D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5e] Will they fix the other H spell?

[hong]

Nothing wrong with that. But giving them a means to ignore mind-affecting spells (a couple of d8 damage won't worry the fighter types to much) is to much, especially cause they can try the save first.

Nonsense. So they can avoid this effect a limited number of times per day. They're still vulnerable to everything else the foozle can throw at them, and by spending three feats and boosting their Cha, they limit themselves in the other ways in which they could either boost their defnses or hit back.

So you give the fighter types the means to overcome their weakness (mind-affecting spells), wizards the means to overcome theirs (low HP)?

What, you mean like via Toughness, Dwarf's Toughness, Giant's Toughness, Dragon's Toughness...?

What's next? Rogues getting fighter BAB and d10 so they can survive counterattacks?

See, I KNEW that you'd be arguing that disintegrate should be 4th level before long.

I think every class should have a weak link, which isn't so easy to overcome (and if they want to, they'll have to lose effectivity in those sectors they're good at!)

Which part of "spend three feats and bump up Cha" do you have trouble understanding?

So the fighter wants to be better against mind-affecting stuff? Better get a high WIS, Iron Will, ...

... Indomitable, Unyielding Soul, ...

... or even multiclass into a class with good will saves. Wizard wants more HP? Take toughness, get a high CON, or, again, multiclass, into something with more HP (barbarian, for example).

Are you having fun arguing with yourself?

Also, the matter of not going after orcs because they're so strong can also be applied to clerics: if they are to dangerous for you, don't attack them! But sometimes you'll have no choice: the wizard will see an orc before him, the fighter that cleric. In both cases they have to depend on their comrades to help them (the wizard will depend on his fighter comrades that they draw the attacks on them - it's not hard to get the attention of an orc - and the fighter will depend on his cleric friend to either counter hold person spells, or cast remove paralysis - or freedom of movement, on higher levels. That's the spirit of D&D: to combine the powers of the individual in order to get a powerful party where people cover each other's back, mask each other's weaknesses and improve each other's strengths. It's not made for single characters without weaknesses.

What on earth are you babbling about?

 

[Victim]

Realistically, a wizard can't use the improved toughness feats because his base Fort save won't be low enough to qualify.

On the other hand, fighters have lots of feats, and will often take Iron Will to help with Will saves. So characters interested in improving will defenses will already want Iron Will, so that only 2 additional feats and a high Cha stat.

In some cases, a high CHA is already attractive for other reasons. For example, Paladins, fighter/paladins, divine champions, etc all have a reason for decent CHA. Also, by high levels, characters could have a CHA boosting item to make the requirement easier.

It might be more interesting to make the strain of shrugging off the spell more than mundane HP damage. Fatigue or ability damage might be better.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I think 1d8/level is too low - at least 2d6 damage per spell level, I think, is fine.

At higher levels, 9d8 damage isn't going to frighten the fighter as much as a 9th-level spell (Dominate Monster takes away his will, other 9th-level spells might even be nastier, etc).

 

[hong]

At higher levels, 9d8 damage isn't going to frighten the fighter as much as a 9th-level spell (Dominate Monster takes away his will, other 9th-level spells might even be nastier, etc).

If, after spending three feats and bumping up my Cha, I'm still as frightened by dominate monster as I was before, I would think that something was wrong.

 

[MerakSpielman]

Hmm....

All spells that effect somebody else adversely doing hp damage instead of more varied effects....

Hmm....

"Quick! Stop that man! We must find out who hired him to assassinate the Baron! No, wait, don't cast Hold Person!" Dice are rolled, "You killed him, idiot! Now what will we do?"

"Hey, I'm going to try to cast Charm Person on the shopkeeper when he's not looking so I can get better prices." the DM makes a couple rolls, "Ok, you killed him." "What!!??"

Can anybody think of any others? Honestly, the goal of spellcasting isn't ALWAYS to kill kill kill as fast as you can, you know. Don't you people (referring to the people advocating this system) do anything with your games other than fight enemies? Our last game ended after 5 hours without us ever even rolling initative (Not typical, even for us, but a fun example).

 

[Kae'Yoss]

"you people" is exaggerating, since it's really only one who's advertising that silly feat, which is the creator himself.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

Hmm....

All spells that effect somebody else adversely doing hp damage instead of more varied effects....

Hmm....

"Quick! Stop that man! We must find out who hired him to assassinate the Baron! No, wait, don't cast Hold Person!" Dice are rolled, "You killed him, idiot! Now what will we do?"

"Hey, I'm going to try to cast Charm Person on the shopkeeper when he's not looking so I can get better prices." the DM makes a couple rolls, "Ok, you killed him." "What!!??"

Can anybody think of any others? Honestly, the goal of spellcasting isn't ALWAYS to kill kill kill as fast as you can, you know. Don't you people (referring to the people advocating this system) do anything with your games other than fight enemies? Our last game ended after 5 hours without us ever even rolling initative (Not typical, even for us, but a fun example).

Well some of us were advocating is that save or die spells do pseudo HP. That your HP reflect so many varied things why not also reflect your ability to relfect your resistance to spells. So in the pseudo HP game world you take HP damage and if the spell finishes you off the effect takes place, it doesn't kill you, your jsut held, turned into a toad whatver. But since it does pseudo HP it does make it easier to kill you since other people will be hacking it as well.

Actually they would do HP, its just HP would be seen slightly differently. And no a hold person wouldn't kill you though it might help kill you since it would weaken your defenses.(HP)

 

[Larcen]

..."Ok, you killed him." "What!!??"...

Hong, in order to avoid this you may want to consider changing your feat a bit. Instead of dying, why not have the mind affect take hold if you are ever reduced to zero HPs by this feat? It can be described as having so weakened your body, that it finally took hold of your mind. M2¢.

Of course, then you will have a Charmed person with zero HPs. Maybe the damage should be subdual.

 

[hong]

Hong, in order to avoid this you may want to consider changing your feat a bit. Instead of dying, why not have the mind affect take hold if you are ever reduced to zero HPs by this feat? It can be described as having so weakened your body, that is finally took hold of your mind. M2¢.

Of course, then you will have a Charmed person with zero HPs. Maybe the damage should be subdual.

That's not a bad idea, actually.

 

[Darklone]

Well, this could be drifting to houserules...

I read about some houserules in the net where the DM replaced all paralyze at once spells (such as Hold Person) with temporary ability damage, instant kill spells with a (high) damage cap and instant dominate spells ... were already balanced by allowing multiple saves.