D&D 3E/3.5 Edition Experience - Did/Do you Play 3rd Edtion D&D? How Was/Is it?

[Garyda]

I disagree - it is overpower along with a glut of options. There is no way that WotC ever play-tested every possible combination of options from all of their supplements and too many DMs were unwilling or unable to Rule Zero supplements.

It also didn't help when they started taking campaign setting-specific options and importing them into non-campaign supplements. Not that those were necessarily overpowered, but it introduced the implicit "it's ok to use stuff never intended to be mixed-and-matched" that made it so hard for DMs to say no. "No - you can't play a Warforged with levels in the Nar Demonbinder PrC. This campaign is set in Kalamar." Or multiple versions of the same thing. Purple Dragon Knight from Player's Guide to Faerun or from Complete Warrrior? A savvy player will argue that since it is in Complete Warrior it can be used in any campaign. A DM needs to be savvy enough to see the prerequisites, note that membership in the Purple Dragons is one of them, and then declare it not allowed in his/her non-Faerun campaign.

That, I think, is when 3.x jumped the shark - when they started recycling content in different products. I'm fine with the idea that they recycle content from a 3.0 product in a 3.5 product, if it needs to be updated. That same example of the Purple Dragon Knight? They added a requirement (Cormyr as home region or Knowledge (Cormyr local) 8 ranks) and added two skills to the class skills list (Knowledge (Cormyr local) and Knowledge (tactics)). But when they put it into the Complete Warrior? They went ahead and removed the requirement for knowledge or home region (not that big a deal) and raised the BAB prereq from +4 to +5, but also they changed the Leadership prereq to Negotiator, which removed the pre-req of being at least 6th level (Leadership's prereq). So - you could potentially have a PC take this PrC a level earlier than originally intended.

And? Like I said you are dealing with information over load. You've got to much crap going on and you're so busy looking at all the crap that you've lost sight of the primary goal which is entertainment. If all you ever do is one offs it's a problem because you never know what you are going to get. If you've got your standard group all you've got to worry about is those things particular to your group.

 

[Garyda]

I've been running games since the early 80's and playing with most of these guys on and off since then so I'm pretty up to speed on how to approach a campaign for them. The issue was when I had 10-12 foes on the table and they all had feats, buffs, spells, round by round conditions, that had to be managed. So yes it was information overload in that regard, when I was spending a lot of time putting together spreadsheets to manage the combats I realized there had to be a better way. It was a great spreadsheet though.

Half my table could handle 3.x fine, the other half had to be reminded constantly about all the advanced abilities and applications of those. Which was a drag. But my guys are fairly casual, only a couple read books and work on stuff away from the table, for the others game night is the only time they are doing D&D. So we gave 3.0 a try and it collapsed under its weight around 10th level and we switched back to 1e. When 3.5 came out I figured...lets try it again! And it collapsed under its weight at the same point. Also buying a book that was just to explain all the rules in other books made me think, "Flexor...why are you doing this to yourself?"

IME 3.x was great for those who loved tweaking builds and all that, which just isn't my group outside 2 players. With a die hard group who were systems masters I'm sure it ran a lot better. But my beer, whiskey, and pretzels group is another story.

Now I'm pushing them through the meat grinder in Swords and Wizardry and having a blast. But I like to game like its 1975 so its all a great fit.

For casual gamers I stick with stuff like settlers of cattan. Much as I love fantasy dealing with people who simply don't care enough to learn the in's and outs is a night mare.

 

[Gilladian]

I've played every edition of DnD. 3.5 (with my house rules) is the one that I can do what I like with. My group knows the rules, my campaign world is written for 3.5. We played 4e, 5e, and 2e. 3.5 is the one for us. And I own SO MUCH stuff. I have so many databases that I've created (spells, magic items, monsters, maps, NPCs, adventures) that help me use the game, as well as hundreds of wiki pages of campaign setting. I'm just too lazy to give it all up.

 

[Orius]

3.x was always that way, but I guess it wasn't until the absolute glut of options was there in front of me...it was the ever-increasing number of base classes that were essentially gestalts of the original base classes (practically negating the point of those original base classes) that I started to look harder....and saw it. All the fiddly little bonuses that were there for the sake of being there...the necessity of feats...just...I just tired of it suddenly.

3.5 proliferation of more and more base classes was one of problems with the revision. I don't like a lot of classes, and prefer to customize a smaller number of them; that is why I prefer 2e to older editions, since it attempted rather clumsily to do that with kit and later Skills and Powers. 3e did it better with skills and feats, but then 3.5 comes along and adds new base classes which basically combine other classes and further weaken the already weaker non-casters when those classes needed to be shored up. Tome of Battle is a huge offender here by trying to fix the fighter by adding more classes that make fighter even more irrelevant. That book was 3.5 rocket cycling over an ocean of sharks.

I disagree - it is overpower along with a glut of options. There is no way that WotC ever play-tested every possible combination of options from all of their supplements and too many DMs were unwilling or unable to Rule Zero supplements.

That's another big problem with 3.5, what the grognards call weakening or neutering the DM, but which I would say is "player entitlement." Just because you have a book, doesn't mean I want you to belly up to my table and use whatever you cherry picked out of it. I don't mind giving players options, but I don't want stuff that clashes with my world building or screws up game balance, making it much more difficult to run the game. The charop crowd would opine that's crappy DMing which is an attitude that needs to be stomped. 3.0's splats at least had a sentence in the intro which stated that players need DM approval first and it was stated even more strongly in 2e, but I see little of that in 3.5.

It also didn't help when they started taking campaign setting-specific options and importing them into non-campaign supplements. Not that those were necessarily overpowered, but it introduced the implicit "it's ok to use stuff never intended to be mixed-and-matched" that made it so hard for DMs to say no. "No - you can't play a Warforged with levels in the Nar Demonbinder PrC. This campaign is set in Kalamar." Or multiple versions of the same thing. Purple Dragon Knight from Player's Guide to Faerun or from Complete Warrrior? A savvy player will argue that since it is in Complete Warrior it can be used in any campaign. A DM needs to be savvy enough to see the prerequisites, note that membership in the Purple Dragons is one of them, and then declare it not allowed in his/her non-Faerun campaign.

Yeah, that's a problem. I play homebrew, so no, you are not going to bring in that Eberron/Realms/Greyhawk specific stuff into my game. If there`s a parallel in my world for that material I might use it, after I adapt and nerf the broken crap, but it is ultimately my perogative as DM to do so.

 

[teitan]

Yeah 3.5 was the edition where players took power out of the DM’s hands. When I switched to core plus 1 some of my players protested and like I noted many of the “broken builds” ignored prerequisites just to get the mechanics. To this day whenever someone tells me about their “build” I cringe. In my 5e campaign if someone comes to me with a desire to multiclass or some “build” concept I tell them to justify it in the story and if they can give me a reason beyond “it’s just cool” I will find a way to work it into the game but I’m all sorts of done with with the whole plotting out a characters progression from level 1-20 with multiple class dips etc. I don’t blame it on 3.5 as a system. I blame it one the culture that evolved out of the game with the ignoring of prerequisites and roleplaying. In 2e AD&D had a reputation for munchkin power gaming but it really came out in 3.5 especially with the relaxing of multiclassing rules. I still actually like a lot of 3e to be honest with myself more than I have in past posts. I had a complicated relationship with later evolutions of the culture that occurred. A big part of my love for 5e was that it got back to what made D&D cool while keeping the high fantasy boom.

 

[atanakar]

I've played every edition of DnD. 3.5 (with my house rules) is the one that I can do what I like with. My group knows the rules, my campaign world is written for 3.5. We played 4e, 5e, and 2e. 3.5 is the one for us. And I own SO MUCH stuff. I have so many databases that I've created (spells, magic items, monsters, maps, NPCs, adventures) that help me use the game, as well as hundreds of wiki pages of campaign setting. I'm just too lazy to give it all up.

That is not lazy. It's sensible. Keep playing the edition you clearly enjoy.

 

[3catcircus]

And? Like I said you are dealing with information over load. You've got to much crap going on and you're so busy looking at all the crap that you've lost sight of the primary goal which is entertainment. If all you ever do is one offs it's a problem because you never know what you are going to get. If you've got your standard group all you've got to worry about is those things particular to your group.

And at the time, every month or so, we'd get a "hey, I just picked up this new Complete xxx and I wanna use Feat yyy from it." or "the YYY book is out, I think I want to rrebuild my character into ridiculously overpowered PrC zzz - you need to design a rebuild quest."

 

[3catcircus]

Yeah 3.5 was the edition where players took power out of the DM’s hands. When I switched to core plus 1 some of my players protested and like I noted many of the “broken builds” ignored prerequisites just to get the mechanics. To this day whenever someone tells me about their “build” I cringe. In my 5e campaign if someone comes to me with a desire to multiclass or some “build” concept I tell them to justify it in the story and if they can give me a reason beyond “it’s just cool” I will find a way to work it into the game but I’m all sorts of done with with the whole plotting out a characters progression from level 1-20 with multiple class dips etc. I don’t blame it on 3.5 as a system. I blame it one the culture that evolved out of the game with the ignoring of prerequisites and roleplaying. In 2e AD&D had a reputation for munchkin power gaming but it really came out in 3.5 especially with the relaxing of multiclassing rules. I still actually like a lot of 3e to be honest with myself more than I have in past posts. I had a complicated relationship with later evolutions of the culture that occurred. A big part of my love for 5e was that it got back to what made D&D cool while keeping the high fantasy boom.

I'm also so tired of the "I want my character to be x and have y and do z" expecting DMs to change their campaign for that player. No, I'm not handing out a +1 flaming kukri in the treasure in this funeral cairn the party has broken into - the campaign is thematically middle ages british isles, not Indian subcontinent. Maybe there will be a sgian dubh instead. Or I might throw in a gladius left behind when the occupying invaders from the continent departed.

 

[Eyes of Nine]

I've played every edition of DnD. 3.5 (with my house rules) is the one that I can do what I like with. My group knows the rules, my campaign world is written for 3.5. We played 4e, 5e, and 2e. 3.5 is the one for us. And I own SO MUCH stuff. I have so many databases that I've created (spells, magic items, monsters, maps, NPCs, adventures) that help me use the game, as well as hundreds of wiki pages of campaign setting. I'm just too lazy to give it all up.

And I am in the exact opposite place (both of which being valid). I never played, so the thought of pulling together all the resources makes me say “nah”

 

[Son of the Serpent]

Dont know exactly when it reached it but it is at exactly 75% strictly positive votes now, and rising.

Slightly below 20% negative, and lowering.