Remove ads

Dungeons and Dragons Megathread

Reader mode
Q99 said:
If you don't know that, though, doesn't it actually make sense to just stop advancing past a certain point, rather than find your magic dwindle to uselessness?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The truename DC is based on the Challenge Rating of your target. Specifically CRx2.
Which is a problem because the DC basically scales at double the speed of your skill ranks.

CR of enemies is going to go up as you level regardless of what you do, as does your own CR and that of your allies.
 
Chloe Sullivan said:
The original Truenamer isn't as bad as people make it out to be. Not that that's saying much, mind you.

If you used the DMG2 bonded item rules to basically have a magic item that could keep up at a [your skill ranks] or [your ranks -1] bonus to truenaming, you essentially escalated your bonus at about the speed of the x2 CR that was the biggest complaint. It's not a well known thing, but it does work.

My big complaint about truenaming is that it was basically "% chance your weaker-than-a-spell will fail", which is a big loser in the action economy. I mean teachnically an arcanist using armor had the same issue but almost no one actually played an arcanist who actually had spell failure percentage for just that reason.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Well, there's also the part about how their abilities were objectively inferior to what everyone else got at the same level. "Woo, yea, this is basically the spell the wizard got five levels ago, thanks."
 
Wolf Ritter said:
I can't explain to you without spoiling my players. :cry:
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Well, to cover what's already revealed- you start out with seeing a legendary Balor fight an Ancient Dragon, fall down a rift, get saved by the dragon, and end up near three similarly-saved NPCs, so there's both a strong hook and clear social angle right off the bat.
 
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showt...enge-Winner%29

Ah, one of my favorite classes of all time! Literally, I love it so much! As soon as Zaydos published it, it won my heart and soul. And then I got the chance to play it...except the GM flaked, and the GM who swooped in to save the day is comfortable with 5E.

So here's the issue. I have Zaydos' permission to do this, but he's unable to help. I've never played 5E yet, and my GM is unsure of how to balance and convert things from 3E, but will welcome a converted Princess.

So I beseech GITP SV for help. How would you go about converting the Princess? Ideally, I'd like it to be a base class as opposed to a subclass or archetype to something else.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
 
Does anyone else have this weird issue where players who've never played Clerics before tend to play them like Divine Wizards and refuse to engage in melee despite having the heaviest armor in the game, good saves overall, and decent hp?
 
Wolf Ritter said:
Does anyone else have this weird issue where players who've never played Clerics before tend to play them like Divine Wizards and refuse to engage in melee despite having the heaviest armor in the game, good saves overall, and decent hp?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I've seen it. And, sometimes, it's just the concept. Like Tessa Bot, I'll totally throw her into melee, because HP and all, but it's not my concept and I'm not aiming to be good at it (see: str dump) so she'll generally stand behind the actual fighter and summons, if ahead of the real squishies.

IMO clerics should be d6 classes rather than d8.
 
Wolf Ritter said:
Does anyone else have this weird issue where players who've never played Clerics before tend to play them like Divine Wizards and refuse to engage in melee despite having the heaviest armor in the game, good saves overall, and decent hp?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Honestly, I intend to make an Ecclesitheurge specifically so I get something out of playing a Cleric like a Divine Wizard, so... it's not that surprising to me at all. :V
 
Chloe Sullivan said:
well in older editions, they had much weaker casting than wizards to "balance" that. 3.5 changed that though.

Still, Wizards are still tier 1 even with d4 hitdie, so eh.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah, but there should be balance in t1 3.5, especially since people who don't play optimised wizards are punished at low levels where a cleric/druid would survive.
Wizards get a shitty hit die, no armour even if you're proficient and shitty weapon proficiencies
Clerics get a slightly better hit die, armour proficiencies and usable weapons
Druids get the same hit die, slightly worse armour, same sort of weapons. Also they can turn into bears.

IIRC the only buffs wizards get that clerics don't are Haste and Fly. They excel in burn spells, debuffs and other control spells.
Clerics get healing spells, a wider range of buffs, turning undead and Divine Metamagic (which probably shouldn't be allowed ever).
Druids get most of the above, plus they can shapeshift.


I swear there was a quote for this...
Here we go!
D&D Tip #1: You know how Milo can Shatter wands and render wizards helpless? You can do that in D&D, too! If you destroy or steal (say by Shatter, Sunder, or Sleight of Hand) a Cleric's Holy Symbol, a Wizard's Spell Component Pouch, or a Druid's Holly and Mistletoe, that caster is now an Expert, Commoner, or Grizzly Bear, respectively.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
HP&tD20, Ch40.
 
