# I've got the 3.5 PHB in front of me



## roytheodd (Jun 9, 2003)

My office got an advance copy. I don't have time to read it now, but thumbing through it I will say that it's interior contents look A LOT like the interior contents of the 3.0 version. The artwork is mostly the same (pictures for gear, races, and iconic characters). The chapters are laid out in the same order. Really, it's going to have a comfortable feel to it because it looks so much like what we already have (right down to the artwork of Lidda's burnt face while misuing a magical device).


----------



## coyote6 (Jun 9, 2003)

Say, uh, completely unrelated to this thread, but, uh, someone -- Eric Noah! Yeah, Eric Noah, he wanted to know where exactly "the office" is located, so he could, uh, send you something. A, uh, card. Yeah, a card. And, just so I- err, he can be sure you'll be there to get the card, could you tell us- err, him, Eric Noah, that is -- tell him when your office will be empty?

'Cause, you know, Eric Noah. Wanted to know. Told me to ask.


----------



## EricNoah (Jun 9, 2003)

Reeeeaaally.....

Please provide a street address.  I'll be right over!

*edit* LOL, coyote, we're on the same wavelength!


----------



## Hida_Kurain (Jun 9, 2003)

So what did they do to the Paladin?
What's the smite progression and any other abilities?
-Hida Kurain


----------



## Endur (Jun 9, 2003)

*Power Attack and Die Hard*

Did they make any changes to the Power Attack feat?  Do you inflict more damage with a two handed weapon?

What does the "Die Hard" feat do?


----------



## Sixchan (Jun 9, 2003)

No!  What we really want to know is:

Who is the sexiest Gnome?


----------



## EricNoah (Jun 9, 2003)

I want to know about the Tumble skill.  Is is an opposed check now or still a static DC?


----------



## Drezden327 (Jun 9, 2003)

roytheodd said:
			
		

> *My office got an advance copy. I don't have time to read it now, but thumbing through it I will say that it's interior contents look A LOT like the interior contents of the 3.0 version. The artwork is mostly the same (pictures for gear, races, and iconic characters). The chapters are laid out in the same order. Really, it's going to have a comfortable feel to it because it looks so much like what we already have (right down to the artwork of Lidda's burnt face while misuing a magical device). *




I think you should scan the book and e-mail me a copy, so that I can verify that it is in fact the 3.5 PHB, yeah, that's it just to verify.   Tough job, but I'll humbly volunteer to do it


----------



## roytheodd (Jun 9, 2003)

Hida_Kurain said:
			
		

> *So what did they do to the Paladin?
> What's the smite progression and any other abilities?
> -Hida Kurain *




Smite Evil is gained at 1/day at 1st level, 2/day at 5th level, 3/day at 10th level, 4/day at 15th level, and 5/day at 20th level.

Smite Evil (Su): Once per day, a paladin may attempt to site evil with one normal melee attack. She adds her Charsima bonus (if any) to her attack roll and deals 1 extra point of damage per paladin level. For example, a 13th-level paladin armed with a longsword would deal 1d8+13 points of damage, plus any additional bonuses for high Strength or magical effects that would normally apply. If the paladin accidentally smites a creature that is not evil, the smite has no effect, but the ability is still used up for that day.
At 5th level, and every five levels thereafter, the paladin may smite evil one additional time per day, as indicated on table 3-12: The Paladin, to a maximum of five times per day at 20th level.


----------



## Drezden327 (Jun 9, 2003)

roytheodd said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Smite Evil is gained at 1/day at 1st level, 2/day at 5th level, 3/day at 10th level, 4/day at 15th level, and 5/day at 20th level.
> 
> ...




What are the scribing costs for Wizards in 3.5??


----------



## Drawmack (Jun 9, 2003)

did they do anything to my beloved cleric?


----------



## Phasmus (Jun 9, 2003)

Are there any significant changes to the Sorcerer, outside of the ability to swap spells every other level?


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jun 9, 2003)

How in the Nine Hells did you get a hold of this without an NDA? And can you give me advice on getting a copy now too?


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Jun 9, 2003)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> *How in the Nine Hells did you get a hold of this without an NDA? And can you give me advice on getting a copy now too? *




YEA!


----------



## roytheodd (Jun 9, 2003)

EricNoah said:
			
		

> *I want to know about the Tumble skill.  Is is an opposed check now or still a static DC? *




Still static


----------



## Cam Banks (Jun 9, 2003)

I'm somewhat suspicious of this "my office got an advanced copy" statement. Sounds like something that really should be covered by an NDA, unless it's a review copy or something like that.

Cheers,
Cam


----------



## MasterLich (Jun 9, 2003)

K everyone hold their pants up and dont spew (yet). Let us all give him some time to read and then we can start badgering him.

IMHO, lets give him a day or so, then the harassing commences 

Personnaly i would like to any changes to cleric but it can wait until you are ready.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jun 9, 2003)

Cam Banks said:
			
		

> *I'm somewhat suspicious of this "my office got an advanced copy" statement. Sounds like something that really should be covered by an NDA, unless it's a review copy or something like that.
> 
> Cheers,
> Cam *




Even if it was a review copy, wouldn't it be covered by something so all the info doesn't get out right away...?


----------



## Vivictus (Jun 9, 2003)

It comes out in a month. There probably isn't an NDA. I know someone who used to have a friend that worked at WotC but she wasn't a gamer, so she'd send my friend stuff she got like a month in advance, sometimes more. He had the original 3E core books all a month early cuz of that.


----------



## EricNoah (Jun 9, 2003)

I've been getting most WotC releases about two weeks before it hits the stores, so this isn't so much of a stretch.  Would be interested to know what kind of "office" this is though (a magazine, a video game producer, etc.).


----------



## JoeBlank (Jun 9, 2003)

Roy's profile indicates he is a game wholesaler. This goes along with the WoTC store employee example mentioned above. Very believable.

And although he has a low post count, we low post count guys have got to stick together. I can't imagine he would troll about something like this. 

Keep feeding us info, Roy. (Waiting on the sorcerer scoop, myself.)


----------



## roytheodd (Jun 9, 2003)

Drezden327 said:
			
		

> *
> What are the scribing costs for Wizards in 3.5?? *




Hmm, the wizard description refers me to page 99 and then a page in the DMG. Page 99 reads:

"Benefit: You can create a scroll of any spell that you know. Scribing a scroll takes one day for each 1000gp in its base price. The base price of a scroll is its spell level x its caster level x 25gp. To scribe a scroll, you must spend 1/25 of this base price in XP and use up raw materials costing one-half of this base price.

Any scroll that stores a spell with a costly material component or an XP cost also carries a commensurate cost. In addition to the costs derived from the base price, you must expend the material component or pay the XP when scribing the scroll."


I do not have the DMG to see what else is said.


----------



## Drezden327 (Jun 9, 2003)

roytheodd said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Hmm, the wizard description refers me to page 99 and then a page in the DMG. Page 99 reads:
> 
> ...




I'm sorry if I wasn't clear Roy- I meant the costs to add a spell (scribe) to a wizard's spellbook - the costs were reduced, but we don't know to what.  Thanks.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jun 9, 2003)

EricNoah said:
			
		

> *I've been getting most WotC releases about two weeks before it hits the stores, so this isn't so much of a stretch.  Would be interested to know what kind of "office" this is though (a magazine, a video game producer, etc.). *




It just seems odd to me with how they're trying to hype the Revision and such...and keep other things so silent and secretive until its released. *shrugs* Not complaining though, info is nice. Just curious.


----------



## roytheodd (Jun 9, 2003)

JoeBlank said:
			
		

> *Roy's profile indicates he is a game wholesaler. This goes along with the WoTC store employee example mentioned above. Very believable.
> 
> And although he has a low post count, we low post count guys have got to stick together. I can't imagine he would troll about something like this.
> 
> Keep feeding us info, Roy. (Waiting on the sorcerer scoop, myself.) *




Mayhaps with all the attention I should keep quiet. I don't really want to spoil all the contents, but really just wanted to share that the book looks REMARKABLY like the 3.0 version. I was expecting a lot of cosmetic change only to find almost none.


----------



## Enceladus (Jun 9, 2003)

Just retype the entire contents of the book here please.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 9, 2003)

roytheodd said:
			
		

> *
> quote:
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Originally posted by EricNoah
> ...




Err... not exactly static.


----------



## coyote6 (Jun 9, 2003)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> *It just seems odd to me with how they're trying to hype the Revision and such...and keep other things so silent and secretive until its released. *shrugs* Not complaining though, info is nice. Just curious.  *




Hey, WotC has to ship the books to distributors at some point . . . Worse comes to worse, someone will get tsk-tsked, and Roy will be forced to be silent.

In the meantime, let's let the man speak. Or write, as the case may be. 

How are Perform, Jump, & languages handled now?

(PS: Eric, I think I figured out which office that would be, but it's probably not worth the airfare for ya . . .  )


----------



## ForceUser (Jun 9, 2003)

roytheodd said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Mayhaps with all the attention I should keep quiet. I don't really want to spoil all the contents, but really just wanted to share that the book looks REMARKABLY like the 3.0 version. I was expecting a lot of cosmetic change only to find almost none. *



It's hard to improve upon perfection


----------



## Drezden327 (Jun 9, 2003)

coyote6 said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Hey, WotC has to ship the books to distributors at some point . . . Worse comes to worse, someone will get tsk-tsked, and Roy will be forced to be silent.
> 
> ...




Andy Collins stated today, on his boards, that there are no changes to the speak languages skill in 3.5


----------



## Endur (Jun 9, 2003)

One of my friends used to work for a magazine that reviewed upcoming products.  He got everything 4 to 8 weeks early ... WOTC, White Wolf, S&S, etc.  

He didn't have to sign NDA's or anything else because his job was to review the products and write about what is coming out soon.

The publishing industry will actually put different covers on advance review copies.  But the gaming industry just sent him the regular products.

Tom


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jun 9, 2003)

coyote6 said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Hey, WotC has to ship the books to distributors at some point . . . .  *




pfft! Everyone knows that books just magically appear on shelves for people to buy them.  
Besides, I'm more interested in the DMG and MM at this point.


----------



## roytheodd (Jun 9, 2003)

Drezden327 said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I'm sorry if I wasn't clear Roy- I meant the costs to add a spell (scribe) to a wizard's spellbook - the costs were reduced, but we don't know to what.  Thanks. *




From a scroll, it looks like a wizard needs to spend a day studying the spell, then make a Spellcraft roll (DC 15 + spell's level) with a +2 if it's of the same school as the wizard's specialty. Success means it's been copied, failure means they can't learn that spell until the wizard gains another point of Spellcraft. Successfully copying the spell makes it vanish from the scroll, but failure leaves the scroll intact.


----------



## Delgar (Jun 9, 2003)

Let's see, things I'd like to know:

Bard Spell List
New Spells
Druid's Wildshape and Spell list

Delgar


----------



## roytheodd (Jun 9, 2003)

On that note I think I'll remain silent though. I really don't want the bosses to reprimand me.


----------



## Thorntangle (Jun 9, 2003)

roytheodd said:
			
		

> *From a scroll, it looks like a wizard needs to spend a day studying the spell, then make a Spellcraft roll (DC 15 + spell's level) with a +2 if it's of the same school as the wizard's specialty. Success means it's been copied, failure means they can't learn that spell until the wizard gains another point of Spellcraft. Successfully copying the spell makes it vanish from the scroll, but failure leaves the scroll intact. *



Whoa.. no monetary cost whatsoever? Unbelievable.


----------



## Hand of Evil (Jun 9, 2003)

Well know that thsi is goign to be very very busy thread!


----------



## Drezden327 (Jun 9, 2003)

Thorntangle said:
			
		

> *
> Whoa.. no monetary cost whatsoever? Unbelievable. *




The rule Roy cites is the same as 3.0 - he just never informs us as to what the new cost is.  Roy - would be great if you could find what the COST is to add spells to the spellback (probably still per page of spellbook).  Although, we all understand why you want to be quiet.


----------



## ForceUser (Jun 9, 2003)

Thorntangle said:
			
		

> *
> Whoa.. no monetary cost whatsoever? Unbelievable. *



Yes, but if you fail you have to wait until you level to try to learn the spell again. Very 2nd edition.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jun 9, 2003)

Thorntangle said:
			
		

> *
> Whoa.. no monetary cost whatsoever? Unbelievable. *




I read that and knew something was off...competely forgot about the money...unless their's something somewhere else about it costing, this should make Wizard players happy.


----------



## roytheodd (Jun 9, 2003)

Drezden327 said:
			
		

> *
> 
> The rule Roy cites is the same as 3.0 - he just never informs us as to what the new cost is.  Roy - would be great if you could find what the COST is to add spells to the spellback (probably still per page of spellbook).  Although, we all understand why you want to be quiet. *




I'll find this for you today. This I can do... just give me an hour or so.


----------



## Nebuchadnezzar (Jun 9, 2003)

> On that note I think I'll remain silent though. I really don't want the bosses to reprimand me.



Please gives us more, Roy, please give us more.

How is the new druid, and how was the monk changed? They will TRULY suck compared to the boosted barbarian, ranger and fighter classes if they don't get a boost themselves.


----------



## Number47 (Jun 9, 2003)

Wouldn't scribing cost rules be in the DMG?


----------



## Thorntangle (Jun 9, 2003)

Another quick one - what are the feats the ranger can select from on their fighting-style path? Any limitations?


----------



## Thorntangle (Jun 9, 2003)

Number47 said:
			
		

> *Wouldn't scribing cost rules be in the DMG? *



Scroll, yes. But the rules for scribing new spells into a spellbook is in the PHB.


----------



## Henry (Jun 9, 2003)

I'll make two offers here:

1) Roy, if you feel the need, I or any other mod will be glad to close this thread at any time at your request.

2) Let's make only one request of Roy for one question - no asking the same ones repeatedly, and only let him answer the ones he feels he can answer without hurting himself in any way.



I must admit, I am a little disappointed. I was hoping for a little more difference in the look. Can you answer me one question:

---Are those annoying underlines in the background behind the text gone now? 

But I am glad of the info provided so far. Thanks!


----------



## coyote6 (Jun 9, 2003)

Henry said:
			
		

> *---Are those annoying underlines in the background behind the text gone now? *




B-b-but! I liked the lines! 

PS: Of course the look isn't entirely new; they had to remain compatible with the previous visual styling. Plus, they didn't have time to test all the new art a whole new look would require (nevermind having laid off the artists).


----------



## greymarch (Jun 9, 2003)

I second ThornTangle's question....what specific feats does a ranger get if he chooses the two-weapon combat style path, or the archery combat style path?  So far, no one seems to know precisely which feats he gets.  The two-weapon combat style path feats are especially important to me. 

Roytheodd, if you are concerned with getting into trouble by posting the answer here, you can email me at greymarch@yahoo.com


----------



## Nail (Jun 9, 2003)

Errr...

Not to put too fine a point on this, but how do we know Roy ain't lieing through his teeth?

Is that a troll I smell?


----------



## kreynolds (Jun 9, 2003)

Nail said:
			
		

> *Not to put too fine a point on this, but how do we know Roy ain't lieing through his teeth? *




By reading some of the posts above that already address this possibility. 

Oh, and there's also that whole "faith" thing...


----------



## Nightstorm (Jun 9, 2003)

I dont know if I believe the guy when he says he has 3.5, but I do know that it's been covered on the radio show that most of the old art is in the new book. THAT SUCKS!


----------



## kreynolds (Jun 9, 2003)

roytheodd, out of curiousity, what's the UPC code on that puppy?


----------



## Nail (Jun 9, 2003)

kreynolds said:
			
		

> *
> 
> By reading some of the posts above that already address this possibility.
> 
> Oh, and there's also that whole "faith" thing...  *




Heh.

Faith?

...anyway: none of what has been "revealed" is new or unpredictable information.  You'll note how little this Roy character has actually said.  

Again: How do you know this is legit?


----------



## kreynolds (Jun 9, 2003)

Nail said:
			
		

> *Heh.
> 
> Faith? *




Sure. Works for some people. Not me, but it works for some people. 



			
				Nail said:
			
		

> *...anyway: none of what has been "revealed" is new or unpredictable information. *




I think that the 3.5 PH being so completely disorganized, which explains why he simply can't manage to find the scribing costs of spells, is pretty new. 



			
				Nail said:
			
		

> *Again: How do you know this is legit? *




Didn't say I did, and there's a reason for that.


----------



## EricNoah (Jun 9, 2003)

Nail said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Again: How do you know this is legit? *




I don't, but I don't think it hurts to give the guy the benefit of the doubt.  If we treat him well, the worst that could happen is we feel foolish when the falsehood is revealed, while the best outcome is that he provides information we want.  The benefit of believing outweighs the drawback of doing so, at least to me!  

Plus I usually have pretty good instincts on stuff like this, it sounds legit to me.  The guy has almost 200 posts, he's been around for a while.


----------



## Nifft (Jun 9, 2003)

I have faith in you Roy!

And no questions! How's THAT for unusual? 

 -- Nifft


----------



## Vivictus (Jun 9, 2003)

Heh, look how many posts I have. I have been around here for quite a long time. I just don't always have time to post on D&D stuff. I am trying to change that lately though. If I were to post something like this and was accused of lying then I'd just give a healthy F you and make you all wait on the information for over a month. If you give the guy the benefit of the doubt, then at least you are getting "something". Plus, accusing someone of being a liar in things like this will only give them the right to come back and say "I told you so!" when the books actually come out.


----------



## Ruvion (Jun 9, 2003)

I sincerely agree with Vivictus and EricNoah...I believe in you my imaginary cyber friend RoyTheOdd!


----------



## Vivictus (Jun 9, 2003)

Oh yeah, and Roy, I wouldn't worry about any NDA. If there was an NDA for the book, then you would have had to agree to it either electronically or by signing something. Since you have obviously done neither, even if there was some sort of NDA, it doesn't apply to you since you are totally unaware of it, and you never agreed to it.


----------



## BryonD (Jun 9, 2003)

So far, I think he is correct.

But I do think he has missed part of the scribing costs thing.

But without breaking *my* NDA, I'll just say I think he is truthful.


----------



## diaglo (Jun 9, 2003)

ForceUser said:
			
		

> *It's hard to improve upon perfection  *




that's what i've been saying about Original D&D to everyone i know that games for years.


----------



## Drezden327 (Jun 9, 2003)

BryonD said:
			
		

> *So far, I think he is correct.
> 
> But I do think he has missed part of the scribing costs thing.
> 
> But without breaking my NDA, I'll just say I think he is truthful. *




Yes, we are just waiting to see what the spellbook (scribing) costs are, which Roy should post real soon.  Thanks again, Roy.


----------



## roytheodd (Jun 9, 2003)

kreynolds said:
			
		

> *roytheodd, out of curiousity, what's the UPC code on that puppy? *




ISBN 0-7869-2886-7

The number below the bar code is 9 780786 928866

Costs for adding spells to spellbooks (I found nothing specific for adding pages):

"Time: The process takes 24 hours, regardless of the spell's level.
Space in the Spellbook: A spell takes up one page of the spellbook per spell level, so a 2nd-level spell takes two pages, a 5th-level spell takes five pages, and so forth. Even a 0-level spell (cantrip) takes one page. A spellbook has one hundred pages.
Materials and Costs: Materials for writing the spell (special quills, inks, and other supplies) cost 100gp per page.
Note that a wizard does not have to pay these costs in time or gold for the spells she gains for free at each new level. She simply adds these to her spellbook as part of her ongoing research."


----------



## Bauglir (Jun 9, 2003)

Is disintegrate the only save or die spell that's been converted to damage?
Or as I suspect have they all went that way?
How much damage?
Oh and Spell Focus/Greater SF - what do they do?

Cheers.


----------



## Hida_Kurain (Jun 9, 2003)

Thank's for the info on the Paladin!  I really appreciate it!
-Hida Kurain


----------



## Sonny (Jun 9, 2003)

I guess that should put most doubts about whether he's got the book or not to rest. Thanks again Roy, I'm sure you knew you were in for a flurry of questions once you posted you had the book, and it's good of you to take the time to answer our queries.

Now about those lines...  


- Sonny


----------



## roytheodd (Jun 9, 2003)

Thorntangle said:
			
		

> *Another quick one - what are the feats the ranger can select from on their fighting-style path? Any limitations? *




"Combat Style (Ex): At 2nd level, a ranger must select one of two combat styles to pursueL archery or two-weapon combat. This choice affects the character's class features but does not restrict his selection of feats or special abilities in any way.
If the ranger selects archery, he is treated as having the Rapid Shot feat, even if he does not have the normal prerequisites for that feat.
If the ranger selects two-weapon combat, he is treated as having Two-Weapon Fighting feat, even if he does not have the normal prerrquisiites for that feat.
The benefits of the ranger's chosen style apply only when he wears light or no armor. He loses all benefits of his combat style when wearing medium or heavy armor."

Here are the ranger's Specials and at which level:
1st: 1st Favored Enemy, Track, Wild Empathy
2: Combat Style
3: Endurance
4: Animal Companion
5: 2nd Favored Enemy
6: Improved Combat Style
7: Woodland Stride
8: Swift Tracker
9: Evasion
10: 3rd Favored Enemy
11: Combat Style Mastery
13: Camouflage
15: 4th Favored Enemy
17: Hide in Plain Sight
20: 5th Favored Enemy


----------



## roytheodd (Jun 9, 2003)

Bauglir said:
			
		

> *Is disintegrate the only save or die spell that's been converted to damage?
> Or as I suspect have they all went that way?
> How much damage?
> Oh and Spell Focus/Greater SF - what do they do?
> ...




It's tough to say. There is no way of spotting the updated info without knowing specifically what to look for, short of reading the whole book. It really really looks like the 3rd Ed book and we'll all need to re-read the cursed book to see all the changes. They've made no attempt to draw attention to the changes in the text of the book.


----------



## Drezden327 (Jun 9, 2003)

roytheodd said:
			
		

> *
> 
> ISBN 0-7869-2886-7
> 
> ...




That's 1/2 (50%) of the current cost!!  Yipee - finally some good news for Wizards.  Thanks again, Roy - I really appreciate it.


----------



## Bauglir (Jun 9, 2003)

roytheodd said:
			
		

> *
> 
> It's tough to say. There is no way of spotting the updated info without knowing specifically what to look for, short of reading the whole book. It really really looks like the 3rd Ed book and we'll all need to re-read the cursed book to see all the changes. They've made no attempt to draw attention to the changes in the text of the book. *




Okeedoke - more specific

Could you have a look and see what the Finger of Death spell does?
Also could you look up the Spell Focus feat?

