dungeones and dragons

[dragoncmd]

i just play the xbox game, alot eaiser :?

 

 

 

which theres 3 (did they make a 3rd console bauldurs gate? that would make it 4)

[dragoncmd]

I really didn't like the "expanding" quality of the Fireball spell in 2e. That was hell in small, connecting rooms.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Besides, I like the fact that all classes advance at the same rate, instead of having independent XP tables for each one. I also like the idea of Prestige Classes better than Kits, even though PrCs now are pretty much just tools to boost power rather than to actually represent membership in a specific organisation. I'm trying to get my group to realise that, but eh...

 

 

 

what you said about the expanding fireball is true and needed to be toned down but its still more realistic than what we have now (it can only get smaller not larger)

[Exarch]

 

The only experience with D&D I've had is playing Icewind Dale. Although I appreciate how indepth and role-playish it is, I don't like the stereotypes it places on races/classes. Many fantasy games do this. Your a dark elf, can you be good? No, dark elves are always evil! No dwarf magicians either, dwarves are technologists!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Even the game I am playing now does this (Guild Wars).. all monks look clean, shaven, like angels. While all warriors are big and brutish, and all necromancers are "evil" looking with bony bodies and scars all over their face.

 

 

 

dark elves are always evil?

 

 

 

Who's Drizzt Do-Urden then? (possibly the most well known character in D&D)

 

 

 

Read the Dark elf trilogy by R.A. Salvatore (good author too)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My point wasn't that dark elves are evil, but that many RPGs say stuff like that. I don't know what restrictions are in D&D, but I do know when I played Icewind Dale that if I was a certain race or class, I could only be a certain alignment, etc.

[Pete_the_Viscous]

Anyone who doesn't, read the "the order of the stick" comics... right now. They're D&D based, but funny even to people who don't know the rules.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read The order of the stick, episode 44 for more on the dark elf business.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For anyone who doesn't want to read that: Yes, they're meant to be evil... but since Drizzt, everyone wants to make a duel scimitar wielding, chaotic good dark elf. It's like making a sephiroth character. Nowadays, one is more original by making an evil, stupid half-orc than a clever, noble, good one, too.

[dragoncmd]

I used to play official dnd about a year ago and really enjoyed it. The Living Greyhawk campaign I think it was called, and the area it was set in was Perrenland (being the place where "Australia" was situated). I quit after getting my character to 8th level, 7th level rogue/ 1st level barbarian halfling. :lol:

 

 

 

I haven't played the 3.5 rules before (I think), what are the main differences between it and 3.0?

 

 

 

in general most of the classes became more powerful the ranger gets like 10 times as many abilities (including the cheapest ability in the game) they added new psionic attack and defense modes (a definite plus) and reduced some of the more obscure actions and turned them into free or move-equivelent actions

[dragoncmd]

 

 

The only experience with D&D I've had is playing Icewind Dale. Although I appreciate how indepth and role-playish it is, I don't like the stereotypes it places on races/classes. Many fantasy games do this. Your a dark elf, can you be good? No, dark elves are always evil! No dwarf magicians either, dwarves are technologists!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Even the game I am playing now does this (Guild Wars).. all monks look clean, shaven, like angels. While all warriors are big and brutish, and all necromancers are "evil" looking with bony bodies and scars all over their face.

 

 

 

dark elves are always evil?

 

 

 

Who's Drizzt Do-Urden then? (possibly the most well known character in D&D)

 

 

 

Read the Dark elf trilogy by R.A. Salvatore (good author too)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My point wasn't that dark elves are evil, but that many RPGs say stuff like that. I don't know what restrictions are in D&D, but I do know when I played Icewind Dale that if I was a certain race or class, I could only be a certain alignment, etc.

 

 

 

sorry but the dark elf trilogy is good :D

 

 

 

the main reason for alignment restrictions is that many classes don't work without them.

