blargney the second
blargney the minute's son
In your opinion, what are the best rules of 3.5?
-blarg
-blarg
D&D 3E/3.5 Best 3.5 rules?
- Thread starter blargney the second
- Start date
blargney the second
blargney the minute's son
I really like feats and abilities that let you convert one resource into something else:
Psionic focus. With a smidgeon of psionic potential, you convert actions in combat into focused power later on - it's kind of like using a bank. Bonus points here because it makes use of a skill check.
Divine feats. They let you spend your turn attempts to do some pretty nifty things. Bonus points because it usefulifies something that's otherwise useless.
Reserve feats. Spellcasters have to choose between casting spells or hanging onto them - making meaningful decisions in a game is what it's all about. Bonus points for discouraging 5 minute adventuring days.
Psionic focus. With a smidgeon of psionic potential, you convert actions in combat into focused power later on - it's kind of like using a bank. Bonus points here because it makes use of a skill check.
Divine feats. They let you spend your turn attempts to do some pretty nifty things. Bonus points because it usefulifies something that's otherwise useless.
Reserve feats. Spellcasters have to choose between casting spells or hanging onto them - making meaningful decisions in a game is what it's all about. Bonus points for discouraging 5 minute adventuring days.
Arashi Ravenblade
First Post
Really the whole rule set.
I mean you had so many options. You could make something as ungodly powerful as Pun-Pun and it be legal or you could play a crappy Commoner who was there for comedy relief and getting the party into trouble.
THere was nothing you couldnt do with DM approval of course.
I mean you had so many options. You could make something as ungodly powerful as Pun-Pun and it be legal or you could play a crappy Commoner who was there for comedy relief and getting the party into trouble.
THere was nothing you couldnt do with DM approval of course.
aboyd
Explorer
I second the mention of Divine Feats & Reserve Feats. However, for my contribution to this topic, I'll say that I like the general twists & turns of the character building rules. Fans of 4th edition bemoan how 3.5 makes it possible to have a gimped character. And it's true -- you can build a character badly, and end up with something unimpressive as early as level 7 or 8. By the time they hit 20th, they can be a mess.
But since this part of the D&D 3.5 system is one of the things that differentiates it from 4th, and since I love learning how to build a good character, I will suggest that it is the one thing that stands out for me as excellent. I'm a member of the Brilliant Gameologists forum, I love CharOp, and I have no problem creating a character at level 20 in PCGen just so I know how my level 1 character will turn out.
I am still eager to play a bard in 3.5 edition. It's something I haven't done, but I'm fairly sure that with all the strategy guides for it I may actually be able to create a bard that kicks butt waaaaaaayyy beyond anything people usually expect from bards. I will enjoy that aspect of the game quite a bit.
But since this part of the D&D 3.5 system is one of the things that differentiates it from 4th, and since I love learning how to build a good character, I will suggest that it is the one thing that stands out for me as excellent. I'm a member of the Brilliant Gameologists forum, I love CharOp, and I have no problem creating a character at level 20 in PCGen just so I know how my level 1 character will turn out.
I am still eager to play a bard in 3.5 edition. It's something I haven't done, but I'm fairly sure that with all the strategy guides for it I may actually be able to create a bard that kicks butt waaaaaaayyy beyond anything people usually expect from bards. I will enjoy that aspect of the game quite a bit.
One aspect of 3.5 that I really like is skills. I'm a little peeved at the 4e skill system since it basically means that anyone of a certain level who is trained in a given skill is equally as good at it as some other shmuck of the same level. The 3.5 skill system allows for characters of equal level to specialize in specific skills while dabbling in others. This feels very realistic to me, which I like. It allows for a lot more variation frm character to character, even if they're a similar build.
Derro
First Post
I'll chime in with Divine and Reserve feats, too. I also like Tactical feats. Is there a book that contains all of the Tactical feats? I hate having to look through half a dozen books.
I like most of 3.5. Character creation and development are high points for sure. Just with the core classes and the UA class options there are many, many options to fit all sorts of concepts. I think that my single largest disappointment with 4e is that it is difficult to play outside of the pre-defined archetypes. I'm a real character builder. I sometimes get more joy out of figuring how my character is going to advance than playing the game itself. 3.5 is great for that.