Cheers again 

(I suspect that by the time this thread is done you'll wish you'd just scanned the entire book and posted it up )


----------



## greymarch (Jun 9, 2003)

roytheodd said:
			
		

> *
> 
> "Combat Style (Ex): At 2nd level, a ranger must select one of two combat styles to pursueL archery or two-weapon combat. This choice affects the character's class features but does not restrict his selection of feats or special abilities in any way.
> If the ranger selects archery, he is treated as having the Rapid Shot feat, even if he does not have the normal prerequisites for that feat.
> ...




Thanks Roy, but we need a few more details to solve the puzzle.

If a ranger chooses two-weapon fighting at 2nd level, then what does he get for his 6th level Improved Combat style?  Does it automatically assign a feat to him at 6th level, or does he choose from a list of feats?  If its a feat, which one does he get?  If he has to choose a feat from a list of feats, which feats are on the list?

Same thing at 11th level.  What precisely does he get for Combat style mastery?  Does he automatically get one assigned feat, or does he pick one feat from a list of feats?

Perhaps the best way of phrasing it is this:  If my 2nd level ranger chooses two-weapon fighting at 2nd level, what precisely do I get at 6th level, and what do I precisely get at 11th level?


----------



## roytheodd (Jun 9, 2003)

*Re: Power Attack and Die Hard*



			
				Endur said:
			
		

> *Did they make any changes to the Power Attack feat?  Do you inflict more damage with a two handed weapon?
> 
> What does the "Die Hard" feat do? *




Power Attack
"Benefit: On your action, before making attack rolls for a round, you may choose to subtract a number from all melee attack rolls and add the same number to all melee damage rolls. This number may not exceed your base attack bonus. The penalty on attack and bonus on damage apply until your next turn.
Special: If you attack with a two-handed weapon, or with a one-handed weapon wielded in two hands, instead add twice the number subtracted from your attack rolls. You can't add the bonus from Power Attack to the damage dealt with a light weapon (except with unarmed strikes or natural weapon attacks), even though the penalty on attack rolls still applies. (Normally, you treat a double weapon as a one-handed weapon and a light weapon. If you choose to use a double weapon like a two-handed weapon, attacking with only one end of it in a round, you treat it as a two-handed weapon)."



Diehard essentially allows you to automatically stabalize when between -1 and -9 hit points. I don't want to retype it all, but that's it in a nutshell.


Someone asked if they still had the lined pages - yes they do. However, they've also made the charts better by having every other row have a tan background.


----------



## roytheodd (Jun 9, 2003)

greymarch said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Thanks Roy, but we need a few more details to solve the puzzle.
> 
> ...





This is not verbatim because that takes too long:

Improved Combat Style: If you chose archery at 2nd level you gain the Manyshot feat for free. If you chose two-weapon combat, you get Improved Two-Weapon Fighting feat for free.

Combat Style Mastery: If you chose archery, you get Improved Precise Shot feat for free. If two-weapon, you get Greater Two-Weapon Fighting feat for free.


----------



## greymarch (Jun 10, 2003)

roytheodd said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> This is not verbatim because that takes too long:
> ...




Holy Cow!  I hope you are for real Roy, because you have just made my day! 

3.5 D&D Rangers kick-butt with two-weapons.  An 11th level ranger, by taking the two-weapon combat path, could get 6 attacks in one round.

Thanks Roy.  By the way, how does the Improved Precise Shot work?


----------



## Jody Butt (Jun 10, 2003)

roytheodd said:
			
		

> *My office got an advance copy. I don't have time to read it now, but thumbing through it I will say that it's interior contents look A LOT like the interior contents of the 3.0 version. The artwork is mostly the same (pictures for gear, races, and iconic characters). The chapters are laid out in the same order. Really, it's going to have a comfortable feel to it because it looks so much like what we already have (right down to the artwork of Lidda's burnt face while misuing a magical device). *




That's a bummer.  The least they could have done was given us a new look, and, especially, new art.  Sheesh.  $130 CDN for the same 'ol books with some errata.


----------



## Iron_Chef (Jun 10, 2003)

Any changes to wizard or cleric bonus feats? Item Creation feats still the same?


----------



## roytheodd (Jun 10, 2003)

Bauglir said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Okeedoke - more specific
> 
> ...




Finger of Death
You can slay any one living creature within range (25ft + 5ft/2 levels). The target is entitled to Fort save to survive the attack. IF the save is successful, the creature instead takes 3d6 points of damage +1 point per caster level (max +25). The subject might die from damage even if it survives its saving throw.

Spell Focus: Add +1 to the Difficulty Class for all saving throws against spells from the school of magic you choose. You can gain this feat multiple times, but its effects don't stack. Each time you take the feat, you must choose a different school.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Jun 10, 2003)

I don't think this has been asked yet, changes did they do to the bard?  Do they actually get more than Bardic Knowledge and Bard Music at 1st level and then nothing else down the special ability table?

And how are the Monk's Flurry of Blows handled?  When do they get the additional attacks, and can they still make even more attacks but take an (-2) attack penalty?


----------



## greymarch (Jun 10, 2003)

Here is another question for you Roy...

There is a new feat called Investigator.  What does it do, and does it have any prerequisites?  If it does, what are those prerequisites?


----------



## roytheodd (Jun 10, 2003)

greymarch said:
			
		

> *
> By the way, how does the Improved Precise Shot work? *




Yoy, you and your ranger, hehe.

Improved Precise Shot: Your attacks ignore the AC bonus granted to targets by anything less than total cover, and the miss chance granted to targets by anything less than total concealment... In addition, when you shoot or throw ranged weapons at a grappling opponent, you automatically strike at the opponent you have chosen.

You'll notice that all those with NDA's will be keeping quiet around now as I've hit the nail right on the head. By the by, the Manyshot feat has a picture of an elf drawing two arrows on his bowstring, like in Robin Hood Prince of Thieves. Dream about that for a while.


----------



## Bauglir (Jun 10, 2003)

Hmmm they kept save or dies in .

Thanks Roy

(On the upside by the time this thread is through you'll know the 3.5 PHB back to front)


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jun 10, 2003)

roytheodd said:
			
		

> *By the by, the Manyshot feat has a picture of an elf drawing two arrows on his bowstring, like in Robin Hood Prince of Thieves. Dream about that for a while.  *




That picture was in one of the earlier Revision Spotlights.  
Thanks for the info, I won't be asking any questions, just reading on. These guys seem to have the questioning well covered.


----------



## roytheodd (Jun 10, 2003)

greymarch said:
			
		

> *Here is another question for you Roy...
> 
> There is a new feat called Investigator.  What does it do, and does it have any prerequisites?  If it does, what are those prerequisites? *




Investigator: You get a +2 bonus on all Gather Information and Search checks. No pre-reqs.


----------



## greymarch (Jun 10, 2003)

roytheodd said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Investigator: You get a +2 bonus on all Gather Information and Search checks. No pre-reqs. *




Thanks Roy!

I hate to be redundant, but what does Improved precise shot do?


----------



## Drezden327 (Jun 10, 2003)

roytheodd said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Investigator: You get a +2 bonus on all Gather Information and Search checks. No pre-reqs. *




How about the feat Magical Affinity??


----------



## elbandit (Jun 10, 2003)

*My curiosity...*

I am curious what new Bard singing abilities were added.

Thanks!


----------



## CrusaderX (Jun 10, 2003)

Thank you for taking the time to answer all of these questions.  That's very generous of you.  

My only question - are there any more changes to the Paladin class besides the extra smites that were mentioned?


----------



## Ruvion (Jun 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Drezden327_
> That's 1/2 (50%) of the current cost!! Yipee - finally some good news for Wizards. Thanks again, Roy - I really appreciate it.




....Well, the current cost in the PHB 3e (second printing) is *exactly* 100 gp per page...apparently the cost per page to inscribe new spells did not change in 3.5e.


----------



## Wraith Form (Jun 10, 2003)

*Thanks, Roy!!*

No questions, just a quick THANKS.

Oh, and you're odd.

Mmm, wait, no--you're *THE* odd.


----------



## IanB (Jun 10, 2003)

Ruvion said:
			
		

> *
> 
> ....Well, the current cost in the PHB 3e (second printing) is exactly 100 gp per page...apparently the cost per page to inscribe new spells did not change in 3.5e. *




Yes, but the number of pages was cut in half (except for level 0 spells.)


----------



## ergeheilalt (Jun 10, 2003)

Revion: You might want to take a look again Each spell in a wizards spell book costs 100 gp per page, yes; however, 3e spells took up two pages per level (1 page for cantrips). A 5th level spell takes up 10 pages, but in 3.5 only 5 pages. Thats right, half off baby 

Erge - a really happy wizard now.


----------



## Lord Rasputin (Jun 10, 2003)

Drezden327 said:
			
		

> *
> 
> How about the feat Magical Affinity?? *




Per Urban Arcana, +2 to Spellcraft and Use Magical Device.


----------



## Ravellion (Jun 10, 2003)

Well well! I am impressed so far.

I have got several questions. Any answer would be appreciated, and I do think many people will want to hear the answer to these:

What is the duration of the _bull's strength_ spell, and how much enhancement bonus to strength does it give?

How much of a bonus does Greater Weapon Focus give, and what are the prerequisites? Is it fighter only?

How much of a bonus does Greater Weapon Specialization give, and what are the prerequisites?


----------



## Drezden327 (Jun 10, 2003)

Ruvion said:
			
		

> *
> 
> ....Well, the current cost in the PHB 3e (second printing) is exactly 100 gp per page...apparently the cost per page to inscribe new spells did not change in 3.5e. *




Oh the cost per page didn't change, but the NUMBER OF PAGES did!!  In 3E a spell takes up 2 pages per level, now it will take up 1 page per level - hence 50% less - yippe again!


----------



## Lord Rasputin (Jun 10, 2003)

*Monks, animate dead*

Well, the new spell scribing info is good for my enchanter and my necromancer ...

What level is animate dead for wizards/sorcerers? I'm really sick of waiting for 9th level, even though I'm within 3,000 xp.

As for my other active character, what is the monk special ability progression?


----------



## Ruvion (Jun 10, 2003)

ah you are right!  The page count for scribing spells have decreased, according to Roy, in 3.5e.  My bad...this is what you get when you never play wizards...sigh.


----------



## Kai Lord (Jun 10, 2003)

I'd like info on Druid revisions and the Ranger's animal companion.  Thanks.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Jun 10, 2003)

Great info, Roy!

Can you confirm/deny the dwarf's movement rate in medium/heavy armor?

How does the bard's casting spells in armor work?

Can you confirm the mechanics of Greater Two Weapon Fighting?

Thanks!


----------



## JoeBlank (Jun 10, 2003)

Let me add my thanks to the others, Roy.

Can you give us word on the sorcerer and bard mechanic that allows them to swap out spells at even levels?

And are ther any changes to the sorcerer's skill list?

That should be it for the sorcerer, if the info we have up until now is correct.


----------



## BryonD (Jun 10, 2003)

Does Wild Empathy use diplomacy?


----------



## EricNoah (Jun 10, 2003)

BryonD said:
			
		

> *Does Wild Empathy use diplomacy? *




Jesse Decker just posted in the Dragon 309 thread -- no, it doesn't (the statement from the mag was an error).


----------



## roytheodd (Jun 10, 2003)

Sorry all, I'll have to post more tomorrow. Keep with specific questions and I'll answer what I can when the boss isn't looking.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Jun 10, 2003)

Greater Two Weapon Fighting has been around since Masters of the Wild, it's just simply a 3rd attack with the secondary weapon at -10 from the first one.