 

 

 

For example a paladin is supposed to be a holy warrior devoted to justice it doesn't make sense for a paladin to be going around slaughtering people.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alignment restrictions for clerics are based on your deity (I think everyone agrees that that makes sense)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Druids are supposed to be defenders of nature so they can't stray too far away from nuetrality (their orders don't want exterior motives getting in the way of their work)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

barbarians... well... a lawful barbarian??!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

rouges, fighters, mages, socerors, and rangers are open with is nice (psions and physic warriors are too)

 

 

 

and bards I don't remember (I mean how many people play bards?)

 

 

 

I think 2nd edition had race restrictions but they took that away (though if you play and outsider your still going to have some problems if you don't follow those alignment settings, I mean, try playing a good bodak)

[indy500fan]

Anyone who doesn't, read the "the order of the stick" comics... right now. They're D&D based, but funny even to people who don't know the rules.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read The order of the stick, episode 44 for more on the dark elf business.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For anyone who doesn't want to read that: Yes, they're meant to be evil... but since Drizzt, everyone wants to make a duel scimitar wielding, chaotic good dark elf. It's like making a sephiroth character. Nowadays, one is more original by making an evil, stupid half-orc than a clever, noble, good one, too.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

heh, im up to 143 (from 1) and they are pretty funny :lol: how many are there?

[Evil_Elf]

I knew some people that played. One night I wasnt doing anything so I joined them for the hell of it, it was kind of fun, in a really geeky way. Just about everything was over my head, I was along for the ride more or less.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No idea what I played, pretty sure it started with F though, and I was some kind of chaotic dwarf.

[dragoncmd]

I knew some people that played. One night I wasnt doing anything so I joined them for the hell of it, it was kind of fun, in a really geeky way. Just about everything was over my head, I was along for the ride more or less.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No idea what I played, pretty sure it started with F though, and I was some kind of chaotic dwarf.

 

 

 

D&D is NOT for geeks... its for nerds GET IT RIGHT PEOPLE!!

[Zonorhc]

 

I regularly play 3.5e, and I like it a lot more than the other editions I've played.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2nd edition had a steep learning curve and unnecessarily complex rules for AC, saves and stat-based bonuses. THAC0 was a disaster in my eyes. And come on, Save vs. Wands?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3rd edition was a marked improvement with the simplification of the whole system and the introduction of the d20 license and the fact that the D&D franchise was no longer under the control of TSR. There were redundant skills and outright broken spells (Haste), but it was better than 2e.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pete, the multiclassing system they have now allows for more versatility and more character development opportunities. In 2e, you were pretty much stuck with what you started off as, regardless of what happened to your character. Now, your human rogue might discover some talent for sorcery, then after a near-death experience involving arcane magic, decide that serving the gods is the way to go. You just couldn't do that in previous editions without house-ruling.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Computer-based RPGs using any D&D ruleset are crap. They remove some of the best aspects of the game, like hyper-creative thinking, heavy role-playing and outright interesting spells. I mean, I could have found so many ways to efficiently beat Neverwinter Nights if it was a tabletop module. There's no fun in playing a Wizard in CRPGs because all the fun non-combat-but-can-be-used-creatively spells are usually taken out, like Wall of Stone, Transmute Rock to Mud, Transmute Mud to Rock, Explosive Runes...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I've gone off on a tangent here, so I'll stop.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For the record, I'm currently playing a human evoker/plane shifter.

 

 

 

I personally liked 2nd edition but I understand you complaients

 

 

 

I think they ruined the ranger (my favorite class) in 3.5 by giving it hide in plain sight which is the most un-realistic ability ever thought up (though a few stupid prestige classes had it in 3.5)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What was wrong with haste?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For what you said about the computer games. I understand your complaints about not having enough freedom to do what you want (try morrowind its not D&D based but its an extremely good game in that aspect) but I thought that most of the ones for pc were done extremely well but the console games took the fun of character creation (argueably the most important part of D&D) out of the game and even though I have not played the console games I do not see any way they could have made up for this.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Where is the "plane shifter" class from? Also do you use a premade campaign setting or a homemade one (I use Forgotten Realms though I have practice making more than a few cities because I am always stuck being DM)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Plane Shifter is from the Manual of the Planes. We play a homebrew campaign setting, mostly because nobody feels like buying premade ones and the DM doesn't like to be restricted by setting-defined material. Sure, you can modify it, but you might as well make your own world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Haste was terrible in 3e because of the fact that it gave an extra action per round. For spellcasters, this meant a lot of extra artillery being hurled, and entire encounters being finished four or more rounds faster than they would have. It was downright unbalancing when you consider that a spell available to Wizards at 5th level and Sorcerers at 6th would allow you to cast two spells per round, where the most similar effect in 3.5e is a 17th/18th-level acquisition spell (Shapechange, Choker form).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The whole Drizzt Do'Urden argument is pointless. I think it has been established long ago that people who play drow are more often than not Drizzt clones because they want to be "cool" or "original" by being a chaotic good drow wielding two scimitars and deep-seated emotional problems. Most of them top it off with little to no roleplaying whatsoever.

