| Author |
 Topic  |
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
 Posted - 09 Jun 2003 : 06:38:10
|
These are the 3.5 tidbits taken from the EN World site, regarding Dragon Magazine #309 -
*There are no more exclusive skills. Anyone can take skill ranks in any skill.
*Magic missile is off of the Bard's spell list, and it mentions the have and inside track on Enchantment on Div. spells.
*The weight of some items have changed, small and large sized characters will notice the difference.
*Anyone can wield a weapon of any size, after a size penalty if you use a weapon made for someone of a different size.
*Since there are no more class exclusive skills, some skills require another skill to be effective. The example given was the new Wild Empathy skill will require ranks in diplomacy to work effectively.
*New feat: Craft Construct
*New condition: Sickened (-2 on all checks including weapon damage rolls)
*In the 3.5 MM bonus feats will be indicated with a superscript "b" after the feat name.
*New Spell: Crushing Despair (no details given other than it's a Bard and Wizard spell)
What do you all think of these changes?,
May your learning be free and unfettered
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
branmakmuffin
Senior Scribe
USA
428 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jun 2003 : 16:21:28
|
Sage of Perth:
quote:
*There are no more exclusive skills. Anyone can take skill ranks in any skill.
Good. "Less arbitrainess = "more good".
quote:
*Magic missile is off of the Bard's spell list, and it mentions the have and inside track on Enchantment on Div. spells.
"More arbitrainess" = "less good" on the MM thing. I wonder what the rationale is. Are bards not supposed to have attack spells? Did the designers envision armies of bards conquering Faerun with Magic Missiles? The Divination and Enchantment thing sounds sensible given the nature of D&D bards.
quote:
*The weight of some items have changed, small and large sized characters will notice the difference.
This makes sense, since they did it with armor in 3e.
quote:
*Anyone can wield a weapon of any size, after a size penalty if you use a weapon made for someone of a different size.
Hm, somehow I can't picture a 3' tall character wielding a 6' long sword.
quote:
*Since there are no more class exclusive skills, some skills require another skill to be effective. The example given was the new Wild Empathy skill will require ranks in diplomacy to work effectively.
Diplomacy is already too much of a "catch all" skill.
quote:
*New feat: Craft Construct
No comment.
quote:
*New condition: Sickened (-2 on all checks including weapon damage rolls)
I guess, since "sickened" has a particular meanign within the rules. We could add endless situational modifiers, though: uncertain -1 to hit, hesitant -1 to hit, juiced +1 to hit and damage, really enthusiastic +2 to hit, very discouraged -2 to hit, intestinal gas -1 to hit.
quote:
*New Spell: Crushing Despair (no details given other than it's a Bard and Wizard spell)
That sounds like an attack spell. Maybe bards aren't supposed to have damage-causing spells?
quote:
What do you all think of these changes?,
|
Edited by - branmakmuffin on 09 Jun 2003 16:22:17 |
 |
|
|
Bookwyrm
Great Reader
USA
4740 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jun 2003 : 20:15:06
|
Okay. In the other topic you mentioned this, it sounded like you were saying that the class/non-class skill system would be abandoned. However, the exclusive skills, I think, would be best abandoned. I've thought that reading lips, for instance, shouldn't just be for bards and rogues. I can do that myself, and I'm neither. (Okay, I'm more like rank 1 in that skill, but you get the idea.)
Some of them, like Decipher Script, would be pointless for non-spellcasters, of course. Spells like comprehend languages fix that for such people.
The rest of the points, I think, were summed up by Bran. |
Hell hath no fury like all of Candlekeep rising in defense of one of its own.
Download the brickfilm masterpiece by Leftfield Studios! See this page for more. |
Edited by - Bookwyrm on 10 Jun 2003 21:52:22 |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jun 2003 : 12:20:29
|
I actually found most of these changes pretty encouraging. Some have problems, but for the most part, the changes I think will work quite well. I have already started limited play tests with this material, and other 3.5 material released so far, just to create some idea of how the changes of 3.5 will affect the game.
May your learning be free and unfettered
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jun 2003 : 12:23:19
|
I guess the real question to ask now is, once the changes of 3.5 become official core rulings, how long do you think it will be before you convert to the new rules.
Will you use a wait-and-see approach, change over to the new system straight away, or remain with standard 3e rules.
