PDA

View Full Version : [DND] How taboo is Dragonlance 3.5 material?



Coidzor
2010-09-22, 01:43 AM
I mean, I've seen some mention/discussion of using material from Eberron or Forgotten Realms outside of its native setting, but never really seen Dragonlance mentioned at all.

Was the setting just that unpopular or is there some difference that impedes translation into general 3.5?

Some kind of licensing thing making it third party and thus leprous?

FMArthur
2010-09-22, 01:52 AM
To be honest I'm not entirely sure what Dragonlance is and have never seen a book from it. Simple awareness of the product is probably the big issue.

Kylarra
2010-09-22, 02:08 AM
Dragonlance gets mentioned a lot for white dragonspawn and reserves of strength.

Greenish
2010-09-22, 02:57 AM
Dragonlance gets mentioned a lot for white dragonspawn and reserves of strength.And Dynamic Priest, every now and then.

But it isn't official WotC, is it?

Ianuagonde
2010-09-22, 02:58 AM
One of my players wanted to play a Gnome with +Int who knows a lot. So now she's playing a Tinker Gnome from the Philisopher's Guild.

I don't use it on a regular basis, but I dip it for a few nice ideas. Flying citadels FTW!

BobVosh
2010-09-22, 03:19 AM
There isn't anything really amazing in it. Also I hate how terrible the order of the knights are, since they require each other but build off different classes.

Leon
2010-09-22, 03:54 AM
Maybe the fact that its where Kender are from scares people off.

Thurbane
2010-09-22, 03:55 AM
And Dynamic Priest, every now and then.

But it isn't official WotC, is it?
I believe it's an officially licensed 3rd party product (the book bears a WotC logo).

oxinabox
2010-09-22, 04:37 AM
I'm looking at the book now. (Dragonlance Campign setting, 3.5)
IT is Pubvlished by WOTC,
and it is dungeons and dragoins content as it uses the word Dungeon Master. (which WOTC don't do in there other 20 systems).
Also days dungeons and dragons in big letters in a couple of places.

In anycase.
IMHO It doesn't balace well with core.
Internally it's Ok, i think, but combining it with others... not so much.
It has rewrites of most major races, and they are balanced differnt than most.
Most races (though there are dozens of exerptions) have +2 to one stat -2 to another, very few of the dragonlance rances have that.
there are some +2 +2, -2 -2, and some +2, -4 and a mix of things.

And then there are kender, +2 dex -2 str -2wisdom (personally i think they need a +2 cha to go with that - for some reason no "good race" has genocided kender. in fact as a rule they are ... liked.)

Fizban
2010-09-22, 04:41 AM
Thurbane's right about the logo, but I also don't recognize many of the names in the credits so to speak.

The Dragonlance setting books have maybe a 50/50 mix of stuff that's just fine and stuff that's just fine but really tied up in the setting. Aside from obviously broken stuff (the aforementioned Reserves of Strength and White Dragonspawn) most of it's just fine for play. There's a Noble class that sucks, a divine sorcerer class, and some spells that are either simple retypes or are otherwise balanced. Magic items are pretty by the book so there's no worries there. The base races are a bit more powerful than usual, but the level adjustments on Draconians are as high as those on Lizardfolk and other non-standard races in other books.

The biggest problems I would expect using Dragonlance material is that its very Dragonlance. The unique spells all have special histories, the prestige classes are all special organizations, the magic items are usually stats for those you see in the novels, and the game basically runs it's own versions of all the monsters (tons of wacky dragon types and special demons and undead for the War of Souls for example). The setting has a long and detailed history- far too long to really run a campaign in it, in my opinion. It's a great setting, but there are multiple eras each with their own series of at least 3 novels behind them and it's awkward trying to find a place to start that isn't the end. If you've only read the War of the Lance trilogy, then you'll be in for a shock when you find out the setting doesn't pick up till hundreds of years later and the world's had several more wars as big as the first. Reading the fluff in the setting books made me want to go read the novels, but only turned me off to actually trying to think of a game in it.

Summary: keep your wits about you just like you would with any book and the mechanical material is very much usable, so take what you will. If you want to run a game in it, make sure you know just how much history you'll have to deal with. Forgotten Realms is huge, but I'm pretty sure those novels tend to have more localized effects (and the setting books don't detail the events of every novel), while every Dragonlance trilogy adds another world changing war with a new cast of characters and another hundred or more years of adaptation when the war's over.

Coidzor
2010-09-22, 04:59 AM
So basically drowned in fluff.
And then there are kender, +2 dex -2 str -2wisdom (personally i think they need a +2 cha to go with that - for some reason no "good race" has genocided kender. in fact as a rule they are ... liked.)

I think kender were a failed attempt to create something as lovable as hobbits without them being as stodgy. The "everyone loves them" informed ability in the face of a contradictory lifestyle and behavior matrix is the hallmark of poor writers, after all.

AslanCross
2010-09-22, 05:21 AM
I was introduced to high fantasy through the Dragonlance novels, and while it has great fluff, I always felt that the fluff was great for a story, but not really a game. That's just the feeling, anyway.

As for using the material in non DL games, I guess I always just felt it was too difficult to divorce crunch from fluff.

There are some monsters in Bestiary of Krynn that can be adapted, but the classes and PrCs might be difficult.

EDIT: Everything Fizban said, essentially.

Aharon
2010-09-22, 05:27 AM
I think only the campaing setting was official, the rest of the setting related books are 3rd party. This might explain the lack of use.

It also contains some poorly balanced stuff, as mentioned before.

BobVosh
2010-09-22, 05:42 AM
I think kender were a failed attempt to create something as lovable as hobbits without them being as stodgy. The "everyone loves them" informed ability in the face of a contradictory lifestyle and behavior matrix is the hallmark of poor writers, after all.

I wouldn't called them bad writers, as the death gate cycle was quite good. Overall I like most of the dragonlance campaign setting, the exception being how ridiculous the tinker gnomes are and kender. Kender is one of the worse party member types you can have in a game, as far as I can tell.

IdleMuse
2010-09-22, 06:03 AM
There's also the Mystic, a simple spontaneous cleric with the same numbers as Sorcerer, and a single domain, which grants them an extra domain spell known rather than /day. They're also deliberately secular, which is interesting from a fluff standpoint if you want to insert them into other settings.

Unfortunately, aside from specific domain choices, they don't get turn undead. Or any other class abilities.

Thane of Fife
2010-09-22, 06:30 AM
I think kender were a failed attempt to create something as lovable as hobbits without them being as stodgy. The "everyone loves them" informed ability in the face of a contradictory lifestyle and behavior matrix is the hallmark of poor writers, after all.

The Kender creation story can be found here (http://www.kencyclopedia.com/kender/general/kenderdl3e.cfm?page=realcreation), at the Kencyclopedia, along with everything else you never wanted to know about Kender.

I think that they're supposed to be like little kids, in that they are aggravating, but, when you don't have to do with them, you can't help but like them.

