Converting to 3.5 woes...

[Limper]

Have you considered asking your DM about creating a new 'weapon style' set of feats for your own ranger? You could easily create a new one to go along with two weapon fighting and archery.

As for your wizard... Well, as a player of a sorcerer with Polymorph Other, Haste, AND Time Stop, I can only say the following: Don't be such a bloody wuss.

Are you going to still have fun playing the character... in RP it will be the same but if you play in an action oriented game like I do you suddenly can't keep up... you were cool and you did have a blast and carry your weight... now your a gimp and bagage for the team... do you still concider it fun?

Oh and the DM hates house rules so no dice on changing the Ranger... the only reason we got the Monte ranger is because he didn't like the PHB one... now he LOVES it.

 

[rushlight]

I'm really looking forward to 3.5, as it will fix a number of problems that as the DM I've either had to work around, or houserule anyway.

One of those problems is the escalation of power for players vs those of the monsters. This gets more pronounced the higher up in levels that you go. Assuming that everyone follows the rules.

For those of us who desire some balance, where the PCs aren't unstoppable, these changes are required. For some campaigns where the DM desires unbeatable PCs, you can pick and choose from 3.5 or ignore it all together. But I would imagine that those high-powered campaigns are far fewer in number than those struggling to maintain some balance, while trying to adhere to the rules.

Personally, I just started changing rules when necessary. I'm still working on a fix for an 18th level fighter PC who can kill a CR 25 dragon in 3 rounds, by himself. That's a fighter made by the rules. It also destroys the balance and fun for everyone else. Why bother using a party when the fighter can do it all? In order to give the fighter a challange (something that he can't kill in 3 rounds) then the creature would probably slay everyone else in 2 rounds. That isn't fair or fun for everyone else.

As for players with story-arc abilities, that's nothing for a DM to fix. Just allow them to keep those abilities. It's the DM's job to preserve the fun for ALL the players, and himself. I feel that 3e was becoming way too overbalanced, and needed a fix. However, it's the DM who can decide exactly WHAT needs to be fixed. I have several players in my group who will be retaining abilities that should go away, because those are not unbalancing, and they are part of that character. I have several other players who are screwing up the balance for the rest of the party, and they will get fixed.

Also as part of the conversion process, I'll allow some actual character "retooling" so that players end up with a concept that they like. In some cases this can include actually swapping levels in one class for levels in a new class that better fits the concept of that character. Or in a few cases, the new rules for a class may make a player no longer enjoy his character, so I will allow him to redesign that character so that he will be pleased to continue. By the way, I'm using an in-game event to justify all these changes to magic and the world at large, so everything "feels" right.

In the end, I will restore balance to the game, eliminate a majority of the house rules that were required to prop-up 3e, make each player happy, and preserve the fun of my game. It's up to each DM to decide what is required for his game. To that end, I don't think that 3.5 is the problem with most people - it's how they fear it's implementation by their DM that they are afraid of. Sure, if you've designed your character around a central theme and it's removed in 3.5 you have a right to be unhappy. But your DM should either let you keep your guy the way he is (unless that's causing problems for other players) or allow you to fix your guy so that you follow the new rules while keeping your theme alive. Problem solved.

 

[enworldatemylogin]

I haven't read the books yet or really delved into the compiled list of changes, but I have been reading all the new 3.5 threads, and I'm starting to form an opinion.

3.5 is 4th edition. So many changes just can't be all "improvements" or "tweaks".

I'm wondering just how easy or not it will be for 3.0 characters to co-exist with these new 4.0 characters. Or is conversion of everthing a must?

When 2nd edition came out, it may have had certain changes, but in essense, I could play my 1st edition characters right along with 2nd edition version and nobody whined.

My semi-irregular group has no intention of switching, indeed, I would bet I'm the only one who really knows 4.0 is coming out.

My weeknight group on the other hand is going to switch to it, the DM is whole heartedly interested in it and has been trying to convince me to buy the book. He bought 4 copies from Amazon for himself and the other players and sent me the 10 % discount coupon to share the love.

Bah! I say.

 

[Aaron L]

So, by this I have seen that the people who don't like the rivision changes don't like them because they reduce the power of personal characters.

 

[rushlight]

"I'm wondering just how easy or not it will be for 3.0 characters to co-exist with these new 4.0 characters. Or is conversion of everthing a must?"