I am curious as to everyone's answers,
May your learning be free and unfettered
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
branmakmuffin
Senior Scribe
USA
428 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jun 2003 : 21:45:26
|
I will never convert to 3.5 because I don't use (A)D&D mechanics. The 3 core books are only sourcebooks for me.
Bookwyrm, decipher script is an exclusive, trained-only rogue/bard skill. |
Edited by - branmakmuffin on 10 Jun 2003 21:45:56 |
|
|
|
Bookwyrm
Great Reader
USA
4740 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jun 2003 : 21:51:22
|
| Pay attention, Bran! Look at what we were talking about! |
Hell hath no fury like all of Candlekeep rising in defense of one of its own.
Download the brickfilm masterpiece by Leftfield Studios! See this page for more. |
|
|
|
branmakmuffin
Senior Scribe
USA
428 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jun 2003 : 22:56:10
|
We are talking about 3.5. What are you talking about? Are you bitching because I (admittedly being picky) commented on what you said about Decipher Script? If so, let's analyze what you said.
You said "Some of them [skills, presumably], like Decipher Script, would be pointless for non-spellcasters [my emphasis], of course. Spells like comprehend languages fix that for such people [spellcasters, presumably]." Decipher Script is a non-spellcaster-oriented skill. Why would you say it's either pointless for non-spellcasters or pointless to make it a non-exclusive skill, whichever one you meant? Did you mean to say it is pointless for spellcasters?
I didn't misquote you, 'cause I sure don't want to get on your bad side (that's sarcasm). |
|
|
|
Bookwyrm
Great Reader
USA
4740 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jun 2003 : 23:03:31
|
Yes, I deserve that last, Bran. Perhaps I should take my medication. 
What I was referring to was the previous paragraph:
"However, the exclusive skills, I think, would be best abandoned."
Make sense now? As you can see, I also am talking about 3.5e.
Edit: Yes, I meant to say spellcasters, not non-spellcasters. That one was my mistake. |
Hell hath no fury like all of Candlekeep rising in defense of one of its own.
Download the brickfilm masterpiece by Leftfield Studios! See this page for more. |
Edited by - Bookwyrm on 10 Jun 2003 23:05:46 |
|
|
|
branmakmuffin
Senior Scribe
USA
428 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jun 2003 : 23:24:53
|
| I wasn't commenting on the "previous paragraph". I agree with that, I have nothing else to add to it. |
|
|
|
Bookwyrm
Great Reader
USA
4740 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jun 2003 : 23:31:34
|
| Okay, look. For the last time. I was speaking of the fact that 3.5 gets rid of the idea of exclusivity, and opens all skills to all classes. As such, it made no sense for you to 'correct' me by saying that Decipher Script is only available to bards and rogues, as that has no bearing on this context. |
Hell hath no fury like all of Candlekeep rising in defense of one of its own.
Download the brickfilm masterpiece by Leftfield Studios! See this page for more. |
Edited by - Bookwyrm on 10 Jun 2003 23:32:41 |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jun 2003 : 08:14:34
|
Please gentle-sages, this is a library. The other partrons are becoming a little anxious around these displays, both here and in the other forum section. Please control your argumentative natures, or you may succeed in attracting the attention of the wise Alaundo.
In fact I think I hear his stern footsteps now  .
May all your learning be free and unfettered
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
Edited by - The Sage on 11 Jun 2003 08:53:09 |
|
|
|
Alaundo
Head Moderator
United Kingdom
5692 Posts |
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
|
|
Elrond Half Elven
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
322 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jun 2003 : 21:46:51
|
WOW God! the sage is pyscic, or shoudl that be psyco?   .
Harahara hrar, sorry i couldnt resist that old one. I must say some of the changes are looking better... some. I disagree witht he bard being given less damaging spells. I also think that the new condition is perhaps useful, but there are already alot of conditions. The new feat, hmm well i presume that is talking about golems . To quote Bran "No comment." Thw eight of items, well i think its just a minor change, and no more exclusive skills i am not sure of, hmm more flexiblity i suppose.
Hanx
Elrond |
Once upon a midnight dreary, while i pondered, weak and weary,
Over many a quaint and curious volume of forgotten lore-
While i nodded, nearly napping, suddenly there came a tapping,
As of some one gently rapping, rapping at my chamber door.
