D&D 3.5 has many shortcomings

Found the wizard

For all its faults, and as much as I love 2e, 3.5 took D&D in a positive direction. Having players just want to roll high (instead of having some rolls where a low roll is good) is simply logical. The board game aspect made fights more interesting and opened it to more strategy. And the OGL was a smart idea (even if it did result in a lot of bad products).

>tfw my favorite thing with 3.5 is the wacky stupidity that the million and two splats give you
>while also hating the fact that core mechanics are shit, and one trillion splats make reading chars hell

>in-fact, if you run a game using ONLY ToB and Psionic classes, it functions.
Doesn't that get a bit limited in healing, though? I don't remember much in the way of non-selfish psionic healing.

>tiers
Shoo shoo

> Wizard players

I like the XP/CR system design(even though the actual CR numbers are often wrong). I don't think I've seen another XP system that allows lower level characters to catch up without the XP requirements scaling exponentially.

Nope, Devoted Spirit can chip in on healing.

The problem is that since magic items cost XP to make, careful abuse of the system can put you ahead of everyone else and go unnoticed.

How does it handle non-HP healing like petrification, ability damage, diseases etc.?

The Warblade could make martial scripts of Iron Heart Surge, I guess.

You can't Iron Heart Surge away being a statue, user.

Rot Grubs and fake equipment that deals damage to the player or mimic-like things are always fun. Also enemies that can destroy player equipment are a personal favorite of mine

Cursed necklace too

>lol so random exdee

Have you ever played Tales of Maj'Eyal? 4e would have been interesting if the power source idea had been developed further, with each having it's own resource that controlled power use and pushed a different playstyle.

I kind of expanded on "3.5 with ToB and Psionics Only" for my group, it's grown into a monster of its own accord. It's unrelated, but we also removed half-ranks, favoring the "if you train a skill that is a class skill for one or more of your classes, gain a flat +3 bonus in that skill" thing and making max ranks = your HD.

We introduced the concept of alchemy to the game; essentially, a number of potions, extracts, oils, powders and the like are available, and all they really take to create are the necessary ingredients, a Craft (Alchemy) check and being at or above a certain level. The costs are calculated the same way as they would be in 3.X with magical items for the most part, but everything from curative potions to weapon oils that alter your weapon's properties (like making your weapon's damage override DR, making your strikes deal a non-stacking debuff to targets for X rounds, et cetera), bombs and a number of processes which relate to normal chemistry in the real world are possible through this.

Healing via potions (instead of, say, Devoted Spirit) takes place as a form of regeneration here: If your potion's spell equivalent would heal you for 2d8+3 damage, it instead heals you for 3 HP automatically, as well as 2hp/round for 8 rounds (gaining 5 on the first, 2 on the second, etc). You always get the full benefit of the potion's HP potential this way, just not all at once.

If you're playing PF psionics, the vitalist is one of the most interesting healer classes I've seen.

Yes, it's almost as if he wants some kind of unusual or dare I say "fantastic" elements in his strictly period-accurate medieval roleplaying game.

Have you seen that document that converted the core magic into psionics? I can't find the PDF, but I remember it being interesting.

Yeah, yeah that was the customizability that earned it the nickname of "The world's least granular point-buy system". But here's the thing, other point buy systems exist and had already existed before 3.5. If you want to build a Lucha or a generic shounen protagonist in any one of about 200 other rpg systems, you can do that, and you can do it just by going "I want to be Goku, I'll buy flight, strength, reflexes, endurance, energy blast, and variable power". You don't have to start with monk and at 5th level pick up a single level of sorcerer to prestige into Somatic Adept, go for that three levels until you get a certain class feature and then take a two level dip in *another* class along with getting a Headband of Hair-spiking for SSJ hair, then take yet another class that gives you something else, and...".

Point buy systems let you just make what you want, and you'll usually wind up with parity with any other party member, rather than being crippled compared to a straight-up Conjuration wizard.

It's like you don't understand the appeal of a challenge.