Coidzor
2010-09-22, 06:38 AM
Ahh, so intentional cruelty on the part of the devs.

Kesnit
2010-09-22, 07:14 AM
Kender is one of the worse party member types you can have in a game, as far as I can tell.

As someone who played a Kender in a DL game, I have to disagree. As with anything, it comes down to the player and not the race. Did I try to pickpocket my allies a few times? Yes. But I also openly stated that I was doing so, so as to give the other players a chance to resist. (I also only went after items that they had put away before my PC got to look at them.) He also willingly returned things that had "fallen into his pack" to those he had "borrowed" them from when he no longer had a use for them.

Almost every time I read about someone complaining about a Kender PC, they say things like "he stole from the party and was a jerk about it." That is the player, not the race.

Lhurgyof
2010-09-22, 08:17 AM
Maybe the fact that its where Kender are from scares people off.


Kender deserved to be killed off as a PC race.

Kylarra
2010-09-22, 10:53 AM
Reserves of strength is easily fixable though, simply choose to interpret the uncapping as solely being for the 1-3 caster levels provided by the feat.

ErrantX
2010-09-22, 12:51 PM
While I agree with the posts saying it's impossible to really run a game in Dragonlance, I disagree with some of the comments made about some of the classes. I really like how the Solamnic Knights are arranged, building off of each other. That's how it is supposed to work. And if you don't love the Order of High Sorcery, well, I don't know what can be done :)

There are a lot of great, somewhat setting specific things but much of it could be refluffed. Academy Sorcerers and Citadel Mystics could easily be refluffed into a setting where mystics and sorcerers get specialized training. Not all spontaneous casters should have to walk their path alone, ya know? The Solamnic Knights could also be refluffed into a different order but using those mechanics. It's not hard, the crunch is solid.

-X

Tyndmyr
2010-09-22, 12:54 PM
Kender deserved to be killed off as a PC race.

Uh oh, some extra words snuck into that sentence there. Don't worry, I got em.

Awnetu
2010-09-22, 01:18 PM
Kender deserved to be killed off as a PC race.

TO ARMS BRETHREN! THE GREAT TRIBBLE KENDER HUNT IS UPON US!

Elhann
2010-09-22, 02:00 PM
Uh oh, some extra words snuck into that sentence there. Don't worry, I got em.

I'm with Kesnit on this. A well played Kender character doesn't use his race as a excuse to steal everything that's not nailed to the ground, their impatience can be used to move the plot along, and will be perfect in a light-hearted game.

I remember the kender rogue in my DL campaign: he had a sheet of paper just for the trash he had (teaspoons, wool, some oddly shaped stones, the picture of an ugly lady...). He had a most curious relationship with my cat familiar, and was extremely happy to be included in the zone of effect of my pattern-based spells. Not only that, he forced me to develop a minor phantasm to keep his mouth shut when the kender should be quiet.
Turns out, said spell gave a few bonus points in my High Sorcery Test.

So no, they don't deserve to be killed off. You just only need a small dosis of them each time: stay out of Kendermore, and everything will be fine.

On the rest, I agree with most of this thread. The main story of Krynn is written. No matter what you do, there will be a Majere somewhere that makes your quest unimportant. There are some nice dragonlance monsters, the races are ok for the most part (if you can live with, or ignore kenders/gnomes). Some classes are just fluff, and others are nice crunch, with an adaptable fluff.

DragoonWraith
2010-09-22, 02:06 PM
No, the race as a whole makes no sense. Every single non-Kender in the world would hate them; the fluff claims they're well liked. It's nonsensical. Further, even if they weren't hated, they act like children - stupid children - in a dangerous world. They would get themselves killed off even if no one was gunning for them. Finally, from a gameplay perspective - the fluff says you are supposed to play them as Chaotic Stupid. And no one likes that.

Can they be played other ways? Sure, but then you're not really being true to the race. If you aren't annoying your friends, you're not really a Kender. So yeah, they should die in a fire.

Esser-Z
2010-09-22, 02:09 PM
Yeah, Kender have no redeeming qualities. The 'positive' kenders you've played are just halflings.

Coidzor
2010-09-22, 04:14 PM
Hmm, I'm thinking the inevitable Kender Pogroms might also be a deterrent to bringing it up...

Shyftir
2010-09-22, 04:24 PM
You misunderstand Kender. They come off child-like but are actually very clever.

1) They breed like rabbits.
2) They might be annoying but they are as good at getting past barriers as ants. (i.e. amazing thieves)
3) They are secretly an inherently magical race. I think of them as Fey that just sorta seem like halflings.
4) Every army that ever tried to destroy Kendermore failed utterly.

In short, you can try to kill them off, but it's like trying to rid the world of mice, never gonna happen.

DragoonWraith
2010-09-22, 04:29 PM
Those are not really points in their favor, to my mind. You essentially described them as pests or vermin.

awa
2010-09-22, 04:30 PM
I would argue that forgotten realms has far more back story then dragon lance and people have no trouble playing it (personal i hate forgotten realms but that is neither here nor there)

BunnyMaster42
2010-09-22, 05:26 PM
4) Every army that ever tried to destroy Kendermore failed utterly.

Ok, I have to ask, how is it that no army has ever been able to destroy Kendermore? I'm not horribly familiar with the setting, but I sort of figure it would be a lot like the shire, but a lot more annoying, right?

Oh, and as far as FR having more backstory, while that may be true, Faerun just feels a whole lot larger than Krynn despite there being far more novels set there, or at least it does to me. It's probably because the FR stories seem to be built up around the setting while DL seems to be built up around the novels.

Tyndmyr
2010-09-22, 05:34 PM
You misunderstand Kender.

They are annoying and need to perish in fire. I understand them perfectly.


1) They breed like rabbits.

This does not counteract being annoying. Oh no.


2) They might be annoying but they are as good at getting past barriers as ants. (i.e. amazing thieves)

Right. So they're GOOD at randomly stealing stuff and annoying me. Still not helping your case here.


3) They are secretly an inherently magical race. I think of them as Fey that just sorta seem like halflings.

Everyone down to gnomes has magic. That is not a reason to escape the cleansing flames.


4) Every army that ever tried to destroy Kendermore failed utterly.

Well yes, it still exists. Pretty much any area that exists has not yet been destroyed. That's why it NEEDS to be destroyed now. It's a shame earlier attempts were so incompetent.

Eldariel
2010-09-22, 05:37 PM
And Dynamic Priest, every now and then.

But it isn't official WotC, is it?

War Mage from Age of Mortals is also delightfully non-fail attempt at a blaster caster.

Soranar
2010-09-22, 05:42 PM
thing is, dragonlance is a lot like dragon magazine material

mostly, it just gives you more options but sometimes it gives you something incredibly powerful which usually has very annoying fluff to go with as a compensation.

But since that fluff doesn't fit well in other realms (since it usually entails relationships with other organizations) it takes what little balance you had and smashes it to smithereens.