-The Raven by Edgar Allan Poe |
|
|
|
branmakmuffin
Senior Scribe
USA
428 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jun 2003 : 00:54:38
|
Elrond:
Is it true then that they took some (or all?) damage-causing spells away from bards? You're not going off my assumption, are you, as my comment was pure conjecture? |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jun 2003 : 13:24:20
|
I certainly hope that is the actual case. I have always thought that the Bard should have very little in the way of damaging-causing spells. To me it has never sat well with the whole Bard class structure.
May all your learning be free and unfettered
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Bookwyrm
Great Reader
USA
4740 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jun 2003 : 16:19:16
|
| Well, he ought to have some. Some sort of low-level offensive spell . . . not magic missile (which, by the way, I can't find on a bard spell list anyway), but how about inflict spells? |
Hell hath no fury like all of Candlekeep rising in defense of one of its own.
Download the brickfilm masterpiece by Leftfield Studios! See this page for more. |
Edited by - Bookwyrm on 13 Jun 2003 16:19:52 |
|
|
|
Elrond Half Elven
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
322 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jun 2003 : 16:48:15
|
Eh Bran, i kind of thought that because Magic Missile was taken away from the bard, then he would have fewer offensive magic spells. I argee with Bookwyrm, a bard should have a number of low-level offensive spells. I feel however that he should have the ability to cast magic missile. Perhaps Wizard of the Coast feel that Magic Missile is so popular that it is overused? Almost every mmage character i have seen or played has it! lol 
Hanx
Elrond |
Once upon a midnight dreary, while i pondered, weak and weary,
Over many a quaint and curious volume of forgotten lore-
While i nodded, nearly napping, suddenly there came a tapping,
As of some one gently rapping, rapping at my chamber door.
-The Raven by Edgar Allan Poe |
|
|
|
branmakmuffin
Senior Scribe
USA
428 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jun 2003 : 16:48:47
|
Sage (and Elrond):
Now that I think about it, perhaps you're right. A bard isn't supposed to be a quasi-mage/thief (as I complain he was in 2e). I take back what I said in my first response about it being arbitrary to take damage-causing spells away from bards. Now I see that it makes sense. |
Edited by - branmakmuffin on 13 Jun 2003 16:50:51 |
|
|
|
Elrond Half Elven
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
322 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jun 2003 : 16:58:14
|
What woudl you say then Bran would be the best choice of spells to allow a Bard to have? I'd say spells that change the condition of his oponent, or emotion spells. I would also say that he should have a lot of Divining spells and protection spells. Enchantment spells would be high on my list and perhaps a few selected illusion spells. Any thoughts?
|
Once upon a midnight dreary, while i pondered, weak and weary,
Over many a quaint and curious volume of forgotten lore-
While i nodded, nearly napping, suddenly there came a tapping,
As of some one gently rapping, rapping at my chamber door.
-The Raven by Edgar Allan Poe |
|
|
|
branmakmuffin
Senior Scribe
USA
428 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jun 2003 : 20:31:26
|
Elrond:
I agree wth your list: emotion-affecting spells, illusion spells, Divination spells, since they have to do with knowledge. I can't think of anything else off hand. I imagine this is what Sage had in mind when he said that spells like Magic Missile aren't really in keeping with the nature of the bard.
I was too quick to disagree with his comment. |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jun 2003 : 07:29:05
|
Yes, that's correct Bran, that's exactly what I was thinking. I have always believed that in relation to the 3e Bard, to have access to offensive spells like magic missile, and the like would create the same kind of problems that sprang up with the 2e Bard. The classes are fairly balanced as it is now, to have another arcane spellcaster who casts powered damaging magic simply throws the balance out of alignment. The Bard should represent what he has always said to have been- a Jack-of-all-Trades, but master of none, much like how I envision Benjamin Franklin to be ( sorry about that, but I have been reading his autobiography of late).
The Bard should excel at a little of what every class has to offer, although I find myself thinking that perhaps the spell Burning Hands should be one offensive spell the Bard is actually allowed to keep. I really can't explain why, it just seems to fit. Anyway with regards to his other spells, I agree with Elrond's list. This is how I have always imagined the Bard would be like with regard to arcane spells.
May all your learning be free and unfettered
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jun 2003 : 07:32:36
|
BTW, I have noticed that a lot of responses, except Bran's first don't answer my second question about whether you as a gamer will be making any use of 3.5. Please refer to my third post for details about what I asked, as I would still like to know everybody opinions.
