Retrogaming in 3.5 for Powergaming fun?

[Chaosticket]

I know there is a massive divide between people who think Roleplaying is far more important than Gaming. Personally I am not good at Roleplaying well with any new people or groups. It takes me time to meet people, get to know them, and make a character. Its especially problematic to make a character that is an interesting personality but also fits power goals so I feel Im making mistakes. My first thoughts in new games is about the Gameplay, not the Roleplay. Because of that Im wondering if I should try out Dungeons and Dragon 3.5?

I have more experience in Pathfinder and both 2nd and 5th edition Dungeons and Dragons. A major difference between the editions is the relative potential power from character builds. In 3.5 its possible to do things the other editions just dont allow or have nerfed so badly its not worth trying.

Im wondering if 3.5 is worth trying out just for the Powergaming potential? Ive heard and looked up interesting ideas, especially Multiclassing and Prestige Classes. That would keep things interesting enough to try meeting random strangers.

[Fizban]

Personally I don't think any game should be chosen for specific powergaming reasons. You can choose a game because it has lots of options to play around with, but if your specific goal is to throw off the expected balance of the game, then it sounds to me like you're not there to play the game.

In theory 3.5 is a ridiculous cheese-fest but that's only as true as the group makes it, because any DM that actually wants to run the game without that only needs to say "how about no?" and poof no more cheese-fest. I will guarantee you that every game with rules has people who will exploit those rules to powergame it as hard as possible. Reading char-op forum posts may make it sound like "everyone" plays 3.5 that way, but if you actually go looking for groups like that, you may be disappointed. I can't say for sure though- there are plenty of people who've mentioned pickup groups on roll20 or other networking places that just cheese it up way past where they wanted to play.

I too am more interested in roleplaying games for the game than the roleplay, but that doesn't mean I want "powergaming." On the contrary, I fell in love with the game presented to me by the 3.0 starter set, PHB, and DMG. As much as I like all the extra material, I'm also eager to squash all the OP garbage various designers slipped or dumped in and reign the game in to what it was meant to be.

Now, if what you actually mean to say is that you want a game with a higher power level that's something else entirely. 5e absolutely intentionally reduced player character power, and the transition from 2e to 3.x absolutely increased it from what I understand, and Pathfinder. . . is a bunch of houserules for 3.5. 3.5 is the edition which reaches the highest power level, and if you'd rather a more familiar dnd than trying something like Exalted, then yeah try it.

[GrayDeath]

Honestly, I would actually rate Pathfinders Power level as higher than 3.5s.

Yeah, you can break 3.5 much more easily (and in about a dozen more ways at the least), but thats doing things that obviously were not even remotely intended (Infinite Loops say hello, as do some really whacky PRC Combos and some spell combos or single spells as well), but if you just play it "out of the box" without scourging forums or 3+ years of in depth Experience, there is little real difference in how high the power goes in the higher echelons of classes, and in medium and lower ones all PF Classes tend to have more beef.


Now if you REALLY want to play something ridiculously powerful without any regard for balance (and think you can get a group for it together) go for Exalted 2nd (2.5) Edition or Scion.

Both allow your Characters to do stuff from the start that can overpower 99% of the folk you meet easily.

Now if thats something GOOD is another question altogether, as is what the DM will actually make you face ^^

[Avigor]

If you want to play around with powergaming cheese just for kicks, without actually researching min-maxing, play Munchkin.

[Chaosticket]

There is Powergaming and then there is Munchkinmism. They can crossover but they arent the same.

For example try making a Magic Knight character through the ingame rules. Start as a Fighter or Wizard and eventually get the Eldritch Knight as Prestige Class.

Now to go into Munchkinism add Abjurant Champion and Spellsword levels. So you have a Fighter/Wizard/Eldritch Knight/Abjurant Champion/Spellsword. Thats mild on the scale. More seriously you can go into rule loopholes like an ability that gives you a spell-like ability and use that to count as a requirement for a prestige class.

Prestige classes are particularly interesting in 3.5. In Pathfinder they are obsolete because of increased base class power, reduction of benefits from Prestige classes, and a heavy emphasis on variant classes through Class Archetypes.

5th edition Dungeons and Dragons is fine for what it is, but due to the heavy downgrading of difficulty and power there isnt much of a struggle to improve a character. Theres no looking for ways to have 20 feats per character, multiclassing a Hulking Hurdler, just something as basic as a Magic Knight that isnt mediocre. Its very basic.

