D&D 3.5 genereal

Ladies, find your own thread

>On to my question. How the fuck do I run large scale combat without it becoming bogged the fuck down?
Don't. Mass combat has never worked in any edition of D&D.

3.5e D&D does not have the ability to handle this. It can barely handle skirmish combat between PCs and a handful of enemies. Pick up another system with mass combat rules (GURPS, Savage Worlds, Fate, etc.) and run it in that.

No, that's exactly where you should go if you want to talk about 3.5. They know the game WAY better than the fucktards you'll see posting in other 3.5 threads and that's more important than anything else if you're looking for mechanical advice. Seriously, people unironically say combat maneuvers are useful now.

>troll desperately tossing out bait

It's so sad that this is what you do with your life.

None of that is trolling you delusional fucktard.

>still trying

>believing that every single person who repeatedly tells you to kill yourself is the same person

3.5/PF players need to be sent to a ghetto for keeping their mutated braindamaged flipper baby of a system alive and unaborted

4e+ fags should go back to wow

>hurr 4e is wow
Seriously? This meme again? Lol 3aboos

>Being directed to a general based on 3.PF is trolling.
If your skin was any thinner you'd be practically transparent.

sorry your argument is too short you'll have to keep saying the same thing for two hours with four other people in simplistic roles who also repeat the same actions

.......I find that hilarious.

It isn't trolling if it's true.

Oh, I'm sorry faggot, you'll have to outright shut down dissent to stop people from fairly owning your ass with a proper argument
Actually, this says a lot about 3aboos. Also if your combat takes two hours, in any system, you're a retard or playing with retards

How does 4e combat take any longer to resolve than any other edition of D&D?

Not to mention, if I'm going to play a Fighter and be in combat for 2 hours, it's nice to have actual options for how I can approach combat that don't boil down to "Mother, May I?" and conditional modifiers.

"Heros of Battle" Supplement book might have the answers you seek.

On top of that, lump large groups of your soldiers unto units that can be represented by a single stat line. Play out the battle with those and see who wins. Have not touched HOB in a while, but I think there is army combat rules in there.

This also means you can influence that strength and number of units, special units, set up, moral, surprise rounds, all based on players decisions tactically and politically.

Pathfaggots still mad, I see.

Then it's trolling.
Who are you trolls, anyway? What's your game?

Are you just butthurt 4rries? Still trying to keep the system war going even though you lost?

>Truth is trolling

There isn't a game. You've invented this whole troll narrative in your head because you fundamentally can't handle anyone criticizing your pet system.

>pure lies are truth

I'm gonna just gonna go ahead and guess you really are just butthurt 4rries, and that you get triggered by just seeing 3.5. Like, literal PTSD, sending you back a decade ago.

>still trying

Everyone knows you guys are just butthurt trolls. Hell, shouldn't you be banned? Didn't your last troll thread get deleted?

>Anything I don't agree with is a lie.

Where do I find a decent 3.5 campaign to join online? I'd rather do IRL but I live in the literal middle of nowhere

3.5 sucking at mass combat without the DM inventing a wholly separate subsystem for it isn't a controversial opinion given that the game is built around skirmish level combat. 3.5 itself doesn't even have mass combat rules anywhere outside of homebrew.

...

Maybe the mod's a troll too? Or maybe, just maybe, there is truth to what everyone says about 3.pf, that it has glaring oversights in its design and imbalance issues and is just not very good.

>3.5 itself doesn't even have mass combat rules anywhere outside of homebrew.

Congrats. You've revealed you know absolutely nothing, and that you were a troll all along.

I guess that's why you do nothing but spam lies in hopes that a repeated lie will one day turn into a truth. It's really sad and pathetic.

>still trying

It's not even sad at this point. It's now just devoid of any emotion.

You trolls are just going to keep at it, no matter how many decades pass and people continue to play 3.5 while your favorite games languish. If you could only accept this, you might be happier in the end, but instead you're going to always be here, shitposting futilely, while everyone just shakes their head at the weak bait you keep trying to toss about.

51% of all tabletop players play 5e.
The vast majority of 3.5e players moved on to Pathfinder.
Heck, fucking 4e has more players than 3.5
Your system is dead trash, m80.

>I guess that's why you do nothing but spam lies in hopes that a repeated lie will one day turn into a truth.

Heroes of Battle is unplayable.

>Heck, fucking 4e has more players than 3.5

Why is it zero surprise that the trolls here are delusional? You'd have to be, to be trolling as much as you do.

I don't give a shit, m8. I don't even play or like 4e.
The point is that your system is dead trash.

>delusional troll keeps trying after being BTFO for being caught in a lie

Why? Just give up, matie.

>moving goal posts

Also, nice opinion. God, you trolls really are pathetic.

Somehow I think the DM who's worried about combat getting bogged down with too many enemies wouldn't want to use the mass combat rules that bog the game down.

>troll keeps trying

Just give up already, nobody believes your lies anyway.

I swear to god, there was a 2e book that was all about running kingdoms. Might've been called Kingmaker, but the only thing I can find is the PF version.

You're thinking of Birthright and it was an entire setting based around running kingdoms. It was cool in concept but was also pretty much unplayable, no thanks to no playtesting.

You ever stop to think "man, maybe these 'trolls' are pissing me off in order to gain (you)'s and bump their threads?"

Because if you haven't, you're unbelievably dense.

>troll keeps getting caught in lies
>no, YOU'RE the one lying, not me

Could you be any more pathetic?

see Wake up.

>troll caught trying to hide
>immediately tries to twist it around on other people

You're not fooling anyone, troll.

see You're being played.

Sure
Which one?
Currently running Atropus

>ignore OP's post, do nothing but call the people who gave OP solutions and advice trolls
The only troll in this thread is you.

