3.5 Backwards compatibility
- Thread starter Olive
- Start date
Tom Cashel
First Post
So, Mr. Butt...given your sig, you seem to be a fictionsuit created specifically to protest 3.5e. Sort of like Sauron-With-Pokey-Helmet before Fellowship of the Ring came out. What happens in August when you're out of a job? What if the revision is actually good?
How about this: YOU wait for 4e if you like. I might just do the same thing, if 3.5 isn't what I want. But I'll wait and see.
That said...WotC is indeed working hard to make the revision compatible. But no matter what they do, they can't make truth out of a lie: "v.3.5 will not make key game accessory and supplement titles obsolete." Um, how about the Core Rules?
The issue I have with this Revision is not with it being too soon (in some cosmic RPG schedule), but rather the fact that it was rushed. It's all been smoothed over, but there's been talk of them not having enough time to playtest certain things...and the fact that they fired all their "name" designers about halfway through development...
I fear the worst, but I hope for the best.
Mr. Butt...you are now "unofficial." But take heart...you're still "backwards compatible."
How about this: YOU wait for 4e if you like. I might just do the same thing, if 3.5 isn't what I want. But I'll wait and see.
That said...WotC is indeed working hard to make the revision compatible. But no matter what they do, they can't make truth out of a lie: "v.3.5 will not make key game accessory and supplement titles obsolete." Um, how about the Core Rules?
The issue I have with this Revision is not with it being too soon (in some cosmic RPG schedule), but rather the fact that it was rushed. It's all been smoothed over, but there's been talk of them not having enough time to playtest certain things...and the fact that they fired all their "name" designers about halfway through development...
I fear the worst, but I hope for the best.
Mr. Butt...you are now "unofficial." But take heart...you're still "backwards compatible."
Belen
Legend
It's funny, but it harkens back to the 2e conversion manual to 3e. It just shows us how non-compatible 3.5 is. If you need a conversion book to convert, then the changes are more extensive than they originally led us to believe.
Not that I am not going to buy 3.5, just saying that the worriers seem to have a point, especially after seeing the latest magic downgrades.
Not that I am not going to buy 3.5, just saying that the worriers seem to have a point, especially after seeing the latest magic downgrades.
Maggan
Writer for CY_BORG, Forbidden Lands and Dragonbane
Wasn't 2e updated?
Did 2e really last 11 years? Seems like a long time to me. I never transitioned from 1e to 2e, so I'm a bit out of the loop when it comes to changes to the system.
But I distinctly remember someone claiming that 2e had several minor/medium revisions during its lifetime, as well as the Skills&Powers update, and stuff like that.
Anyone care to elaborate on that? Or wait... I should just drop it? Oki...
Cheers!
M.
Jody Butt said:
Did 2e really last 11 years? Seems like a long time to me. I never transitioned from 1e to 2e, so I'm a bit out of the loop when it comes to changes to the system.
But I distinctly remember someone claiming that 2e had several minor/medium revisions during its lifetime, as well as the Skills&Powers update, and stuff like that.
Anyone care to elaborate on that? Or wait... I should just drop it? Oki...
Cheers!
M.
Henry
Autoexreginated
I think the general complaint is that the Player's Option books in 2E were optional, and 3.5e is an official change - in other words, there will be no more support officially for non-3.5 rules. In other words, adventures will be written that only take the set of rules considered subpar into account. It will be assumed that casters will rarely be casting two spells a round; it will be assumed that rangers will have all their additional abilities; etc.
Not that it matters a lot to me, but that seems to be the idea.
Not that it matters a lot to me, but that seems to be the idea.
Re: Re: Re: SRD and conversion manual
So WotC goes out of business. Big deal. No more "official" rules for D&D as produced by WotC. What if someone else buys the D&D brand? Then they will produce "official" rules.
With four sets of official D&D rules already produced I can find a flavor I like. And I don't mind doing a little bit of work tweaking rules for my particularly game. That's kind of the point for me. And I am not shelling out 90 (or 60) bucks for 2/3 (or 3/4) redundant material (how much in 3.5E is supposed to be new?)
Also D&D can't die because of the OGL. Fan supported D&D goes a long, long way.
Mr. Lobo
Buttercup said:
So WotC goes out of business. Big deal. No more "official" rules for D&D as produced by WotC. What if someone else buys the D&D brand? Then they will produce "official" rules.
With four sets of official D&D rules already produced I can find a flavor I like. And I don't mind doing a little bit of work tweaking rules for my particularly game. That's kind of the point for me. And I am not shelling out 90 (or 60) bucks for 2/3 (or 3/4) redundant material (how much in 3.5E is supposed to be new?)
Also D&D can't die because of the OGL. Fan supported D&D goes a long, long way.
Mr. Lobo
Last edited:
BelenUmeria said:
Not necessarily. The conversion book may not be at all necessary, but is there merely to quell people's concerns about how difficult it might be to convert.
It may well be that any reasonably intelligent person could read the new rulebooks and know how to convert. But, you are talking about customers in a culture that needs "Lather. Rinse. Repeat." on each and every bottle of shampoo. Some folks just like to have things spelled out for them, and WotC may simply want to meet the customer's wants.
Also, there's another advantage to having a conversion book. When you sit down with your group to perform the conversion, having such a document can make the process easier. If the conversion is spelled out, you can do it without having a new PHB for each player for reference.
The_Gneech
Explorer
Which would you rather have, a free conversion booklet, or new $30 3.5e editions of MM2, Epic Level Handbook, Manual of the Planes, Dieties and Demigods, etc.?
That's $120 worth of books you won't be buying. Oh yeah, that's moneygrubbing all right!
-The Gneech
That's $120 worth of books you won't be buying. Oh yeah, that's moneygrubbing all right!
-The Gneech
Ron
Explorer
The upcomming 3.5 will consist of a new edition of D&D, perhaps they will not include a big revision, but still it will be a new edition (despite of what they are calling it). What's the problem about it? Star Wars was revised in even lesser time. It is obvious that Wizards is trying to make some extra money, which is what any company should do. They need to stay healthly in business.
However, I liked most of what I've heard about the new edition and I decided to purchase it when it's finally released. If it's not of your liking, do otherwise. I've never got in AD&D 2nd edition and I've never regreted such decision.
However, I liked most of what I've heard about the new edition and I decided to purchase it when it's finally released. If it's not of your liking, do otherwise. I've never got in AD&D 2nd edition and I've never regreted such decision.
Maggan
Writer for CY_BORG, Forbidden Lands and Dragonbane
New material?
I think one of the problems is that we just don't know yet. Some things we know, and to some people those changes are major enough to turn down the revision, and to some those same changes amount to a "oh is that how it worked, well I never used that rule meself, so I'm okay with that".
Anyways, even though I don't mind that WotC revises the books, I'm sad to see that this causes so much frustration among fellow gamers. It would have been nice if WotC could have avoided that, even though I'm not sure how they could have done that...
Cheers!
M.
Mr. Lobo said:
I think one of the problems is that we just don't know yet. Some things we know, and to some people those changes are major enough to turn down the revision, and to some those same changes amount to a "oh is that how it worked, well I never used that rule meself, so I'm okay with that".
Anyways, even though I don't mind that WotC revises the books, I'm sad to see that this causes so much frustration among fellow gamers. It would have been nice if WotC could have avoided that, even though I'm not sure how they could have done that...
Cheers!
M.
Similar Threads