----------



## Iron_Chef (Jun 10, 2003)

Can you post the Craft Construct feat???


----------



## BryonD (Jun 10, 2003)

EricNoah said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Jesse Decker just posted in the Dragon 309 thread -- no, it doesn't (the statement from the mag was an error). *




Cool, I know that the version I have is only MOSTLY right.  But I thought that would have been a really odd change.

Thanks


----------



## Krug (Jun 10, 2003)

Heh thanks Roy.  Good job.


----------



## Valiantheart (Jun 10, 2003)

Hey thanks for taking the time Roy.  I have a question:

What are the bonuses for Greater Weapon Focus and Greater Weapon Specialization?


----------



## Kai Lord (Jun 10, 2003)

Here's a big one:

Have the Druid weapon restrictions been eliminated?


----------



## Vivictus (Jun 10, 2003)

Hey Roy, one thing I am really curious about is how the skills now work. I know that there are NO exclusive class skills anymore, but there was mention of how to use certain skills, some classes may need access and use of a seperate skill to get it to work. When you get a chance and read that section, can you elaborate on that a bit more please?

Also, if you have the time (IF!) then I think it would be pretty cool if you could post the charts of all the classes special abilities gained per level. Of course, some wouldn't be necessary like fighters (who I assume remained the same for the most part). That's if you have the time. Honestly I wouldn't wanna bother with it.


----------



## Branduil (Jun 10, 2003)

Roy,

Could you mention any changes to the Half-Elf and Half-Orc race, if any? Thanks.

~Branduil


----------



## Wraith Form (Jun 10, 2003)

Vivictus said:
			
		

> *Honestly I wouldn't wanna bother with it.*



Cripes, if *YOU* wouldn't want to, what in the world makes you think *HE'S* gonna want to?

Seriously, everyone, Roy's not going to be able to answer all these questions, nor is he going to *WANT* to.  Calm down--the book'll be out in a few WEEKS, and then all the mysteries will be revealed, for better or worse.


----------



## Eldragon (Jun 10, 2003)

He might not be able to answer all of these questions, but if he does, he will be elevated to godhood on these boards.


----------



## dagger (Jun 10, 2003)

Thanks for giving us the info man!


----------



## Wraith Form (Jun 10, 2003)

Eldragon said:
			
		

> *He might not be able to answer all of these questions, but if he does, he will be elevated to godhood on these boards. *



Well, there is *THAT* part of it I hadn't considered.....  Hmmmm....


----------



## Drezden327 (Jun 10, 2003)

*Re: Re: Power Attack and Die Hard*



			
				roytheodd said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Power Attack
> "Benefit: On your action, before making attack rolls for a round, you may choose to subtract a number from all melee attack rolls and add the same number to all melee damage rolls. This number may not exceed your base attack bonus. The penalty on attack and bonus on damage apply until your next turn.
> ...




As if there wasn't enough reason to make a two-handed Tank Fighter and/or ESPECIALLY Barbarian!!  I mean really - give me a break - who thought that 2 handed tanks weren't doing enough damage?!!


----------



## fett527 (Jun 10, 2003)

roytheodd

ENWorld's newest favorite poster.


----------



## Olive (Jun 10, 2003)

Thanks Roy,

any info on how Scry works now, without a skill?

And if there are no exclusive skills, then does everyone get Use Magic Divice? Or is that built in to somthing else?


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jun 10, 2003)

Olive said:
			
		

> *Thanks Roy,
> 
> any info on how Scry works now, without a skill?
> 
> And if there are no exclusive skills, then does everyone get Use Magic Divice? Or is that built in to somthing else? *




That was asked on Andy Collins' board today. Everyone gets UMD as a crossclass skill...its not as bad as it sounds. The lowest DC to use anything is 20, and buying half ranks isn't going to get you anywhere fast, which will keep the Bard and Rogue doing just fine in the UMD area.


----------



## Stalker0 (Jun 10, 2003)

fett527 said:
			
		

> *roytheodd
> 
> ENWorld's newest favorite poster. *




I agree, Roy, if your info turns out to be legit, you probably just became one of the most recognized members on this board.

As far as questions go, personally, I would like people to focus on new stuff (like druid spells, the skill system). Lets not focus on "confirming" the changes that are preety much solid at this point.

I would like to know how the druid animal companion works, also, what is the prereqs for improved precise shot (it sounded like a very strong feat, was curious if its one of the new high level feats).

From what I've heard so far
1) Spell costs= sweet!!
2) Power Attack= WTF!! Honestly, its not like PA was EVER by anyone considered a weak feat. Two handed weapons already get bonuses, I don't see the need for it (unless shields have gotten upgraded, hey roy, could you hook us up with shield info? epecially the tower shield?). But if anyone was worried about the golf bag for penatrating DR, I think PA will do it just fine.
3) Spell focus = grrrr. I don't like it, but then again I'll have to take a look at the whole system before I judge.
4) Combat styles= I'm just proud I created a ranger with a mechanic just like this a while back (or very embarrased if it turns out to be a bad mechanic


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Jun 10, 2003)

*Nominates roytheodd for the EN World Hall of Fame*


----------



## Felon (Jun 10, 2003)

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> 4) Combat styles= I'm just proud I created a ranger with a mechanic just like this a while back (or very embarrased if it turns out to be a bad mechanic




It's not a GREAT mechanic, that's for sure. It looks like the combat paths simply assume that a character doesn't have a certain feat by the time he reaches a certain level. If a character mult-classes into into ranger from another class (especially fighter) that may well not be the case. Providing a pick list would've worked better, and I suspect that will become a common house rule situation.


----------



## Wolf72 (Jun 10, 2003)

Felon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> It's not a GREAT mechanic, that's for sure. It looks like the combat paths simply assume that a character doesn't have a certain feat by the time he reaches a certain level. If a character mult-classes into into ranger from another class (especially fighter) that may well not be the case. Providing a pick list would've worked better, and I suspect that will become a common house rule situation. *




maybe even a set of feat tree's the ranger can follow.  Two examples given already are the archery and TWF ... 

I can almost see allowing a PC to take the 1st archery at 2nd lvl and then the next time the upgrade comes around take the 1st TWF choice ... 

come up with some other feat tree's that are ranger like to give the character some more options.

ps Thanks Roy!!!


----------



## Olive (Jun 10, 2003)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> *
> 
> That was asked on Andy Collins' board today. Everyone gets UMD as a crossclass skill...its not as bad as it sounds. The lowest DC to use anything is 20, and buying half ranks isn't going to get you anywhere fast, which will keep the Bard and Rogue doing just fine in the UMD area.  *




Except with that Cosmopolitan feat from FRCS... pretty exceptional circumstances tho.


----------



## jasamcarl (Jun 10, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Power Attack and Die Hard*



			
				Drezden327 said:
			
		

> *
> 
> As if there wasn't enough reason to make a two-handed Tank Fighter and/or ESPECIALLY Barbarian!!  I mean really - give me a break - who thought that 2 handed tanks weren't doing enough damage?!! *




Maybe...i've gotten the impression that, as DRs go down, ACs have gone up in 3.5. The cost in terms of 'hits' in giving up on an attack bonus might have become steeper.


----------



## BryonD (Jun 10, 2003)

Felon said:
			
		

> *It's not a GREAT mechanic, that's for sure. It looks like the combat paths simply assume that a character doesn't have a certain feat by the time he reaches a certain level. If a character mult-classes into into ranger from another class (especially fighter) that may well not be the case. Providing a pick list would've worked better, and I suspect that will become a common house rule situation. *




Maybe.  But I do not think it is as bad as you say.  The bonus feats tend to come much easier than they would if you "earned" them.  

So a high level fighter complaining about the weak bonus feat he got from taking a ranger level would be akin to a high level fighter complaining about the weak 1d4+1 mm he got from taking a level of wizard.


----------



## coyote6 (Jun 10, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Power Attack and Die Hard*



			
				jasamcarl said:
			
		

> *Maybe...i've gotten the impression that, as DRs go down, ACs have gone up in 3.5. The cost in terms of 'hits' in giving up on an attack bonus might have become steeper. *




Maybe -- but why is two-handed use so favored? The cost increases for everyone, after all. While two-handed use has its costs -- notably, the lack of a shield, and thus lower ACs -- it also has benefits (notably, more damage, both base & through increased Str mod) that I think make up for the loss.

Say, I wonder if that means that wielding a weapon in two hands now gives 2x your Str bonus instead of 1.5x. I hope not. 

<checks>
The stat blocks in Dungeon #100 appear to have x1.5 Str bonus, not x2.

In any case, it seems like too big of a bonus. 

Oh well, they can tone it down in 3.75 or 4.0 or whatever is next.


----------



## jasamcarl (Jun 10, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Power Attack and Die Hard*



			
				coyote6 said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Maybe -- but why is two-handed use so favored? The cost increases for everyone, after all. While two-handed use has its costs -- notably, the lack of a shield, and thus lower ACs -- it also has benefits (notably, more damage, both base & through increased Str mod) that I think make up for the loss.
> 
> ...




Again, i'm also under the impression that Attack bonuses for monsters (especially at high levels) have also gone up. AC might also have a greater value.


----------



## L0rd_Dark0n (Jun 10, 2003)

Does anyone know if 3.5 will be using Wound and Vitality points instead of just Hit Points?  Oh, and thanks Roy for all the info!


----------



## Gyoza Dog (Jun 10, 2003)

I'm more put out (if I'm reading it correctly) by the fact that you now can't power attack with a light weapon. A fighter with a light weapon can't convert their accuracy into increased damage now without also being a rogue. In fact you can't do much with your accuracy because light weapons are hopeless for disarming and other special maneuvers. The heavy weapon guys will be the ones with the tactical options.


----------



## Droogie (Jun 10, 2003)

Re: ranger- Too bad virtual feats are still in the game, although Roy didn't mention anything about not being able to use the twf style with double weapons. It would be nice to use the quarterstaff like Little John finally. 

As for spell scribing costs: its nice that spells take up less room, but I still feel 100 gp per page is still an unrealistic price. Spellbooks are mundane items--essentially a cookbook. What could possibly cost 100 gp per page!?! Even the waterproof ink from Dragon Magazine (#300?) was only 20 gp a vial. House ruled. 

And from the sounds of it, those awful armor illustrations in the equipment chapter are still there. Rats.

Ah, well. Still can't wait to buy'em. 

Thanks, Roy.


----------



## Endur (Jun 10, 2003)

Thanks Roy!!

Tom


----------



## John Crichton (Jun 10, 2003)

L0rd_Dark0n said:
			
		

> *Does anyone know if 3.5 will be using Wound and Vitality points instead of just Hit Points?*



I don't have the book but I think I can safely say that the HP is used, not WP/VP...


----------



## coyote6 (Jun 10, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Power Attack and Die Hard*



			
				jasamcarl said:
			
		

> *Again, i'm also under the impression that Attack bonuses for monsters (especially at high levels) have also gone up. AC might also have a greater value. *




Loss of a shield is, at most, a loss of 7 AC; high-level monsters already have sufficiently high attack bonus that characters like the Iconics will get hit. Higher attack bonuses ought to make the lower AC even less relevant. 

So, if Two-Hand Man gets 2-for-1 for Power Attacks, do they get 2-for-1 for Combat Expertise?


