D&D 3E/3.5 Why 3.5 Worked

[DEFCON 1]

I enjoyed my time with 3E and 3.5 when I played them many years ago. But right now I am playing in a PF game a friend of mine has put together, and I have found as I have delved into the PFSRD that it has the same issues with it that 3E and 3.5 had for me... that there are dozens of fiddly little additive game mechanics and bonuses that allow you to "customize" your character, but when taken in total have absolutely no narrative differential. The description of the feature, or feat, or ability that is meant to evoke what your character can do just essentially disappears once the mechanical bonus is added into your sheet.

Case in point: the Dodge feat, a +1 to AC. Now feats are seemingly "special", in that you only get them every couple of levels. So they should seem to really be an important part of you your character is because it allows you to "customize" who you are. And when you select Dodge, the name and description makes you think "Ah ha! I'm a dodger! I can avoid attacks better than other people by rolling out of the way!"

So you add the +1 bonus to your AC total. Great. But then what happens? That bonus just becomes one in an entire series of bonuses that raise your AC, and pretty soon when you are actually playing at the table, all you end up thinking is "My AC is 21." That's it. How you got to 21 never comes up. A couple points from armor, a couple from a shield, Dodge, this bonus, that bonus... they never appear as part of the roleplay and you never think about them ever again. So this supposed defining narrative feature of your character is just washed away in the morass of numbers on your sheet.

So to me... specific individual mechanics you take for your character never actually define who you are in the world-- it always ends up being how you roleplay the character that does it. And as a result, I just don't care if more and more and more "game mechanics" get added (theoretically to allow me to even further "customize" my PC), because those mechanics to me don't actual CREATE who my character is and what he is known for. I get that from how my character behaves and how they interact with other people and the world itself.

And this is why I find the massive amounts of mechanics now found in 3.5 and PF to ultimately be more unwieldy that actually useful.

 

[Maxperson]

I enjoyed my time with 3E and 3.5 when I played them many years ago. But right now I am playing in a PF game a friend of mine has put together, and I have found as I have delved into the PFSRD that it has the same issues with it that 3E and 3.5 had for me... that there are dozens of fiddly little additive game mechanics and bonuses that allow you to "customize" your character, but when taken in total have absolutely no narrative differential. The description of the feature, or feat, or ability that is meant to evoke what your character can do just essentially disappears once the mechanical bonus is added into your sheet.

Case in point: the Dodge feat, a +1 to AC. Now feats are seemingly "special", in that you only get them every couple of levels. So they should seem to really be an important part of you your character is because it allows you to "customize" who you are. And when you select Dodge, the name and description makes you think "Ah ha! I'm a dodger! I can avoid attacks better than other people by rolling out of the way!"

So you add the +1 bonus to your AC total. Great. But then what happens? That bonus just becomes one in an entire series of bonuses that raise your AC, and pretty soon when you are actually playing at the table, all you end up thinking is "My AC is 21." That's it. How you got to 21 never comes up. A couple points from armor, a couple from a shield, Dodge, this bonus, that bonus... they never appear as part of the roleplay and you never think about them ever again. So this supposed defining narrative feature of your character is just washed away in the morass of numbers on your sheet.

So to me... specific individual mechanics you take for your character never actually define who you are in the world-- it always ends up being how you roleplay the character that does it. And as a result, I just don't care if more and more and more "game mechanics" get added (theoretically to allow me to even further "customize" my PC), because those mechanics to me don't actual CREATE who my character is and what he is known for. I get that from how my character behaves and how they interact with other people and the world itself.

And this is why I find the massive amounts of mechanics now found in 3.5 and PF to ultimately be more unwieldy that actually useful.

Pathfinder changed Dodge to a general +1 to AC?

 

[JeffB]

I enjoyed my time with 3E and 3.5 when I played them many years ago. But right now I am playing in a PF game a friend of mine has put together, and I have found as I have delved into the PFSRD that it has the same issues with it that 3E and 3.5 had for me... that there are dozens of fiddly little additive game mechanics and bonuses that allow you to "customize" your character, but when taken in total have absolutely no narrative differential. The description of the feature, or feat, or ability that is meant to evoke what your character can do just essentially disappears once the mechanical bonus is added into your sheet.

