D&D 3.5 Reprints in September?

Warunsun · Apr 28, 2012

nillic said:
I see several posts here saying people would pick these up, my question is why? Pathfinder supports an updated version of these rules that many seem to think work a lot better (I mean Hide AND Move Silently? WHO HIDES LOUDLY!?).

This would be like people buying 3.0 books while 3.5 is out and supported.

Pathfinder is different. If your Dungeon Master want to stick to the core of v3.5 then having the v3.5 Player's Handbook is a lot more useful to that player. I am not knocking Pathfinder but after several years of expansions and hardcovers it is significantly different from v3.5.

Falstaff · Apr 28, 2012

Warunsun said:
Pathfinder is different. If your Dungeon Master want to stick to the core of v3.5 then having the v3.5 Player's Handbook is a lot more useful to that player. I am not knocking Pathfinder but after several years of expansions and hardcovers it is significantly different from v3.5.

And it says Dungeons & Dragons on the cover.

Drowbane · Apr 28, 2012

nillic said:
I see several posts here saying people would pick these up, my question is why? Pathfinder supports an updated version of these rules that many seem to think work a lot better (I mean Hide AND Move Silently? WHO HIDES LOUDLY!?).

This would be like people buying 3.0 books while 3.5 is out and supported.

PF is Paizo's house rules for 3.5. And some of those House Rules are rather undesirable to some of us. I like Paizo a lot, but I prefered them when they were running Dragon and Dungeon mag.

nillic · Apr 28, 2012

I guess I just feel like Paizo's rules were just house rules we were all using anyway. I feel like PF is a better rules set which focuses not on how many prestige classes you can stack, but on making your core character class important.

But hey, this isn't the forum for that. And to each their own, as long as we're all having fun around the table.

Zireael · Apr 28, 2012

Back to the topic - what is/was a Dungeon boardgame? It seems "Dungeon!" is not a fake, after all...

nillic · Apr 28, 2012

I don't know, but WoTC has really been hitting some home runs with their board games so I'm interested!

Cergorach · Apr 28, 2012

A reprint of the 3.5E PHB would be a good move, updated with errata would be brilliant because it would add value to folks that already have a 3.5E PHB.

I've spoken to a lot of folks that still play 3.5E, or even started playing since the release of 4E. The biggest issue they have is that they don't have access to a ready supply of reasonably priced 3.5E PHBs. And that doesn't surprise me, you only need one DMG/MM per game group, but one PHB per player is desirable. It's a pain for new 3.5E D&D players.

PF is great, it really is, but as mentioned before it isn't D&D. It is my D&D in all but name, but it doesn't have the D&D brand and that is important to a lot of folks. Also while PF might be popular, it doesn't mean everyone knows about it, about half the folks I talk to here buying my excess D&D books haven't heard of PF (although they'll look into it as a possible new version for their game group after I show them the core rulebook). Still most game leaders (although not necessarily full time DMs) have a huge investment in 3.5E D&D books and are still looking to complete their collection and want to give it value by playing it.

You could use the electronic versions or the printed SRD versions, but a lot of folks still prefer a nice full color hardcover physical book.

WotC has an issue with the D&D brand, it's loosing value due to 4E loosing a lot of fans/sales to PF. WotC might be forced to do everything in their power to keep as many D&D fans as possible while they scramble at a 5E edition that might return D&D to it's former glory...

IronWolf · Apr 28, 2012

ColonelHardisson said:
Are there many games besides D&D and Pathfinder that have conducted open playtests as long or longer? I can't think of any, off the top of my head. I agree that an open playtest should be longer than 4 months (assuming that's as long as it will be; I'm inclined to think it will be longer), but I don't think it will accomplish nothing for it to be four months.

I think the thing is if it is 5e being released in September, then an open play test that starts in late May is really more of an open preview, not test. There simply isn't enough time to take the feedback from an open playtest, tweak the rules, test the tweaked rules and then make them fit for publishing and turn the book over to the printer in time for a September release.

A four month open play test with a release sometime in 2013 would work fine.

rkwoodard · Apr 28, 2012

agreed and

Warunsun said:
Pathfinder is different. If your Dungeon Master want to stick to the core of v3.5 then having the v3.5 Player's Handbook is a lot more useful to that player. I am not knocking Pathfinder but after several years of expansions and hardcovers it is significantly different from v3.5.

I agree with this, Pathfinder and even the later 3.5 is too different, not bad just different.

I have started re-reading 3.5 and realized it was a darn good game. I have 2 of the complete books, and they are good add ons.

But I also have Book of 9 Swords, Magic of the Incarnum, and Tome of Magic. Each has systems that vary wildy from the base: Skills, Feats, Prep Magic, and Spontaneous Magic system. They are all good, as is Pathfinder, but they are not core 3.5.

I almost wish (knowing it would not be a good business decision), that WOTC would have marketed each of those as separate RPG games.

So, while I like the looks of Pathfinder and would play, I much prefer 3.5 with few expansions.

RK

IronWolf · Apr 28, 2012

Cergorach said:
A reprint of the 3.5E PHB would be a good move, updated with errata would be brilliant because it would add value to folks that already have a 3.5E PHB.

I think a reprint of the 3.5e PHB would have been a brilliant move when Pathfinder was released. Now it seems a little late.

It seems to be more of a threat to D&D Next than anything. D&D Next is supposed to be the edition that brings everyone together, a re-release of 3.5 doesn't instill confidence that D&D Next is ready to do that.