Things that should not be.

[Gharkash]

So, there are things that were not given enough thought, to say the least. Truenamers and monks for example, considered broken, as in not working.

My question is what other things are broken in 3.5, and why don't they work? Including the aformentioned.

[Darth Stabber]

So, there are things that were not given enough thought, to say the least. Truenamers and monks for example, considered broken, as in not working.

My question is what other things are broken in 3.5, and why don't they work? Including the aformentioned.

Monks aren't borked like truenamer, monks are just bad.

[Darrin]

My question is what other things are broken in 3.5, and why don't they work? Including the aformentioned.

Manipulate Form (Su).
Bloodline levels.
Overrun/Improved Overrun.
Trample feat.
Tome of Battle Errata.
The bottom half of the first column of page 79 in Complete Psionic.

[Tyndmyr]

Truenamers work. I've played them. Provided you read the class entry, and realize "hey, truenaming is important", you're good. Not unlike realizing that int is important for wizards.

The bigger issue they face is that they don't get a lot of support from other books...it's a common trend in classes introduced in splatbooks. There's a million supplemental sources for wizards and such, not so much for many more obscure classes.

[Gharkash]

Manipulate Form (Su).
Bloodline levels.
Overrun/Improved Overrun.
Trample feat.
Tome of Battle Errata.


Pls explain. By ToB errata you mean the qusterv QaQ?

[Piggy Knowles]

The Tome of Battle errata is for the wrong book (Complete Mage, IIRC)...

[Tyndmyr]

No, they actually published an errata for ToB. It's terrible. They copy/pasted it from what...Complete Mage? Then didn't bother to replace all the things.

Monks and Truenamers are imperfect, and could be improved. This...this was just pure laziness and fail. Entirely different level.

[Lonely Tylenol]

The bigger issue they face is that they don't get a lot of support from other books...it's a common trend in classes introduced in splatbooks. There's a million supplemental sources for wizards and such, not so much for many more obscure classes.

Lack of splatbook support for things should not be.

I discovered in my book-diving for my Permanency support homebrew that Permanency is actually mentioned in, like... Two or three other books, and only those books. They clearly didn't forget that Permanency exists outside of core, because it is clearly made mention of in other books... That said, the potential Permanency support (all of the spells) vs. what is actually supported (the wall of spells in Sandstorm and one or two other things) is galling. Why create a spell for which the only purpose is to modify spells, give it a fixed list of things it can modify, and then never update that list?

Speaking of, every spellcaster in the game that isn't an Assassin, Bard, Cleric, Druid, Paladin, Ranger, or Sorcerer/Wizard (or has a spell list explicitly based on the aforementioned, as opposed to their own spell list) would like a word, WotC.

[Menteith]

Check out the Dysfunctional Rules Collection, located on these very forums, for some of the worse thought out (by RAW) ideas.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=214988

[Gharkash]

Thanks for the list. Could any one provide a link for the ToB errata? I am too damn curious.

[FMArthur]

Thanks for the list. Could any one provide a link for the ToB errata? I am too damn curious.

You can get it on this page. (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20040125a) It's actually a bit weirder than people are saying here; the ToB errata cuts off mid-sentence, in the middle of a word even, to go into the Complete Mage errata. Here's the segment:


Page 53 – Firesnake
[Deletion/Substitution]
Remove last two sentences of first paragraph.
Substitute last two sentences of second paragraph with “A c

Page 37 – Alacritous Cogitation
[Addition]
Revise end of first sentence to read, “...cast any arcane spell you know of the same level or lower and of casting time no longer than 1 round.”

[Curmudgeon]

Well, the Fighter class is a good example of something that wasn't thought through properly. The class is mainly an empty shell, with most class features replaced by Fighter bonus feats. But that only works if there are adequate worthwhile Fighter bonus feats to work throughout all levels of the class. And there aren't.

Most feats provide a fairly weak benefit, weaker than named class features in other classes. Examples: Evasion, Uncanny Dodge, Camouflage, Hide in Plain Sight, Mettle ─ these are all stronger than almost any Fighter bonus feats. So having feats instead of such class features automatically makes the Fighter a weaker class. Very few feats provide a benefit to Fighters alone. The benefits of Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Focus, and Greater Weapon Specialization (the main Fighter-specific feats) are quite meager compared to what other classes get by 12th level.

