Alright so i grew up playing base 3.0 rules and thats whats I've grown up on and played for the most part of my life. I recently started a group with some friends of mine, most of which have not played D&D but have done other table top rpgs. This campagin is the first serious campagin I've run and being that I'm older I've started looking at new ways to improve the game as I've noticed later editions have. So the group agreed that if we were to switch editions it would either be to 3.5 or 5e and I've heard that 3.5 can be broken and less fun as the levels get higher and they are interested in the branching paths classes can take in 5e. So im basicly just asking for a general opinion as to whether or not to switch and if so what edition. We have alot of the 3.0 books such as all the expanded class books, Book of Vile darkness, etc. so id hate to leave all of that stuff off the table unless i were to buy the 5e versions of the books. Thanks for answering
Switch?
delericho
Legend
Honestly, at this point I wouldn't bother with 3.5e - although on balance I do think it's a better game than 3.0e, a lot of the changes aren't actually improvements. And 3.5e has the same structural problems as 3.0e, especially as regard casters and especially at higher levels.
As for 5e... well, I like it, but it might not be to your taste. My recommendation here is actually pretty simple: WotC have made a set of Basic rules available for free download on their site that include most of the rules of the game (but a limited set of classes, races, etc), so I'd recommend downloading that, have a quick read, and decide if it's appealing. If so, you could do a lot worse than to spend $20 on the Starter Set and try running "Lost Mine of Phandelver".
As for 5e... well, I like it, but it might not be to your taste. My recommendation here is actually pretty simple: WotC have made a set of Basic rules available for free download on their site that include most of the rules of the game (but a limited set of classes, races, etc), so I'd recommend downloading that, have a quick read, and decide if it's appealing. If so, you could do a lot worse than to spend $20 on the Starter Set and try running "Lost Mine of Phandelver".
Ralif Redhammer
Legend
5e is a leaner system than 3e, but there are elements that will definitely feel familiar to someone coming from any edition.
As far as the multitude of sourcebooks for 3e, I think you’ll not see a similar proliferation in 5e, based on their release strategy so far. So yeah, unless you convert the stuff on your own, it’s all likely to get left behind.
If you're looking for something more like 3e, you could try Pathfinder - that has scads of sourcebooks and optional rules, too. But my personal preference is for D&D 5e.
As far as the multitude of sourcebooks for 3e, I think you’ll not see a similar proliferation in 5e, based on their release strategy so far. So yeah, unless you convert the stuff on your own, it’s all likely to get left behind.
If you're looking for something more like 3e, you could try Pathfinder - that has scads of sourcebooks and optional rules, too. But my personal preference is for D&D 5e.
Celebrim
Legend
If you are going to play 3e, stick with 3.0 and don't 'upgrade' to 3.5. There is a small amount of actual errata that is useful in 3.5 (haste/harm) but the majority of changes and additions make the game worse compared to core 3.0. And in particular, the bloat you have to trim in 3.0 is so much smaller, that you can pick and choose better what to allow at the table.
But I would advise sticking with 3e only if you have, like I have, a very extensive set of house rules for 3e that tweak it in the direction you prefer or conversely if you have never found a need for house rules or third party supplements and extensive rulebooks. If you don't have house rules and don't see why you'd need them, then in most cases I'd recommend going to 5e because of its better balance and generally less fiddly nature. There are attributes of the 5e rules that are a bit coarse grained for my taste, but all and all its a very tight system that will allow you to play D&D smoothly and with lots of excitement.
The biggest problem with going to 5e at this point is the lack of DM/player support compared to 3.X. You may find that spells you want in your campaign don't exist and will need to be invented or imported from prior editions. You may find that monsters you want likewise need conversion and documentation. If you want to depart from kick the door down trope dungeon crawling, you might find the rules support very thin. You'll probably find that your options in published campaigns are very limited. At this point, if you aren't willing to run an Underdark campaign were the PCs begin as captives of the Drow, I'd recommend you do it all yourself. None of that is likely to change any time soon. By comparison, 3.X offers basically all the 3.0 and 3.5 from numerous parties, and all Pathfinder material as easily minable ideas and rules blocks. So if you run vary nonstandard campaigns featuring lots of non-combat mini-games or unusual settings and you do it by relying heavily on published material rather than smithing what you need as you need it, you might find 3.0 works better.