[willyhenriksen]

a friend of me is bard and is changing over to be a dragon-elf so we begin to be scared of hes long fingernails, if you are a paladin and gets evil you become a ex-paladin and lose some stuff...

[dragoncmd]

 

 

I regularly play 3.5e, and I like it a lot more than the other editions I've played.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2nd edition had a steep learning curve and unnecessarily complex rules for AC, saves and stat-based bonuses. THAC0 was a disaster in my eyes. And come on, Save vs. Wands?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3rd edition was a marked improvement with the simplification of the whole system and the introduction of the d20 license and the fact that the D&D franchise was no longer under the control of TSR. There were redundant skills and outright broken spells (Haste), but it was better than 2e.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pete, the multiclassing system they have now allows for more versatility and more character development opportunities. In 2e, you were pretty much stuck with what you started off as, regardless of what happened to your character. Now, your human rogue might discover some talent for sorcery, then after a near-death experience involving arcane magic, decide that serving the gods is the way to go. You just couldn't do that in previous editions without house-ruling.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Computer-based RPGs using any D&D ruleset are crap. They remove some of the best aspects of the game, like hyper-creative thinking, heavy role-playing and outright interesting spells. I mean, I could have found so many ways to efficiently beat Neverwinter Nights if it was a tabletop module. There's no fun in playing a Wizard in CRPGs because all the fun non-combat-but-can-be-used-creatively spells are usually taken out, like Wall of Stone, Transmute Rock to Mud, Transmute Mud to Rock, Explosive Runes...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I've gone off on a tangent here, so I'll stop.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For the record, I'm currently playing a human evoker/plane shifter.

 

 

 

I personally liked 2nd edition but I understand you complaients

 

 

 

I think they ruined the ranger (my favorite class) in 3.5 by giving it hide in plain sight which is the most un-realistic ability ever thought up (though a few stupid prestige classes had it in 3.5)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What was wrong with haste?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For what you said about the computer games. I understand your complaints about not having enough freedom to do what you want (try morrowind its not D&D based but its an extremely good game in that aspect) but I thought that most of the ones for pc were done extremely well but the console games took the fun of character creation (argueably the most important part of D&D) out of the game and even though I have not played the console games I do not see any way they could have made up for this.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Where is the "plane shifter" class from? Also do you use a premade campaign setting or a homemade one (I use Forgotten Realms though I have practice making more than a few cities because I am always stuck being DM)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Plane Shifter is from the Manual of the Planes. We play a homebrew campaign setting, mostly because nobody feels like buying premade ones and the DM doesn't like to be restricted by setting-defined material. Sure, you can modify it, but you might as well make your own world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Haste was terrible in 3e because of the fact that it gave an extra action per round. For spellcasters, this meant a lot of extra artillery being hurled, and entire encounters being finished four or more rounds faster than they would have. It was downright unbalancing when you consider that a spell available to Wizards at 5th level and Sorcerers at 6th would allow you to cast two spells per round, where the most similar effect in 3.5e is a 17th/18th-level acquisition spell (Shapechange, Choker form).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The whole Drizzt Do'Urden argument is pointless. I think it has been established long ago that people who play drow are more often than not Drizzt clones because they want to be "cool" or "original" by being a chaotic good drow wielding two scimitars and deep-seated emotional problems. Most of them top it off with little to no roleplaying whatsoever.