While many classes have features that scale with increasing levels (spellcasting being the most obvious example), very few feats provide a scaling benefit. Power Attack is the prime counterexample. If there were more Fighter bonus feats (and more specifically Fighter-only feats) which provided a greater benefit at higher levels akin to Power Attack then the Fighter would be a more viable class. Instead, the standard model is feat trees, with either a "feat tax" (i.e., weak feats which are prerequisites, like Dodge and Mobility to get to Spring Attack); decreasing benefits (like Two-Weapon Fighting ... Perfect Two-Weapon Fighting); or increasing requirements (like DEX 13 for Rapid Shot, DEX 17 for Manyshot, and DEX 19 for Improved Manyshot). Feat trees show (1) that Wizards of the Coast was greatly concerned that feats would give too much power to characters, and (2) the various ways they used to try to prevent that from happening.

What we've got is many hundreds of feats in the game, 90% of which are crud (maintaining Sturgeon's Revelation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon%27s_Law)), and most of which aren't suitable for Fighters. So every Fighter takes Power Attack, making that an unwritten cost for the class: there just are so few good Fighter bonus feats that that one good choice becomes automatic. And while magic users (both allies and enemies) grow in power, there's a very small number of feats which address magical enemies at all. Being able to hit harder with an attack is close to laughable if a Fighter can't find an enemy to attack, or if they're facing a magic effect (with the enemy responsible somewhere else) and a physical attack isn't an answer to that magical problem.

This could have been addressed with more and better Fighter feats. For instance, feats that provide protection against magic, with better protection at higher levels, would do a lot to make Fighters viable. But even at Epic levels most Fighters can't have that; those options simply aren't available to them.
Improved Spell Resistance [Epic]

Prerequisite: Must have spell resistance from a feat, class feature, or other permanent effect.
Awaken Spell Resistance

You gain spell resistance.
Prerequisite: Con 13, dragon type. Meanwhile, there are dozens of feats that help spellcasters overcome spell resistance, and hundreds of spells that don't care about SR, so even if a player intent on building a Fighter character picked a race specifically to acquire SR it would still be meager protection. And that doesn't address other types of magical threats.


The short version: the Fighter doesn't work because Wizards of the Coast was worried that the class most directly intended for combat would be too powerful in a combat-centric game, and made the vast majority of feats wimpy to address that unreasonable fear.

[Darth Stabber]

Truenamers work. I've played them. Provided you read the class entry, and realize "hey, truenaming is important", you're good. Not unlike realizing that int is important for wizards.

The bigger issue they face is that they don't get a lot of support from other books...it's a common trend in classes introduced in splatbooks. There's a million supplemental sources for wizards and such, not so much for many more obscure classes.

Truenamers work only in the strictest of senses. Without significant skill optimization, including diving through several other source books for items, and using some fairly questionable rulings on certain items, it gets worse as levels go on. My baseline for determining if a class is truely playable is can it accomplish anything it's designed to do with book it's printed in+SRD. Truenamers are all but completely unable to affect enemies, or even allies with in that restriction, the DC's of truespeak checks scales WAY faster than your skill checks do, infact by 15 affecting yourself is next to impossible, and you are the easiest target for your own effects. The failure is strong in truenamer.

[Namfuak]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned Samurai from Complete Warrior. They are basically fighters with less feats and all the feats chosen for them, who can only use one kind of fighting style and only 2 weapons (in specific hands, of course). Oh, and they can demoralize enemies and do a smite attack a few times a day, woo hoo.

[demigodus]

Truenamers work only in the strictest of senses. Without significant skill optimization, including diving through several other source books for items, and using some fairly questionable rulings on certain items, it gets worse as levels go on. My baseline for determining if a class is truely playable is can it accomplish anything it's designed to do with book it's printed in+SRD. Truenamers are all but completely unable to affect enemies, or even allies with in that restriction, the DC's of truespeak checks scales WAY faster than your skill checks do, infact by 15 affecting yourself is next to impossible, and you are the easiest target for your own effects. The failure is strong in truenamer.

Item Familiar is in the SRD. Then the pendant that gives +10 untyped Truenaming bonus for 10,000 gp is in Tome of Magic. Finally, tack on Skill Focus: Truenaming from the SRD.