>do nothing except call helpful anons trolls and try to shift the blame
What's your end game? Is this really all you have to do with your life? Pathetic.

I haven't called anyone except Richard Petty a troll.

Wow, these 4rries really are buttblasted.

>still trying to deny it
Oh please. Anyone with half a brain can see right through your lies.

Not an argument.

I don't have to argue with trolls.

>How the fuck do I run large scale combat without it becoming bogged the fuck down?

3.5's mass combat rules are found in chapter 4 of Heroes of Battle. It works by accumulating Victory Points for achieving objectives rather than tracking every unit's hit points.

He asked how to do it without becoming bogged down.

Why are you still here?

Why are YOU still here?

People are not going to be scared off by trolls like you, no matter how badly you troll. Might as well give up.

Also, please, don't embarrass yourself any further by replying.

You do realize he's intentionally pissing you off in the hopes that you give me (you)'s right? That's how trolling works, you say something that garners a reaction in the hopes that somebody responds.

Is this your first day on Veeky Forums?

Leave the little shit alone.

Honestly I can never believe that there are people who'd still play 3.X over pathfinder.
Using some 3.X book IN your pathfinder games? Sure. but just not using 3.75- I mean pathfinder? Why?
And it's not the same as comparing 2e vs 3e, or 4e/5e vs 3e. Path is just an updated 3.X.

Oh sorry a useful answer.
Well OP. Pathfinder did update rules over mass combats- much better presented then Heros of battle (Which was kinda clunky), rules for ruling territories/kingdoms and generally running an empire.

about the same thing thats wrong with 5e general.
shitposting, circlejerking and shitflinging at their respective enemy

I just always had pcs do missions, either through skills or skirmishes.

Kinda clunky is an understatement, you were better off looking at HoB for inspiration and then making shit up. It's extremely slow in practice.

> Characters are focused on ruling rather than heavy dungeoning
You know what sounds like the best system for such a game?
DUNGEONS and dragons.

Fucking retarded D&D players.

DUDE DND IS SHIT LMAO!!!!!!!!!!

just save yourself from the retarded shitposting and ask this somewhere else.

Here is something i would like to ask.

Why is it that you feel threatened enough to come here and attack 3.5? If it is a dead game, why noy let it die? Old World of Darkness and Wh40k rpgs are dead systems with less players combined yet you do not attack them. What is the source of your malfunction?

It's sad when you make a thread on Veeky Forums just so you can troll with fake arrogance

psionics and tome of battle

Tell me Veeky Forums, do you like the tome of battle?

Best book ever made for 3.5, best subsystem ever made for 3.5.

Second, you mean.
Psionics was better

Psionics had some pretty major issues that ToB didn't, like half the classes and almost every PRC in XPH being shit, broken carryovers from Whizzard casting, action economy breakers that aren't broken when ToB does it but definitely are in the hands of something on par with Sorcerors, and C. Psi being a trainwreck. It's an improvement over Vancian on most fronts but it's definitely not the best subsystem.

>and C. Psi being a trainwreck.
why?

Shit editing, broken as fuck on many many fronts, copypasted power lists from XPH and nerfs to things that didn't need to be nerfed, Linked fucking Power. It's hard to find content that isn't extremely broken, isn't extremely shitty, and isn't reprinted from XPH in it.

Was there anything even good in there? I forget.

Ardent is cool, Lurk is okay although I think PsyRogue is much better, Soulbow makes a shitty class legitimately good, Zerth Cenobite is a better Fist of Zuoken(although it's not relevant anymore thanks to Tashalatora, but that's not C.Psi's fault).

>Implying that isn't how all D&D threads go nowadays.
At least in the general you'll find some help without being accused of being a troll when you say "well, maybe it's not the best system for X."

This, and the fucker doing that won't help the guy asking for help for shit on top of that.

>inb4 TROLLS TROLLS TROLL I HATE YOU DON'T YOU HAVE ANYTHING BETTER TO DO THAN SPREAD LLIIIIIIIIIIIEEEEEES!?!
I hate this place, I hope the fucker gets banned soon. It's even harder to discuss 3.PF nowadays because of him

Can I just say, rangers suck in 3.5.

Rangers would genuinely be a good class if they could freely switch who their favored enemy is.

Then again, that's the problem with most martials, they can only afford to be amazing in one particular instance and only a handful of times per day because their shit operates off of once/day shit.

Vanilla? Oh yeah, it's the picture of mediocrity. It's got a couple of good substitution levels and SotAO is excellent, though.

I rework weapon style in my games and make improved animal companion an option when someone uses them.

There was a feat , like improved rapid shot or something i wrote into the groups shared phb instead of many shot. I highly recommend it because it makes more sense for the abilities it has already and also removes the penalty of the extra arrow.

I also make favoured enemy retrainable and with broader monster groups.

People have already mentioned Tome of Battle and Stormwrack.
Two other books that might interest you (I'll post a Sendspace link):
Eden Studio's Fields of Blood- The Book of War.
All about mass combat and ruling realms.
Malhavoc Press' Cry Havoc.
Entirely about war and mass combat, but not it has suggestions for missions outside normal battles (raids, reconnaissance, rescue, assassination and negotiation).
/filegroup/tWcyn9jZ0pCzMXZZonWvSQ

I like the alternate ranger styles in Wildscape (a Fantasy Flight Legends & Lairs book. In fact, that whole series was awesome), it's nice having more options that 'bow and 'two swords'.

Why would anyone willingly choose to run 3.PF in 2017?

Okay, where are the functional mass combat rules in D&D? Criticizing something you fanboy for isn't trolling.

He's not here for discussion, he's here to call everyone who dislikes 3.PF a troll.

Notice how he never contributes and leaves once people get wise to his shit?