Ranger REG
Explorer
Re: 3.5 in an Unearthed Arcana volume? -> I hope not.
AFAIC, 3.5 sounds okay to me, because honestly, I don't even want to know if there is going to be a 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.6, 3.7, etc. ... all Revised Editions. The way I see it: You do a new edition, then a revised edition, before you move on to next new edition (4e).
But if you want to be proper, "3e Revised" is cool.
Well, what would you call the current second printing of PH? 3.02?KDLadage said:
I would not want to see this for mostly the reasons presented.
However, I would like to (once again) go on record as having said that the idea of calling this 3.5 is the worst marketing move WotC has made in a long time.
3.1? Sure, this would make sense.
3eRevised? Another good choice.
3.5? Makes me wonder what 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4 were. What did I miss?
AFAIC, 3.5 sounds okay to me, because honestly, I don't even want to know if there is going to be a 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.6, 3.7, etc. ... all Revised Editions. The way I see it: You do a new edition, then a revised edition, before you move on to next new edition (4e).
But if you want to be proper, "3e Revised" is cool.