Since you suggest you got by with the 3.0 base rules, I'm going to recommend that for you 5e is probably the way to go.
But I would advise sticking with 3e only if you have, like I have, a very extensive set of house rules for 3e that tweak it in the direction you prefer or conversely if you have never found a need for house rules or third party supplements and extensive rulebooks. If you don't have house rules and don't see why you'd need them, then in most cases I'd recommend going to 5e because of its better balance and generally less fiddly nature. There are attributes of the 5e rules that are a bit coarse grained for my taste, but all and all its a very tight system that will allow you to play D&D smoothly and with lots of excitement.
The biggest problem with going to 5e at this point is the lack of DM/player support compared to 3.X. You may find that spells you want in your campaign don't exist and will need to be invented or imported from prior editions. You may find that monsters you want likewise need conversion and documentation. If you want to depart from kick the door down trope dungeon crawling, you might find the rules support very thin. You'll probably find that your options in published campaigns are very limited. At this point, if you aren't willing to run an Underdark campaign were the PCs begin as captives of the Drow, I'd recommend you do it all yourself. None of that is likely to change any time soon. By comparison, 3.X offers basically all the 3.0 and 3.5 from numerous parties, and all Pathfinder material as easily minable ideas and rules blocks. So if you run vary nonstandard campaigns featuring lots of non-combat mini-games or unusual settings and you do it by relying heavily on published material rather than smithing what you need as you need it, you might find 3.0 works better.
Since you suggest you got by with the 3.0 base rules, I'm going to recommend that for you 5e is probably the way to go.
Random Bystander
First Post
Never switch to a new edition just because it's a new edition. Switch to a new edition if it's a better edition for you. IMO, of course.
Tony Vargas
Legend
Really, what other RPGs? Storyteller, perhaps? Do they have any one game in common?
It's rare to get a group together where D&D isn't the only RPG experience they have in common. This might be an opportunity to play something else, entirely. Their past gaming experience could also hint at which version of D&D might work better for them...
The differences between 3.0 and 3.5 are minor but pervasive and it's debateable whether they add up to much of an improvement. Sticking with 3.0 vs 3.5 would probably be fine. 3.0 isn't substantially less broken than 3.5/PF (at high levels or otherwise), just not nearly as bloated (though, when 3.5 first came out, 3.0 sure seemed bloated). If you have all the 3.0 stuff, go ahead and use it. It wouldn't be hard to adapt to 3.5 but the gain is commensurately minimal.
5e isn't a lot less 'broken' than 3.x/PF, either, there's just a lot fewer broken options to choose from, because there's very little of 5e published so far. You have the 3 core books some adventures published in the same hardbound format as other rulebooks, and one supplement, Sword Coast Adventurers' Guide, plus a few on line bits and pieces. There's no '5e versions' of most of the stuff in your 3.0 library - not even close.
The 'branching paths' in 5e are just a single sub-class choice at 2nd or 3rd level. 3.0 offers much more customization and interesting alternate 'paths' via multi-classing and PrCs, so I wouldn't change over for that reason, alone.
The compelling case for 5e is that it is the current edition, and, while not any simpler in its basic system, it's not so bloated as 3.5 or even 3.0, so can actually be more accessible to new players. AND, it's what's being played at public events under the AL banner.
Last edited:
Psikerlord#
Explorer
Personally I would recommend looking at the OSR games like swords & wizardry. I've played 2e - 5e and although I liked them all well enough, the hit point and damage bloat in 5e ultimately turned me off.
The thing about most OSR games is they are rules light which means you can hack them very easily. Adding or subtracting whatever you like. So you can take swords & wizardry cherry pick your fav mechanics from other systems and slot them right in and you wont/shouldn't break anything.
The thing about most OSR games is they are rules light which means you can hack them very easily. Adding or subtracting whatever you like. So you can take swords & wizardry cherry pick your fav mechanics from other systems and slot them right in and you wont/shouldn't break anything.
jaz0nj4ckal
First Post
Psikerlord has the right idea - I started out with AD&D 2nd Edition and after years of playing AD&D 2nd, I found Basic D&D. I like Basic D&D the best because it is rule light, and you can add, and delete items you don't like. It can be argued by some that the latter allows the DM and gamer to focus on content and Roleplaying in greater detail, since rules are not thought about as detailed.
pming
Legend
Hiya!