At any particular level, your truenaming skill will be 2*level + 19. The DC to effect something of your CR is 15+2*CR, so first time everyday, you can effect a creature 2 CR above you, without having to roll. Now if only you had utterances worth effecting them with... also add 5 to DC if target has SR that you want to ignore...

The class is broken in the "make monks look good" sense yes, but lets not overplay the fail. It is very much possible to make one "function" (not sure if that is the right term for Truenamers) with just SRD+ToM.

[The Glyphstone]

Item Familiar is in the SRD. Then the pendant that gives +10 untyped Truenaming bonus for 10,000 gp is in Tome of Magic. Finally, tack on Skill Focus: Truenaming from the SRD.

At any particular level, your truenaming skill will be 2*level + 19. The DC to effect something of your CR is 15+2*CR, so first time everyday, you can effect a creature 2 CR above you, without having to roll. Now if only you had utterances worth effecting them with... also add 5 to DC if target has SR that you want to ignore...

The class is broken in the "make monks look good" sense yes, but lets not overplay the fail. It is very much possible to make one "function" (not sure if that is the right term for Truenamers) with just SRD+ToM.

Yeah, but it takes hefty optimization to do so, as evidenced by the use of Item Familiar (an infamously cheesy feat). Truenamer is the only class in the game, as-printed, that becomes unable to use its own class features if it becomes high enough level without external assistance.

[Man on Fire]

Monks aren't borked like truenamer, monks are just bad.

Somebody here needs to get introduced to Ultimate Monk.

[navar100]

Things that should not be:

Continuous uncalled for bashing of 3E.

Get over it already. Go play some other system you like much better. Have fun.

[Gharkash]

I really like the 3.5 ed, and some 3ed stuff, but some things are horribly worded or made.

[Man on Fire]

Things that should not be:

Continuous uncalled for bashing of 3E.

Get over it already. Go play some other system you like much better. Have fun.

"Don't like, don't read" isn't exactly a good defense. Just because people criticise things in the game doesn't mean that they cannot enjoy it. I enjoy D&D even through I hate many of the rules, like making entire races of one alignment or favorizing casters.

[Tyndmyr]

Truenamers work only in the strictest of senses. Without significant skill optimization, including diving through several other source books for items, and using some fairly questionable rulings on certain items, it gets worse as levels go on. My baseline for determining if a class is truely playable is can it accomplish anything it's designed to do with book it's printed in+SRD. Truenamers are all but completely unable to affect enemies, or even allies with in that restriction, the DC's of truespeak checks scales WAY faster than your skill checks do, infact by 15 affecting yourself is next to impossible, and you are the easiest target for your own effects. The failure is strong in truenamer.

It is not at all hard to get a pass on truenaming, even at level 20, using only Tome of Magic and core. Skill boosting is not difficult.

18 int + 5 int from levels + 5 inherent int + 6 enhancement int = 34 int. This could be boosted further using these sources using age and a race with +int, but even this provides a +12.

Max ranks. If you don't max ranks in truenaming, you're not trying. This is +23.

Skill Focus Truenaming. In the phb. Kind of obvious. +3

The amulet from ToM. It's literally in the same section as the class. Not terribly expensive. Again, kind of obvious. +10.

+2 to affect yourself from personal known truename. Class feature of truenamer. Literally not avoidable.

+5 utterance. First level utterance. Needs deliberate avoidance to not take it at some point.

+2 MW tool. Core. Dirt cheap.

Total modifiers: +56 self, +54 others.

To affect a CR 20/20 HD target with your primary utterance list, you need a 55. No worries there. The other utterances have a different dc scaling that is even less a concern.

Also, keeping strictly within core + ToM, there's plenty of UMD options for skill boosting. UMD is a class skill for truenamers. They're an int based class, so you have the skill points. This is...not hard.

Higher op tricks like polymorphing into something with a massive bonus to truenaming are also possible within these limits, but these tricks are slightly less obvious to the novice player. Everything listed above relies on fairly well known boosts, and the basic concept of "more int and truenaming" requires only a very basic understanding of the skill system and the truenamer class to hit upon.

