3.5 Backwards compatibility

[shadow]

From what I've heard, I'm not too thrilled about 3.5e. It seems like I've barely gotten into 3e, when a completely new edition pops up. It's nice that Wizards is releasing a conversion manual for some of their books, but what about all the third party d20 stuff that I've brought? I guess it doesn't really matter, though, because I don't think that I'll be switching to 3.5e. Of all the changes that I've seen and heard about, none of them really appeal to me. Uber-ing the fighting classes, nerfing the spells, the new damage reduction rules, the new gnome! The new ranger had potential, but from what I've seen it doesn't look that much better than the current one. Oh, well as for me, I'll stick with 3e.

 

[Drakron]

Me too, its 3rd edition or nothing.

At least the nerfing of spells will make my group more resistent to change to the "revised" or I would have to quit.

 

[Arcane Runes Press]

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?

No.

Jody Butt is a regular poster on rpg.net, and has been for a while. The only difference between there and here is the number of swear words in his post.

He's equally vocal in his tirades against the now "old" D&D 3E and d20 in general, so it isn't just 3.5.

And, I guarantee you, he won't be out of a job when 3.5 is released, even if it's carried down from Heaven by a host of angels and awarded both the Nobel prize for Literature and a Pulitzer in the "We know it's not news, but it's JUST THAT DAMN GOOD" category.

Jody Butt doesn't like D20 in any incarnation and you should be prepared for him to tell you that, at length, OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

Patrick Y.

 

[Darkness]

Re: Re: I'll concede the point

A revision every decade should be sufficient. 1E lasted for 12 years. 2E lasted for 11 years. 3E lasted for three years. 'nuff said.

2e would have needed a revision ages ago.

And most other game systems revise their core books more often than that anyway...
So it's not too bad, especially considering they'll make the changes freely available.

 

[Apok]

Jody Butt doesn't like D20 in any incarnation and you should be prepared for him to tell you that, at length, OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

And he hangs around here why, exactly? Must be a glutton for punishment or something.

There are a plethora of posters over at rpg.net that, for many and varied reasons, despise d20 and they know enough not to come here.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

I don't get it.

People gripe and complain over and over about how broken things are, how this should be fixed and how this is the worst thing every and who this is wrong and should just be thrown out forever...
Then, WotC LISTENS to these complaints, and decides they need to update the rules to address these problems that have come up. In the process of thier Revision, they realize other things that should be fixed, and it grows to a larger scale, but is STILL 'fixing' things that were complained about over and over.
They then announce that the rules will be put out COMPLETELY FREE in the SRD, meaning that people don't even need to BUY the new books. Now, they say they'll even provide a "Conversion Manual" to assist in the conversion, which probably isn't that much, but like another poster said, we live in the "Lather. Rinse. Repeat" age.
And after all this, people decide to change thier minds. Now WotC is a company out to get our money...when weren't they? Star Wars Revised was quicker than this, and it changed a lot...yet...the game is SO MUCH BETTER. This is what I see the Revision for D&D doing. Like it or not, games evolve. If you want to stick with older versions, don't complain they aren't being supported, because, believe it or not, you're in the minority. WotC would NOT do this if there wasn't a majority WANTING the Revision..they wouldn't make money otherwise.
...is this just another case of the vocal minority and the silent majority? It seems like that with most everything D&D these days...

 

[Psion]

So, Mr. Butt...given your sig, you seem to be a fictionsuit created specifically to protest 3.5e.

Actually, he's not. He's a frequent poster over on RPGnet, infamous for his "I'll play D&D and complain about it every second of the way" sort of posts and attitudes.

That said, I'm not really sure he's totally in the wrong here. I personally wouldn't characterize printing a new edition as money-grubbing, but it does seem to be a bit early to me as well.

 

[Psion]

People gripe and complain over and over about how broken things are, how this should be fixed and how this is the worst thing every and who this is wrong and should just be thrown out forever...
Then, WotC LISTENS to these complaints,

That's debatable...

If anyone ever clamored for square bases, I never heard it.

OTOH, I did hear many complaints about half-elves and monk and paladin multiclass restrictions, and those aren't changing...

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

That's debatable...

If anyone ever clamored for square bases, I never heard it.

OTOH, I did hear many complaints about half-elves and monk and paladin multiclass restrictions, and those aren't changing...

Truthfully, most of it I never saw on this board. There was some....but the big amount of it I found at the WotC boards...Square bases is definatly one I've never heard though, but I did have a few problems with the "long" creature agruments about where the head is with my players..... *shrugs*

 

[jasamcarl]

That's debatable...

If anyone ever clamored for square bases, I never heard it.

OTOH, I did hear many complaints about half-elves and monk and paladin multiclass restrictions, and those aren't changing...

Square bases is mechanically a far more compelling change than any of the latter revisions. Care to explain your aversion to it?