----------



## L0rd_Dark0n (Jun 10, 2003)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> *I don't have the book but I think I can safely say that the HP is used, not WP/VP...   *




Why is that?  Is it just to make it more backwards compatible with 3E?  Also, has anyone heard if there will be class dodge bonuses like in Star Wars?


----------



## coyote6 (Jun 10, 2003)

L0rd_Dark0n said:
			
		

> *Why is that?  Is it just to make it more backwards compatible with 3E?  Also, has anyone heard if there will be class dodge bonuses like in Star Wars? *




IIRC, someone from WotC (Ted Stark, AV, Andy Collins -- someone) said that 3.5e wouldn't have VP/WP, or general class-based Defense bonuses (monks & I guess dwarven defenders and the like will still have their AC bonuses). 

You might look for those in Unearthed Arcana, but I imagine we're at least 3-4 months before we start getting hints about that book (beyond what slipped already -- it's a book of variants, which is why I wouldn't be shocked to see VP/WP or the like).


----------



## BryonD (Jun 10, 2003)

*The PA logic*

This is _as I understand it_ and I don't claim to speak for anyone.

Imagine two characters, one with STR13 Dex18, so he just qualifies for PA and the other with STR 18.  The STR18 guy uses a 2 handed weapon and the other guy is using a finesse weapon.

Assume everything else is comparable.

The STR13 guy gets a +1 damage bonus.
The STR18 guy gets a +6 damage bonus.

They both have the some attack bonus.  So the STR13 guy actually benefits better from PA.  His chance that a hit will turn into a miss is the same.  He perk for hitting is the same.  But his penalty if the hit becomes a miss is more than 5 points less (5 for STR bonus and the 2H weapon will have a higher base damage).

So PA actually rewards marginal STR guys.  The change gets rid of the PA plus finesse thing (a change I like), unless you use a rapier (I can not think of any other off hand, perhaps I forget).  And, the change makes the feat a true power smashing feat like it is supposed to be.

That said, I think they over did it.  But I found it easier to swallow after I thought about it this way some.


----------



## John Crichton (Jun 10, 2003)

L0rd_Dark0n said:
			
		

> *Why is that?  Is it just to make it more backwards compatible with 3E? *



Not only that, but all the spells mentioned do HP damage, the ranger class has a d8.  These are all HP, not WP/VP.

That and HP is one of those things that I believe will always be in D&D.  But that's just an opinion.  The above we already know.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jun 10, 2003)

Olive said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Except with that Cosmopolitan feat from FRCS... pretty exceptional circumstances tho. *




But that isn't Core. And anyway, it has a Regional requirement in the Realms anyway...and when I run Realms games, I stick to those requirements.  

As for the VP/WP and the class based Defense bonus...it doesn't work for D&D. To use VP/WP you would have to completely rework every single attack or damage dealing spell in the book, and THAT would be a new edition...NOT a Revision. Class based Defense...well, that's needed for Star Wars and d20 Modern because armor isn't as common, and doesn't provide huge bonuses. D&D doesn't need it, because of the myraid of spells, armor, etc.


----------



## John Crichton (Jun 10, 2003)

coyote6 said:
			
		

> *You might look for those in Unearthed Arcana, but I imagine we're at least 3-4 months before we start getting hints about that book (beyond what slipped already -- it's a book of variants, which is why I wouldn't be shocked to see VP/WP or the like). *



Probably not.  Monte doesn't like VP/WP.  Plus, the system is interchangable with D&D meaning HP will have to be used.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jun 10, 2003)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> *Probably not.  Monte doesn't like VP/WP.  Plus, the system is interchangable with D&D meaning HP will have to be used. *




Methinks he was talking about the rumored Unearthed Arcana, apparently a book of varients by WotC...not Monte's Arcana Unearthed. Though, I don't see VP/WP being presented as a variant, because of the sheer amount of work it would take. That would require an entire book to itself.


----------



## John Crichton (Jun 10, 2003)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> *Methinks he was talking about the rumored Unearthed Arcana, apparently a book of varients by WotC...not Monte's Arcana Unearthed. Though, I don't see VP/WP being presented as a variant, because of the sheer amount of work it would take. That would require an entire book to itself. *



Ah!  Damnable reversed titles...


----------



## Eridanis (Jun 10, 2003)

This is exciting news, and all (thanks, Roy, for sharing!!) - but perhaps we could leave the speculation & discussion for another thread, and leave this one relatively clear for Roy to skim through and answer whatever questions he can.


----------



## coyote6 (Jun 10, 2003)

*Re: The PA logic*



			
				BryonD said:
			
		

> *The STR13 guy gets a +1 damage bonus.
> The STR18 guy gets a +6 damage bonus.
> 
> They both have the some attack bonus.  So the STR13 guy actually benefits better from PA.  His chance that a hit will turn into a miss is the same.  He perk for hitting is the same.  But his penalty if the hit becomes a miss is more than 5 points less (5 for STR bonus and the 2H weapon will have a higher base damage).*




I can't dig that funky logic, man. 

B does more damage, so missing is a bigger penalty to him? That's saying that dealing more damage is a downside. 

You realize that the change to Power Attack actually makes that worse -- now B, Power Attacking for X points off his attack bonus, getting +2x to damage, now loses *even more* damage when he misses, and gets an even steeper "penalty". So this doesn't fix that problem; it actually makes it worse.

(That is, if I understand your reasoning correctly, which I'm not sure I do.)



			
				BryonD said:
			
		

> *So PA actually rewards marginal STR guys.  *




I can't follow that; yes, the guy that does 1d6+1 damage gets a greater proportional increase (i.e., any particular amount of damage increase is a greater percentage of its base damage)from Power Attack than a guy that does 2d6+9. However, the 2d6+9 guy still does 1d6+8 more damage. Proportional increase has little relevance; the absolute increase is identical. 

BTW, by that logic, two-handed weapons should get a greater bonus to damage from Weapon Specialization, enhancement bonuses, morale bonuses, etc., than one handed weapons. So do all those things also reward marginal Str characters more than strong ones?



			
				BryonD said:
			
		

> *The change gets rid of the PA plus finesse thing (a change I like), *




That change (no Power Attack with light weapons) is, IMO, entirely separate from increasing the damage bonus given for two-handed weapon use. You can say "can't Power Attack with light weapons" all by itself.



			
				BryonD said:
			
		

> *unless you use a rapier (I can not think of any other off hand, perhaps I forget). *




Spiked chain. Which, as a Large weapon, requires two hands, and thus qualifies for +2 damage per point of Power Attack. So now Dex 22, Str 14 guy gets even more bang for his Dex-backed buck. 

Hmm, perhaps we should break off this subthread and let Roy dish some more news.


----------



## Stalker0 (Jun 10, 2003)

Eridanis said:
			
		

> *This is exciting news, and all (thanks, Roy, for sharing!!) - but perhaps we could leave the speculation & discussion for another thread, and leave this one relatively clear for Roy to skim through and answer whatever questions he can. *




I agree, Roy is already doing so much by answering so many questions. We should just leave this for questions and answers.


----------



## Felon (Jun 10, 2003)

BryonD said:
			
		

> Maybe.  But I do not think it is as bad as you say.  The bonus feats tend to come much easier than they would if you "earned" them.




If you've already got the feat, the combat style gets you nothing. If you had a pick list, you'd get something. That pretty well sums it up.



> So a high level fighter complaining about the weak bonus feat he got from taking a ranger level would be akin to a high level fighter complaining about the weak 1d4+1 mm he got from taking a level of wizard.




No, a magic missile would be something. We're talking about nothing. I prefer a design that gives something over a design that gives nothing.


----------



## Kai Lord (Jun 10, 2003)

Eridanis said:
			
		

> *This is exciting news, and all (thanks, Roy, for sharing!!) - but perhaps we could leave the speculation & discussion for another thread, and leave this one relatively clear for Roy to skim through and answer whatever questions he can. *



I second that.  So what are you waiting for Mr. Moderator?   Start trimming the fat from this thread and delete posts that don't contain questions or answers.  Someone can start a separate "In response to all the new 3.5 data" thread and it'll be much easier for everyone.


----------



## jasamcarl (Jun 10, 2003)

*Re: Re: The PA logic*



			
				coyote6 said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I can't dig that funky logic, man.
> 
> ...




No, what he is saying is that damage output is no longer penalized by not placing point distribution in Str to the same degree he used to, because str counts for comparitvly less. Thus, the dex fighter has a higher AC while dealing almost the same degree of damage. All fighters benefit from the change, not simply the str guy. The fact that he has a higher total damage output is simply a form of ultra specialization that requires a cost in AC.

And i think you are underestimating the marginal benefit of AC. Rumors I've heard conscerning the change of the in AC bonus types suggest that npc/pc ACs have also increased. Though we will have to see how monsters and equipment ultimatly come out to be sure. And I've seen multiple iterative attacks fail as the situation stands.

And its ironic that you dismiss ac bonuses while saying that there are no changes in the marginal utility of damage. Most highlevel combat seem to rely on 'big' damage bursts from spells, magic enhancements,  etc. Str damage, because it is linear in progression, makes little difference in the number or rounds a combat takes to play out. And given the 'burst' nature of damage at high levels, the consequences to taking a hit from touch attacks, grapples, etc are extreme.


----------



## KingCroMag (Jun 10, 2003)

Can you describe what kinds of creatures are on the summon monster series and desribe the planar binding rules?
-KCM


----------



## Apok (Jun 10, 2003)

*Re: My curiosity...*



			
				elbandit said:
			
		

> *I am curious what new Bard singing abilities were added.
> 
> Thanks! *




Ditto.


----------



## Celtavian (Jun 10, 2003)

*Re*

Thanks for the advance info Roy. This is awsome.

What did they change about the Sorcerer?

What does the Rogue trapsensing ability do?


----------



## jgsugden (Jun 10, 2003)

*How did specialist wizards change?*

How did specialist wizards change? I know there was some small change there, but nobody seems to know what it was, at least nobody but you, Roy.


----------



## Jhyrryl (Jun 10, 2003)

*Trap Sense*

Thanks for the info, Roy.

I've seen a reference to a Trap Sense ability for rogues.  Is this simply the rogue's ability to actively *search* for magical traps and mechanical traps with a DC greater than 20; is it something along the lines of allowing rogues to passively *spot* the presence of a possible trap; or is it something completely different.

Personally I think the ability to passively detect the presence of traps is greatly needed in the game, to help speed up play.

Edit: sorry for the duplicate question; should have read the previous posts more thoroughly.  <g>


----------



## Ricochet (Jun 10, 2003)

*Monks*

Could you list the monks progression + special abilities per level Roy?

Thanks for all your great info and time!


----------



## Steverooo (Jun 10, 2003)

*Thank you!*

Thanks for all the news, Roytheodd (I hope you aren't overwhelmed)!


----------



## Plane Sailing (Jun 10, 2003)

Felon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> If you've already got the feat, the combat style gets you nothing. If you had a pick list, you'd get something. That pretty well sums it up.
> *




You are forgetting that in most cases the ranger feats seem to be available earlier than you would be able to get them via straight feat achievement (the TWF at 6th and 11th certainly).

Plus, it is no loss to any character concept to get the appropriate supporting feats to work alongside the bonus feats when they arrive (point blank shot, precise shot, far shot for the archery goon, for instance).

The only situation where I can see someone missing out is if they pout and stamp and say I MUST have TWF at *1st* level or my entire character concept is null and void" - not withstanding the miniscule amount of time characters actually spend at 1st level.

