Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="El Mahdi" data-source="post: 5724115" data-attributes="member: 59506">Completely Untrue. 3.0 was not intended as an open beta for 3.5.  3.5 was not even specifically planned for when 3.0 was developed.  3.5 came about as a need appeared to clean up problems and errata that had come to light with widespread play of 3.0.  Unfortunately, 3.5 ended up becoming much more than just a cleaning up and fixing of errata, and decisions were made to make more large and significant changes to the system itself.  Changes that were unpopular with some of the 3.0 designers and even developers involved with 3.5. The changes in 3.5 were a mixed bag of necessary and good, as well as unnecessary and not so good. Objectiveness is a wonderful talent to develop, but it requires the ability to seperate personal preferences from evaluations.  It also means not portraying personal preferences as defacto truth, and especially resisting the urge for revisionist history.  I've found objectiveness a worthy attribute, though it does require practice and honest self evaluation.    To the OP: I myself don't play either 3.0 or 3.5 straight, I play my own houseruled system based on 3E.  I used 3.0 as my chasis, and used the parts of 3.5 I found to be necessary and good, as well as bits and pieces from Pathfinder, Trailblazer, and 4E - and left the parts I didn't prefer behind. I personally don't know anyone who still plays 3.0 straight, though I have seen people posting here at ENWorld who say they do. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification