Hang on, I'm a bit confused. Earlier in this thread (or perhaps another one, I'm having a bit of trouble keeping them straight) you talked about how you play low level D&D,
Lately. I've been playing 3e since it came out. I have run several high level and a couple of epic games. I haven't done as much of that lately (though my current party is at 10th), mainly because scheduling doesn't allow for campaigns of that length any more.
don't play earlier editions,
Well, I played 2e, but I don't feel the need to try OD&D.
your players don't play core casters
I don't recall having said that (though feel free to find some quotes; there's probably a misunderstanding there). My players prefer martial characters, but I've had enough over the years to have had all kinds; and druid is probably one of the most played. Even wizards (which are the class I said they don't like due to the bookkeeping) have been played a few times.
There's also all the NPCs that I've run; balance isn't just about player characters.
and don't use item creation feats.
True, but some of my campaigns did allow the opportunity and they still didn't do it. In any case, that's pretty typical. I would not call item creation an assumed part of the 3e play experience (nor would I call most applications of it unbalancing).
Now you're saying that none of that is right, that you do, in fact, play high level campaigns with core casters and item creation feats.
I think where you're confused is between when I'm talking about my typical experiences playing 3e since 4e came out, and the entire breadth of my 3e experience (which has a lot more of those things).
Yet you still suffer no problems.
I've suffered some problems, just not those problems.
The main issues I have with 3e are its lack of simulatory depth (my players are quick to call BS on things that don't make sense), limitations on what character you can create using the class system, confusing math (especially multiclassing), confusing and limited basic combat options, and dependency on magic items.
Plausibility is definitely the
#1 issue. And inflexible character creation is definitely
#2 .
Care to share how that is achieved? Since the rest of us here are having considerable problems achieving what you apparently have.
Given that the few overpowered characters we have had have been more fighters than casters I find it hard to address this.
The overpowered half-ogre barbarian I had resolved itself naturally. The game-breaking paladins I've experienced have been solved by banning paladins. The overpowered shifter I played has been solved by learning and interpreting the rules better (those were early days). The closest thing I ever had to an overpowered core caster was a cleric with a dubious prestige class from some online source that gave him a number of arcane spells and sanctuary with a scaling DC, but even that wasn't game-breaking. I also had an early psion that was rather unbalanced, but that was because I made some bad rulings allowing him to convert spells to powers and the player neglected to note the existence of the metacap.
My last campaign was a druid, a wizard, and a ranger, and there were no balance problems there.
My own objections to 3e have been addressed by a combination of later 3.X iteration (largely PF & TB) rules (combat maneuvers and combat exploits and combat reactions, as well as many other smaller things), a liberal application of Unearthed Arcana (vp/wp and spell points fix a lot of things), and plenty of houserules and interpretations drawn from combining the above to simplify multiclassing math and create more interesting tactical options. The magic item thing I just live with.
I'd be quite happy if a system gave me simpler and easier ways to do this (which 5e supposedly will be able to but I haven't seen it yet).