BRC
2010-09-22, 05:43 PM
As far as I can tell, Kender came about in this way.
Step 1: Let's take a classic character: The Kleptomaniac Rogue (You know the one, tries to loot everything that shines).
Step 2: Let's make that character a halfling (The classic Rogue race)
Step 3: Let's take the distinguishing feature of that character (Habit of looting/stealing things) and make it from a characteristic to an all-encompassing, character-defining FEATURE. Let's turn a habit into a total compulsion that they carry out on a subconscious level!
Step 4: Let's make an entire race of these things!

ErrantX
2010-09-22, 05:51 PM
This thread is devolving into a kender hate thread. Not really what this is about.

So... back on topic:

War Mage is also a really great blaster prestige class. Almost forgot it!

-X

Esser-Z
2010-09-22, 05:53 PM
You misunderstand Kender. They come off child-like but are actually very clever.

1) They breed like rabbits.
2) They might be annoying but they are as good at getting past barriers as ants. (i.e. amazing thieves)
3) They are secretly an inherently magical race. I think of them as Fey that just sorta seem like halflings.
4) Every army that ever tried to destroy Kendermore failed utterly.

In short, you can try to kill them off, but it's like trying to rid the world of mice, never gonna happen.
Where an army fails, a Wizard laughs and snaps his fingers.

Zaydos
2010-09-22, 06:01 PM
The problem with the dragonlance books is that they are only semi-official like Dragon Magazine (only the campaign setting was printed by WotC the others were printed by Sovereign Press and are officially licensed products with no OGL content). It didn't get anywhere near the support that Forgotten Realms and Eberron got so it never really sold in 3.5. It was based on the fluff of the later books which put off people who wanted to play the original trilogy (I was one of those, as were several people at the FLGS when it first came out) and would probably have done better to start with War of the Lance. People are also more hesitant to file off the numbers of the fluff like they do with FR and Eberron because it didn't get as much support in an attempt to turn it into a generic setting. I'll sometimes let things from it into my games; it doesn't give any more broken things than FR (incanatrix) and Eberron (Lore drake kobolds, planar shepherd).

On Kenders in the original trilogy people didn't like kenders; the party liked Tasslehoff because they knew him and they liked him, note he also had learned not to steal from them (although I think there were a few incidents where he did and ended up saving the party). A lot of people liked Tassle, it was later kenders that everyone hated.

Elemental_Elf
2010-09-22, 06:08 PM
IIRC, WotC licensed Dragon Lance to a third party company. The a fairly large percentage of the profits of the first campaign setting book would go to WotC in return, the third party company was allowed to use D&D trademarked words and present itself as a 'real' D&D campaign setting.

I always thought the book has some really cool concepts but the execution (especially on many of the prestige classes) was poor. Instead of letting you just take levels in a Knight PrC, you had to first take levels in a squire PrC. Flavorfully that's really cool but mechanically its laaaaame. I would have preferred it if they had created a Squire base-class, which would meet the requirements for the Knight PrC's.

I really liked the idea of the Mystic (its a spont casting Cleric who doesn't have the nasty downsides to the Favored Soul).

One of my players wound up taking a PrC from the book, the name escapes me, but it basically made him into a legendary general (maybe that was the PrC's name?). At any rate he had a lot of fun with it. Of course it was an overpowered gestalt campaign so the specifics are fuzzy but I remember him having a really powerful companion and a ton of followers (via the Leadership feat, which the PrC granted bonuses to).

Race wise I felt they could have done more to make the monstrous races more accessible . I mean its all good and well to put a Centaur in the Race section but if you aren't going to reduce the LA and Racial Hit Dice, forget about it.

All in all its a good book. Definitely not a must have but a good book none the less.

Coidzor
2010-09-22, 06:10 PM
This thread is devolving into a kender hate thread. Not really what this is about.

I have to wonder if this is perhaps the reason DL isn't brought up more often, haha x.x


So... back on topic:

War Mage is also a really great blaster prestige class. Almost forgot it!

-X

How's it manage to do that?

Thurbane
2010-09-22, 06:16 PM
Just wondering what people think of the Noble base class in the campaign book...it's kinda like a hybrid Aristocrat/Marshal (in the camapign setting, there is no Aristocrat NPC class - Nobles fill that niche).

At a glance it looks OK - probably a bit underpowered, but is it a better option than the Marshal?

Coidzor
2010-09-22, 06:17 PM
Just wondering what people think of the Noble base class in the campaign book...it's kinda like a hybrid Aristocrat/Marshal (in the camapign setting, there is no Aristocrat NPC class - Nobles fill that niche).

At a glance it looks OK - probably a bit underpowered, but is it a better option than the Marshal?

I've only seen it mentioned twice, and both times in unflattering terms, so, I dunno.

Zaydos
2010-09-22, 06:31 PM
Just wondering what people think of the Noble base class in the campaign book...it's kinda like a hybrid Aristocrat/Marshal (in the camapign setting, there is no Aristocrat NPC class - Nobles fill that niche).

At a glance it looks OK - probably a bit underpowered, but is it a better option than the Marshal?

It's the Noble class from StarWars d20 placed into D&D, with slightly better saves. Since the power level of classes in StarWars d20 is typically lower (even soldier is worse than the thug variant of fighter; and optimized is probably the strongest class in the game) I'd say it works best as a DM class and that Marshal is probably better (1 level dip in marshal can give your allies charisma to an important stat's rolls, 20 levels can to whatever stat is important at the moment while the noble adds +5 when it can aid another). Also their best ability (Favor) is up to DM fiat fairly completely.

Lucid
2010-09-22, 06:33 PM
On Kenders in the original trilogy people didn't like kenders; the party liked Tasslehoff because they knew him and they liked him, note he also had learned not to steal from them (although I think there were a few incidents where he did and ended up saving the party). A lot of people liked Tassle, it was later kenders that everyone hated. Our DM got us to HATE and FEAR Tas. We played an alternate timeline campaign, where something had gone horribly wrong. Raistlin was the BBEG(no surprise there) and Tasslehoff was his Dragon (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheDragon). Yes, this lovable character which we all grew up reading about got us all to go "Oh ****", cause everytime he showed up there would be casualties.:smalleek:

As far as the books go, there's a lot of setting specific material. And the setting lends itself more to story-driven, somewhat railroaded games over a sandbox approach. Though it's quite possible to just pick a moment in Krynns' history, ignore what comes afterwards and let the players actions decide.

Zaydos
2010-09-22, 06:42 PM
Our DM got us to HATE and FEAR Tas. We played an alternate timeline campaign, where something had gone horribly wrong. Raistlin was the BBEG(no surprise there) and Tasslehoff was his Dragon (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheDragon). Yes, this lovable character which we all grew up reading about got us all to go "Oh ****", cause everytime he showed up there would be casualties.:smalleek:

As far as the books go, there's a lot of setting specific material. And the setting lends itself more to story-driven, somewhat railroaded games over a sandbox approach. Though it's quite possible to just pick a moment in Krynns' history, ignore what comes afterwards and let the players actions decide.

