3.5 - Is your game better?

[Pants]

Arr, by the gods, man, he's a pirate! He doesn't have bloody thumbs. He has hooks! Lost one hand to a SHARK, he did, and the other... well, the other was lost in a tragic disagreement over a tavern wench...

Yarrr... no opposable hooks, what be the world comin' to yarr?

 

[Limper]

Hasn't helped our game... but to be fair it hasn't killed it either.

Converting everything has been a nightmare and I don't like about 7/8ths of what they changed.


I'll be DMing soon and I'm sticking with 3.0.

 

[seasong]

For $100:
- three years worth of clarifications
- three years worth of errata
- small tweaks in various places
- improved magic item pricing
- an expanded monster manual
- the extra pages in the DMG
- marginally better organization
worth it

Do the above things noticeably improve the game? Only in small ways. But the ease factor of those little tweaks is worth it to me.

Unfortunately, in addition to the above:
- even MORE errors to be errata'd
- big changes that are not tweaks and were not necessary
- no more easy NPC tables... why?
- the entire spell descriptions section

The $100 is, well, pretty cheap. But the above factors are ALSO a cost. They are a cost on my time to fix, a cost on my time to create NPCs, and a nullification of the 3 years of included errata (and even there, they failed to include all of the original errata).

Other costs include:
- reduced electronic support for the meantime
- balance is not significantly improved; the broken stuff is just different now, and the GMs have to learn where they are all over again

Still, I'm okay with it. I just wish they'd done a good job with it, instead of a half-assed job. And I wish they'd had Monte on board to cut down on some of the excesses of the author's house rules.

-seasong

 

[billd91]

Has 3.5 improved my game? A bit. The rule-set is definitely improved, could still use some more improvements.

Is it worth the price of admission? As of today, I've spent a net $42 getting the 3 books (including discounts where I've been able to find them and selling my 3.0 books on the used market). So, I'd say yes.

Is it worth the price of admission to my players who didn't have the books yet (and there are 4 of those)? Definitely. And it will continue to be worth the price of admission for every gamer who didn't have the books previously to be able to pick up an updated set of rules.

 

[KnowTheToe]

Is it worth the price of admission to my players who didn't have the books yet (and there are 4 of those)? Definitely. And it will continue to be worth the price of admission for every gamer who didn't have the books previously to be able to pick up an updated set of rules.

I couldn't agree with this statement more. The clairifications of rules should help new players better understand the game. WoTC could have written rule clairifications without rule changes to use in the next printing, but I will admit it might not have been worth the expense.

 

[jasamcarl]

EDIT: I'm trying to be less abrasive.

 

[Jack Daniel]

Yarr, the 3.5 scout/hunter/Robin Hood be nary a ranger, an' any bilge-rat that say otherwise kin answer ta me broadsword. The 3.5 monk gets fewer attacks than any two-weapon lubber, an' gnomes is all singing dirges an' ditties all-o-the-sudden! Avast, 'tis not makin' any rhyme er reason! By the thundrous fire o' every cannon on me grand galleon, I'll not have it in me games!!! But the worst of it is that the number o' feats in the player's hand-whatsit got doubled, and all the green swabbies I play with take an hour to make a character. 3.5 is the worst edition yet to teach to young lubbers.

 

[Nifelhein]

I couldn't agree with this statement more. The clairifications of rules should help new players better understand the game. WoTC could have written rule clairifications without rule changes to use in the next printing, but I will admit it might not have been worth the expense.

I do agree with this statement, but a friend, who misses 2nd edition says 3.5 is just this: Dungeons and Dragons for Dummies.

While I may agree with him I have also seen far too many rule lawyers in all these years that make me want a clear rule as possible, people still believe that the rule is there as a must be that way.

As a law student in a country where law is the first source of the Law, not jurisprudentia, if you mind, I can see why the laws are up to now interpreted ipsis literis, i. e. by its letter, not is "spirit" or "the creator intention".

Just my thoughts, though.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

I do agree with this statement, but a friend, who misses 2nd edition says 3.5 is just this: Dungeons and Dragons for Dummies.

While I may agree with him I have also seen far too many rule lawyers in all these years that make me want a clear rule as possible, people still believe that the rule is there as a must be that way.

As a law student in a country where law is the first source of the Law, not jurisprudentia, if you mind, I can see why the laws are up to now interpreted ipsis literis, i. e. by its letter, not is "spirit" or "the creator intention".

Just my thoughts, though.

As for calling 3.5 Dungeons and Dragons for dummies, many of the changes from 2e to 3e was simply consolidating to a single, coherent, system. Many of the systems in both previous versions was simply sloppy procedures. Let's be honest was THAC0 a good idea, given that 3.0 can crunch the same numbers with a step less in the math? Why did thieve's skills and proficiencies use seperate systems? Why couldn't humans multiclass, or demihumans dual class?

Sometimes simplifying a system is the most sophisticated step to take. (Goodness knows I will always remember taking a 3k subroutine in Amiga Basic and reducing it to 4 lines...) Remember Algebra? simplifying the problem till the solution is obvious. My favorite was discovering that a half page problem came down to 0=0! The entire problem cancelled out.

The Auld Grump

 

[Mystery Man]

Question: 3.5 - Is your game better?

Answer: Yes, ruleswise its much better. But there wasn't anything wrong with it before so its more of the same, just with updated software.