I always thought bards should be d8- since they're generally expected to swashbuckle a little! and clerics d6- to represent that they're not as squishy as wizards but are still mostly casters. I could see druid with either, but eh, they're still more caster than fighter. And can turn into bears.
 
shepsquared said:
Yeah, but there should be balance in t1 3.5, especially since people who don't play optimised wizards are punished at low levels where a cleric/druid would survive.
Wizards get a shitty hit die, no armour even if you're proficient and shitty weapon proficiencies
Clerics get a slightly better hit die, armour proficiencies and usable weapons
Druids get the same hit die, slightly worse armour, same sort of weapons. Also they can turn into bears.

IIRC the only buffs wizards get that clerics don't are Haste and Fly. They excel in burn spells, debuffs and other control spells.
Clerics get healing spells, a wider range of buffs, turning undead and Divine Metamagic (which probably shouldn't be allowed ever).
Druids get most of the above, plus they can shapeshift.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Look, I usually stay away from t1, because most people can't play t1.

Also, clerics arguably have better casting than wizards - they don't have to hunt for scrolls to get the spells they want. Their whole list is just there.

And IIRC Celerity domain gives clerics Haste.

Wizards generally get better PrC options than clerics though.

Honestly, i'm more concerned with making tier 2-4 games function
 
Chloe Sullivan said:
Look, I usually stay away from t1, because most people can't play t1.

Also, clerics arguably have better casting than wizards - they don't have to hunt for scrolls to get the spells they want. Their whole list is just there.

And IIRC Celerity domain gives clerics Haste.

Wizards generally get better PrC options than clerics though.

Honestly, i'm more concerned with making tier 2-4 games function
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yep. I just tend to play in games that don't pay attention to tiers, we just play down/up to each other's levels.

Mostly unrelated: whats the highest tiered rogue equivalent in pathfinder (skillmonkey and decent in combat)?
 
Clerics are non-squishy because their intended playstyle is to stand next to the tank dropping heals and because "kill the healer first" has been accepted tactical supremacy since Red Box.

However, since no one wanted to play a healbot who draws disproportionate aggro WoTC tried to make Clerics more interesting to play with additional spellcasting, second best combat abilities and so forth. It was meant to entice people to play Clerics.

They just overcompensated.
 
Aaron Peori said:
Clerics are non-squishy because their intended playstyle is to stand next to the tank dropping heals and because "kill the healer first" has been accepted tactical supremacy since Red Box.

However, since no one wanted to play a healbot who draws disproportionate aggro WoTC tried to make Clerics more interesting to play with additional spellcasting, second best combat abilities and so forth. It was meant to entice people to play Clerics.

They just overcompensated.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Part of the problem is 'have the healer stand next to.'

Make common heals have a bit of range and then it's somewhat less of a problem.
 
Flare said:
Yes, but 3.5 also gives you feats with a drip-fed, so burning one on something that could never come up is pretty unwise.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Which is why people have it as a Bonus Feat for Sorcerers.
And I think the fluff for that is that their body/blood technically counts as an Optional Component, since they are supposedly descended from Dragons(or Outsiders, or Fey, or Elementals, etc).
Q99 said:
Part of the problem is 'have the healer stand next to.'
Make common heals have a bit of range and then it's somewhat less of a problem.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
"Healing Beam!"
But seriously if Negative Energy can be used in Beams, Rays, and Blasts why not Positive Energy?
 
Last edited:
Chloe Sullivan said:
well in older editions, they had much weaker casting than wizards to "balance" that. 3.5 changed that though.

Still, Wizards are still tier 1 even with d4 hitdie, so eh.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

They were already pretty well balanced by Turn Undead (which had infinity uses in older games and was much more useful in general) and their interaction with the Morale mechanic that was trumped only by the Bard and Followers trumped only by the Fighter.

Maybe d6 hit die was excusable, but d8 was right out in my opinion.
 
Sydonai said:
"Healing Beam!"
But seriously if Negative Energy can be used in Beams, Rays, and Blasts why not Positive Energy?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
There are spells for that. Most suck, but then, so do cure spells.

If you want a healbot, get a binder or crusader. Clerical healing is basically just Close Wounds and (Mass) Heal, the other spells just don't give you a worthwhile return in most cases.
 
Honestly, in 3.X you want to get Cure Minor Wounds as an at-will and just take five minutes after each fight.
 
AuraTwilight said:
Honestly, in 3.X you want to get Cure Minor Wounds as an at-will and just take five minutes after each fight.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That can be done in 3.5 but takes way more effort than is worth it.

Binder gets multiple ways of "infinite out of combat healing." Binding Buer is easy. If you get a shield of mercy, Andras can heal infinitely, and if you take Sacred Healing or Healing Devotion feats, so can Tenebrous.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top