Regards,


----------



## Plane Sailing (Jun 10, 2003)

Thanks for sharing these titbits Roy, much appreciated.

I would join my voice to those enquiring about changes to the sorcerer (any new class skills?)

Regards,


----------



## Beckett (Jun 10, 2003)

Felon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> If you've already got the feat, the combat style gets you nothing. If you had a pick list, you'd get something. That pretty well sums it up.
> *




But how is this different than how it works now?  Under 3.0, if my 1st level Fighter takes Ambidexterity and Two-Weapon Fighting, and then takes a level of Ranger, he gains nothing.  At least under 3.5, there's a greater chance that the character won't already have the combat path feat.


----------



## Hawdy (Jun 10, 2003)

Thanks Roy for all the great information u have given us.

Thats best with the info u give, is that I believe what u are given is the real stuff. Not rumors or incorrect material...

Can u by any change inform us with the abilities a monk gain every lvl, just as u did with the ranger ?

Im afraid they have made to many changes, cos I liked the monk as it was before..

Im REALLY greteful for all the help

Regards 
Hawdy


----------



## BryonD (Jun 10, 2003)

Felon said:
			
		

> *
> If you've already got the feat, the combat style gets you nothing. If you had a pick list, you'd get something. That pretty well sums it up.
> *




If you've  already got the feat, then you are so advanced that anything a low level ranger would get is going to be very minor to you.  That pretty well sums my side up.

I can agree that a choice would be better.  I am not saying you are wrong.  But, imo, you are significantly over-stating it.  The scenario you describe will be so rare as to be irrelevant.


----------



## pech21 (Jun 10, 2003)

What does Improved Feint do?


----------



## BryonD (Jun 10, 2003)

*Re: Re: The PA logic*



			
				coyote6 said:
			
		

> *I can't dig that funky logic, man.
> *




Under the old PA, they both trade the same chance to miss for the same potential benefit.  Because the 2H guy deals a lot more damage, he stands to lose a lot more if he misses.  So he has more reason to NOT use PA.


----------



## MisterTwister (Jun 10, 2003)

As far as the whole Power Attack thing, does this mean that just because someone has slain a bunch of ogeres and dragons that they can now hack through iron gates and thick walls of stone like they were butter? If they increased hardnesses, then why is it now harder for those without the feat to damage these things? 
All of the changes seem good except this one. In my opinion Power attack was out of control before. Now its just insane. Was anyone actually thinking to themselves, "Ya know, Power Attack should be stronger."


----------



## Fenes 2 (Jun 10, 2003)

Probably those who calculated power attack with full attack actions, where PAing for more than +2 usually set you back statistically.

Myself, I usually see PA used with a charge attack, where it is very, very powerful since you don't have iterative attacks in such a situation.


----------



## pech21 (Jun 10, 2003)

What does Two Weapon Defense do?

PS You are somply amazing -- the amazing oodroyman (goes into themesong...)


----------



## Videssian (Jun 10, 2003)

Can you post the info on the Expertise feat?  I'm curious to see if it still has that limit of using +5 from the BAB (ie: does it now incorporate what Improved Expertise (OA) does?).  And also what the prereqs are.

Thanks!
Videssian


----------



## Endur (Jun 10, 2003)

*Armor Changes?*

Hi Roy,

Have any of the armor's changed their values or their dex max?

Tom


----------



## Felon (Jun 10, 2003)

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> You are forgetting that in most cases the ranger feats seem to be available earlier than you would be able to get them via straight feat achievement (the TWF at 6th and 11th certainly).




No, they're set up so you get them when a character would have the minimum BAB to receive them through a linear, single-class progression.



> The only situation where I can see someone missing out is if they pout and stamp and say I MUST have TWF at *1st* level or my entire character concept is null and void" - not withstanding the miniscule amount of time characters actually spend at 1st level.




Some feats are necessary ASAP to make the concept viable. Precise Shot is very much needed for an archer. I don't think that's petulent on his part. The class should have been designed to take into account.



			
				Beckett said:
			
		

> But how is this different than how it works now?




The character should be designed to work well, no to work _somewhat_ better than it does now.



			
				BryonD said:
			
		

> If you've  already got the feat, then you are so advanced that anything a low level ranger would get is going to be very minor to you.  That pretty well sums my side up.




Just because you already have point blank shot before your ranger reaches 9th-level, you're not hyper-advanced. At any rate, the design could have taken this account, but didn't.



> I can agree that a choice would be better.  I am not saying you are wrong.  But, imo, you are significantly over-stating it.  The scenario you describe will be so rare as to be irrelevant.




A choice would have been better. I'm stating that pretty plainly, neither over nor under. And no, it won't be all that rare a scenario for mult-classers.

I don't really play rangers, don't really care about'em, but a flawed design is a flawed design. Going into denial mode doesn't change that.


----------



## MisterTwister (Jun 10, 2003)

Man this guy's getting packed like a tourist that gave a Calcutta beggar a dollar.


----------



## BryonD (Jun 10, 2003)

Felon said:
			
		

> *I don't really play rangers, don't really care about'em, but a flawed design is a flawed design. Going into denial mode doesn't change that.  *




Eh, you're wrong.  No big deal.  Enjoy your game.


----------



## Belen (Jun 10, 2003)

Ugh!  After 3 years, can we PLEASE stop hearing about Rangers!?  Yes, they were a little front loaded in 3e, but they were still a good, viable class!  

They are now a bit overpowered in 3.5 and still we hear complaining.  The design is not flawed.  Any person can look at the Ranger and say.."gee whiz, I get precise shot at 2nd level, so I will take another feat at 1st level."

Sorry to say, that even a multi-class character can still look at the Ranger stats and take feats around the virtual feats.

And since a Ranger gets, good BaB, skills, spells, and a ton of special abilities, then I fully agree with virtual feats, just to keep them from being overpowered combat dogs.

No lists, no making feats "real" etc.  The class is powerful enough as is!

By the way, Roy...you da man!  Any Bard info would be greatly appreciated.

Dave


----------



## Brekki (Jun 10, 2003)

Request:  Druid news:
- animal companion rules ? ... CR/HD or combo ?
- wildshaping ? CR/HD/templates ?


----------



## Plane Sailing (Jun 10, 2003)

Felon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> No, they're set up so you get them when a character would have the minimum BAB to receive them through a linear, single-class progression.
> *




Well, it may have changed *but* it used to be +9 BAB to get improved TWF, and the ranger can get it at 6th level. Similarly (although I can't be certain without my books) GTWF required more than a +11 BAB.

So, unless there has been a change in the standard feats (and there may well have been - we don't know yet) it looks like they do get most of the feats early.

As I said.

Cheers


----------



## daTim (Jun 10, 2003)

We should take discussion about his answers to other threads, so that it is easier for him to skim the board for quesitons, and not have to plow through discussion. 

With that, here is my one question: what does improved weapon specilization and focus do, and what are the pre-req's?


----------



## Chun-tzu (Jun 10, 2003)

I'd like to third the nomination to separate discussion from news in this thread.

And to, what, 105th the thanks to the Odd-man, Roy.



			
				Felon said:
			
		

> *Some feats are necessary ASAP to make the concept viable. Precise Shot is very much needed for an archer. I don't think that's petulent on his part. The class should have been designed to take into account.*




Precise Shot is NOT part of the Ranger's combat path.

It's Rapid Shot at 2nd level, Manyshot at 6th, and Improved Precise Shot (defined earlier in this thread) at 11th.


----------



## Mark Chance (Jun 10, 2003)

*Funky Logic Man!*



			
				coyote6 said:
			
		

> *I can't dig that funky logic, man. *




Have no fear! Funky Logic Man is here!

It's *Solid!* meets *Mutants & Masterminds*!


----------



## Ravellion (Jun 10, 2003)

Perhpas we shouldn't discuss the ramifactions to the rules changes in this thread. We must be flooding the chap.


----------



## Jack Daniel (Jun 10, 2003)

I third that request to see the monk and druid class ability progressions!  It'd really be helpful to know how monks Flurry now, and whether or not their unarmed damage beign changed was a rumor or not (I kinda liked the old d6/d8/d10/d12/d20 progression).

But rangers... well, it's not like anything's changed since the rumors first came to light, but suffice it to say I knew all along that Combat Styles would be crap, so that's one class that's never going to see my campaign.  The revision hasn't even come out, and I've already had to fix the 3.5 ranger.


----------



## Dave Turner (Jun 10, 2003)

Could you summarize the changes to the Sorcerer class, Roy?  Will I have to resort to the BoAM version permanently?


----------



## Joshua Randall (Jun 10, 2003)

*Toughness*

Has there been any change to the Toughness feat? I'm wondering if it's getting the Neverwinter Nights treatment (i.e., +1 HP/level instead of a flat +3 HP). Thanks!


----------



## Rugger (Jun 10, 2003)

Gyoza Dog said:
			
		

> *I'm more put out (if I'm reading it correctly) by the fact that you now can't power attack with a light weapon. A fighter with a light weapon can't convert their accuracy into increased damage now without also being a rogue. In fact you can't do much with your accuracy because light weapons are hopeless for disarming and other special maneuvers. The heavy weapon guys will be the ones with the tactical options. *




Wow.

I've been understanding of most of the changes so far...but did they think Power Attack needed to be powered up? It's one of the best feats in the game as is...argh.

And no light weapons for Power Attack. Double argh.

-Rugger
"I lurk!"


----------



## Grayhawk (Jun 10, 2003)

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> *You are forgetting that in most cases the ranger feats seem to be available earlier than you would be able to get them via straight feat achievement (the TWF at 6th and 11th certainly). *



I saw an argument somewhere, that if two-weapon fighting is balanced through levels 1 to 5 - where it doubles the amount of attacks - it looses potency when characters reaches BAB +6, as it now no longer doubles the possible amount of attacks.

Therefore, I suspect that ITWF will have a prereq of BAB +6, for all characters.

But this is merely speculation on my part.


----------



## bret (Jun 10, 2003)

I would like to hear about some of the things that haven't been talked about before.

Sorcs: Do they have any class skills based on Charisma yet?

Rogues: The only thing I've heard about them is the Trap Sense ability. Are there other changes? Specifically, is their list of Rogue Special feats expanded or do they get more special abilities?

From what I've seen, the best sneak in the game is going to be a Ranger. They have nearly as many skill points as rogues, get a couple of special abilities (HiPS and Camo) to further improve it, and have other things.

So what has the Rogue got?


----------



## Razz (Jun 10, 2003)

I have a few quick questions for roy:

---What are a Ranger's good saves? Are they Fortitude or Fortitude and Reflex?
---What does Two Weapon Defense do?
---What does Wild Empathy do?
---What're the Ranger's new class skills?


----------



## Christian (Jun 10, 2003)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> *Ah!  Damnable reversed titles...   *




People's Front of Judea? [spit] We're the Judean People's Front!! ... People's Front of Judea. Splitters!


----------



## MarauderX (Jun 10, 2003)

Roy, excellent work so far, and thanks for your time to look up all of these questions as the guru-on-the-mountain.

Could you post some quick summaries of the new Bard and Sorcerer?

Thanks --


----------



## Thorntangle (Jun 10, 2003)

Razz said:
			
		

> *I have a few quick questions for roy:
> 
> ---What are a Ranger's good saves? Are they Fortitude or *



Fort and Reflex per Andy Collins and Dungeon/Dragon mag. The others have been mostly answered as well.