It's not a perfect class, but it's entirely playable as printed without splatbook diving. The more annoying problem is that splatbook diving gives a lot more to the more well known classes.

[Aharon]

Yeah, but it takes hefty optimization to do so, as evidenced by the use of Item Familiar (an infamously cheesy feat). Truenamer is the only class in the game, as-printed, that becomes unable to use its own class features if it becomes high enough level without external assistance.

Aleax'd by Tyndmyr:
Truenamer works with just ToM and PHB: Polymorph into Garbler. All your utterances are now basically at will.

To add to the actual thread: Differences between SRD and PHB. It's often disregarded, but in several instances, the SRD lacks information that was considered fluff, but actually isn't.

[TheGeckoKing]

The fact that Sarrukhs were given an LA (Serpent Kingdoms, curse you!).
The fact that Greater Doppelgangers were given an LA (Dungeon Mag 127, curse you!).
The fact that they messed up the Shadowcaster and Truenamer (CURSE YOU ToM!).

[Venger]

Truenamers work only in the strictest of senses. Without significant skill optimization, including diving through several other source books for items, and using some fairly questionable rulings on certain items, it gets worse as levels go on.

keeping even a decent chance of making your truenaming check outright requires an item familiar, and I've never even heard of those being allowed in a real game


Aleax'd by Tyndmyr:
Truenamer works with just ToM and PHB: Polymorph into Garbler. All your utterances are now basically at will.

To add to the actual thread: Differences between SRD and PHB. It's often disregarded, but in several instances, the SRD lacks information that was considered fluff, but actually isn't.

the fact that the truenaming monsters have such huge bonuses to their truenaming checks shows that at the end, wotc knew truenaming didn't work and rather than fix it, they had to plop a huge bonus on there.

what are some examples of the latter? the only one that springs to mind is the somewhat infamous "slayer" which is just due to product identity

[demigodus]

Aleax'd by Tyndmyr:
Truenamer works with just ToM and PHB: Polymorph into Garbler. All your utterances are now basically at will.

To add to the actual thread: Differences between SRD and PHB. It's often disregarded, but in several instances, the SRD lacks information that was considered fluff, but actually isn't.

Except Truenamers don't get spells. Running around with scrolls of Polymorph just to have your class features function, sounds a bit poorly done for a class....


keeping even a decent chance of making your truenaming check outright requires an item familiar, and I've never even heard of those being allowed in a real game

That, or a massive Int score, joining the Paragonistic Assembly (thereby losing 10% of Wealth by Level, and being forced to go on quests that you might not have time for in some settings), and using the MIC guide for making custom items.

It can be done. You just have to go to ridiculous extremes. And then once you start using the utterances, you realize that having them as no-DC, SR: No, at-will abilities would still not make them good...

The Truename DCs aren't really the biggest flaws with the class. Just, they are so blatantly obvious, and you have to work so much to get past them, that you tend to miss the other class flaws.

[Gharkash]

If i remember correctly the utterances seem more like support/croud control/debuffs, and not that impresive at all.

[Venger]

If i remember correctly the utterances seem more like support/croud control/debuffs, and not that impresive at all.

one thing that utterances are not is crowd control, since for the longest time, you can't affect more than one target at a time with an utterance (and LoS/LoR don't make affecting multiple enemies easier) but yeah, there aren't a lot of good utterances in the first place, even if they were warlock style at-wills (and would that really have overpowered the truenamer? no)

[The Glyphstone]

For classes that don't really work as intended and are bad even when they do, howbout the Soulborn?

[Steward]

Let's be honest. With Tome of Magic, it's like they published a first draft. How much did they charge for that book again? What else were they so busy doing, to explain why they couldn't take the time to read over the book once to make sure that class features don't short-circuit each other, feats don't impair truenaming to no purpose, and entire lists of utterances actually have enough information to be used in play? (And the errata doesn't fix all of the horrible wording, by the way).

That's not even getting into the cumbersome and frustrating mechanics or the fact that the class receives limited support even in it's own book (I didn't read through the whole chapter the first time I played a Truenamer, and I didn't realize that every prestige class was designed to benefit some other Core class rather than... um... the Truenamer itself. But seriously, they couldn't let any of the prestige classes advance truenaming?)

