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

[cbwjm]

I think in pf2e (anyone, feel free to correct me), they've changed it so that you only need 100xp per level, but it is the enclunter difficulty that determines the xp. Meaning a 1st level group fighting some orcs gets the same amount of xp as a 9th level group fighting some giants. I think after a certain point you gain no xp for some encounters (like the 9th level group fighting some 1st level orcs) because it's so easy. I think I like this better than the old, "Hang on, just need to kill an orc to get me up to 10th level" bit.

 

[rabindranath72]

I think I like this better than the old, "Hang on, just need to kill an orc to get me up to 10th level" bit.

To be fair, per 3e DMG ("Ad Hoc Awards"), such an encounter would not give any XP at all if it didn't use resources or used very few.

 

[DeadlyUematsu]

Re-reading the DMG, there are a lot of guidelines and advice if actually listened to could have saved many a game from alpha-striking and other absurdities.

 

[rabindranath72]

Re-reading the DMG, there are a lot of guidelines and advice if actually listened to could have saved many a game from alpha-striking and other absurdities.

EXACTLY this! The first thing I ask when discussions on 3e get heated is "have you read the DMG"? And 9 out of 10 times, the reply is "no". And judging from the discussions I have seen on the 'net over the years, it seems hardly anyone has ever read it and put its guidelines into practice (starting with the designers of scenarios!) The book is packed to the brim with variants to change the feel of the game; I use many of them to recreate the feel and tropes of AD&D, from "low magic", to "power components", "race/class limitations", "1st level multiclassing", "training", "no PrCs", etc.

 

[Alzrius]

Re-reading the DMG, there are a lot of guidelines and advice if actually listened to could have saved many a game from alpha-striking and other absurdities.

Yeah, that's a truism that's been noted previously, and it remains salient to this day.

 

[Staffan]

The standard-official way of "You need more xp to gain a level as you go up in level, but you also get more xp per encounter and per session as you go up in level" strikes me as just being wonky.

One side effect of increasing both XP rewards and XP requirements at higher levels is that it effectively reduces the XP cost of things that use XP as a, well, cost. At 13th level, when you potentially get limited wish, the 300 XP cost is 1/43 of a level. At 19th level, the cost is 1/63. Of course, the deed required to get that XP probably stays about the same or even becomes a little more difficult.

 

[rabindranath72]

One side effect of increasing both XP rewards and XP requirements at higher levels is that it effectively reduces the XP cost of things that use XP as a, well, cost. At 13th level, when you potentially get limited wish, the 300 XP cost is 1/43 of a level. At 19th level, the cost is 1/63. Of course, the deed required to get that XP probably stays about the same or even becomes a little more difficult.

I found that using the variant rule (replace XP with 20xXP gp expenditure) tends to work better. As I also use the "power components" variant, and the same rule for creation of magic items, the money sink becomes relevant at all levels.

 

[GM Lent]

EXACTLY this! The first thing I ask when discussions on 3e get heated is "have you read the DMG"? And 9 out of 10 times, the reply is "no". And judging from the discussions I have seen on the 'net over the years, it seems hardly anyone has ever read it and put its guidelines into practice (starting with the designers of scenarios!) The book is packed to the brim with variants to change the feel of the game; I use many of them to recreate the feel and tropes of AD&D, from "low magic", to "power components", "race/class limitations", "1st level multiclassing", "training", "no PrCs", etc.

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.

 

[Ahndrostalgan]

I thought and still think 3/3.5e was a good game, but only if you use level caps to keep power level and min/maxing under control. The math at higher levels became cumbersome and silly, with +15’s and more and AC’s likewise super high, etc. Through the first 5-10 levels, I thought it was an improvement on AD&D, and just as good as 4e/5e (and not so terribly different, really).

 

[AnotherGuy]

I started with 2e and I consumed the DMG as one does when one is young and obsessed over the hobby but I was too young and so even though I'd read it all I didnt quite understand it and how to apply it correctly. 3e and 4e I didn't do my homework with the DMGs. I looked when needed but not to understand the game properly with its strengths and weaknesses. Only afterwards.

It has only been with 5e that I have actually read the DMG and have a good handle of the game again - how to homebrew correctly to tailor make the rules that suit my GM style. Now I'm not continuously fighting the system as I was in previous editions. It also helps that I'm older, wiser with players and my table as a whole.