Case in point: the Dodge feat, a +1 to AC. Now feats are seemingly "special", in that you only get them every couple of levels. So they should seem to really be an important part of you your character is because it allows you to "customize" who you are. And when you select Dodge, the name and description makes you think "Ah ha! I'm a dodger! I can avoid attacks better than other people by rolling out of the way!"

So you add the +1 bonus to your AC total. Great. But then what happens? That bonus just becomes one in an entire series of bonuses that raise your AC, and pretty soon when you are actually playing at the table, all you end up thinking is "My AC is 21." That's it. How you got to 21 never comes up. A couple points from armor, a couple from a shield, Dodge, this bonus, that bonus... they never appear as part of the roleplay and you never think about them ever again. So this supposed defining narrative feature of your character is just washed away in the morass of numbers on your sheet.

So to me... specific individual mechanics you take for your character never actually define who you are in the world-- it always ends up being how you roleplay the character that does it. And as a result, I just don't care if more and more and more "game mechanics" get added (theoretically to allow me to even further "customize" my PC), because those mechanics to me don't actual CREATE who my character is and what he is known for. I get that from how my character behaves and how they interact with other people and the world itself.

And this is why I find the massive amounts of mechanics now found in 3.5 and PF to ultimately be more unwieldy that actually useful.

Yep. The game within the game. Gaming the system. System Mastery. Builds. Optimization. Whatever you want to call it. This is 3.x's hallmark. I understand wanting to have a competent character, but when your mechanical choices don't do anything to add to the in game fiction-and instead are just there to overcome some sort of meta-game negative in the system- meh...I've no use for this type of playstyle/game.

 

[Shiroiken]

3.xE edition was popular with a certain type of player & DM. It is filled with detailed mechanics, and an important aspect of the game is breaking down the best (usually "optimal") choices for character creation and leveling. This appeals to players interested in such things, but many others (like myself) do not enjoy that level of math and planning. It's not really that different that why some players still love 4E, or really any other edition, because it best has the mechanical aspects enjoyed by those players. Since 3E was part of the 2nd D&D boom, it's unsurprising that a lot of players like this mechanic... it's what they learned the game with. I suspect the same will be true in later editions of 5E, as it is part of the 3rd boom (and considered the 2nd Golden Age by some).

 

[Anoth]

I wonder if anyone besides me has played pathfinder with the only multiclassing allowed is one prestige class

 

[Weiley31]

Just remember: if ya go back to playing 3.5 e, make sure the Warblade and Duskblade are choice selections.

I found them to be a lot more fun than some of the regular base classes.

 

[Maxperson]

3.xE edition was popular with a certain type of player & DM. It is filled with detailed mechanics, and an important aspect of the game is breaking down the best (usually "optimal") choices for character creation and leveling. This appeals to players interested in such things, but many others (like myself) do not enjoy that level of math and planning. It's not really that different that why some players still love 4E, or really any other edition, because it best has the mechanical aspects enjoyed by those players. Since 3E was part of the 2nd D&D boom, it's unsurprising that a lot of players like this mechanic... it's what they learned the game with. I suspect the same will be true in later editions of 5E, as it is part of the 3rd boom (and considered the 2nd Golden Age by some).

This is incorrect. It was popular with at LEAST two types of player & DM. The optimizer group. And the roleplay group that chose feats and such for their character, even if not optimal for leveling. There were probably other types as well, but those are the two largest camps that I saw that loved 3e.

 

[pogre]

We played 3.5 with PHB only and it worked great for us. Had some fun long lasting campaigns, but I was ready for a new edition on the basis of villain's stat blocks alone!

 

[Maxperson]

We played 3.5 with PHB only and it worked great for us. Had some fun long lasting campaigns, but I was ready for a new edition on the basis of villain's stat blocks alone!

Yeah. Creating high level villains was major work. That's why WotC and 3rd party NPC books were purchased by me. They were among the few 3rd party supplements I bought.

 

[Coroc]

Out of all the editions 3.5 is one I don't have a lot of nostalgia for 3.5.

In DDO 3.5 really shines. 3.x E is really good for computer games where all that feature precondition stuff and tons of + and - is registered by the machine. I never played it PnP, i like the improvements over 2e like the three saving throw system and the linearity.
What i do not like about 3e is the level dip power gaming it enables. No critics, if yo uare into that kind of game that is fine it just is not my gusto. But i almost always prefer single class be it 2e, 3e, or 5e.