I try to limit the influence of core magic (as it was one of my main points of dislike for 3.X, alongside the class system that loved said magic so much) in our little group homebrew. Keeping alchemy as mystic chemistry and psionics where it lies makes the martial adepts stand out a little more than they would if I started pulling the 3.X spell list and magic items into the game.

What about psionics appeals to you? Is it more about the fluff or the mechanics? I ask because there are some similar point-buy alternative rules for normal magic, if that might interest you.

It's a bit of both, really.

I am aware of spell-point variants, but I also like having the ability to augment powers. I even think psionic focus is really cool.

I like the fluff too. It's kind of a cosmic crystal pseudoscience meets flying swordsman orientalism aesthetic with glowing i-ching symbols and ectoplasmic blades.

I like that skill point house rule.

As for alchemy, have you read Dragon magazine issue 358? That one lists psionic alchemical items.

Does anybody here have any good weapon houserules? One of my chief complaints about 3.5 is that weapon damage does not scale to keep up with hit point inflation.
I think it would help if weapon damage scaled the same way the monk's unarmed strike damage does.

The spell point variant is broken as fuck, though.

At least Psionics has some checks in it, like needing to pay to augment stuff.

Generally there's a fuckton of miscellaneous bonuses that help scale to keep up with the hit point inflation, for better and worse - and eventually the base weapon damage becomes mostly irrelevant.

I think I'd like it better if base weapon damage stayed relevant though. Or at least stayed relevant much longer, for 'feel' reasons if nothing else.

I don't think it should be too hard to just step up your weapon's damage every four character levels. Might help if there was a more unified progression.

*unified progression*

I mean, yeah there is that table...

This guy pokes at it a bit
brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=13278.0

>Does anybody here have any good weapon houserules?

By the time I started reworking damage and CR math I just realized it'd be easier to rework the system from the ground up.

What the hell, my homebrew bone is itching.

How would you rework the system?

>gut the skill system entirely and have skills based on class, race, and background a bit like how 5e did it.
>restructure the classes to use Star Wars Saga's talent trees for class features to make multiclassing actually work. Prestige classes just get rendered down into talent trees with entry requirements. Do the same with 3/4ths and half casting classes.
>go through all of the spells and either cut them, rework them into 4e style rituals, combine redundant spells (ie cure X wounds), and then place the remainders into specific talent trees
>throw out feats. Rework into talent trees
>severely reduce monster crunch to prevent massive statblocks that are never fully use

By the time I started going I realized the resulting system would look nothing like 3.5 when finished, and spending that much time on another fantasy heartbreaker wouldn't be work it in the end.

...

>>severely reduce monster crunch to prevent massive statblocks that are never fully use
Good fucking christ this was 3e's biggest problem. Look at a 4e statblock, it has literally everything there. You could rip a statblock out of a page and give it to me and I'd be able to use it.

d20? You have to look up its spells, feats, weapon abilities, it's ridiculous. The only good thing about it is that it makes it easy to convert anything to player use.

Are you honestly saying classes don't have a disparity in versatility? A fighter can do everything a wizard can?

Well I personally would do exactly what Legend d20 did. That game grew out of several pages of houserules to make PvP in 3E fair.

Reeeeee! Why can't martials just stand there and be my wizard's fucking meatshield instead of getting to actually fight back themselves?

Any recommendations other than GURPS/M&M?

HERO system, if only because it's the halfway point between both of them.

Savage Worlds?

Thanks. I'd heard it be described as 'like GURPS, but instead of being awful for superheroes, it's awful for non-superheroes'.

The one flaw with point-buy systems is that you need a certain amount of system mastery to make sure your character isn't really weak, so you need to make sure your players have a decent knowledge of the system, but aren't munchkins who'll make everyone else useless.

I've been GMing for a long time, but never any DnD (save for ADnD a long ass time ago) but now I've got a new group and they are kind of deadset on playing 3.5 for w/e reason. One of the players really wants to be a monk, but I know just from the memes-and skimming through it-monk is not viable.

Whats a good monkesque class from a supplement or not broken homebrew?

He wants to be a "jacky chan" type character, fighting with ladders or w/e shit is at hand etc.

