dnd 3.5e

>>47200682
Ignoring the rules is the best way to play 3.5.

In other words the best way to play 3.5 to not play 3.5 or PF

Why can't you jump during a charge? Leap Attack only increases your power attack bonus damage.

>>47200777
Charging is a full round action, it takes up your movement and attack.

>>47200682
Maybe you should be cool with not having to take the leap attack feat.

>>47200963
Just maybe

>>47200682
Wow, look at that, another example of 3.5 RaW being fucking retarded

Maybe you could just accept that it's possible, because it makes sense and doesn't unbalance the game any more than 3.5 already is

>>47200682
You should realize that you're wrong.
http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20070731a
Check out the 3.5 Main FAQ page 72, you can jump during a charge without any feats.

>>47200773
To be fair, that's typically the best way to play any pre-4e D&D. There was always at least one or two rules somewhere that would partially tank the experience if you even remembered to use them.

>>47201014
Huh, well thank you.

Why is it that the only 3.5 threads we have anymore, are rules-lawyering trollbait crap?

Is this the experience everyone has with 3.5? Because mine is completely different. Yeah we ignored a lot of the rules but we used most of them.

>>47200998

Except he's wrong about the RAW, as well. Literally the only charging rules I remembered was (1) it gives +2 to hit and -2 AC til your next action, and (2) it has to be in a straight line.

>>47201164
3.5 is such an old format that it is easily broken out of shape.

>>47201164
My experience with 3.5 is the opposite of rules-lawyering

By which I mean, we kept finding rules that stopped us from doing cool things, so we kept ignoring them

I think this is why 3.5 has so many houserules, it's just so easy to go "nah, that's shit, let's just ignore that" to about 80% of the finicky little rules

>>47200682

Cool picture but you're wrong. You can jump as a part of a charge's movement.

>>47201014
Oh snap this guy had an exact citation. Well played.

>>47200773
>>47200998
>>47201190
>>47201276

All these haters taking the first opportunity to shit on 3.x regardless of context.

File: bait max.gif (1MB, 400x254px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 400x254px

>>47200682

>>47203355

Actually, I agree with half of those "haters", and I like 3.5.

>fun because it's so flexible
>can change a few rules with ease without screwing the game up

That's what makes it an excellent homebrew base, too.

>>47203615

What?

Dude, most homebrews are shit, especially the ones that claim to "fix" D&D.

>>47203887

Smaller pieces of homebrew content are fun to play, though. Classes/races that are designed to be balanced to the rest of the game, mostly.

>>47201276

My experience with 3.5 is watching the DM riffling through the book anytime someone did anything that wasn't swinging at a single target.

It happened so often, I swear to god, at least 20-30 minutes out of a 4-5 hour session was spent waiting for him find a specific rule.

Then to add insult to injury, the rules basically tell you that either 1) you can't do it, 2) you can't do it without a specific feat with at least 2-4 prereqs, or 3) you can do it but it's ultimately less efficient than just swinging at him normally.

>>47203917

You mean those homebrews that add half-Fey/Werewolf/Vampire rules or the classes that are basically just martials that can ignore the rules while mages ate shit because the guy who made it was a martialfag with an agenda against magic?

Either way, no fucking thanks, I'd rather just play a game that doesn't require a shitload of 3rd party "fixes" just to be playable.

It's why I refuse to play Bethesda games out of principle.

>>47200682
Who the fruck cares?

Is this some sort of really subtle trolling? Like, "I intentionally pretend to not know the rules."

>>47203993

I'm talking more about adding fun classes like the armormaster my roommate/DM made.

>Barbarian variant
>character switches armors anime-style
>consumes usage points for each turn she wears them
>has a spell-like ability connected to each armor
>requires a turn action to switch, similar to drawing a weapon

I play a Planeswalker, as in from Magic: the Gathering.

>split all of the spells up by color
>mostly by school of magic (for example, necromancy is typically black/white, depending on the effect and how it can be used)
>mid-range fighter, not as strong as a Barbarian or Fighter
>mid-range magic, not as good as a Sorcerer or Wizard

I basically found a template for the planeswalker online, kept about 2%, and trashed the rest because it sucked, then rebuilt it from the ground up.

Point is, it's fun to do homebrew if you do it right.

>>47203355
3.x does such a fine job shitting on itself, it hardly needs our help.

>>47204113

The question is, why not just make an actual system rather than trying to graft extra bullshit onto a system that can barely handle the options given in the base rulebook?

I mean, not!Erza and not!Planeswalkers are okay, I guess, but honestly, why not take that creativity and use it in a system that isn't shit?