Tome of Magic had three brilliant ideas but limited follow-through. It's probably one of my favorite books, and I really wish that they had spent as much as time on Shadowcasters or Truenamers as on the Binder.

[eggs]

Monk and Truenamer are somewhat strange examples. They both look like they do what they were supposed to do, just at a lower power-level than their competitors. If that's the metric, add every class with less than 9 levels of spellcasting.

As far as things not given enough thought, just open Complete Psionic to a random page. Even its good parts don't work right (Practiced Manifester wouldn't make sense, if it weren't known to be Practiced Spellcaster with the serial numbers filed off. It's not hard to build an Ardent that's supposed to learn a new power when no options are legally available. No three people will ever reach a consensus on how Erudite works. Linked Power and Synchonicity clearly break the action economy, especially when used together).

[Righteous Doggy]

Are you sure about truenamer doing what its supposed to do? if I read right theres a feat in the book that increases the DC of uttering your own truename, but foes trying to utter it explicitly aren't affected... How does this help exactly?

[eggs]

It makes it harder for a truenamer to get the minor boosts from a personal truename against a target. It only applies when a character expects to have their Truename researched (probably only for a BBEG or characters opposing a Truenamer BBEG), but otherwise, it gives a crappy benefit from a feat slot - not exactly a damningly distinct achievement in 3.5.

[Righteous Doggy]

Also the feat to give anyone truenaming as an inclass ability, and I don't see how thats really useful... And the book also has examples of truespeak, which you can't actually read becuase its facerolled :smalltongue:.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Also the feat to give anyone truenaming as an inclass ability, and I don't see how thats really useful... And the book also has examples of truespeak, which you can't actually read becuase its facerolled :smalltongue:.

Hey, I actually took Truespeak Training once on a Swashbuckler in a VERY low-op game. I eventually went into Bereft for fluff reasons.

The feat is good IF you need Truespeak ranks (Truespeak spells, Truespeak PrCs, etc...)

[eggs]

I'm pretty sure that the in-game representation of Truename Training is just reading Finnegan's Wake over and over until it's just easier to pretend the words mean something. :smalltongue:

[Aharon]

Except Truenamers don't get spells. Running around with scrolls of Polymorph just to have your class features function, sounds a bit poorly done for a class.....

Most martial classes need equipment to function, so if it's poorly done, it at least has precedence in WotC design.

Another thing that shouldn't be:
Sharn LA

[navar100]

"Don't like, don't read" isn't exactly a good defense. Just because people criticise things in the game doesn't mean that they cannot enjoy it. I enjoy D&D even through I hate many of the rules, like making entire races of one alignment or favorizing casters.

When not a day goes by where someone is not bashing 3E by complaining about Tiers, Fighters can't fly, Gate and Natural spell exists, ad infinitum, seeing yet another new message thread asking people for their gripes about 3E, I'm far beyond po'd already about it.

I really, really don't like 4E, but unlike people with 3E derangement syndrome, I do not feel the necessary urge to go into the 4E forum and complain about all the things I don't like about it.

It's not about one person having a problem with his fighter compared to the wizard and seeking advice. It's not even about the Tiers. It's "female dog" "female dog" "female dog" every day just for the sake of "female dogging".

I get it already. 3E is far from the most perfect game system ever, but it's not the horrendous abomination of feces people just can't keep quiet about.

[FMArthur]

When not a day goes by where someone is not bashing 3E by complaining about Tiers, Fighters can't fly, Gate and Natural spell exists, ad infinitum, seeing yet another new message thread asking people for their gripes about 3E, I'm far beyond po'd already about it.

I really, really don't like 4E, but unlike people with 3E derangement syndrome, I do not feel the necessary urge to go into the 4E forum and complain about all the things I don't like about it.

It's not about one person having a problem with his fighter compared to the wizard and seeking advice. It's not even about the Tiers. It's "female dog" "female dog" "female dog" every day just for the sake of "female dogging".

I get it already. 3E is far from the most perfect game system ever, but it's not the horrendous abomination of feces people just can't keep quiet about.
I really don't think you're reading it in the same spirit as intended by the posters. Specific things in the game are bad, and acknowledging that is not an indictment of the system. It's useful to pick out which things make the game better and worse because overall we really enjoy the game and want to get the most out of the experience for us and our groups. "Fighter is weak" doesn't mean "I hate Fighter!" and "3E has problems" doesn't mean "I hate 3E!"