It depends on what "type" of group you guys are. You like 3e, so I'm going to assume you like the crunch and "optimization minutia". If that is true, then I'd just stick with 3e or maybe look at Pathfinder, just for a small change and that feeling of "new game" you may be looking for.
If, however, you like all the stuff you can get in 3e, but you all happily ignore rules, manipulate spells, and/or generally tweek all that optional stuff you have for 3e to fit your own campaign world and style....then 5e is probably at least worth checking out. The Starter Set at the minimum. The thing with 5e is that it is a very "loosey-goosey" type of game, where the DM is the "rule" that kicks in anytime something isn't specifically covered in the rules set themselves....and this DM adjudication is something that comes up consistantly during a game. Where in 3e, there was likely a book somewhere that had a rule specifically for 'that situation', or one that was really close, with 5e a DM is needed to come up with rulings on the fly.
"Rulings, not rules" is kind of the name of the game in 5e. If you really enjoy the freedom of creation and have no problems coming up with stuff to populate your campaign world on your own... 5e is a pretty sweet game. If you enjoy that sort of thing, there is absolutely nothing stopping you from using all your 3e stuff (and PF, and 1e/2e, and Rolemaster, and Warhammer Fantasy, and, and, and...), and then "equating" any mechanics into 5e ones. I just rant an 8'ish month 5e campaign that used nothing but the core 5e PHB/MM/DMG, but everything else were from Labyrinth Lord, Basic D&D, 1e AD&D, and "generic fantasy supplements" (like the d30 book of tables, and Central Casting heroes book...oh, and two monsters from the Fifth Edition Foes book...so I guess there was that 5e 'extras'). The campaign was dirt simple to run and use, with conversion "on the fly" a no brainier.
^_^
Paul L. Ming
It depends on what "type" of group you guys are. You like 3e, so I'm going to assume you like the crunch and "optimization minutia". If that is true, then I'd just stick with 3e or maybe look at Pathfinder, just for a small change and that feeling of "new game" you may be looking for.
If, however, you like all the stuff you can get in 3e, but you all happily ignore rules, manipulate spells, and/or generally tweek all that optional stuff you have for 3e to fit your own campaign world and style....then 5e is probably at least worth checking out. The Starter Set at the minimum. The thing with 5e is that it is a very "loosey-goosey" type of game, where the DM is the "rule" that kicks in anytime something isn't specifically covered in the rules set themselves....and this DM adjudication is something that comes up consistantly during a game. Where in 3e, there was likely a book somewhere that had a rule specifically for 'that situation', or one that was really close, with 5e a DM is needed to come up with rulings on the fly.
"Rulings, not rules" is kind of the name of the game in 5e. If you really enjoy the freedom of creation and have no problems coming up with stuff to populate your campaign world on your own... 5e is a pretty sweet game. If you enjoy that sort of thing, there is absolutely nothing stopping you from using all your 3e stuff (and PF, and 1e/2e, and Rolemaster, and Warhammer Fantasy, and, and, and...), and then "equating" any mechanics into 5e ones. I just rant an 8'ish month 5e campaign that used nothing but the core 5e PHB/MM/DMG, but everything else were from Labyrinth Lord, Basic D&D, 1e AD&D, and "generic fantasy supplements" (like the d30 book of tables, and Central Casting heroes book...oh, and two monsters from the Fifth Edition Foes book...so I guess there was that 5e 'extras'). The campaign was dirt simple to run and use, with conversion "on the fly" a no brainier.
^_^
Paul L. Ming
Imaculata
Hero
3.5 and 5th edition are both great. If you're used to 3.0, then 3.5 is not a big change. Plus the third party support is excellent. You can even use Pathfinder stuff in 3.5.
5th edition streamlines a lot of things. Sometimes for the better, and sometimes for the worse. There's not even close to the amount material for it as for 3.5 (yet), but I'm sure we'll see plenty of support eventually. Will it ever be as many books as for 3.5? No, that is impossible (no open gaming license, and no synergy with Pathfinder). But its a good edition none the less, that is praised by new players and old.
5th edition streamlines a lot of things. Sometimes for the better, and sometimes for the worse. There's not even close to the amount material for it as for 3.5 (yet), but I'm sure we'll see plenty of support eventually. Will it ever be as many books as for 3.5? No, that is impossible (no open gaming license, and no synergy with Pathfinder). But its a good edition none the less, that is praised by new players and old.
Similar Threads