----------



## Tom Cashel (Jun 10, 2003)

BelenUmeria said:
			
		

> *Ugh!  After 3 years, can we PLEASE stop hearing about Rangers!?*




NEVER!!  There's always next season.


----------



## Psion (Jun 10, 2003)

roytheodd said:
			
		

> *Spell Focus: Add +1 to the Difficulty Class for all saving throws against spells from the school of magic you choose. You can gain this feat multiple times, but its effects don't stack. Each time you take the feat, you must choose a different school. *




I was hoping this one wasn't true.

Ah, well. First house rule of the revision goes down...


----------



## Ranes (Jun 10, 2003)

Thanks very much for the info, Roy! I'm looking forward to more. Now, I've read through all the posts thus far and I don't think you answered Henry's question from a few pages back, so please forgive me if I bump it. It is, after all, an extremely important question, upon which, no doubt the success or failure of 3.5 hinges. Never mind all these trivial debates about scribing costs, TWF and the like...  

Are the page backgrounds still lined?

Thanks.


----------



## JoeBlank (Jun 10, 2003)

I, for one, am filled with dread that poor Roy showed up for work this morning and the magic 3.5 PHB had disappeared.

Speak to us, Roy. Let us know you are still out there.


----------



## Nebuchadnezzar (Jun 10, 2003)

We care for you, Roy, we really do. Please, please, please give us what we want.


----------



## jmucchiello (Jun 10, 2003)

Grayhawk said:
			
		

> *Therefore, I suspect that ITWF will have a prereq of BAB +6, for all characters.
> 
> But this is merely speculation on my part. *



This is most likely correct since that's how ITWF and GTWF work in d20 Modern.



> _Originally posted by Psion_
> *I was hoping this one (spell focus nerfed to +1) wasn't true.
> 
> Ah, well. First house rule of the revision goes down...*



Ditto.


----------



## Krellic (Jun 10, 2003)

Roy mate, keep your head down.  The only way you're going to be able to answer all the questions flying at you is to devote the next few weeks to regurgitating the contents back to us.

Kudos for trying though!


----------



## BVB (Jun 10, 2003)

pech21 said:
			
		

> *What does Improved Feint do? *




I second this question; I've got a finessing, bluffing fighter who might benefit from this.

Improved Feint details, please?


----------



## Sejs (Jun 10, 2003)

> What does Improved Feint do?




I'm guessing it'll let you feint in combat as a move-equivalent action instead of the normal standard.


----------



## JDWiker (Jun 10, 2003)

roytheodd said:
			
		

> *My office got an advance copy. I don't have time to read it now, but thumbing through it I will say that it's interior contents look A LOT like the interior contents of the 3.0 version. The artwork is mostly the same (pictures for gear, races, and iconic characters). The chapters are laid out in the same order. Really, it's going to have a comfortable feel to it because it looks so much like what we already have (right down to the artwork of Lidda's burnt face while misuing a magical device). *




I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but, Roy, you should really think again about posting this information. I'm sure you're feeling like Santa Claus right now, with all the people you're making happy, but if Wizards takes offense--and at this point, you really don't know whether they do or they don't--you could be seriously jeopardizing your "office's" ability to ever get advanced copies of any Wizards products again. Obviously, I don't know what your office does, but not receiving advanced copies could potentially be a very bad thing for them.

That's assuming that Wizards particularly cares, mind you--the release being so close and all. I'm certainly not trying to imply that I speak for them, by any stretch--only that you might not have considered the potential drawbacks of posting information that's still technically confidential.

(This opinion, of course, is predicated on the notion that we give you the benefit of the doubt as to the veracity of your claims, as Eric suggests. I really don't know whether you're pulling our collective legs or not.)

JD


----------



## BVB (Jun 10, 2003)

*Re: Re: I've got the 3.5 PHB in front of me*



			
				JDWiker said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but, Roy, you should really think again about posting this information. I'm sure you're feeling like Santa Claus right now, with all the people you're making happy, but if Wizards takes offense--and at this point, you really don't know whether they do or they don't--you could be seriously jeopardizing your "office's" ability to ever get advanced copies of any Wizards products again. Obviously, I don't know what your office does, but not receiving advanced copies could potentially be a very bad thing for them.
> 
> ...




What's it matter to you what Roy does?
His choices; his consequences.


----------



## Drezden327 (Jun 10, 2003)

*Re: Re: I've got the 3.5 PHB in front of me*



			
				JDWiker said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but, Roy, you should really think again about posting this information. I'm sure you're feeling like Santa Claus right now, with all the people you're making happy, but if Wizards takes offense--and at this point, you really don't know whether they do or they don't--you could be seriously jeopardizing your "office's" ability to ever get advanced copies of any Wizards products again. Obviously, I don't know what your office does, but not receiving advanced copies could potentially be a very bad thing for them.
> 
> ...




Well so far everything he has posted seems to check out and Andy Collins just confirmed the whole power attack change on his boards, so I'd say it's pretty safe to say he is telling the truth.  Now, if we would just tell us more ....  Where O Where is our new friend Roy today, with his gifts on information??


----------



## Shard O'Glase (Jun 10, 2003)

I agree with JD, and maybe Roy does as wll considering the pause in him coning back to this thread.  And I don't care what Roy does but that doesn't mean I want to see someone get screwed and maybe put their job in jeapardy over some eager fans of a game.


----------



## Kershek (Jun 10, 2003)

Or perhaps he sees all the requests, his jaw drops, and then says "This will take a while, so I'll get to that later"


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Jun 10, 2003)

WOW!

Check out the view count on this thread!  15k in under 24 hours!


----------



## tecnodemon (Jun 10, 2003)

Right now all I want to know is what did they change for Druids, and did they modified their weapon's list? I some things that changed for the druid like more class features and better spells. I just want know about the weapon list!!


----------



## KittieFox (Jun 10, 2003)

*DRUIDS*

Please, I think many of us would like to hear about the Druids...

Particularly:


*Allowed Weapons* _(Do they finally get to use bows?)_
*Wild Shape* _(Do they still have elemental, or do they now get legendary, etc.?)_
Any other major changes to the druid class
[/list=1] 

Thanks a lot!  Can't wait until the books are out.


----------



## greymarch (Jun 10, 2003)

*Re: Re: I've got the 3.5 PHB in front of me*



			
				JDWiker said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but, Roy, you should really think again about posting this information. I'm sure you're feeling like Santa Claus right now, with all the people you're making happy, but if Wizards takes offense--and at this point, you really don't know whether they do or they don't--you could be seriously jeopardizing your "office's" ability to ever get advanced copies of any Wizards products again. Obviously, I don't know what your office does, but not receiving advanced copies could potentially be a very bad thing for them.JD *




Just like JD to ruin the fun.  Your Jedi Counseling articles are littered with the same cynicism.  

Roy is a big-boy; he knows what he is doing.

Besides, Roy hasnt answered a question since yesterday afternoon, so perhaps he is already burned out with answering questions, or perhaps he is afraid "the man" is on to him.


----------



## DonAdam (Jun 10, 2003)

> What's it matter to you what Roy does?




What does it matter to you what JD does? His choices, his consequences.

Some people like to show concern for others. It's not unheard of, and it's a perfectly healthy human endeavor.


----------



## Kae'Yoss (Jun 10, 2003)

I'm going to join the throng of petitioners, but first, I want try to answer some questions posted earlier, from what they did in d20 Modern:

The better Two-Weapon Feats (Improved and Advanced, in d20M, would be Greater here) will be available as soon as you get the attacks with your first hand -> at BAB +6 and +11. 

Two-Weapon Feats will be usable with two ranged weapons (i.e. Daggers), and the better versions will allow combos. (This may not be the case here, since d20 Modern has move weapons that benefit from this, and they're used much more often there).

Improved Feint gives a +2 bonus to spot to feint in combat, plus you can do it as a move action.

*Now to my questions:*
Any changes to elves? Do they gain any weapon familiarity? 

Any changes to weapon proficiencies? There are rumors that it's n ow Martial Weapon Proficiency (Bows), or (Blades Weapons) and the like.

Any changes to Sneak Attack? Since power attack cannot be used with small weapons anymore, what about Sneak Attacks and big weapons?

Do we still get 1/0.5 times our Str score with two weapons and 1.5 times our Str score with a big weapon? If it has increased (to 1/1 and 2, is there some obvious benefit the shield-bearers and single-weapon users get?)


Then I want to thank you that you're telling us all that. But I have to tell you that I have your.... pet. Yes, your pet, a small, cuddly animal (or was it large?). If you don't have a pet, I have an item that means very much to you, or maybe some photos you don't want that others see. Yes. If you want that what I have back (you know what it is), give me that PHB, or the.... whatever gets it. And don't call anyone, especially not the police!
Signed
Anonymous.


----------



## coyote6 (Jun 10, 2003)

KaeYoss said:
			
		

> *Then I want to thank you that you're telling us all that. But I have to tell you that I have your.... pet. Yes, your pet, a small, cuddly animal (or was it large?). If you don't have a pet, I have an item that means very much to you, or maybe some photos you don't want that others see. Yes. If you want that what I have back (you know what it is), give me that PHB, or the.... whatever gets it. And don't call anyone, especially not the police!
> Signed
> Anonymous. *




It's not going to work, AnonKaeYossymous -- my min - err, Eric Noah's half-fiend love child has already stolen the book, in an epic adventure of daring heroic action! Why do you think The Odd One hasn't posted lately, eh?


----------



## nHammer (Jun 10, 2003)

*I'd like to see this thread split into two different threads. One for questions and answers ONLY, and one for discussion of the answers. It'd make it easier if you didn't have to go thru a couple of hundred post to find out info on 3.5.*


----------



## Bill Door (Jun 10, 2003)

grEEtinGs.

my iNQuirY iS *thiS:*  doEs thE toME aPPeaR tO havE anY periPHeraLS?  suCH aS a chaRaCTeR geNeRatioN aPPlicaTioN, oR a coNTaiNeR oF steaMeD claMs?

thanK yoU foR youR seRVice.



beAM.


----------



## Simplicity (Jun 10, 2003)

Now there's an eyeball I haven't seen in a long time...


----------



## Bill Door (Jun 10, 2003)

shAme.


----------



## greymarch (Jun 10, 2003)

Roy hasnt posted anything on this thread in the last 24 hours.  Maybe we really did scare him off.

I got the answers I was looking for though.  I am in the process of rebuilding my epic ranger for D&D 3.5, and the only piece of information I needed to finish the process was the exact feats a ranger gets if he chooses the two-weapon combat style, or the archery combat style.  Roytheodd was kind enough to provide the answer.  Thank you Roy!   Steal all the pens and pencils you can before your company sacks you for leaking this information!


----------



## Cheiromancer (Jun 10, 2003)

And the revised druid is on the Wizards site (except for a sidebar concerning animal companions).


----------



## Bhaal (Jun 10, 2003)

Forget the ranger, I'm dying to hear about the monk; they've been too tight-lipped about it.  Any info on the monk's stuff would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## Farland (Jun 10, 2003)

I think the guys been pretty convincing, and this should put to rest all those nagging "3.5 is so different it'll wreck my campaign" threads.  Nothing looks too terribly extreme.  In fact, I'm pretty excited.


----------



## EnderTheElder (Jun 10, 2003)

*Druid*

FYI they posted the druid info at the wizards site for those that were asking: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rs/20030610a


----------



## Sejs (Jun 11, 2003)

Heh, I was going to post on the druid thing too... looks like I was a little slow on the draw.


