So Monte’s book is out with twenty spell levels (no more confusion?), more spells from various sources, some fixed spells, minor powers for spell casters, quicker hitpoint recovery. ¹
I’m curious, but we still have so much 3.5 core gaming to do...
On that note, I found Merric’s post on Understanding the Megadungeon quite interesting. The core idea is that monster vs. PC balance is in the hands of the players.
Given the problematic encounters in my CityOfBrass game where players just have to accept what I throw at them, a megadungeon would offer an alternative. Players get to pick the risk they want to take by choosing where they go.
And hopefully you don’t put the roper right at the entrance. ;)
#RPG #thoughts
(Please contact me if you want to remove your comment.)
⁂
So I kinda already bought the BOXM 😄 So I’ll either bring along my laptop or the PDF on a memory stick if you want to take a look.
I think the 20 spell level idea is brilliant.
– Adrian 2008-02-21 10:03 UTC
---
Your Arcana Evolved one-shot got me interested in the changes made to the magic system. And apparently there are some changes I endorse: Getting rid of those spells that players cast every single time, wasting time and not adding to the fun at the table – *Bless*, *Prayer*, *Haste*, *Protection from Evil*, various ability buffing spells replaced by a single one, and less save or die spells. I like it! I’ll read through the BOXM spells and will consider using those for my next campaign. 😄
– Alex Schroeder 2008-02-25 09:56 UTC
---
I am finally reading the actual spells in BOXM, and he has made some large changes. Very few save-or-die effects (except for things with built-in HD or hp limits, like *Circle of Death* or *Power Word Kill*), *Haste* gives you a bonus to AC and jump and an extra move action, *Protection from Evil* grants no bonuses to AC or saves, *Raise the Dead* can only be cast by a level 19 cleric, just to name a few.
I disagree with a few decisions – *Implosion* doesn’t seem much better than *Harm* or *Destruction*, but is considerably higher level, things of this or that nature – but it seems like a step in the right direction if you want to stick to the basic framework of 3.5E spells.
– Adrian 2008-02-25 13:02 UTC
---
Why are all the ability boosting spells like *Bull’s Strength* 1d4+1 instead of +4? Then again, they last for an hour per level. After a while certain key players will just have them always on. I’m fine with that, as it will use up an appropriate spell slot. And you can cast them twice to get the better of two rolls. I’m not sure how playtested this is. It appears that upon reaching level ten or eleven, my players use a lot less stat boosting spells. I wonder why? Has a standard action become too expensive? Do they have magic items granting them a bonus that does not stack? I’ll have to take a look.
No *Prayer* and *Bless*! Cool. I like that. I like the disciplines. These offer ways of specializing spell casters in ways that improve the game. But there’s a drawback: If you use Divine Inspiration, this is an interesting *Bless*. And it’s just a complicated. Taking it again at 4th level and making it permanent is the real improvement.
I also like how Divine Presence can heal others, but *they* need to spend an action doing it. That grants clerics some much needed smiting actions. No *Divine Power* makes sure that clerics are not just the better fighters. I hope I haven’t missed a spell that reinstates that power.
I’m unsure regarding fighter power. Every class gets a feat at every level, so the fighter bonus feats are not as valuable anymore. I’d have to try it to see whether I wanted fighters to get a bonus feat every single level. It might make them more impressive...
And no Attacks of Opportunity when getting up in order to weaken trip attacks somewhat. As I have a trip master in my group, I know how necessary this is!
This book is the first collection of house rules that I might consider for a new campaign. I like it.
– Alex Schroeder 2008-02-26 18:53 UTC
---
The 1d4+1 stat-boosting spells for 1 hr/lvl was the way 3.0 worked. They made the change in 3.5E to a static bonus and a shorter duration. The problem with the 1d4+1 versions is that, because they are 1 hr/lvl, if a spellcaster has it, he is burning spell slots because the party wants this long-term buff.
Yeah, usually after a certain level, the PCs have +4 stat boosters. And a standard action in combat is highly, highly valuable – actions really are the currency of the game.
The fighter is stuffed by these rules, frankly, since now a barbarian can get lots of the juiciest feats, except Weapon Specialization – but who cares, because I can rage and get +2/+3/+4 to attack and damage, depending on my level. And I move faster and have more hit points. I think this points to the need for using the *Tome of Battle* classes, or something along those lines, to replace the current fighter. Just giving more bonus feats won’t work IMO – they need to be very, very potent, and difficult to access without being a fighter and expending a lot of feats. *PHB2* started going in this direction, but if a standard character has 20 feats at 20th level, even those feats are not hard to get for any class.
– Adrian 2008-02-27 08:06 UTC
---
It appears that upon reaching level ten or eleven,
my players use a lot less stat boosting spells. I wonder why?
Regarding the monday group: Most player already have a +2 ability item (on their most favorite ability), so the +4 granted from the spell isn’t worth using a standard action anymore.
– Sektat 2008-02-28 11:53 UTC
---
Good point. Once you have +2 ability score items, and you can cast something like *Prayer*, which is better than a +2 increase to a single ability, and affects allies and enemies in a large area to boot, you are going to cast that single spell, rather than spending multiple spells (and actions) on *Bull’s Strength*, *Bear’s Endurance*, and the like.
– Adrian 2008-02-28 15:13 UTC
---
The following are just a reminder to myself:
The Tequila Sunrise Tome of Collected House Rules and Variants for Dungeons & Dragons 3rd Edition