Are th 3.0 splats any good under 3.5?
- Thread starter Ron
- Start date
fafhrd
First Post
Ron said:
If you're a brave soul and rather certain of your abilities to strike an intuitive balance , go for it. There's some neat stuff in there. Personally, I only have to look at the nerfing energy substitution took in the minis handbook to know that I'm outmatched. It may not be proactive of me, but I've decided to let WotC tell me what is balanced by disallowing splat and adhering to the Complete series.
Of course, following the recent fluff friendly trend, I'll note that there is some decent fluff in the splat books.
CRGreathouse
Community Supporter
Frankly, I didn't think they were any good under 3.0, and they're worse under 3.5.
Kalendraf
Explorer
fafhrd said:
This is my exact view as well. I allowed pretty much everything and anything from them into the campaign back in 3e and there were some definite balance issues with some of it. A lot of my players had gone out and bought the splat books, though I never endorsed them doing so. But since I was allowing all of it in, I think it became seen as their way to get cool stuff into the game that they wanted.
Under 3.5, I totally banned all splat books and d20 feats, PrC's, etc. This really upset a lot of them. I have now been allowing the updated stuff from the complete series back into the campaign slowly, since it seems a lot more balanced and at least somewhat playtested as well.
My suggestion is if you're a DM, you can't really go wrong with a purchase - you may find something you like even in an older version. But if you're a player, you should make absolutely certain with the DM that he's going to allow it before blowing your money.
Ron
Explorer
I've played RtToEE a couple years ago and the DM allowed the splats. They were mostly unused, although those who used them, mainly one of the wizards and a archery based fighter were really min/maxed. I played a ranger for most part and I couldn't find much use for Master of the Wild, but I haven't really read them to a point I could have an opinion. I gave a look in the Complete Divine and I wasn't impressed. Problem is Wizards don't impress me anymore with countless new feats and prestige classes, especially because most of them fall apart when you get in the details.
Did anybody made a comparative review of the old and new splats?
Did anybody made a comparative review of the old and new splats?
Derulbaskul
Adventurer
I would also throw in my vote to say that the splatbooks simply were not good products in the first instance. Sure, there were some good things in them (just don't ask for examples) but, in the main, they were a waste of money.
Patman21967
First Post
For the most part, I like them. But..I had a Cleric player in Rappan Athuk who became a campaign crusher....he took the feat Reach Touch, which allows a 30' reach for touch spells....and you got it.....Harm and Heals....Harm, under 3.0 was a crusher....no save, he had spell penetration...it was ugly....we made a house rule....no reach touch feat....and for Energy substitution....you had to take it a new time for each energy form....AND NO SONIC....that's gay
The 3.0 Class books are only worth it from a historical perspective. They were "not bad" at the time, but they've aged badly, especially with the Complete series being far superior. (The Complete series, while not perfect, is a huge step upwards from the uneven writing of the 3.0 Class books).
Cheers!
Cheers!