Interesting note, however - 

1)  Druids can spontaneously channel prepared spells into Summon Nature's Ally in the same fashion that Clerics can with Cure spells.

2)  Looking at the weapons and armor section - druids are _proficient_ with club, dagger, dart, quarterstaff, scimitar, sickle, shortspear, sling, spear and all natural attacks.  They are proficient with light and medium armor, and shields.  They still cannot use metal armor or shields (though Ironwooded items are a-okay).  If they wear restricted armor or use a restricted shield they lose their spellcasting, supernatural and spell-like abilities for 24 hours.

_Note - this says NOTHING of using a restricted weapon._  It looks like druids can use any weapon... they're just not normally proficient with weapons outside the druid list.


----------



## DSC-EricPrice (Jun 11, 2003)

Thanks to all who have offered up information on the version of our favorite game.  Now that I have that out of the way...

While spontaneously casting summon nature's ally is an improvement of the Druid class I am once again disappointed at the treatment of this class.  I guess as soon as I get Treasures of the Underhalls done I'm going to have to write up a druid class that takes into account the environment of the druid and stops treating them all like tree huggers...  geesh! 

Over the years I've played a Dwarf who oversaw a cavern of elaborate and precious cavern formations (deep druid) and a Saterri (more on that later) who helped balance a planar ecosystem instead (planar druid).   These deserve to be variant Core classes and not prestige classes.  If you're with me, say aye! (or email me and let me know I'm not crazy)

Eric


----------



## Kae'Yoss (Jun 11, 2003)

I think that the number of core classes should be kept low. Additional ones only if they are really necessary (a Samurai is a necessity for Oriental Adventures, but noone really needs a gladiator - that concept can be made with a fighter).


----------



## ChaosMage (Jun 11, 2003)

DSC-EricPrice said:
			
		

> *Thanks to all who have offered up information on the version of our favorite game.  Now that I have that out of the way...
> 
> While spontaneously casting summon nature's ally is an improvement of the Druid class I am once again disappointed at the treatment of this class.  I guess as soon as I get Treasures of the Underhalls done I'm going to have to write up a druid class that takes into account the environment of the druid and stops treating them all like tree huggers...  geesh!
> 
> ...





Mongoose actually dealt with that problem in a web enhancement to their druid book; you can get it at http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/pdf/druid.pdf
I think they did a fairly good job with it... it may solve your problem.


----------



## AdvntrGuy (Jun 11, 2003)

*3.5 Druid*

Posted in the revision spotlight at WotC.  They did a great job!


----------



## tecnodemon (Jun 11, 2003)

Plus do not forget about there new, more spells as well. For the weapon's list that Sejs asid "2) Looking at the weapons and armor section - druids are proficient with club, dagger, dart, quarterstaff, scimitar, sickle, shortspear, sling, spear and all natural attacks. They are proficient with light and medium armor, and shields. They still cannot use metal armor or shields (though Ironwooded items are a-okay). If they wear restricted armor or use a restricted shield they lose their spellcasting, supernatural and spell-like abilities for 24 hours.

Note - this says NOTHING of using a restricted weapon. It looks like druids can use any weapon... they're just not normally proficient with weapons outside the druid list." the only thing the druids can now is pay a feat slot to leanr other weapons. That of course if they change the feat rules.

They did make the druid more interesting I should in combat. Now to see the new druid's spell list that they added and changed.


----------



## MindWright (Jun 11, 2003)

*2HW Balance*

Okay, the new rules posted for Power Attack got me thinking, and I came up with a few questions.

1) Does a 2HW inflict x2 bonus damage based on STR as well as when power attacking? {I think someone alread asked this}

2) Do Off Hand attacks exist in the new rules at all?  What does the new 2WF table look like?  Are both attacks given full STR bonus damage?

3) Is the Rapier considered a Light weapon, or is it still a special exception?

Basically the only way this can make sense is if it is balancing other changes, and I now have some suspicions about what those changes might be.  Hence the questions.

Also, thanks be to Roy for he is as cool as he is odd.


----------



## Witch Doctor (Jun 11, 2003)

Hey Roy, what's the skinny for the sidebar to the druid animal companion?


----------



## Paladin (Jun 11, 2003)

Iron_Chef said:
			
		

> *Can you post the Craft Construct feat??? *




It's in _Dragon_ #309, page 30.

*Craft Construct* [Item Creation]
The creature can create golems and other magic automations that obey its orders.
*Prerequsites:* Craft Magic Arms & Armor, Craft Wondrous Item
*Benefit:* A creature with this feat can create any construct whose prerequisites it meets. Enhancing a construct takes one day for each 1,000 gp in its market price.
To enchant a construct, a spellcaster must spend 1/25th the item's price in XP and use up raw materials costing half of this price (see the Golem, Homunculus, and Shield Guardian monster entries for details.) A creature with this feat can repair constructs that have taken damage. In one day of work, the creature can repair up to 20 points of damage by expending 50 gp per point of damage repaired. A newly created construct has average hit points for its Hit Dice.

Also - constructs get bonus Hit Points based on their size (page 27).


----------



## William Ronald (Jun 11, 2003)

First, I would like to thank Roytheodd for starting this thread.  Let's hope he does not suffer for disclosing some information from the book.

Roy, if you can answer a few more questions, great and thanks.  If not, thanks again for starting the thread.

1) Any impression as to how sorcerors and wizards compare with other classes? I know this has been an issue on these and other message boards?

2) There was some talk about changes to bardic music.  Are the bard's  base abilities more effective?

3)I remember that there was some talk of "medium" saves for rangers and other classes.  Does such a thing exist in 3.5?


----------



## Eldragon (Jun 11, 2003)

Hmm, still no word from Roy. 

I suspect a black helicopter came to his house in the night, Landed on the roof, and goons dressed in black with WotC logos on their hats came and abducted him in the night. Each of these goons were wielding +1 Clubs of Silencing.


----------



## Hawdy (Jun 11, 2003)

Bhaal said:
			
		

> *Forget the ranger, I'm dying to hear about the monk; they've been too tight-lipped about it.  Any info on the monk's stuff would be greatly appreciated. *




Yeah I cant wait to find out what changes they have made on my beloved monk.....


----------



## TheAuldGrump (Jun 11, 2003)

Hmmm, I have this terrible fear that Roy was crushed by the weight of responses when he went back to the forums...

The Auld Grump


----------



## MisterTwister (Jun 11, 2003)

I can't believe tht WotC did not get wind of that hemmorage of content that was going on her the last day and a half. If we find out that ENWorld was contacted directly and read the riot act it would not surprise me. Even if it was a messageboard. Who knows.


----------



## Li Shenron (Jun 11, 2003)

Frankly, if the PHB has been already printed, I don't think WotC would have ship it to someone or some shop without considering the obvious consequences of information getting spread, since he is not aware of any NDA.

It is only in the interest of WotC to raise expectations and excitement about their coming products, and that's what happened with this thread. It doesn't "spoil" the sale at all. If WotC sent him the PHB without being clear about not talking about it around, it means they perfectly know it is to their advantage tht this happens.

Of course, before a book goes to the print it's very different, since nothing is final and an NDA is useful. A RP book is not a novel or a movie that you spoil if you tell the story before: this is a manual we are going to read and use over and over and over...


----------



## Mark (Jun 11, 2003)

Does the credit page make note of any third party publisher whose material was used in the revisions?


----------



## Tsyr (Jun 11, 2003)

Hmm... Looks like I'll still have to house-rule Scythes as a weapon for druids... It's always seemed so damn fitting, and yet it never is done...


----------



## Greybar (Jun 11, 2003)

Answers about Druids on the WOTC site...

John

_Edit: Heh, can't keep up with this thread.  Ah well, maybe this will be useful to someone like myself who missed the earlier link..._


----------



## Eternalknight (Jun 11, 2003)

Let's hope Roy is alive and well and not stuck in WotC own version of the Tomb of Horrors they set up in Seattle underneath their offices 

Anyway, here's a question:  With the advent of new spells in the system, have the clerical domains changed?


----------



## Valiantheart (Jun 11, 2003)

Well I guess we taught Roy and thing or three about giving away free information?


----------



## Stalker0 (Jun 11, 2003)

Li Shenron said:
			
		

> *Frankly, if the PHB has been already printed, I don't think WotC would have ship it to someone or some shop without considering the obvious consequences of information getting spread, since he is not aware of any NDA.
> 
> It is only in the interest of WotC to raise expectations and excitement about their coming products, and that's what happened with this thread. It doesn't "spoil" the sale at all. If WotC sent him the PHB without being clear about not talking about it around, it means they perfectly know it is to their advantage tht this happens.
> 
> Of course, before a book goes to the print it's very different, since nothing is final and an NDA is useful. A RP book is not a novel or a movie that you spoil if you tell the story before: this is a manual we are going to read and use over and over and over...  *




Considering that WOTC is planning to put all the 3.5 info in the SRD, it would be a little silly now to think that info without the books is going to spoil book sales


----------



## Palladion (Jun 11, 2003)

> *Considering that WOTC is planning to put all the 3.5 info in the SRD, it would be a little silly now to think that info without the books is going to spoil book sales *



The interesting question is, with the 3e books and the SRD, could you play 3.5e without buying the books?  NOT suggesting you do this, but it seem possible.

Patience.

---
Palladion


----------



## Nine Hands (Jun 11, 2003)

Palladion said:
			
		

> *
> The interesting question is, with the 3e books and the SRD, could you play 3.5e without buying the books?  NOT suggesting you do this, but it seem possible.
> 
> Patience.
> ...




I don't see why not.  You could do the same thing with the 3.0 SRD.  Not that I would want to, its nice to have a book to flip through and unless EVERYONE at the gaming table is using the SRD in some form (electronic or paper) then its hard to play.

I own like 3 PHBs, 2 DMGs, and 2 MM, along with at least one of every WotC book (more if my kids use the same book).  Yet I end up using the SRD on my laptop more than the core 3 books.

Its pretty wierd


----------



## Kershek (Jun 11, 2003)

The SRD doesn't have everything you need.  It's missing some monsters, character creation and advancement rules, and flavor text that sometimes is more than just flavor.  If you just use the SRD, you will be missing some needed information.


----------



## Voadam (Jun 11, 2003)

Kershek said:
			
		

> *The SRD doesn't have everything you need.  It's missing some monsters, character creation and advancement rules, and flavor text that sometimes is more than just flavor.  If you just use the SRD, you will be missing some needed information. *




Eh, all you'll miss is stat generation, the order of doing things during advancement and xp. The excised monsters are mostly iconic D&D but I've played since the eighties and this weekend was the first time I'd ever seen a slaad (one of the WotC IP monsters not in the srd) in an actual game. You can play a fine D&D game with just the monsters in the srd.

XP is the toughest one to come up with your own reasonable replacement system, but it is certainly doable.

I pretty much only use the DMG for instant npcs, character wealth per level chart, and xp, all the items and hazards I normally refer to the srd.


----------



## Spiteful Dwarf (Jun 11, 2003)

ROY IS DEAD!!  DEMOGORGON HAS STOLEN HIS ESSENCE!!!  ALL HOPE FOR THE FUTURE IS LOST!!!  (well, for the next month or so...)


----------



## Piratecat (Jun 11, 2003)

Since someone has started a clean thread for more Q&A, I'll close this and provide a link!


----------

