D&D 3.x 3rd Edition Revisited - Better play with the power of hindsight?

[rabindranath72]

Were you able to find "1st level multiclassing" in the 3.5 DMG? It was a sidebar in the 3.0 version but I thought it had been removed in the revision.

Nope, they removed it unfortunately. No idea why, as it was useful and flavorful. They also removed the "low magic" variant (which was reintroduced in a more fleshed-out form in PF1). More reasons I don't like 3.5

 

[francisca]

The very first thing I would do to greatly improve the game and (mostly) everyone's experience with it immediately conflicts with the whole initial premise of taking the game as it actually is and working with that. Which is to lower the level cap from 20th level to 12th level.

Interesting. My initial reaction was: it's fine if you stick with the core, and end the campaigns around 10th level or so. I ran a 3.5 game for about 2.5 years, and the players didn't get past level 9, and it was fine. Likewise, I played in a Dragonlance 3.5 game for about 5 years, and didn't stray far from the core (we had a couple class variants from the 3e Unearthed Arcana mixed, plus a couple DL specific classes), and we tapped out around 11th.

Overall, 3/3.5 was a solid system, and I had fun with it, but again, I wasn't stirring in 20 different sourcebooks.

 

[GM Lent]

Nope, they removed it unfortunately. No idea why, as it was useful and flavorful. They also removed the "low magic" variant (which was reintroduced in a more fleshed-out form in PF1). More reasons I don't like 3.5

Yeah, that's what I thought. I just throught maybe (after all these years) I had just missed it.

C'est la vie.

 

[Voadam]

Interesting. My initial reaction was: it's fine if you stick with the core, and end the campaigns around 10th level or so. I ran a 3.5 game for about 2.5 years, and the players didn't get past level 9, and it was fine. Likewise, I played in a Dragonlance 3.5 game for about 5 years, and didn't stray far from the core (we had a couple class variants from the 3e Unearthed Arcana mixed, plus a couple DL specific classes), and we tapped out around 11th.

Overall, 3/3.5 was a solid system, and I had fun with it, but again, I wasn't stirring in 20 different sourcebooks.

My experience was different.

I had plenty of fun in core only games but you still had CoDzilla and batman wizards in core once you got past low levels.

I liked a lot of supplements, particularly Unearthed Arcana, to tune the game to taste and enjoyed playing and running high level games with a lot of supplements thrown in.

Lots to keep track of, a lot of prep for making NPCs, and plenty of ways things can get unbalanced, but I had great fun with high level and lots of supplements.

 

[VHawkwinter]

Nope, they removed it unfortunately. No idea why, as it was useful and flavorful. They also removed the "low magic" variant (which was reintroduced in a more fleshed-out form in PF1). More reasons I don't like 3.5

In hindsight I wish I had never gotten rid of my 3.0 DMG. I didn't realise how many things had been cut from the 3.5 version.

 

[kigmatzomat]

Interesting. My initial reaction was: it's fine if you stick with the core, and end the campaigns around 10th level or so.

I ran 3e from 1st to 22nd. Much easier than my 2e game that went into the 20s.

PrC management was a thing. Someone wanted the Lloth-esque PrC in a Dragonlance-based setting. We talked about it and he went Dragon Disciple.

I ran into power balance issues with martial vs casters. Came up with a PrC for the fighter, gave the monk Fist of Zuoken from PsiHB, and a multi-classed character who got weak towards the end got TBo9S as a PrC. I felt TBo9S is where 5e should have taken martials the 4-asco. 5e maneuvers don't hold a candle to TBo9S.

 

[rgard]

Were you able to find "1st level multiclassing" in the 3.5 DMG? It was a sidebar in the 3.0 version but I thought it had been removed in the revision.

It wasn't in the 3.5 DMG. I played one character using those rules in 3.5.

 

[GM Lent]

It wasn't in the 3.5 DMG. I played one character using those rules in 3.5.

Yeah, I thought so. I never understood why they took it out.

 

[rgard]

Yeah, I thought so. I never understood why they took it out.

Probably some space limitation. It's pretty easy to do without the book though. Just map out what the character would look like at 2nd level then split up what the character gets at 1st and 2nd level.