Well I think it was hinted in one of the Trial of the Twins books that there was an alternate time line where Tas was Raistlin's dragon and a major badass. Which also reminds me Tas thought that other kenders were immature and annoying by the end of the original series.

And yeah if I ever ran a Dragonlance game it would be at the beginning of the War of the Lance and you'd have to be the ones to bring back the good gods.

Coidzor
2010-09-22, 08:05 PM
Well I think it was hinted in one of the Trial of the Twins books that there was an alternate time line where Tas was Raistlin's dragon and a major badass. Which also reminds me Tas thought that other kenders were immature and annoying by the end of the original series.

And yeah if I ever ran a Dragonlance game it would be at the beginning of the War of the Lance and you'd have to be the ones to bring back the good gods.

Ostensibly seeing that much death and destruction is supposed to transform them into the adult form of "Forlorn" Kender, or something.

ErrantX
2010-09-22, 08:05 PM
I always thought the book has some really cool concepts but the execution (especially on many of the prestige classes) was poor. Instead of letting you just take levels in a Knight PrC, you had to first take levels in a squire PrC. Flavorfully that's really cool but mechanically its laaaaame. I would have preferred it if they had created a Squire base-class, which would meet the requirements for the Knight PrC's.

I really liked the idea of the Mystic (its a spont casting Cleric who doesn't have the nasty downsides to the Favored Soul).

I really liked the way the Knight classes fit together, actually. It was really modular. There was no squire prc, there was Crown Knight, Sword Knight, and Rose Knight (all full knights) that had requirements that staged upwards. There was nothing stopping you from going 1-10 in any of them, but to progress to the higher orders you needed make the requirements.

I also really like the Mystic; I use Mystic instead of Favored Soul in my games.


How's it manage to do that?

It beefs damage dice, adding up to +3 per damage die on spells for one. Gives defensive buffs to allies as well, 2 metamagic feats.


Just wondering what people think of the Noble base class in the campaign book...it's kinda like a hybrid Aristocrat/Marshal (in the camapign setting, there is no Aristocrat NPC class - Nobles fill that niche).

At a glance it looks OK - probably a bit underpowered, but is it a better option than the Marshal?

Noble is... eh. Tier 5. Not good. But not really any way to make it good tier-wise. In an RP friendly group, then it's awesome. But otherwise, it's not.

-X

Karsh
2010-09-22, 08:14 PM
Clerist substitution levels make for a pretty good Knight of the Sword, as you get 9/10 casting plus leadership abilities, a d10 HD, and full BAB.

The one class in Dragonlance down which madness truly lies is the un-errataed War Mage from the Age of Mortals book, and even with the errata it's still nearly a must-have for a blaster arcanist.

It gets an ability similar to the Warmage Edge, but with the notable exception of it giving +3 damage per damage die at 5th level in the class. This is the equivalent of changing a fireball from 15d6 damage to 15d12, with the exception that it makes the damage rolls even more bell-curvey and slightly less prone to Maximize Spell madness.

And this damage die thing is uncapped. Wings of Flurry? +3 per CL. Disintegrate? +6 per CL up to +120, assuming they fail the fort save.

The errata restricts Battle Magic to something like 3+INT per day, but as a Wizard, you're going to get to use it like 10 times, which is really more than enough to make the few levels you have to invest to get the ability totally worth it.

Lhurgyof
2010-09-22, 10:16 PM
I'm with Kesnit on this. A well played Kender character doesn't use his race as a excuse to steal everything that's not nailed to the ground, their impatience can be used to move the plot along, and will be perfect in a light-hearted game.

I remember the kender rogue in my DL campaign: he had a sheet of paper just for the trash he had (teaspoons, wool, some oddly shaped stones, the picture of an ugly lady...). He had a most curious relationship with my cat familiar, and was extremely happy to be included in the zone of effect of my pattern-based spells. Not only that, he forced me to develop a minor phantasm to keep his mouth shut when the kender should be quiet.
Turns out, said spell gave a few bonus points in my High Sorcery Test.

So no, they don't deserve to be killed off. You just only need a small dosis of them each time: stay out of Kendermore, and everything will be fine.

On the rest, I agree with most of this thread. The main story of Krynn is written. No matter what you do, there will be a Majere somewhere that makes your quest unimportant. There are some nice dragonlance monsters, the races are ok for the most part (if you can live with, or ignore kenders/gnomes). Some classes are just fluff, and others are nice crunch, with an adaptable fluff.

The issue happens in the fact that kender multiply like rabbits, leaving a player to make multiple kender from the same clan, who are always at the same level of rage inspiring annoyance. Dx

Can't wait until I can get the 70 bluff check to give someone a suggestion. "Hey Kender, all the 'traps' in here actually just spit out random assortments of junk."

-crunch-

And much praise was had that day.

Elemental_Elf
2010-09-22, 10:29 PM
I really liked the way the Knight classes fit together, actually. It was really modular. There was no squire prc, there was Crown Knight, Sword Knight, and Rose Knight (all full knights) that had requirements that staged upwards. There was nothing stopping you from going 1-10 in any of them, but to progress to the higher orders you needed make the requirements.

That was it (been a while since I looked at the book). :smallredface:

I guess you're right about the Knightly Classes, I guess I just wanted access to the good ones faster :smallbiggrin:


I also really like the Mystic; I use Mystic instead of Favored Soul in my games.


I think the Favored Soul has its virtues... So long as you make CHA the only stat for his spell casting (never liked the split focus, always felt like a needless nerf). But if that option is off the table, then I agree the Mystic is better. :smallcool:

Fizban
2010-09-23, 02:55 AM
I would argue that forgotten realms has far more back story then dragon lance and people have no trouble playing it (personal i hate forgotten realms but that is neither here nor there)
Forgotten Realms may have more chronological backstory, but every "age" of dragonlance already has a trilogy of novels detailing all the heroes and how they saved the world that age. The only time you wouldn't be a sideshow would be if you played after the end of the last books, or if you did a timey wimey adventure like in the Twins books (which were awesome).

Ok, I have to ask, how is it that no army has ever been able to destroy Kendermore? I'm not horribly familiar with the setting, but I sort of figure it would be a lot like the shire, but a lot more annoying, right?
Armies might not have managed it, but a dragon overlord in one of the later books, several hundred years after the war of the lance of course, raised it to the ground. Apparently it was so traumatic that it actually made some of the kender into drepressed "grey" kender that get their own sidebar in the Age of Mortals setting book.

Esser-Z
2010-09-23, 06:26 AM
This is because dragons are awesome.

BunnyMaster42
2010-09-23, 08:23 AM
Armies might not have managed it, but a dragon overlord in one of the later books, several hundred years after the war of the lance of course, raised it to the ground. Apparently it was so traumatic that it actually made some of the kender into drepressed "grey" kender that get their own sidebar in the Age of Mortals setting book.

