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

[teitan]

I feel like we should delay 5e's poll for 3 years. It hasnt marinated long enough for us to really get a solid reading.

it’s lasted as long as 4e so why not?

 

[DammitVictor]

--twitch-- Stacking bonuses...st-stacking b-bonuses... --twitch--

Yep, right there with you-- I would be perfectly happy with a rule that said that multiple alignment/bane bonuses didn't stack, that limited stacking AC bonuses, and so forth. While it's very obvious that the RAW and RAI are both for all of these modifiers to stack, one: it's irritating to juggle so many different little numbers, and two: encounter design did not get the memo about expected attack and defensive values.

I really did love a lot of 3rd Edition. And there are a lot of things about it that I miss in 5th Edition. But having to manage dozens of different bonus types and whether or not they stack? (and when? and how?) Nope. This is the biggest reason why I would ever only run 3.X D&D again with the E6 houserules.

(I'd also cap ability scores at 18 + racial mod. So Dwarves could have up to a 20 in Constitution, but only up to 16 in Charisma. But that's another houserule for another thread.)

But then, dear god no, why would you do this? E6 and "core only" are probably the two biggest offenders-- aside from 5e itself-- when it comes to deliberately ripping the vibrant heart out of D&D. "Low level PHB only D&D" is a playstyle that dozens of other games do, and most of them do it better than D&D.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

While it's very obvious that the RAW and RAI are both for all of these modifiers to stack, one: it's irritating to juggle so many different little numbers, and two: encounter design did not get the memo about expected attack and defensive values.

Really? By my reading, it was fully expected that everyone would stack at least four different scaling AC bonuses (enhancement to armor, enhancement to shield, deflection, and natural armor). There's no other way for your AC to keep up with BAB.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

it’s lasted as long as 4e so why not?

It hasnt been as many years since inception (which i think is all the more importabt when we are talking about an edition that doesnt have a more youthful competitor yet)

 

[Son of the Serpent]

@CleverNickName looks like ill be right in a few hours. It just hit roughly 73.6% positive. Iiit's a'comin'...

 

[Orius]

I switched to 3e as soon as it came out, and I was not disappointed. The internal consistency and freedom was a big improvement over the previous editions. Early on, the edition really built on stuff that came before, and provided a lot of options for DM world building. For the player, there was a nice selection of material as well.

If there is one problem I have with 3e, it is 3.5.

I didn't like when it came out, and felt it was little more than a cash grab. Everything I've read about the release of 3.5 since has only really strengthened my view as such. The initial rules really needed errata in places, but 3.5 went far beyond errata and introduced more problems along the way. Honestly, I strongly feel that the biggest impetus behind 3.5 was to change just enough and add enough new stuff so people would feel the need to buy new books all over again, sooner than it should have been and to undercut the third party competition. The worst part is some of the little things changed here and there are actual improvements, so one can't just ignore 3.5. That and the majority of the 3e fanbase seems to like 3.5.

I want to run it again, but there are some things I'd need to address first. First, I'd need to keep a pretty tight grip on magic. Magic always has the potential to unbalance the hell out of everything in any edition of D&D, and nowhere is that more evident than in 3e. Access to spells would need some strong restrictions, and I'd need to put some controls on magic item creation, particularly access to specific items. I'm strongly considering requiring the acquisition of formulas somewhat like 5e does things. Second, material from splats would need to be sharply controlled too. I'd probably slow XP gain a bit and sort of reduce campaigning after level 10, or at least look to how classic D&D handled high levels with domains and have less dungeon adventuring. Another thing to do would be to reduce bonuses to keep the math properly tamed.

 

[GreyLord]

Before a 4e poll we should have one for D20 modern and the D20 Star Wars...

Just sayin...

 

[teitan]

It hasnt been as many years since inception (which i think is all the more importabt when we are talking about an edition that doesnt have a more youthful competitor yet)

It's been 11 years?

 

[teitan]

I think, were I to run 3e again, I would run 3e itself or Pathfinder, which cleaned up 3.5 but it would be core only because whoooboy 3.5 and PF go off the raaaiiiiiillllllllllsssssssss

 

[Son of the Serpent]

It's been 11 years?

What im saying is, when we do the 4e poll it will have been x years since 4e inception.

One week later it will NOT have been x years from 5e inception.