3.5e "Unearthed Arcana"

Re: 3.5 in an Unearthed Arcana volume? -> I hope not.

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?
Well, what would you call the current second printing of PH? 3.02?

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.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Re: Re: 3.5e

Ranger REG said:
Even I consider waiting for the second printing of D&D Revised. And we are not the only ones.

But then I got to thinking. If ALL of us are waiting for the second printing of D&D Revised, no one is going to buy the first printing of D&D Revised when it hits the store shelves in July.

If no one buys first printing, then there will be no second printing. ;)

Ah, let's just hope there are at least 10,000 gullible gamers desperate to grab the three core rulebooks in July. :p

In 2 1/2 years, they still haven't had a second printing of either the DMG or Monster Manual, so I'm not too inclined to wait around. I'm sure I'll get more than my money's worth out of these books so I won't feel too bad about picking them up as soon as they come out.
 
Last edited:



Remove ads

Top