Yeah, I knew about the dragon destroying Kendermore, but why would it have been so hard for an army to do the same? An army that actualy wanted to wipe them out probably could, so was it just that nobody felt like it?

The Big Dice
2010-09-23, 09:28 AM
Forgotten Realms may have more chronological backstory, but every "age" of dragonlance already has a trilogy of novels detailing all the heroes and how they saved the world that age. The only time you wouldn't be a sideshow would be if you played after the end of the last books, or if you did a timey wimey adventure like in the Twins books (which were awesome).
Or you ignore canon. Which isn't too hard to do. I've had plenty of practise there, between L5R and Star Wars. You just have to stop reading any and all material other than books directly relating to gaming in the setting your campaign is based in.

That way, the "official" stuff doesn't get in your way.

awa
2010-09-23, 11:14 AM
but forgotten realms has all those epic level adventures all over the place it makes little sense for goblins to be threatening trade routs when a high level adventure can take care of it with a standard action and virtually no expenditure of resources.
where as dragon lance has a lot of stuff happening in between those dragon wars not to mention the fact that the wars were happening even when the main characters were not there.

The Big Dice
2010-09-23, 11:54 AM
but forgotten realms has all those epic level adventures all over the place it makes little sense for goblins to be threatening trade routs when a high level adventure can take care of it with a standard action and virtually no expenditure of resources.
As if an epic level adventurer would get out of bed for something as prosaic as goblins threatening trade routes.

And given 3.5 rules, those epic level dudes aren't even making money off trade like they would have been under BECMI rules!

Elemental_Elf
2010-09-23, 12:27 PM
but forgotten realms has all those epic level adventures all over the place it makes little sense for goblins to be threatening trade routs when a high level adventure can take care of it with a standard action and virtually no expenditure of resources.

Time is money friend... Plus if every epic level Tom, Richard and Harry wandered around the country-side killing off all of the low-level threats, then there wouldn't be anything for low level adventurers to fight and gain experience from. Which means the next generation of epic level Toms, Richards and Harrys would never arise, thus ensuring evil's long term victory.

EDIT: The nickname for Richard is caught by the filter.

The Vorpal Tribble
2010-09-23, 01:57 PM
TO ARMS BRETHREN! THE GREAT TRIBBLE KENDER HUNT IS UPON US!
*rawr?*

Oh... nm. Kender are tasty.

Notreallyhere77
2010-09-23, 02:07 PM
... There's a Noble class that sucks...


I've only seen it mentioned twice, and both times in unflattering terms, so, I dunno.



Noble is... eh. Tier 5. Not good. But not really any way to make it good tier-wise. In an RP friendly group, then it's awesome. But otherwise, it's not.
-X


Why the hate on the Noble? Sure, he doesn't buff himself like the bard, but have you considered the uses of the Favor ability?
Once a week, you can get passage into illegal areas, a discount on black-market goods, an audience witht the king, a place to lay low for a while, or a magnificent weapon (on loan). At higher levels, you can have a guy whacked, borrow a castle, or take command of a small army. Once every two weeks, assuming you roll for a scaled DC.

It's what the Noble does during downtime that makes him powerful.

Zaydos
2010-09-23, 02:15 PM
Why the hate on the Noble? Sure, he doesn't buff himself like the bard, but have you considered the uses of the Favor ability?
Once a week, you can get passage into illegal areas, a discount on black-market goods, an audience witht the king, a place to lay low for a while, or a magnificent weapon (on loan). At higher levels, you can have a guy whacked, borrow a castle, or take command of a small army. Once every two weeks, assuming you roll for a scaled DC.

It's what the Noble does during downtime that makes him powerful.

I mentioned the Favor ability and the reason why I dislike it. The ability is completely up to DM fiat even if you succeed the DC, even including a line about how you shouldn't allow it to save the day. So you can have an unimportant guy whacked, borrow a castle you don't need, or take command of a small army of red shirts.

Notreallyhere77
2010-09-23, 02:27 PM
I mentioned the Favor ability and the reason why I dislike it. The ability is completely up to DM fiat even if you succeed the DC, even including a line about how you shouldn't allow it to save the day. So you can have an unimportant guy whacked, borrow a castle you don't need, or take command of a small army of red shirts.

Fair enough. All I remember is that it doesn't allow you to defer and adventure. And the small army of redshirts is every small army in the game, isn't it? The ones that don't die in battle can still take watch, hold a section of space as a polder, or whatever.

Zaydos
2010-09-23, 02:40 PM
Most of my opinion on playing Nobles is from the StarWars d20 game (where they're identical except they have a Medium Reflex instead of a Good one and might get a few bonus feats) and I soon realized they were useful for a 1 (or 2) level dip for skill points and class skills when building a diplomatic character but after that point Scoundrel was better for a diplomat. In D&D they're so many other classes that work better (what amounts to the Thug variant of Fighter is the strongest class in Star Wars d20, at least if you optimize stealth and/or range; without optimization Jedi is the strongest) that it really is just a weak class.

I do think it makes an excellent replacement for Aristocrat and is what Aristocrat ought to have been.

Notreallyhere77
2010-09-23, 02:47 PM
I do think it makes an excellent replacement for Aristocrat and is what Aristocrat ought to have been.

Me too, and makes the aristocrat as powerful as they should be. Although DMG aristocrats have full armor and martial weapon proficiency going for them, too, and Noble doesn't.

I loved playing a Noble in SagaEd SWd20. My second character was one, and he remains my favorite character for that game that I have ever played.
I didn't play any SWd20 before SE, though, so I didn't know they were identical.

Zaydos
2010-09-23, 03:01 PM
Me too, and makes the aristocrat as powerful as they should be. Although DMG aristocrats have full armor and martial weapon proficiency going for them, too, and Noble doesn't.

I loved playing a Noble in SagaEd SWd20. My second character was one, and he remains my favorite character for that game that I have ever played.
I didn't play any SWd20 before SE, though, so I didn't know they were identical.

Yeah in the 2nd edition of the SWd20 game they have the same list of abilities. Not completely sure about overlap of class skills (I don't have my SWd20 books anymore a friend borrowed them and never returned them) and I don't remember if they got a bonus feat ever 4th or 5th level but they got Coordinate, Favor, etc.

I only played Saga once. I was a Jedi, a young, immature kid trained to be a Jedi after the destruction of the temple, whose master had recently died (the GM suggested it; I was half way done with a non-Jedi character because he had said no Jedi). I remember the classes looking more balanced than before but I'm not the best on Saga edition rules. I did enjoy my noble in in SWd20 even though I multi-classed out pretty quickly.

onthetown
2010-09-23, 06:18 PM
I absolutely adore Dragonlance. It's hard for me to understand why people don't like it.

For the crunch, though, I can see why. I haven't really used anything out of the 3.5 setting except Dalamar's Lightning Lance and Wizard of High Sorcery.

PlzBreakMyCmpAn
2010-09-24, 10:20 PM
Or you ignore canon.
That way, the "official" stuff doesn't get in your way.Wait there are people who play dnd for the fluff?:smallcool:

Dragonlance Campaign Setting is a WotC book. The rest has a valid liscence.

You want taboo? Kingdoms of Kalamar

Yehomer
2010-09-25, 07:53 AM
Many people say the campaign setting is a few centuries after the War of the Lance. IIRC, the campaign starts after the War of Souls, which was only about 60 years after the War of the Lance.

Also, I used the Death Knight variant for my campaign, because it's slightly more powerful than the one in MM2 (It can create intiligent skeleton warriors).

Fizban
2010-09-25, 08:09 AM
Many people say the campaign setting is a few centuries after the War of the Lance. IIRC, the campaign starts after the War of Souls, which was only about 60 years after the War of the Lance.

Also, I used the Death Knight variant for my campaign, because it's slightly more powerful than the one in MM2 (It can create inteligent skeleton warriors).

Huh, wow, you're right. The timeline puts it at 67 years, I guess I just figured with how much was happening and all the time shenanigans, some actual time elapsed. The shorter amount of time means that you don't have as large of a frame to live up to, but then it also means that anything you do no matter how big apparently won't last more than 10 or 20 years. All that stuff that felt like it should have taken hundreds of years happened in a far shorter time, but the world is still completely different in the age of mortals than it was during the war of the lance, and for some reason it just feels like that's what most people have actually read. I far exaggerated the timeframe, but I still think there's way too much story for most people to work in a new campaign. It could be done of course, but you have to be able to work within a very detailed world and also make the new campaign stand out enough to be awesome, when the last several were already world shattering apocalypses.

The Glyphstone
2010-09-25, 08:19 AM
Wait there are people who play dnd for the fluff?:smallcool:

Dragonlance Campaign Setting is a WotC book. The rest has a valid liscence.

You want taboo? Kingdoms of Kalamar

As is the deserved fate of a book that thinks +3 metamagic adjustment is a fair trade to turn any "Save or X" spell into "No Save".

Zaydos
2010-09-25, 12:24 PM
As is the deserved fate of a book that thinks +3 metamagic adjustment is a fair trade to turn any "Save or X" spell into "No Save".

-double take- Wait what? I'd heard good things about Kalamar, or at least interesting things, when I heard anything at all and now I hear this. That's just... how could they make that?

Esser-Z
2010-09-25, 01:09 PM
As is the deserved fate of a book that thinks +3 metamagic adjustment is a fair trade to turn any "Save or X" spell into "No Save".

...wait WHAT?

Kylarra
2010-09-25, 01:13 PM
As is the deserved fate of a book that thinks +3 metamagic adjustment is a fair trade to turn any "Save or X" spell into "No Save".+4 actually. :smallbiggrin:

Esser-Z
2010-09-25, 01:15 PM
+4 actually. :smallbiggrin:

Oh, that's okay then.

No wait, no it isn't! That absurd!

Zaydos
2010-09-25, 01:16 PM
+4 actually. :smallbiggrin:

A reason to arcane thesis a non-blasting spell, brilliant! Wait no it's not.

Coidzor
2010-09-25, 02:07 PM
...:smalleek: So that's why. Wow.

Aharon
2010-09-25, 05:20 PM
Combine that with some other, completely third-party feat that removes subtypes from spells, and you can have a no-save, non-mind-affecting charm monster :smallbiggrin:

Zaydos
2010-09-25, 05:24 PM
Combine that with some other, completely third-party feat that removes subtypes from spells, and you can have a no-save, non-mind-affecting charm monster :smallbiggrin:

I could have fun with that. Now I just need a way to avoid SR entirely and Charm a few gods.

DragoonWraith
2010-09-25, 07:08 PM
Be a Beguiler 20 and catch them Flat-Footed?

Greenish
2010-09-25, 07:15 PM
Be a Beguiler 20 and catch them Flat-Footed?Or factotum… 11, is it? They also get up to 7th level spell likes, to which they can apply Metamagic feats, so you'd need a metamagic reducer of some kind.

jgumbyrx
2010-09-29, 09:58 AM
I believe it's an officially licensed 3rd party product (the book bears a WotC logo).

well, actually it would be "2nd party"

- 1st party = direct from WotC
- 2nd party = non-WotC product that is officially licensed and endorsed by WotC
- 3rd party = compatible with, but not officially indorsed

Jothki
2010-09-29, 11:52 AM
I believe the "second party" would be the person playing D&D.

Eldariel
2010-09-29, 12:29 PM
I could have fun with that. Now I just need a way to avoid SR entirely and Charm a few gods.

Charm? Dominate! Dweomerkeeper's Supernatural Spell and go to town. Of course, that still doesn't really work on deities (prescience and all that) but most creatures are fair game.

Tyndmyr
2010-09-29, 01:28 PM
As is the deserved fate of a book that thinks +3 metamagic adjustment is a fair trade to turn any "Save or X" spell into "No Save".

That....actually got printed? Wow. I can't imagine how someone could miss the potential for abuse.

No-save phantasmal killers are straight up awesome with that, even with all the types, and no MM reducer abuse.

Coidzor
2010-09-29, 01:33 PM
That....actually got printed? Wow. I can't imagine how someone could miss the potential for abuse.

No-save phantasmal killers are straight up awesome with that, even with all the types, and no MM reducer abuse.

Some of the people involved with the organization didn't even comprehend the power of template stacking (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20051209a) until they finally did it themselves.
This month's installment details Chuladoal, the fiendish gravetouched ghoul swarm-shifter troll. When I began working on this creature, I thought that so many templates would raise the CR without necessarily raising the creature's ability to withstand damage, and that too many templates would result in a weaker creature. What I learned is that the right templates work well together, no matter how many you use. When adding templates to a creature, however, it's best to watch the CR in relation to the Hit Dice as the creature evolves.

Tyndmyr
2010-09-29, 02:54 PM
Wow. That's a bit troubling. Granted, the same might not be true of the people who actually wrote related rules, but thats a level of general expertise I would have assumed from anyone involved in producting professional rules for the game.

This kinda makes me want to start a thread about designing RPGs.

Coidzor
2010-09-29, 03:11 PM
It certainly stuck out to me when I stumbled upon it while looking for info on the gravetouched ghoul template.

jgumbyrx
2010-09-29, 03:36 PM
I believe the "second party" would be the person playing D&D.

actually, that would be the end user. see here (http://books.google.com/books?id=7KV9TiCgsHQC&pg=PA2&lpg=PA2&dq=2nd-party+publisher&source=bl&ots=075OhsQVOB&sig=zxL0XxxeNN0kWmBJwF241ihDihU&hl=en&ei=XqKjTKPMIYy2sAPmyIz7Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false).

FMArthur
2010-09-29, 04:05 PM
Eh, like we always end up saying, it's the metamagic reducers that make things bad. The material on its own doesn't sound incredibly broken - Phantasmal Killer as an example is a 4th level spell and would be 8th level when modified by this metamagic. That sounds about in line with what 8th level spells can do. Can you think of anything seriously broken to do with lower level spells using this (and no reducers)?

Honestly this doesn't sound any worse than ordinary WotC design philosophy: consider only the current item and the class you think about designing it to be used with when making content. :smalltongue:

Eldariel
2010-09-29, 04:33 PM
Wow. That's a bit troubling. Granted, the same might not be true of the people who actually wrote related rules, but thats a level of general expertise I would have assumed from anyone involved in producting professional rules for the game.

This kinda makes me want to start a thread about designing RPGs.

...considering how awesome a job WoTC did comprehending their own rules and how basically all official (anything bigger than forum-made - with the possible exception of Untapped Potential) third party is at best the same level in regards to coherence, rules awareness and balance, I find it really hard to be surprised by some such.


Eh, like we always end up saying, it's the metamagic reducers that make things bad. The material on its own doesn't sound incredibly broken - Phantasmal Killer as an example is a 4th level spell and would be 8th level when modified by this metamagic. That sounds about in line with what 8th level spells can do. Can you think of anything seriously broken to do with lower level spells using this (and no reducers)?

...medium range "You die" is on par with what an 8th level spell is supposed to do? It doesn't even have the Death-subtype -_- Sure, it's a mind-affecting effect but the closest comparison would be Irresistible Dance...which is touch range and doesn't actually kill.

Even worse is Baleful Polymorph; sure it's a 9th level slot you need for it, but it's still no-save just die with no alleviating types (not a death effect, not mind-affecting, not fear, none of the common immunities cover it). Literally the only thing that doesn't die to that is something that's plain magic immune, or a Lich ('cause they have immunity to Polymorphing along with few other very, very rare creatures).

DragoonWraith
2010-09-29, 04:39 PM
A Binder with a Pact with Haagenti would be safe from the Irresistablle Baleful Polymorph.

Eldariel
2010-09-29, 04:40 PM
A Binder with a Pact with Haagenti would be safe from the Irresistablle Baleful Polymorph.

There's a few others (such as the few ways to acquire the Shapechanger subtype), but point being, at that point you need to be immune to every single effect that amounts to save-or-die. And it doesn't seem like immunity to X-type saves would matter since it removes the save so e.g. Undead could be Baleful'd normally.

Tyndmyr
2010-09-29, 04:41 PM
Eh, like we always end up saying, it's the metamagic reducers that make things bad. The material on its own doesn't sound incredibly broken - Phantasmal Killer as an example is a 4th level spell and would be 8th level when modified by this metamagic. That sounds about in line with what 8th level spells can do. Can you think of anything seriously broken to do with lower level spells using this (and no reducers)?

Honestly this doesn't sound any worse than ordinary WotC design philosophy: consider only the current item and the class you think about designing it to be used with when making content. :smalltongue:

Nah. No save, just die is still pretty sick for an eighth level spell. And this is purely core, no shenanigans whatsoever. Or a fifth level no-save charm person. That's pretty straightforward, and clearly ridiculously powerful, when compared against 5th level enchantment spells.

It's got the playability issue of not requiring casters to target weak saves, and most metamagics have a higher level adjust relative to benefit.

Persist is mostly only broken with reducers or cost avoiders, sure. If this were also +6...it'd probably be in the same category as persist. Occasionally useful otherwise, very breakable with TO. At +4, it's broken out of the box, and gets more so as you get creative with it. Very few WoTC things are broken in that way, though many are with obscure combinations.

Lhurgyof
2010-09-29, 04:47 PM
...considering how awesome a job WoTC did comprehending their own rules and how basically all official (anything bigger than forum-made - with the possible exception of Untapped Potential) third party is at best the same level in regards to coherence, rules awareness and balance, I find it really hard to be surprised by some such.



...medium range "You die" is on par with what an 8th level spell is supposed to do? It doesn't even have the Death-subtype -_- Sure, it's a mind-affecting effect but the closest comparison would be Irresistible Dance...which is touch range and doesn't actually kill.

Even worse is Baleful Polymorph; sure it's a 9th level slot you need for it, but it's still no-save just die with no alleviating types (not a death effect, not mind-affecting, not fear, none of the common immunities cover it). Literally the only thing that doesn't die to that is something that's plain magic immune, or a Lich ('cause they have immunity to Polymorphing along with few other very, very rare creatures).

At that point wizards have moved on to even crazier stuff, if they frequent here. :smallsigh:

But yes, that is really broken. I'd only like to use it on stuff like Phantasmal Killer, which is cool but doesn't work that well.

Eldariel
2010-09-29, 04:48 PM
Very few WoTC things are broken in that way...

...Polymorph-line, Planar Binding-line, Simulacrum, every 9th level spell ever, Shivering Touch, Ray of Stupidity, Dweomerkeeper, Planar Shepherd...

Off the top of my head. I mean, you don't need much to make turning into any creature broken, or making any creature you wish obey you broken, or making copies of anything with all spell-likes and such broken, or ability to just bypass all components and countermagic and spell resistance broken, or the ability to...turn into any creature in the game and get their abilities + get tons of extra actions broken, or the ability to one-shot almost anything with a 3rd level spell no save or...yeah.


I think WoTC has a pretty good track record of making stuff that's broken out of the box. Sure, you need DMM or Incantatrix or some such to truly break Persist and you need metamagic like Persist or such to truly break Incantatrix and you need metamagic to truly break Arcane Thesis and so on, but let's not forget all the times WoTC has really just plain screwed up.

DragoonWraith
2010-09-29, 05:01 PM
What's broken about Ray of Stupidity? Isn't that the one that's just Ray of Enfeeblement but Int instead of Str and Transmutation instead of Necromancy?

Eldariel
2010-09-29, 05:05 PM
What's broken about Ray of Stupidity? Isn't that the one that's just Ray of Enfeeblement but Int instead of Str and Transmutation instead of Necromancy?

It's Int damage, not penalty (same issue as with Shivering Touch, btw). Any animal intellect creature, or low int type, is dead (or as good as dead; comatose for a day) no-save. Say, Purple Worm goes down 75% of the time to one, for example.

And it's a 2nd level spell with no CLable components (other than SR, which isn't relevant with most 3- Int creatures) so you can even just get a scroll and one-shot anything with low Int.

Tyndmyr
2010-09-29, 05:06 PM
...Polymorph-line,

In general, not so bad. Certain interactions, like PaOing repeatedly were probably not considered. It's a powerful line, yeah, but the true brokenness comes from player access to things designed solely for NPCs. See, beholder mage and the like. Incredibly broken, but requires a creative mix of abilities.