 

 

 

Ok ok you win on the Dearmon N'a'shezbaernon argument. (you know you're in trouble if you know what that means lol) though the only drow character I made was a fairly unorginal preistess of Ellistree (spelling? too lazy to walk two steps and look it up)

 

 

 

you've proved to me yet again I need to get manual of the planes and planar handbook.

 

 

 

I use the forgotten Realms but most of my campaign is set in the underdark and an undeveloped continent where australia would be in rl which allows me to use the FR gods and some of the underdark cities but I also am able to do alot of city design myself (very little is set in faerun though I also use a bit of Kara-tur).

 

 

 

I understand what you were saying about haste but how did they change it for 3.5? or did they get rid of it? (I hope not that was a classic spell)

[Zonorhc]

Haste

 

 

 

Transmutation

 

 

 

Level: Brd 3, Sor/Wiz 3

 

 

 

Components: V, S, M

 

 

 

Casting Time: 1 standard action

 

 

 

Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)

 

 

 

Targets: One creature/level, no two of which can be more than 30 ft. apart

 

 

 

Duration: 1 round/level

 

 

 

Saving Throw: Fortitude negates (harmless)

 

 

 

Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless)

 

 

 

The transmuted creatures move and act more quickly than normal. This extra speed has several effects.

 

 

 

When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with any weapon he is holding. The attack is made using the creatureÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s full base attack bonus, plus any modifiers appropriate to the situation. (This effect is not cumulative with similar effects, such as that provided by a weapon of speed, nor does it actually grant an extra action, so you canÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t use it to cast a second spell or otherwise take an extra action in the round.)

 

 

 

A hasted creature gains a +1 bonus on attack rolls and a +1 dodge bonus to AC and Reflex saves. Any condition that makes you lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) also makes you lose dodge bonuses.

 

 

 

All of the hasted creatureÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s modes of movement (including land movement, burrow, climb, fly, and swim) increase by 30 feet, to a maximum of twice the subjectÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s normal speed using that form of movement. This increase counts as an enhancement bonus, and it affects the creatureÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s jumping distance as normal for increased speed.

 

 

 

Multiple haste effects donÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t stack. Haste dispels and counters slow.

 

 

 

Material Component: A shaving of licorice root.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It no longer gives an extra standard action per round, so no more dual-casting. Also, they took out Mass Haste and instead allowed Haste to target multiple friendlies, so it didn't actually become too weak.

[willyhenriksen]

bump?

[dragoncmd]

 

Haste

 

 

 

Transmutation

 

 

 

Level: Brd 3, Sor/Wiz 3

 

 

 

Components: V, S, M

 

 

 

Casting Time: 1 standard action

 

 

 

Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)

 

 

 

Targets: One creature/level, no two of which can be more than 30 ft. apart

 

 

 

Duration: 1 round/level

 

 

 

Saving Throw: Fortitude negates (harmless)

 

 

 

Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless)

 

 

 

The transmuted creatures move and act more quickly than normal. This extra speed has several effects.

 

 

 

When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with any weapon he is holding. The attack is made using the creatureÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s full base attack bonus, plus any modifiers appropriate to the situation. (This effect is not cumulative with similar effects, such as that provided by a weapon of speed, nor does it actually grant an extra action, so you canÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t use it to cast a second spell or otherwise take an extra action in the round.)

 

 

 

A hasted creature gains a +1 bonus on attack rolls and a +1 dodge bonus to AC and Reflex saves. Any condition that makes you lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) also makes you lose dodge bonuses.

 

 

 

All of the hasted creatureÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s modes of movement (including land movement, burrow, climb, fly, and swim) increase by 30 feet, to a maximum of twice the subjectÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s normal speed using that form of movement. This increase counts as an enhancement bonus, and it affects the creatureÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s jumping distance as normal for increased speed.

 

 

 

Multiple haste effects donÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t stack. Haste dispels and counters slow.

 

 

 

Material Component: A shaving of licorice root.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It no longer gives an extra standard action per round, so no more dual-casting. Also, they took out Mass Haste and instead allowed Haste to target multiple friendlies, so it didn't actually become too weak.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

yeah so it is still a nice spell I see what your complaint was now