[Steward]

I don't know about you, but I don't criticize things that I don't like. I love Tome of Magic, which is why I harp on it every chance I get. It was so cool, and it had so much potential, and they couldn't even read over it for typos. They had all these brilliant ideas, and they had the same follow-through as a kid writing a term paper an hour before it's due. If the whole thing was a piece of garbage, I wouldn't even care. But it's not, which is why I do.

[Rubik]

Things that should not be?

Fabricate + corpses into meat tree + Chained Raise Dead...

[Malachei]

I love 3E. I must say I also never had any issues with Polymorph or whatsoever. Yes, it is a flawed system, more or less like all game systems, but IMO, it is the best version of D&D ever (and I've enjoyed playing and DMing since 1st edition).

If it is a problem in your game, fix it. If it is not, well, shrug and be happy.

I wonder why so many people go game-tinkering often before any problems actually arise (like the "I am new to the game, and this is my first time DM'ing, but I want to ban tier 1 and 2 classes right away" threads)...

My personal experience is that ALL of the problems that arise in the game can be dealt with, in the game, right on spot or by making an ad-hoc ruling and then introducing a well-thought-out houserule next game session. All it takes is a competent DM.

Personally, I actually love to play (and run) the game. I once stopped playing in a group whose DM was adamant on creating a homebrew version and actually stopped the (interesting) campaign for an actual series of playtesting sessions, whose only purpose was to simulate one aspect of his rules changes. He did not plan to get published, so personally, it seemed a waste of time for me. He actually had great ideas for world-building, but completely stopped those and focused on the mechanics only. Therefore, the player characters did not develop, were frequently rolled anew or mechanically changed, nobody was attached to their character and the storyline and NPCs were mostly improvised for the sake of testing. It seemed like players as guinea pigs.

[killem2]

Fluffy text used in what otherwise is our rule books.

The way wotc wrote the rules for d&d, in comparison to how they write rules for magic: the gathering are so friggen grey.

[JadePhoenix]

I love 3E. I must say I also never had any issues with Polymorph or whatsoever. Yes, it is a flawed system, more or less like all game systems, but IMO, it is the best version of D&D ever (and I've enjoyed playing and DMing since 1st edition).

If it is a problem in your game, fix it. If it is not, well, shrug and be happy.

I wonder why so many people go game-tinkering often before any problems actually arise (like the "I am new to the game, and this is my first time DM'ing, but I want to ban tier 1 and 2 classes right away" threads)...

My personal experience is that ALL of the problems that arise in the game can be dealt with, in the game, right on spot or by making an ad-hoc ruling and then introducing a well-thought-out houserule next game session. All it takes is a competent DM.

Personally, I actually love to play (and run) the game. I once stopped playing in a group whose DM was adamant on creating a homebrew version and actually stopped the (interesting) campaign for an actual series of playtesting sessions, whose only purpose was to simulate one aspect of his rules changes. He did not plan to get published, so personally, it seemed a waste of time for me. He actually had great ideas for world-building, but completely stopped those and focused on the mechanics only. Therefore, the player characters did not develop, were frequently rolled anew or mechanically changed, nobody was attached to their character and the storyline and NPCs were mostly improvised for the sake of testing. It seemed like players as guinea pigs.
You are a genius.



Fluffy text used in what otherwise is our rule books.

That's the best part of the books.

[killem2]

You are a genius.



That's the best part of the books.

Not when you want to find a straight forward answer. The simple Q&A could be destroyed if someone with a brain and a real education in writing was in charge of editing those books.

[Namfuak]

Not when you want to find a straight forward answer. The simple Q&A could be destroyed if someone with a brain and a real education in writing was in charge of editing those books.

And maybe a lawyer.

[demigodus]

Most martial classes need equipment to function, so if it's poorly done, it at least has precedence in WotC design.

Another thing that shouldn't be:
Sharn LA

I'm not too familiar with playing martial classes, but how many of them need to consume a 700 gp magical item before every fight, and make a DC 27 check on a skill (UMD) that doesn't go off their primary attribute, when they have already blown most of their skill points on the skills that are supposed to be their main features (Truenaming + knowledges), just to be able to use class features?