Its mainly going to be a slapstick/comedy campaign is the vibes I'm getting.

>inb4 trying to fit humor inbetween 3.5 rules

Savage Worlds is my go-to generic system actually. It doesn't allow for as much customisation as GURPS and the like, but it's easy to homebrew new stuff in, and character creation is much quicker.

The Tome of Battle should give him the tools he needs.

>all this cancer in one post

My problem with pointbuy systems is that it doesn't foster the gameplay I like class based system for.

Either everyone has similar capabilities, making actual differences between characters smaller and making team-play secondary.

Or everyone specializes at which point you may as well have went with a class based system to make character generation quicker.

If your goal is to have a more simulationist game and don't care about considerations like that however, pointbuy systems are perfectly fine.

Same, it's the only 3.5 book I have anymore.

Incarnum was very underrated.

This is a problem, but there's usually ways around it. For example, M&M has archetypes and lots of easily reconfigured premade characters (with lots of options and background left open to the player), so you can create a character with nothing more than a basic understanding of the rules.

Most decent games do this. I don't think the GURPS corebooks do, but I wouldn't be surprised if the supplements do.

>Good fucking christ this was 3e's biggest problem. Look at a 4e statblock

I refuse to look at anything in that pile of garbage.

t. CoDzilla player

Unarmed Swordsage

Forever THIS! Trying too hard. tone it down and you will get genuine replies.

I love the book and I only call it by this name.

Same. It gives me a nice warm feeling that reminds me of early Veeky Forums.

It also had some fucking atrocious editing.

Not the worst I've seen (that's a tough competition - the worst editing in an actually decent product might be Eldritch Wizardry, I think), but Magic of Incarnum has some issues.

Eh, I'd say worst editing was the official ToB errata.

And what the fuck is Eldritch Wizardry? I have every official 3.5 book and I've never heard of it...

Working on my houserule document.

I know of an OD&D book called Eldritch Wizardry. Didn't know there was a 3.5 version too...

It instilled an amazing sense of wonder in me as a 15 year old, seeing the huge amount of options already available, with more still being regularly released.
I eventually grew to resent all the trawling through books and how useless so much of it was, but the possibilities seemed endless at first.

Oh, I'm talking about the same book is - OD&D Supplement III: Eldritch Wizardry.

Magic of Incarnum's editing isn't THAT bad in the grand scheme of things. It ain't got shit on some of the pre-digital stuff out there.

Heh, wasn't there a post-digital book out there that accidentally replaced every instance of "mage" with Wizard, getting such golden stuff as "iWizard"?

I think the problem is largely with you, because you somehow got stuck being unable to adapt ideas, and that's left you bitter.

The possibilities really are endless.

More like realising you don't need a specific class to represent a specific order of specific wizards, just use a little bit of creativity.

Or he's tired of spending time on the chargen game.

>but it says here that this is how this spell works
>wtf are you reading, let me see
>oh here's your problem, you're reading 3.0!

>Book of Weeaboo Fightan Magic
>Complete Series
>PHB2
>Expanded Psionics Handbook

Honestly these books are great and all character archetypes can be built from them. There are also very few truly broken classes - although a few too many useless ones.

Why is that? Personally I have way more 3.5 experience than PF experience but I've seen a couple really interesting and unique psionic classes that PF has popped out.

I don't even remember what was in the PHB2. Gestalts, I think?

Beguilers. Duskblades. And a few other classes that no one cares about - Knight, Dragon Shaman, and I think one more.

Beguilers and Duskblades are both super balanced, strong without being overpowered, and fill really cool niches.

I love Duskblades but my god could they ever do with a better spell list and more spells known.

I agree about the spell list, it has some weirdly missing spells, and a few spells given that are just a touch too strong for their level. Them getting full BAB and full CL means that you can do some awesome stuff with familiar feats though. Duskblades and Beguilers are in my opinion the ideal that classes should be balanced to; both feel very strong, can do multiple things without feeling like they can carry parties, and are simply fun to play.

