The movie Avengers vs the Tarrasque

[Cthulhu_of_R'lyeh]

Pffffff.

Cthulhu could take him.

[Siriel]

BAH! I take it as modern dice-slingers not up to the challenge of the true beast.

It's probably relatively harder actually, given that 3.5 Tarrasque was basically a joke.

Being fair, isn't power reduced across the board in 5e pretty hard?

Numbers don't go as high in general. I hesitate to call this a power reduction though since it's a change in how the game works.

[Dalak]

It's probably relatively harder actually, given that 3.5 Tarrasque was basically a joke.

Agreed, the Tarrasque has been getting steadily weaker over the editions but it's Regeneration has always been a mainstay.

Numbers don't go as high in general. I hesitate to call this a power reduction though since it's a change in how the game works.

Are magic-users still overpowered in relation to the fighter-types?

[Siriel]

Are magic-users still overpowered in relation to the fighter-types?

Less than they were in 3.5.

I haven't checked in any detail but I would assume they still have the whole "far greater versatility" thing going for them.

But things like ability drain, buffs and instant death are far weaker than they used to be (in fact the only save or die left is the monk's Quivering Palm) so now magic users can't be better than everyone at everything.

[Dalak]

Less than they were in 3.5.

I haven't checked in any detail but I would assume they still have the whole "far greater versatility" thing going for them.

But things like ability drain, buffs and instant death are far weaker than they used to be (in fact the only save or die left is the monk's Quivering Palm) so now magic users can't be better than everyone at everything.

I've always been a Monk fan, so that's less disappointing than it probably should be, but I've been a fan of the save or die. I realize why it's not as preferable anymore considering how long it takes to make replacement characters for 3.5/Pathfinder and beyond, but my nostalgia glasses are firmly on

[Captain Morgan]

The new concentration rules reign in casters a lot. Before, a Caster could potentially fly all day, turn invisible for an encounter, and then spam summons for an entire fight. Now flight, invisibility, and summon monster each require concentration and you can only do one of them at a time.

[Shellhead]

The new concentration rules reign in casters a lot. Before, a Caster could potentially fly all day, turn invisible for an encounter, and then spam summons for an entire fight. Now flight, invisibility, and summon monster each require concentration and you can only do one of them at a time.

Sounds good. I am currently running a 3.5 campaign that includes two 13th level wizards in the party. One of them flies all day, and the other one turns invisible in most encounters. They both spam summons for entire fights, which tends to make each round of combat take longer to resolve than the previous round.

[Pendaran]

The only thing I really like about 5th ed is that I realized the College of Valor Bard is pretty much Link, or as close as you're ever going to get.

[Captain Morgan]

The only thing I really like about 5th ed is that I realized the College of Valor Bard is pretty much Link, or as close as you're ever going to get.

I'm not surprised 5e isn't your thing. 5e, from my limited experience, is great for people uninterested in heavy duty rules and figuring out how optimize characters. It seems like a solid chassis for rookies to use.

I'd expect you and a lot of folks who post here (myself included) to be the sort who gets into the minutia and mechanics.

I myself have stuck to Pathfinder despite its many flaws, but I can totally see why folks dig the streamlined options of 5e. Me, I enjoy the puzzle of fitting together different feats and stuff, and like that PF let's me build concepts as specific as Captain America.

[Sharpandpointies]

Indeed...something many people who criticize detail-intensive rules systems miss is that such rule systems can actually do a great deal for hammering out specifics of a character concept...and continue to support those desired specifics.

It's not better, it's not worse, it's just different, and one needs to find the style that works for their own style of play.

[The MunchKING]

It's probably relatively harder actually, given that 3.5 Tarrasque was basically a joke.

Wait... Howso? It could go from "dead" to "full HP" in under a minute. It reflects most spells, and has armor out the wazoo.

[Pendaran]

It's not that I'm huge into character optimization (I'm actually not much into it at all, despite knowing how) so much as I'm into, well, options. The more I have, the more I can put something together that actually resembles the image of a character in my head, or an homage to a thing, or gives me room to have the character fit the backstory, instead of be limited to having to create a backstory to fit narrow options, with everything all the same feeling defined in a system that lets things feel defined.

Pathfinder hits my sweet spot for that, as far as D&D type stuff. The variety of 3.5 with a lot of stupid edited out.

(also I hate on a personal conceptual level when you can have nongood paladins ;p At least call the other things by some other name! You are missing the entire point!)

[Dalak]

It's not that I'm huge into character optimization (I'm actually not much into it at all, despite knowing how) so much as I'm into, well, options. The more I have, the more I can put something together that actually resembles the image of a character in my head, or an homage to a thing, or gives me room to have the character fit the backstory, instead of be limited to having to create a backstory to fit narrow options, with everything all the same feeling defined in a system that lets things feel defined.

Pathfinder hits my sweet spot for that, as far as D&D type stuff. The variety of 3.5 with a lot of stupid edited out.

(also I hate on a personal conceptual level when you can have nongood paladins ;p At least call the other things by some other name! You are missing the entire point!)

Maladin maybe?

[Sharpandpointies]

It's not that I'm huge into character optimization (I'm actually not much into it at all, despite knowing how) so much as I'm into, well, options. The more I have, the more I can put something together that actually resembles the image of a character in my head, or an homage to a thing, or gives me room to have the character fit the backstory, instead of be limited to having to create a backstory to fit narrow options, with everything all the same feeling defined in a system that lets things feel defined.

Pretty much how I feel about the whole thing (Anima, ridiculous amounts of character options).

Powergaming isn't all that fun, really.

(also I hate on a personal conceptual level when you can have nongood paladins ;p At least call the other things by some other name! You are missing the entire point!)

AD&D tried that, and we ended up with all kinds of weirdness, like Illriggers (admittedly, I liked these guys the best of the bunch) and Lyan Knights.

Boy, I did not like most of those. :(

And dear god, you can still find it on the net.

[Pendaran]

Antipaladin and Blackguard are fine for me for the evil ones. If you desperately need neutral aligned paladins (which again just.. defeats the entire point for me), call them Templars or something.

Really in the ideal, just don't have nongood paladins. Problem solved! (bizarro twisted mirror image of evil things to a paladin are something else)

Good alignment (I can let go having to be lawful good) is the price of admission for paladin stuff or why bother.

Anyway, it's just my personal twitch point.