D&D 3E/3.5 Comparison to 3.5e

[shadowoflameth]

We're just now going to go into 5th edition. A player has expressed missing 3.5 which we played for years. Since there is no online support at WOTC for 5e we're planning a character generation night with one encounter which I play tested successfully with my kids. Still, I'm facing the desire of a regular to try 3.5 again. How have players of older editions found 5e in comparison? Positive? Better Worse, broken? Too Restrictive?

 

[Wik]

5e vs 3.5?

5e is ultimately simpler, but with a looser rules system. It requires more GM interpretation of the rules, and isn't as solidly written. This is a feature, not a bug, but some people don't see it that way.

5e is less mathsy across the board, with fewer buffs and the like. There seems to be less "you get +2 from here, +1 from here, and another +3 for here". It doesn't have the OotS joke - "he'd be a great fighter if he had a better head for math". Combats seem slightly quicker, but not as much as some fans express.

5e has shorter buffs when they show up, and save or die effects tend to only last a few rounds at most. Characters get hit more, and take more damage, but are less reliant on heals and all that. Whereas 3.5 was about the game on an encounter level, 5e takes a more "adventure" approach, what with the short rests. 3.5 seems to be balanced towards 3 or 4 encounters a day. As indicated in the DMG, 5e aims towards 6-8. I'm not entirely sure if this is true, but personal experience shows that 5e adventuring days last longer than the "15 minute adventuring day" issue I saw back in my 3.5 days.

3.5 was definitely more granular. You had a lot of skills for specific things, feats for specific combat maneuvers, and ways to improve/modify every character ability. Want to improve your initiative? There's a feat for that. Like to trip? Feat for that too. 5e, on the other hand, doesn't really work that way. A lot of skills that we saw in older editions (such as riding) kind of get handwaved. If your background supports doing something that isn't in the rules, you can usually just do it, or the GM is expected to make a rule up on the fly.

Combat in 5e is a little less swingy than 3.5. 3.5 tended, especially at higher levels, to have an awful "swing until you crit" mentality - crit-fishing was a pretty valid tactic in 3.5, combined with power attack. In 5e, crits are powerful, but not nearly as much (even with sneak attack dice being doubled!). The fights are less swingy towards the PCs as a result. On the downside, the PCs in 5e have a pretty strong ability to steamroll enemies. Boss fights in 5e seem less reliable to stage effectively.

Honestly? I prefer 5e, and that's where my bias lies. I really don't like 3.5/pathfinder, and haven't for years. I think gaming should be simple, and that rules wind up being impediments to play. that is where my tastes like, and so, expectedly, I'm not much of a fan of the legalese texts that were in vogue in the 3e eras.

If you do it try it out, have fun. As with a lot of things, it all depends on who you play with.

 

[Celtavian]

The thing one of my players most misses about 3.5/Pathfinder is gold having a use. He misses magic items being purchasable. 5E is much lower magic than 3.5. Personally, I prefer the lower magic. I do agree that gold has limited use in 5E unless you're a caster. Gold and treasure isn't worth writing down a great deal of the time. Magic items should be handed out sparingly unless you don't mind the players steamrolling encounters or having to rebuild encounters to account for magic items. That's the primary complaint about 5E from my players.

Otherwise, Wik covered a lot of the differences.

 

[SailorNash]

3rd ed was like looking at the raw source code. Lots of fiddly bits to mess around with. The new edition is quick, simple, and has the same spirit but far more streamlined. Lower magic and reliance on buffs, easier to make less-optimized characters that are still fun and not drastically behind. I'm a fan.

 

[Azurewraith]

Caster balance is a huge difference between 3.5 and 5e in that 5e casters no longer out shine the melee to the point where you played a party of 4fighters and a rogue(magic wand user) to then kill the fighters and re-roll4wizards at around lvl 10. Most of it has all ready been covered.

Personally i have taken 5e and modified the rules with some 3.5 iv added back the complex skill system and skill points to boot iv added the good ol 4e rules for solo monsters having actions out their backside and some homebrew rules to make the system a bit tougher(our group played the first 3chapters of HotDQ without taking a rest except where it was story appropriate)

 

[The Crimson Binome]

I just got out of a year-long Pathfinder adventure path, so 5E is like a breath of fresh air. Many of the changes were made in order to patch specific problems that became evident in the 3.x line.

Not having any real use for money is one issue. When it comes to carrying around hundreds and hundreds of pounds of gold, in the hopes of finding a merchant who can sell +4 weapons and cloaks, which are only necessary to hit arbitrarily inflated AC and save DCs? That's at least three distinct issues.

There's nothing in 3.x that I really miss when playing 5E.

 

[CapnZapp]

The main issue with 3rd Edition is... that is completely breaks down at mid- to high level.

It becomes utterly unplayable - as the DM, I'm supposed to spend hours crafting NPCs that die in seconds, and to find that all attacks either auto-hit or can't damage the PCs at all.

The patches that are 3.5 and PF only tweaks the details without coming even close to fixing the fundamental brokenness of 3E.

But this is precisely what 5th Edition does, and that is why I love it

The thing one of my players most misses about 3.5/Pathfinder is gold having a use. He misses magic items being purchasable.

Yes. This is the - by far - biggest omission and hurdle.

(The DMG's pricing is a complete joke and is far from an acceptable substitute)

 

[delericho]

Still, I'm facing the desire of a regular to try 3.5 again. How have players of older editions found 5e in comparison? Positive? Better Worse, broken? Too Restrictive?

What was it that he liked about 3.5e? If it was a mini-game of character building, the weighing of options and the ability to customise every aspect of his character, he'll probably find 5e is not for him.

Otherwise, he should be fine.

 

[S'mon]

Magic items - it's fine in 5e to have *specific* items for sale, potions maybe - at prices set by the DM, using rarity listing as a (very) rough guide. What you *don't* want to do is simply hand over the DMG as a shopping brochure.

 

[Li Shenron]

We're just now going to go into 5th edition. A player has expressed missing 3.5 which we played for years. Since there is no online support at WOTC for 5e we're planning a character generation night with one encounter which I play tested successfully with my kids. Still, I'm facing the desire of a regular to try 3.5 again. How have players of older editions found 5e in comparison? Positive? Better Worse, broken? Too Restrictive?

For me the main reason to switch from 3e to 5e was that I don't have time anymore to spend "mastering" the system. In 3e it felt like to play and especially DM satisfactorily you needed to know and keep in mind a lot of rules very well, or at least be able to know where to look up for them quickly. I spent a lot of time back then preparing adventures, and today I simply cannot afford it. Maybe if I still had that time, I would still play 3.0 which I liked a lot anyway! In general, 5e still allows enough tacticalities to be interested (by my standards I don't need more that this), but at the same let us focus more on the story, the narrative, and the exploration. Combat is still fun but is just one of the many parts of the game, also in terms of time invested.

I cannot speak about balance at high level, because I've only been playing and running the game at low levels so far...

Magic items - it's fine in 5e to have *specific* items for sale, potions maybe - at prices set by the DM, using rarity listing as a (very) rough guide. What you *don't* want to do is simply hand over the DMG as a shopping brochure.

I would be curious to try doing that anyway sometime, and let the PC buy whatever they want in one campaign. I don't think it would lead to the same problems as 3e.