Well, that depends on the characters, and the abilities you are trying to preserve. For most combat abilities, they probably should be converted. For other abilities, that would depend on the balance desired by the DM.

In the campaign I'm running now, we've survived several "editions". We started in 2e, then converted to Skills and Powers, then to 3e, and now to 3.5. I have one character (a wizard) who has actually gone through every change, and that player dearly loves him. He's gained a few things along the way, and he's lost a few things along the way, but in the end he's ended up just fine.

 

[rushlight]

So, by this I have seen that the people who don't like the rivision changes don't like them because they reduce the power of personal characters.

This is probably true in most cases. The unfortunate thing is they probably don't consider these revisions from the perspective of the other players, or the DM.

The game is about EVERYONE having fun, not being the "best" damage dealer around. Unless that's what all the players (and DM) consider fun, in which case ignore 3.5 and move along.

 

[Limper]

So, by this I have seen that the people who don't like the rivision changes don't like them because they reduce the power of personal characters.

As a player your personal character is your gateway to enjoying the campaign world... without it there can be no enjoyment.

I do not like the design philosophy of 3.5 its a step backward. I am anxiously awaiting Monte's Arcana Unearthed because I agree with Monte's mechanics and the design philosophy he uses. Hell Monte is the only person I would concider paying to be DM.

I also DM and personaly don't think any of the changes are neccessary or improvements. If you spent any time as a player in 3e you could DM 3e quite well. I hadn't run into any balance issues anytime I ran... not in one shots, not in campaigns, not high level (25th), not mid level (15), and not low level 1-5... I had no problem with it at any point on the spectrum.

Personaly I think balance is overrated... I think the best edition of DnD was Skill and Powers (I loved DMing and playing it)... 3e is pretty good (I like the d20 multi genre compatability).

 

[JoeGKushner]

No problems on my end.

In one campaign, I've gota fighter with a greatsword. Right now I've got the Two Handed Power Attack from one of the Mongoose Books that doubles my power attack damage when using a two handed weapon. I now get another feat.

In another campaign, I've got a rogue who uses a dagger/longsword combination. Never bought Ambidexterity and now I won't have to as it's folded into the main book.

In another campaign, I've got an invocker. He'll be losing out on a little but I make a lot of magic items so I'll compensate. The extra money from spells being reduced in costswill help make more items.

 

[rangerjohn]

Where do you get damage dealer? He said he didn't have damage spells, but scouting /information spells. These have pretty much been nerfed to 1min/level spells. Ooh fly, get to edge of town crash. Cast invisiblity get to next room peekaboo I can see you. Yeah, that real damaging, TO THE PLAYER!

 

[rushlight]

"I also DM and personaly don't think any of the changes are neccessary or improvements. If you spent any time as a player in 3e you could DM 3e quite well. I hadn't run into any balance issues anytime I ran... not in one shots, not in campaigns, not high level (25th), not mid level (15), and not low level 1-5... I had no problem with it at any point on the spectrum."

Well, then you haven't had the misfortune of having a powergamer in the midst of a bunch of roleplayers. It is in those situations that balance is a supreme issue. If everyone has the same mindset, then you've already achieved balance. The players are all relativly the same power, and the DM uses challenges equivilent to the players.

However, you have one powergamer guy who can kill the monster in a single round, and you've got issues. The other players can't be effectual, and a challenge only occurs when the DM uses a monster far above the power of most of the players, so the powergamer has a challenge. 3e is notorious for allowing this, and creating situations where someone who really wants to create a "damage machine" rather than a character. The new ruleset is designed to fix this. If powergaming is your thing, and all the other players don't mind, then ignore 3.5. If however, the other players don't agree, or your DM is tired of having to rewrite the game every week to prevent you from taking advantage of some obscure PrC-feat-spell combo then find a new group which does appreciate your ability to deal damage.

"I think the best edition of DnD was Skill and Powers"

This is very telling. We used S&P at one point, just before 3e. It was a mangled mess, and I was glad to get rid of it. It wasn't my idea, but the majority of the players wanted it. So, the poor DM had to make do. S&P = powergamer paradise. Full reign to tweak and poke and fiddle for the most available damage (or spellpower) possible. Man, I'm glad that day is done. If something like this ever reared it's ugly head again, I'd just have to find a new game to play.