What's stopping WOTC from going back to 3.5?

[Hussar]

Just as a point about 3.5 splats.

What power creep? I see people are accepting power creep as a fact of life, but, I have to ask, what power creep?

Every splat caster was weaker than core casters. The splats generally lowered casters down and raised up non-casters, which is something most people agreed needed to be done.

I love it when people say, "Core Only" because I can make the most powerful, most wahoo characters then.

Splats didn't increase power creep, they actually put a pretty strong limit on it. Take a campaign, replace Clerics with Favored Souls, Wizards with Warlocks and Truenamers, and boot Druids to the curb and you have a MUCH lower power game.

You want power creep, look at 2e with splats. Yikes! 3.5 splats, by and large, did very little to increase the power of characters and generally went out of their way to balance existing material.

 

[billd91]

Just as a point about 3.5 splats.

What power creep? I see people are accepting power creep as a fact of life, but, I have to ask, what power creep?

<snip>

You want power creep, look at 2e with splats. Yikes! 3.5 splats, by and large, did very little to increase the power of characters and generally went out of their way to balance existing material.

I would agree that a couple of the splat books boosted fighting classes a nice bit. But several feats like Divine Metamagic and the large number of combat-oriented spells added to the cleric and druid spell lists says the splats most definitely did increase caster power.

 

[Dausuul]

I would agree that a couple of the splat books boosted fighting classes a nice bit. But several feats like Divine Metamagic and the large number of combat-oriented spells added to the cleric and druid spell lists says the splats most definitely did increase caster power.

Don't forget the Initiate of the Seven Veils and the Incantatrix. *shudder*

That said, Hussar is generally right; the truly overpowered stuff is in the Player's Handbook. Splatbooks enhanced the PHB uber-classes rather than superseding them, and the enhancements were just icing on a broken, broken cake. If you banned all PHB classes and allowed only stuff out of splats*, game balance would improve dramatically.

[size=-2]*Except the archivist. Dear God. Do not allow the archivist.[/size]

 

[Desdichado]

Just as a point about 3.5 splats.

What power creep? I see people are accepting power creep as a fact of life, but, I have to ask, what power creep?

Every splat caster was weaker than core casters. The splats generally lowered casters down and raised up non-casters, which is something most people agreed needed to be done.

I love it when people say, "Core Only" because I can make the most powerful, most wahoo characters then.

Splats didn't increase power creep, they actually put a pretty strong limit on it. Take a campaign, replace Clerics with Favored Souls, Wizards with Warlocks and Truenamers, and boot Druids to the curb and you have a MUCH lower power game.

You want power creep, look at 2e with splats. Yikes! 3.5 splats, by and large, did very little to increase the power of characters and generally went out of their way to balance existing material.

100% agree.

Up until Player's Handbook 2, at least. After that, you're on your own. PHB2 classes seem to have been broken in the few times we've used them, as have most of the classes that came out in books after them.

But yeah; the Complete series were all classes that got the shaft. I like them for other reasons, but I often feel inclined as a GM to give them a little extra benefit just so that they can keep up.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Splat book power creep came from the class dipping. It wasnt that the new classes were more powerful on their own they just added some unexpected builds to the game.

 

[prosfilaes]

Splat book power creep came from the class dipping. It wasnt that the new classes were more powerful on their own they just added some unexpected builds to the game.

? Wizard, cleric and druid, the big three in power, don't class dip. Druids don't even usually take prestige classes.

 

[Bedrockgames]

? Wizard, cleric and druid, the big three in power, don't class dip. Druids don't even usually take prestige classes.

I am not denying those are powerful but they became more so with feats from the splat books and i've seen monstrous builds in game from class dipping in splats. If you are going tor magic, sure going all druid makes sense. However i always found standard spellcasters easy to challenge and balance out, the uber builds are what always threw a wrench in my games.

 

[Vegepygmy]

What power creep? I see people are accepting power creep as a fact of life, but, I have to ask, what power creep?

Every splat caster was weaker than core casters.

Radiant Servant of Pelor.

That's just one that disproves your claim. There are others.

 

[JamesonCourage]

Stuff like DDM / Persist Spell and Spell Conpendium (orb spells) were huge additions to core casters. Splat is not limited to just new classes.

Edit: Forgot to mention the new monsters or creatures that could be polymorphed into, etc. Tons of stuff out there gave more power to core classes, and quite dramatically at that.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

? Wizard, cleric and druid, the big three in power, don't class dip. Druids don't even usually take prestige classes.

Seems like an overgeneralization to me. How many levels in a class counts as a "dip?"