Just seems like a massive investment of gold and skills, on top of the investments already needed...

[JadePhoenix]

Not when you want to find a straight forward answer. The simple Q&A could be destroyed if someone with a brain and a real education in writing was in charge of editing those books.

Rules Compendium, in a bookstore near you.

[Curmudgeon]

Rules Compendium, in a bookstore near you.
No, I really don't think so.

For instance, there's the issue of all the rule changes in the book. Wizards of the Coast has repeatedly (in multiple Errata files) explained the Primary Sources Errata Rule, stipulating that a rule in another book which disagrees with a primary source (core) book is always incorrect. Rules Compendium is labeled as a collection of rules rather than a rules supplement, and doesn't have any standing to override the core rules. But it proclaims itself the ultimate D&D rules authority, overriding every other part of D&D. So just there you've got a headache for every DM who allows RC in their games.

Rules Compendium is also pretty limited in what it covers. Any prestige class issues? Too bad; they're not discussed in that book. You want spell clarifications? Sucks to be you, because RC only addresses three spells (pages 25-26) and then creates new problems instead of solving other rules issues about spells.
Feather Fall
The addition of immediate actions to the game means that casting feather fall is now an immediate action instead of a free action, since you can cast the spell at any time, even if it’s not your turn. (See Action Types, page 7, for more information.) And following that reference:
You can’t use an immediate action when you’re flat-footed.
Are we having fun yet? :smallbiggrin:

[JadePhoenix]

No, I really don't think so.


We all know you don't like this book. Everything you said is in no way relevant to what I said.
The other poster complained books have fluff. I pointed him to fluff-less book.

[Tyndmyr]

Are you sure about truenamer doing what its supposed to do? if I read right theres a feat in the book that increases the DC of uttering your own truename, but foes trying to utter it explicitly aren't affected... How does this help exactly?

That's not the class, it's a feat. It IS a stupid feat.

But there's a lot of those. Not terribly special. Still, poorly designed feats arguably should not be.


Also the feat to give anyone truenaming as an inclass ability, and I don't see how thats really useful... And the book also has examples of truespeak, which you can't actually read becuase its facerolled :smalltongue:.

It's useful, yeah. Fiendbinder's logical progression is wizard, and taking levels for truenaming would gimp you. This feat allows you to make the prereq and get into the PrC without it being ridiculously painful in casting progression.

It's not great, though. Still, feats focusing on skills are rarely stellar.

[Curmudgeon]

The other poster complained books have fluff. I pointed him to fluff-less book.
What do you think all those sidebars are, then?
If you want to take a step toward a more realistic set of weather rules, I can suggest two techniques. First, modify the Weather table by region in your campaign world. Second ...

We had fought our way through any number of nasty opponents to get at the rakshasa mastermind. He laired deep underground, where we confronted him and his fiery minions in a large cavern that had pools of lava. Our warforged fighter ...

Say it with me—D&D is a living game. It’s an exciting, vibrant, evolving, and constantly changing entertainment experience unparalleled by anything else out there, because the creators and audience jointly inspire this change. That’s powerful. That’s unique. And it’s really, really fun. At the end of the day, that’s what D&D is all about.
Rules Compendium is positively chock full (about 20 pages worth, when you add them all together) of fluff!

[Steward]

To a certain extent, it would be impossible to make a completely foolproof game, since the playtesters only have a finite amount of time to test each rule and the players have forever to parse the rules over and over until they find some way of getting infinite skill bonuses at level 2 or something like that. I'm not too worried about things like PunPun or the Omnificer because no one really does things like that in actual play (and if they did, then -- as Malachei said -- it's really up to the gaming group to fix that in game). The ambiguity of the English language alone is also a serious barrier to the ideal of perfect clarity.


But there's a lot of those. Not terribly special. Still, poorly designed feats arguably should not be.

To be fair, I can't recall if there are any other feats that directly nerfs your character, to no conceivable advantage. I've always felt that that was a typo or another ambiguous wording, but it was never corrected in errata.


It's useful, yeah. Fiendbinder's logical progression is wizard, and taking levels for truenaming would gimp you. This feat allows you to make the prereq and get into the PrC without it being ridiculously painful in casting progression.