>Beguiler, better than rogues, sorcerers, and wizards.
>balanced
Sure thing fag

The BEST thing that 3.5 edition did, and the thing that it RIGHT is the balance of Barbarians and other martial classes

They are some of the most powerful classes in the early game in DnD history, everyoen else is literally chump change to them until 6th level AT LEAST and they remain balanced and strong afterwards

The Binder is the best spellcaster class period.

Think about it: When people talk about 3.5 being "thematic" or "simulationist" I don't imagine stupid subrules for the Profession skill or Tower Shields granting bonuses to hide checks.

I'm talking about a system of magic that's based around a theme and a premise and the mechanics actually aiming to support that theme and premise and doing it proficiently. Clerics, Paladins and Sorcerers/Wizards all use the same system of powers with a few tweaks which ultimately makes them feel inerchangable but I literally do not know how you could reflavour Binders and that makes them fascinating.

Glitterdust.

Grease.

True

You lose initiative, and get killed in one hit.

>every fight takes place in a small room

>Close range spells not within charging distance

Well ain't you a snowflake

Beguilers are better than Rogues but are in no way better than Wizards or Sorcerors. Wizards can do the exact same shit but better with several PrCs, with Unseen Seer being the most obvious one.

If you where going to be an enchanter/illusionist, there is no reason not to be a Beguiler. You are a wizard with more hit points, double the skill points and at 5th level you do what any wizard does, prestige class.

With the same level of min/maxing beguiler is just wizard++

Chargen is the least fun part of playing a game

An illusionist/enchanter will still probably want to dabble in a few other schools to pick up key spells here and there. Beguiler is awesome, and a lot of people overlook just how amazing the number of skills they bring to the table - especially UMD - can be, but it's no wizard.

>locking yourself into a single school worth of spells
>thinking this is better than the raw choices of a vanilla wizard
I bet you think monk is fucking awesome because of all those class abilities

>there is no reason not to be a Beguiler.
Except for the part where the Wizard isn't limited to Enchantment, Illusion, and a handful of other spells. Beguilers can't bust out half of the insanity a Wizard can - even as early as level 3 they've got massively cheesy spells like Alter Self.

What do you think about making all feats into soulmelds?

One of the problems that creates the LFQW problem is that feats do not scale; the +1 that Weapon Focus gives you at level 1 is still a +1 at level 20. Soulmelds, however, do scale. You can invest them with essentia or bind them to chakras for more powerful effects.
What if, instead of talent trees, you just give everybody soulmelds?

It would also be nice to just do away with all the trap options that gave +1 to specific rolls rather than flavorful/useful new character options

Or at the very least roll those skill bonuses into more useful soulmelds with good binding options, like many of the good soulmelds from MoI.

Imagine if you could take something like attachment related instead of Two-Weapon Fighting.

I house rule that weapon focus and a few other of the +1 bonus scale when you hit the level for the next feat in the tree. I know of doesn't fix the fighter giving him weapon spec, weapon mastery, great weapon focus/spec. But it gives him a lot more wiggle room for what he wants to do.

One of those big books that contained every single AD&D spell ever, yes. Dealing 1d6 daWizard per level, or creating 1d4 Mirror iWizards, is pretty funny.

That's a find-and-replace fuckup, though - Eldritch Wizardry (which, remember, I called a decent product) has the absolute worst layout of any OD&D book, with bits of systems spread scattershot throughout. I've said before in the OSR threads that the rules for psionics are interrupted by the rules for Druids THRICE, except they're also interrupted for the rules for initiative and also IIRC part of the rules for monsters.

Word. I think as far as kickass fluff goes they're beaten by the Truenamer, but the Binder has the crucial advantage of actually having the mechanics back it up.

>Being a Beguiler
>Not being fucked in the ass by everything immune to [Mind-Affecting] stuff
Pick one and only one.

Also, if you really think a min-maxing Beguiler is going to be stronger than an equally min-maxed Wizard then I envy your innocence. The Beguiler's a decently strong class, don't get me wrong, but it's no Wizard. The Beguiler has an optimization ceiling - the Wizard got spell support in almost every single product.

Beguiler has quite a few of the stronger generally useful Wizard spells like Glitterdust and Solid Fog.