Planar Binding-line, Simulacrum,

Simulacrum is fine by itself. Again, like polymorph stuff, it breaks down when used to give the player access to things that were intended only for NPCs. Crazy combos can be done(as with ice assassin), but in isolation, they're merely strong, as the DM controls what you have access to copy.


every 9th level spell ever

The game gets ridiculous at high levels. Unfortunately, this appears to be by design, not a few errors. As you approach epic, and dive into that, the entire game has ludicrously powerful things, and rocket tag abounds. It's not really broken if that's the way they intended it to be played.


Shivering Touch,

Only broken in combination with reach, etc. It's powerful, but has the major downside of a wizard in melee range. In combination with other things, overpowered against many targets. However, solely by itself, it's powerful, but hardly game breaking.


Ray of Stupidity

All ability damage is powerful. Doesn't break the game by itself, though. You can MAKE it into a one shot instakilling mess, but by itself, it's merely strong.

Compare to the core Ray of Enfeeblement, which as a level 1 spell lowers strength by 1d6+1/2lvl. Sure, it's only a penalty, so thats a downside, but it has a greater effect.

Edit: Plus there's the 1 spell level difference, too. By itself, it's not crazy.


Dweomerkeeper, Planar Shepherd...

You've got the big three, sure. And even incantatrix isn't that broken unless you get persist. Then, it's merely quite good. That's still fairly rare, considering the very large amount of 1st party PrCs printed.

WoTC isn't great about watching for broken combos, even fairly obvious ones, sure. However, most of the stuff is at least usable out of the box by itself.

Anterean
2010-09-29, 05:08 PM
Ok, I have to ask, how is it that no army has ever been able to destroy Kendermore? I'm not horribly familiar with the setting, but I sort of figure it would be a lot like the shire, but a lot more annoying, right?


If I recall correctly Kendermore have only been occupied once, by an army lead by the most inept high lord in the history of Krynn (Fewmaster Toede).

To their credit the kenders managed to beat the beat off the occupation without outside assistance (but well lets face it they would have too...)

Eldariel
2010-09-29, 07:32 PM
In general, not so bad. Certain interactions, like PaOing repeatedly were probably not considered. It's a powerful line, yeah, but the true brokenness comes from player access to things designed solely for NPCs. See, beholder mage and the like. Incredibly broken, but requires a creative mix of abilities.

Those are "incredibly broken". The spell is still doing way more than any other 4th level spell (aside from mayhap other insanely broken ones) if you just e.g. turn the Fighter into a Remorhaz or a Hydra or any brute-type monster. Or yourself and your familiar for that matter. Polymorph is kinda like Divine Power except Touch, Min/Level and gives much, much bigger bonuses. And Divine Power is a decent spell on its own right.

Sometimes solving things with attack rolls is the easiest or the path of least effort, and a spell like Polymorph just does that way more efficiently than a 4th (or a 5th or a 6th or a 7th) level spell should. Not to mention all the other uses the spell has (all the wonderful ex special attacks and movement modes you can get). Sure, it doesn't break the game wide open making it literally unplayable but it's still way more power than a spell anywhere near that level should possess.

Or Alter Self on Outsider chassis for some silly 15 points of NA from a level 2 spell on level 3 (so ECL 4 in Core). Add to that your Dex and Mage Armor and Shield and you can reach AC 40 on level 3 without really trying. Again, not campaign breaking but way, way more powerful than anything of that level has any business being (and indeed, way more powerful than basically any other effect of the same level). And the 6 points Humanoids get is way more than the comparable Druid buff (whose expertise that's supposed to be) get (they get 2).


Simulacrum is fine by itself. Again, like polymorph stuff, it breaks down when used to give the player access to things that were intended only for NPCs. Crazy combos can be done(as with ice assassin), but in isolation, they're merely strong, as the DM controls what you have access to copy.

It's not fine by itself. Getting obedient copies with all the key abilities of the host is not fine. Whatever the host is, if it has relevant spell-likes it's going to be overpowered. A second character for one spell that's only limited by how much XP you wanna pay. Want to play with 10 characters? No problem! Honestly, there's a reason Simulacrums of <insert Outsider here> are omnipresent in the various Wizard vs. X threads. Sure, you can't get free wishes out of it (unless the creature happens to have Wish SLA, oshi-!), but getting a second character for few silly points of XP is way more powerful than a 7th level spell should be.

DM can control it in the sense that he can choose not to use powerful monsters but spells aren't supposed to place that kinds of restrictions in the campaign. If a spell says "Due to this spell's existence, powerful creatures are not allowed to be used by the DM/exist in the game world", the spell is utterly and completely broken.


The game gets ridiculous at high levels. Unfortunately, this appears to be by design, not a few errors. As you approach epic, and dive into that, the entire game has ludicrously powerful things, and rocket tag abounds. It's not really broken if that's the way they intended it to be played.

It is also by design that only 3rd of the classes get to play? You mean it's intentional that classes without spellcasting are worthless as opposed to balancing mistake?


Only broken in combination with reach, etc. It's powerful, but has the major downside of a wizard in melee range. In combination with other things, overpowered against many targets. However, solely by itself, it's powerful, but hardly game breaking.

...so as long as a spell is touch range, it's allowed to do whatever? 3rd level spell one-shotting basically anything with no save seems a bit much to me no matter what range you have to use it at. Besides, there are gishes who are in melee anyways and might as well.

And Wizard has a hundred protection spells which allow them to survive in melee on their own turn; that's a "combo" in the sense that "having protection + having offense" is a combo. No, Shivering Touch is way too much.


All ability damage is powerful. Doesn't break the game by itself, though. You can MAKE it into a one shot instakilling mess, but by itself, it's merely strong.

Compare to the core Ray of Enfeeblement, which as a level 1 spell lowers strength by 1d6+1/2lvl. Sure, it's only a penalty, so thats a downside, but it has a greater effect.

Edit: Plus there's the 1 spell level difference, too. By itself, it's not crazy.

Except Ray of Enfeeblement cannot one-shot anything. Indeed, it can't kill anything. It's a debuff, and a fairly useful one. Thing is, Ray of Stupidity targets the one stat that is rather commonly 3-. That, being a 2nd level spell and not having a save is what makes the spell utterly bonkers.

Penalty would be fine (a nice way to hurt low-level Wizards relatively reliably), Damage is just way, way too strong for a 2nd level spell targeting the one stat that's going to be low enough to paralyze an entire class of creatures with.


WoTC isn't great about watching for broken combos, even fairly obvious ones, sure. However, most of the stuff is at least usable out of the box by itself.

I disagree. Some of the stuff is usable out of the box, but much of the stuff simply gives too much for too little or, compared to other spells (powerful as they are), simply provides ridiculously strong effects. And that is without even talking about the level of benefits provided by advancing casting classes vs. advancing classes without casting.

If WoTC knew what they were doing, the benefits of various choices in the same level category would be broadly in the same ballpark. Where WoTC has messed up you can tell by the comparative benefits of said choices being in random directions few light years here or there.