[Chaosticket]

Im still looking for ways to make games interesting. Power Fantasy gameplay is an easy choice as I like character building. Its a question whether Pathfinder can be used for this or if hopping between different kinds of games is a better idea.

[Eldariel]

There is Powergaming and then there is Munchkinmism. They can crossover but they arent the same.

For example try making a Magic Knight character through the ingame rules. Start as a Fighter or Wizard and eventually get the Eldritch Knight as Prestige Class.

Now to go into Munchkinism add Abjurant Champion and Spellsword levels. So you have a Fighter/Wizard/Eldritch Knight/Abjurant Champion/Spellsword. Thats mild on the scale. More seriously you can go into rule loopholes like an ability that gives you a spell-like ability and use that to count as a requirement for a prestige class.

Prestige classes are particularly interesting in 3.5. In Pathfinder they are obsolete because of increased base class power, reduction of benefits from Prestige classes, and a heavy emphasis on variant classes through Class Archetypes.

That's a very strange definition of munchkinism. Generally munchkin is used to refer to abusing rules and specifically with the malicious intent of taking the spotlight/ignoring the other players. Powergaming still tends to refer to building with power as the main goal while optimisation is a more neutral catch-all for building an optimised whatever. A Fighter/Wizard/Abjurant Champion/Spellsword (EK is completely unnecessary and you can even make do without a Fighter level to make it better) is an optimised gish. It's not terribly bad at its job and while it's worse than a Wizard with no other class levels, it's close enough in power that they can be played in the same game. Playing a Beholder Mage or even just a Tainted Scholar or Cancer Mage with Festering Anger would be more akin to actually breaking things. Now, Wizard 5/Fighter 5/Eldritch Knight 10 might be a "WoTC intended Gish" but it's also terrible at actually gishing for a multitude of reasons so not going that is merely basic awareness of the system and its flaws and not falling to trap options (much like not taking Toughness as your every feat). Certainly falls under optimisation but I wouldn't call that Powergaming. Playing a Druid is much more often powergaming but it's really a matter of how it's done rather than what's the actual class combo.


Im still looking for ways to make games interesting. Power Fantasy gameplay is an easy choice as I like character building. Its a question whether Pathfinder can be used for this or if hopping between different kinds of games is a better idea.

Well, PF can be used to it but the ceiling is lower and the floor is higher. If you want to play the god-level characters, 3.5 with maximal optimisation level is the way to go. Anything lower than gods though, PF does fine too.

[Jack_Simth]

In theory 3.5 is a ridiculous cheese-fest but that's only as true as the group makes it, because any DM that actually wants to run the game without that only needs to say "how about no?" and poof no more cheese-fest. I will guarantee you that every game with rules has people who will exploit those rules to powergame it as hard as possible. Reading char-op forum posts may make it sound like "everyone" plays 3.5 that way, but if you actually go looking for groups like that, you may be disappointed. I can't say for sure though- there are plenty of people who've mentioned pickup groups on roll20 or other networking places that just cheese it up way past where they wanted to play.I've largely stopped thinking of things in terms of cheese. Higher and lower optimization? Sure. Not intended use of things? Sure. However... high power is not a bad thing. Low power is not a bad thing. It's being out of range of the expected power level of the table that's a bad thing. See, a DM can easily adapt if the party is all at the same power level - if you've got a party of four high-powered T1 folks that regularly steamroll Party Level +5 encounters? Easy enough for the DM to use +7 encounters instead. If you've got a party of four low-powered T5 folks that regularly have severe problems with Party Level -4 encounters? Easy enough for the DM to use -5 encounters instead. The bigger problem happens when there's a severe power discrepancy: There's few good ways to run an encounter. Pick a high CR opponent to challenge the higher op end of the party? The low-op portion of the party can't contribute much. Pick a low CR opponent to challenge the lower op end of the party? The higher op end steamrolls it. There are ways to do it, but they tend to strain credulity after a little bit. It's much easier on the DM if everyone's in the same ballpark. Sometimes that'll mean the low-op person tuning up. Sometimes that'll mean the high-op person tuning down. But it's better if everyone's in the same ballpark, power-wise.

Or to use The Meme (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFuMpYTyRjw): It's not that Angel Summoner is a bad character. It's not that BMX Bandit is a bad character. It's just that the two don't belong at the same gaming table.