Even though it wasn't implemented fabulously I like monsters as classes. I was super-stoked when I got to play an immature fire giant. Savage Species, despite its many and varied flaws, opened up so many vistas of play for my groups. Monsters show up all the time as interesting and surprising characters. Also a good tool for a GM who wants to include certain kinds of creatures but doesn't want to destroy the party outright.
I think I've got some more but I'm curious to see what other people like.
I like most of 3.5. Character creation and development are high points for sure. Just with the core classes and the UA class options there are many, many options to fit all sorts of concepts. I think that my single largest disappointment with 4e is that it is difficult to play outside of the pre-defined archetypes. I'm a real character builder. I sometimes get more joy out of figuring how my character is going to advance than playing the game itself. 3.5 is great for that.
Even though it wasn't implemented fabulously I like monsters as classes. I was super-stoked when I got to play an immature fire giant. Savage Species, despite its many and varied flaws, opened up so many vistas of play for my groups. Monsters show up all the time as interesting and surprising characters. Also a good tool for a GM who wants to include certain kinds of creatures but doesn't want to destroy the party outright.
I think I've got some more but I'm curious to see what other people like.
blargney the second
blargney the minute's son
Please don't sidetrack this into an edition comparison thread. That way lies madness. Just stay focused on the positive and give me the good stuff!
Another one I like is action points. They give the players a bit of control over how the dice affect the narrative of their character. That reminds me... I forgot about our house rule that players had to describe some cool action in order to use action points.
Another one I like is action points. They give the players a bit of control over how the dice affect the narrative of their character. That reminds me... I forgot about our house rule that players had to describe some cool action in order to use action points.
StreamOfTheSky
Adventurer
Agree with both of these posts, for starters. Especially the skill system. That was the change that pissed me off the most in 4E.
Other rules (if another edition did it first, my apologies. Barely played 2E and nothing earlier):
-The special attacks section of combat rules, with (arguably) clearly defined rules for many of the things you'd want to do in a fight other than attacking the foe for damage.
-Movement rules, and the tactical uses thereof. Whether it's the ability of archers and mages to 5 ft step away and continue fighting, tumbling options, using spells and powers to nearly immobilize enemies just from difficult terrain, all great stuff.
-Multiclassing freedom unseen before or since.
-Readied actions. Many hate them for slowing things down, I always loved them and wished it weren't so obvious when someone was choosing to ready so as to make them more viable. It's amazing how useful it is in a duel with an aggressive foe to ready (move out of the way). They charge, you step to the side...their turn ends, you go now because your initiative changes to just before the other's, and he completed his action after you...you 5 ft step back in to melee range and full attack their (penalized for charging) AC. I love it! A lot of people also don't seem to realize you can 5 ft step as part of the readied action if you didn't move on your turn *devious grin*
-The availability of wands for widespread utility casting.
-The fact that everyone plays by the same basic rules, there is no metagame-y diffences imposed on the NPCs over the PCs.
-That the rules, and the fact there are so many for various things, reduces DM fiat to the lowest level of any edition IMO. And I think that's nice both for the players and the DM. I know when I'm DMing, I hate having to make up rules and DCs on the spot. Mostly because I worry too much if I'm being fair when I do so.
-Uniform levels and experience, and no more individual xp rewards in the standard rules. These were both really annoying to me about 2e, I'm glad 3e got fixed these issues. I don't want the Rogue to be 3 levels higher than the others just cause his class sucks, and I also don't want rules that encourage him with xp to go behind the party's back to steal things for himself. And certainly, it's nice to not have to deal with:
Party: "We're selling the scroll for money."
Wizard: "No! I can get xp for scribing it to my book!"
Party: "But, it's Mordenkainen's Seeing Eye Dog, you'll never use it!"
Wizard: "I don't care! I want the xp!"
-Instead of merely enforcing equipment restrictions on classes, 3e gives "reasons" -- ASF, druidic oaths for metal armor (but not weapons, yay!), etc... -- and often allows for feats and magic items to get around them (iron wood spell, twilight armor, armored caster feat,Spellsword class...).
Sorry. It's hard to say why something is an improvement or better than the "improvement" without talking about other editions. I'll try when I think of more rules to post, though.
Shin Okada
Explorer
Combat rule-set based truly on squares and miniatures, not on rather vague "distance". It made things much clear.
