nuances are not labeled on the site clearly.

Come to think of it, the more annoying thing is that some statblocks on realmshelp seem to be a weird fusion of different 3.0 and 3.5 statblocks (and the site doesn't mention this). For instance, this one: https://www.realmshelps.net/monsters/block/Rakshasa

The 3.0 rakshasa didn't have "DR: 15/good and piercing", it had "damage reduction 20/+3": https://www.dragon.ee/30srd/monsters_r.html

The 3.5 rakshasa didn't have total immunity to spells below a certain level, but it also didn't have the vulnerability to blessed crossbow bolts: https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/rakshasa.htm

>>98846812
I also double checked the books. In case someone else wants to, the Rakshasa is on page 153-152 of the 3.0 Edition Monster Manual. And It's on page 211-212 in the 3.5 update of Monster Manual.

To be clear, this isn't a situation where something was mentioned in the errata and update booklets, but left out of the SRD. I checked those too:
https://web.archive.org/web/20161101193133/http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20040125a
https://web.archive.org/web/20161031221204/http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dnd/20030718a

What are some good, cheap, underrated items? I know about the Healing Belt and the like, I'm looking for weird. Rod of Viscid Globs (MIC) is the vibe.

File: file.png (776 KB, 958x1191)

776 KB PNG

>>98847586 >>98847589 >>98847621 >>98857130

>>98847481
I'm a fan of the Rod of Ropes.

>>98792755
>>98793770
>>98798517
>>98803778

I decided to dig into this some more. The candle of invocation + gate + efreeti + wish trick still worked work in 3.0. The really interesting thing is that the loop was actually made significantly more game breaking in 3.5. There wasn't an additional XP cost to make magic items in 3.0's wish, but there was a lower price limit for making magical and non magical items:
>Create a valuable item, even a magic item, of up to 15,000 gp in value.

But in 3.5, the wording of that part of wish was changed:
>Create a nonmagical item of up to 25,000 gp in value.
>Create a magic item, or add to the powers of an existing magic item.
Though they also made it so you had to pay twice it's XP cost + the base XP cost of wish.
>When a wish creates or improves a magic item, you must pay twice the normal XP cost for crafting or improving the item, plus an additional 5,000 XP.
So you can make more more expensive nonmagical items, increase the powers of a magic item, and the price cap on magic items was (possibly) removed. I have to wonder if that was intentional or an accidental change.

>>98847509
I read that as Rod of Rapes.

>>98847509
Classic, I love this one

Some stuff did stay the same across the revision. Both versions of wish tell you this:
>For example, wishing for a staff of the magi might get you instantly transported to the presence of the staff’s current owner.
So wish probably can't make artifacts, even minor ones.

On a tangent, the candle of invocation was actually slightly cheaper in 3.0 (probably since gate didn't have an XP cost) at 7,800 gp: https://www.dragon.ee/30srd/wondrous_items.htm
In 3.5, the price is 8,400 gp: https://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#candleofInvocation


>>98847565
>I have to wonder if that was intentional or an accidental change.
Basically, I'm wondering if the developers intended for there to be a 25,000 gp cap on creating magic items with wish. They clearly intended to make it possible to make more expensive items, but I'm wondering if they were just trying to raise the cap or remove it entirely.


>Though they also made it so you had to pay twice it's XP cost + the base XP cost of wish.
items cost 1/25th the market price in XP, so If there was a 25,000 gp cap that means you could only pay at most 2,000 XP + 5000 XP each time you created/improved a magic item.
I'm not sure if this an argument in either direction though.

>>98847481
>>98847509
>>98847589

Check out this thread: https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?148101-3-x-Shax-s-Indispensible-Haversack-(Equipment-Handbook)

Out of the 3.5 books that are availible, which one would be the best to look into for customisation options and feats for characters?

>>98848457
Oh god, that is such a broad question. What are you building?

>>98848462

Just in general, I'm new to 3.5 and I was curious about learning more about the character builds versus how 5e does things.

>>98848466
Your best place to start is probably a handbook for your favorite class. If you want something to get started, pick an easier class (I like warmage) and read up about it.

>>98848466
Besides the standard choices classes can make (TWF or Archery for Ranger, special abilities for Rogue, etc.), check out this site:
https://srd.dndtools.org/srd/classes/classes.html
Click on a class and scroll down until you get where it says "[Class] Variants". You can see how different class features or choices are implemented, like swapping your Ranger's Tracking ability for a Rogue's Trapfinding, or your Druid having a different set of environmentally-themed weapon proficiencies.

>>98848457
For better or worse the answer is "yes". 3.5 is a game that rewards pulling a niche spell from a 20-year-old magazine article and combining it with a feat from a book about sailing so that your prestige class from a book about interplanar travel now has this fucked up usecase. You risk drinking from a firehose if you just try to look for 'options', you're far better narrowing it to a class or an archetype and building towards that.

>>98847481
Don't know how cheap it's considered or how underrated it is (I imagine not that much), but I'll be fucked if the Belt of Battle hasn't been my favorite item since I gotten one.

>>98849636
It's 10k and it's extremely popular, but yeah it's really strong

>>98848525
the annoying thing is that page doesnt list the places those variants are from.

What are the most bonkers spell you've seen in D&D? I found out about this one today:

https://new.dndtools.org/spells/curse-of-lycanthropy-4276
>Necromancy
>Level: Pestilence 6,
>Components: V, S, M, DF,
>Casting Time: 1 standard action
>Range: Touch
>Target: Humanoid touched
>Duration: Instantaneous
>Saving Throw: Fortitude negates
>Spell Resistance: Yes

>Dipping your hand in blood and then gripping the target fiercely, you call on the curse of lycanthropy to destroy your foe.

>If the target fails its saving throw, it dies, and 1d6 wererats (in wererat form; MM 173) claw their way out of its body. The wererats do not attack you or your allies, but might attack nearby living creatures. If no target is available, the wererats scurry away to spread their lycanthropy.

>Material Component: A pint of animal blood.

>>98850665
Blade in the Soul, a Seven Sisters spell. Most of the magic in that book is broken af.

>>98850917
huh, that's from 2nd edition.