[CharonsHelper]

Honestly, I would actually rate Pathfinders Power level as higher than 3.5s.

Yeah, you can break 3.5 much more easily (and in about a dozen more ways at the least), but thats doing things that obviously were not even remotely intended (Infinite Loops say hello, as do some really whacky PRC Combos and some spell combos or single spells as well), but if you just play it "out of the box" without scourging forums or 3+ years of in depth Experience, there is little real difference in how high the power goes in the higher echelons of classes, and in medium and lower ones all PF Classes tend to have more beef.


Yeah - Pathfinder raised the floor and lowered the ceiling a bit in general (though they broke another couple things on the way).

Besides multi-classing, a few 3.5 feats such as Shock Trooper are a bit over-the-top, and 3.5 Polymorphing can get pretty crazy even with the base MM, much less if you find the worst offenders. (And a 3.5 Druid's Wildshape? Ugh - nasty.)

But in general I agree. Pathfinder boosted most of the worst classes a good bit (especially after Unchained) and nerfed some of the worst spells & combos. (Though they then made summoning OP.) Though - still with substantial caster/martial issues starting around level 8-10ish. (which isn't quite as early as 3.5)


I've largely stopped thinking of things in terms of cheese.

Even Pun Pun?

[Chaosticket]

Dungeons and Dragons has long been "front heavy" in terms of character decisions and benefits. Rolling stats until you have 18s is better than just accepting whatever as youll never be able to raise many of your stats permanently. Its telling that Gym Workout Manuals are supposed to be super rare items.

Power and versatility are generally treated as the same thing in D&D. a Fighter is "weak" as it can only fight. No magic, no skills. So a class with those features is more versatile, but to keep the Fighter happy they have to be worse at what the Fighter does so you get something like a Cleric. I find it funny when a Cleric ends up be stronger instead.

In Terms of Power the highest tier characters are usually the versatile ones. The reason why the Wizard is considered more powerful than the Sorcerer even in Pathfinder (where the Sorcerer got nice improvements), is that the Wizard can learn ALL its possible spells and actually has a high amount of skills by being an Intelligence based class. That is much better than 2 skills that might work and a handful of known spells known per spell tier.

Im leaning more and more towards munchkinism because the D&D game flaws makes anything open-minded be lumped into that. Any changes to anything are "game breaking" from learning Arcane and Divine magic, to raising statistics by exercise or gaining skill points from practice. Pathfinder raised the bar in some areas but put lock on others to paradigm shift that players would establish. 5th edition D&D went further with that to make the game mostly fixed after level 1.

[Arbane]

Now if you REALLY want to play something ridiculously powerful without any regard for balance (and think you can get a group for it together) go for Exalted 2nd (2.5) Edition or Scion.

Both allow your Characters to do stuff from the start that can overpower 99% of the folk you meet easily.


If you want to stick with something D&Dish but really high-powered from the start (and probably better-balanced than Exalted OR some versions of D&D), try Godbound.


Im still looking for ways to make games interesting. Power Fantasy gameplay is an easy choice as I like character building. Its a question whether Pathfinder can be used for this or if hopping between different kinds of games is a better idea.

If you like high-power, the d20 system, and making characters, how about Mutants and Masterminds? (It was made for superheroes, but there are fantasy sourcebooks.) Like any point-buy game with build-your-own-powers, the GM is required to look over characters to make sure they can't break the setting in half with a single ability- unless that's what you're into.

[Chaosticket]

Im looking for more freedom than I think a class/caste/fixed destiny based game can provide.

Ive heard about 3.5 having combinations that are basically far divergent from the "holy trinity" of Fighter-Rogue-Wizard equivalents that blend powers or break the game by having non-linear abilities like the ability to gain permanent benefits without leveling up. Archivist, Erudite, Illithid Savant, and others. Powers that take power away from the Game Master and put it in the players hands like Leadership feat. Spells that can warp reality or create new planes like Wish, Genesis, Create Demiplane.

4th edition as a reputation but I honestly see people playing all Dungeons and Dragons editions like that. Every character is supposed to fill a role of usefulness on the team, like Tanks, Ranged DPS, Skillmonkey, Utility SPellcaster, etc.

5th edition is the antithesis of what I would like to see. Im very frustrated that is is the only edition anyone near me plays.

Best I can do is just look up other interesting games like Runequest and Mutants & Masterminds that I likely will never be able to play.