I agree. Getting Truespeak as a class skill for non-Truenamers is probably the only way to make any of the prestige classes in that section very good for most of us. They all seem to be geared towards monks, wizards, or clerics, despite using the Truespeak mechanic heavily.

[JadePhoenix]

Rules Compendium is positively chock full (about 20 pages worth, when you add them all together) of fluff!
Wow. 10% of the book is anectodes ans rules suggestion that apparently someone calls fluff. I'm ashamed I could say something so wrong as stating it had no fluff. I stand corrected.

[eggs]

It's useful, yeah. Fiendbinder's logical progression is wizard, and taking levels for truenaming would gimp you. This feat allows you to make the prereq and get into the PrC without it being ridiculously painful in casting progression.
Adding to that, Truespeak ranks can turn Dodge's +1 AC bonus into Total Concealment against one target, which can be useful in builds that have to suck up Dodge+Mobility prerequisites. Again niche, but that's about the best that can be said about 90% of D&D feats.

[Aharon]

I'm not too familiar with playing martial classes, but how many of them need to consume a 700 gp magical item before every fight, and make a DC 27 check on a skill (UMD) that doesn't go off their primary attribute, when they have already blown most of their skill points on the skills that are supposed to be their main features (Truenaming + knowledges), just to be able to use class features?

Just seems like a massive investment of gold and skills, on top of the investments already needed...

Obviously, you don't blow your skill points on your main features if you intend to get them via Polymorph.

To reduce the required investment, you could either use scrolls of PoA so it's only fights in which you don't get dispelled (this has the advantage of remaining PHB+ToM only).

Another way would be tile cheese (see Zaq's guide) so it's a low-gp one-time investment (requires PHB+ToM+CA).

A third way would be using 1/day items:
A minor schema of Draconic Polymorph (18.000 gp) plus a minor schema of metamagic item (persistent spell) (6.000 gp). This requires more sources (PHB+ToM+Draconomicon+ECS+MoE), but likely is the least objectionable. Of course, it's more than twice the price of the amulet of the silver tongue, but it's still doable by ninth.

[killem2]

Let me explain, I don't care if they use fluff, but when you use fluff on top of already badly written rules it is a nightmare.

[Venger]

Adding to that, Truespeak ranks can turn Dodge's +1 AC bonus into Total Concealment against one target, which can be useful in builds that have to suck up Dodge+Mobility prerequisites. Again niche, but that's about the best that can be said about 90% of D&D feats.

what?

how does that work?

[Morph Bark]

When not a day goes by where someone is not bashing 3E by complaining about Tiers, Fighters can't fly, Gate and Natural spell exists, ad infinitum, seeing yet another new message thread asking people for their gripes about 3E, I'm far beyond po'd already about it.

I really, really don't like 4E, but unlike people with 3E derangement syndrome, I do not feel the necessary urge to go into the 4E forum and complain about all the things I don't like about it.

It's not about one person having a problem with his fighter compared to the wizard and seeking advice. It's not even about the Tiers. It's "female dog" "female dog" "female dog" every day just for the sake of "female dogging".

I get it already. 3E is far from the most perfect game system ever, but it's not the horrendous abomination of feces people just can't keep quiet about.

If you don't like gripes with 3E, don't read them. :smallwink:

[Tyndmyr]

Obviously, you don't blow your skill points on your main features if you intend to get them via Polymorph.

To reduce the required investment, you could either use scrolls of PoA so it's only fights in which you don't get dispelled (this has the advantage of remaining PHB+ToM only).

Another way would be tile cheese (see Zaq's guide) so it's a low-gp one-time investment (requires PHB+ToM+CA).

A third way would be using 1/day items:
A minor schema of Draconic Polymorph (18.000 gp) plus a minor schema of metamagic item (persistent spell) (6.000 gp). This requires more sources (PHB+ToM+Draconomicon+ECS+MoE), but likely is the least objectionable. Of course, it's more than twice the price of the amulet of the silver tongue, but it's still doable by ninth.

There's also fun things like a familiar capable of using UMD items using Guidance of the Avatar on a wand constantly. There's a wild number of ways, depending on your tolerance for cheese and group playing style, but realistically, it's workable unless you're in a completely zero wealth campaign.

And hell, artificers suck in that campaign too. Many things do.