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
Edited by - The Sage on 14 Jun 2003 07:34:07 |
|
|
|
Elrond Half Elven
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
322 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jun 2003 : 11:11:45
|
Ok Sorry Sage.
As a Player i WONT be using any of the 3.5 material for at least a year or two, and here is my reason: I have only recientally moved over to 3E and i dont particularly want to fork out another 60 quid for books (Whats that about 90 dollars?) Especially since i havent had much of a chance to Play 3E alot. SO in short no i won't be changing for a while at least. What about you Sage?
Hanx
Elrond |
Once upon a midnight dreary, while i pondered, weak and weary,
Over many a quaint and curious volume of forgotten lore-
While i nodded, nearly napping, suddenly there came a tapping,
As of some one gently rapping, rapping at my chamber door.
-The Raven by Edgar Allan Poe |
|
|
|
Bookwyrm
Great Reader
USA
4740 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jun 2003 : 11:37:39
|
| Perhaps you like that spell because it's a minor-level, but impressive-looking spell? I mean a sheet of flame shooting from your hand -- that's got to be something to see. I think that it would fit in with the bard's personality. However, I also stand by my belief that the bard should have some inflict spells as well. |
Hell hath no fury like all of Candlekeep rising in defense of one of its own.
Download the brickfilm masterpiece by Leftfield Studios! See this page for more. |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jun 2003 : 14:28:01
|
Elrond, I will probably maintain the core 3e rules for the time being. I have the 3.5 core rulebooks already on order, and will most likely purchase them when they are shipped in. But as for incorporating the revised rules into my campaigns, well as a DM I have four separate 3e campaigns running at the moment, two of which are FR related (the other two are PS and DL), I will probably wait until all the existing campaigns are concluded. From there I will then start using the revised rules format. However this may be several months to at least a year. My existing DL campaign has been designed to take into account the soon to be released DLCS in August, and will most likely extend the campaign several months.
Good learning...
- The Sage of Perth: For all your Realms Lore needs
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jun 2003 : 15:09:27
|
Actually Bookwyrm, you could be right there. It would seem impressive-looking, and for a Bard, appearances and displays are everything. But now that I actually realise it, Burning Hands isn't even on the Bard's spell list.
Perhaps then the Bard should simply retain all the 'showy' arcane spells - castings that look impressive but really don't do a whole lot of damage.
May all your learning be free and unfettered
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Arion Elenim
Senior Scribe
933 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jun 2003 : 16:09:55
|
Greetings,
Hey folks...uhm....
I've been playing the same bard for four years now....and..........
Magic Missle is NOT on the bard's spell list. Never has been in 3rd ed.....where are you folks getting this?....Unless I have a defective PH, I don't see it....anywhere....
While I trust the knowledge of the Senior Sages, you folks may have dropped the ball on this one.....
|
My latest Realms-based short story, about a bard, a paladin of Lathander and the letter of the law, Debts Repaid. It takes place before the "shattering" and gives the bard Arion a last gasp before he plunges into the present.http://candlekeep.com/campaign/logs/log-debts.htm |
|
|
|
Arion Elenim
Senior Scribe
933 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jun 2003 : 16:15:47
|
Oh...
and does anyone know if Bardic Music is going to be revamped at all? I always thought it was embarassingly weak. The ability to give temporary hit dice and +2 to attack to a couple of other folks is the greatest power the bard's music has.
Why doesn't bardic music include Mass Charm type stuff? I dunno, I guess they think that Fascinate is enough....but it doesn't work if absolutely ANYTHING else is going on...
My twelfth level bard hasn't used his bardic music in combat for two years....there is simply no reason....his spells are much more effective, and the music just wastes time.....I use the music as roleplay stuff to enhance the sessions in that regard...they seem to have no other use...
Ah well..... |
My latest Realms-based short story, about a bard, a paladin of Lathander and the letter of the law, Debts Repaid. It takes place before the "shattering" and gives the bard Arion a last gasp before he plunges into the present.http://candlekeep.com/campaign/logs/log-debts.htm |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jun 2003 : 16:18:43
|
I had originally taken the information from a statement made at EN World about DM #309. At first I had thought it was a little strange since I also thought that the magic missile spell was never listed on the Bard's spell list. I had just naturally assumed that some other piece of source material may have added it to the list.
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
3.5 Tidbits from DM #309
