Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="teitan" data-source="post: 8220598" data-attributes="member: 3457">People have claimed and "proven" how system X is broken since the good old days. 3e, when run with previous styles in mind, was a great upgrade of that classic AD&D/D&D feel. It's why companies like Necromancer Games/Frog God Games were able to make some really great old school adventures for it. 3.5 became a bronking buck though and escaped those default expectations. Yeah you could build some seriously broken stuff in 3e but you had to break the rules to do it. There was a thread on the WOTC boards back during 3.0 where someone built this monster PC to prove how broken 3e was but had also applied templates to the character and various & sundry prestige classes, broke the multiclass rules. It was an interesting thought experiment but no one was ever going to build that character for play and I don't think any campaign would have led to such an abomination. 3.0 is my favorite version of 3.x. It was developed just enough to not get out of hand and was incompatible enough with 3.5 that it stands out as its own game really. The paperback splats were decent, the FRCS was excellent! The Fiend Folio and Book of Vile Darkness introduced a lot of lore elements that would become core lore elements. It also didn't get a chance to boat like a swamp troll. I'd still run a 3.0 campaign if people would play it but it's gotten a nasty reputation that is unjustified. It isn't all that different from the sacred 3.5.</blockquote>

Verification