[3.5] All, Some or None?

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Before reading anybody's responds to the thread, I just have to say I don't know how folks can answer this question without having actually read the 3.5 book.

I would love to see nobody talking about 3.5 from now till it comes out, AND THEN asking people what they think of it, or what they'll use.

Well I can answer as I will not buy a hundred dollars worth of new D&D books when the 3e books I have work fine and are still partially together binding wise.

 

[Kershek]

Additionally, I am going to be fixing some things that I thought 3.5 should have (hello Monk and Paladin Multiclassing restrictions and druid allowed weapons)

The 3.5 druid doesn't have a restriction on allowed weapons, only armor.

 

[Negative Zero]

Before reading anybody's responds to the thread, I just have to say I don't know how folks can answer this question without having actually read the 3.5 book.

I would love to see nobody talking about 3.5 from now till it comes out, AND THEN asking people what they think of it, or what they'll use.

nHammer, i think you misunderstand my question. i agree that you can't make a completely informed opinion without seeing hte finished product, in fact, i've said as much in a few threads ... which usually get ignored, but that's another matter

what i'm asking is if people think a ruleset should be taken as a whole or not. while normally, this isn't really an issue, if people have house rules for monopoly, RPGs are way too easy targets for them.

but in this specific instance, i think we have a unique case. 3.5 is supposed to be essentially, the same game, only better. it seems to be touted as the system WotC should have made, would have made, had they had the benefit of current experience.

so, in that light, can certain aspects of the ruleset be used without others without damaging the game balance, or the way other rules work, or opening insane loopholes, or messing with its chi?

~NegZ
(hoping he didn't just confuse the issue more)

 

[nHammer]

nHammer, i think you misunderstand my question. i agree that you can't make a completely informed opinion without seeing hte finished product, in fact, i've said as much in a few threads ... which usually get ignored, but that's another matter

what i'm asking is if people think a ruleset should be taken as a whole or not. while normally, this isn't really an issue, if people have house rules for monopoly, RPGs are way too easy targets for them.

but in this specific instance, i think we have a unique case. 3.5 is supposed to be essentially, the same game, only better. it seems to be touted as the system WotC should have made, would have made, had they had the benefit of current experience.

so, in that light, can certain aspects of the ruleset be used without others without damaging the game balance, or the way other rules work, or opening insane loopholes, or messing with its chi?

~NegZ
(hoping he didn't just confuse the issue more)

I think I got it.

I'll say this.

I think it will be possible to use some of the changes in the new book, while also not using some changes. The conflict will come when those that are using different changes come together to game.