D&D 3E/3.5 Edition Experience - Did/Do you Play 3rd Edtion D&D? How Was/Is it?

How Did/Do You Feel About 3E/3.5E D&D?

  • I'm playing it right now; I'll have to let you know later.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

In addition to the majority of the PH, DMG, and MM, a lot of the 3.0 Psionics Handbook, Deities and Demigods, and Epic Level Handbook were turned into OGC (with ELH using 3.5 mechanics), and for 3.5 the Expanded Psionics Handbook was added to the PH, DMG, and MM. D20 Modern had a fantastic SRD OGC selection from the Core Book, the Arcana one, the Menace Manual, and d20 Future.
With the PHB, DMG and MM for 3.0 and 3.5, the 3.0 and 3.5 Psionics books, Deities & Demigods, and the ELH, those were all made OGC via a SRD release, not via the book themselves.

Same with d20 Modern, Urban Arcana, the Menace Manual and d20 Future.

Look in UA, it has a declaration of open game content like any 3rd party book would have, it's the only book WotC did that I'm aware of that had such a declaration and released things to OGC that way.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Voadam

Legend
With the PHB, DMG and MM for 3.0 and 3.5, the 3.0 and 3.5 Psionics books, Deities & Demigods, and the ELH, those were all made OGC via a SRD release, not via the book themselves.

Same with d20 Modern, Urban Arcana, the Menace Manual and d20 Future.

Look in UA, it has a declaration of open game content like any 3rd party book would have, it's the only book WotC did that I'm aware of that had such a declaration and released things to OGC that way.
Gotcha.

And that is correct. The SRD contains the same rules as the ones I listed but was a separate release from the books and nothing in the books themselves was OGC.

The 3.0 Monster Manual 2 has two OGC monsters in the back with the OGL printed there, though they did not actually fully comply with the OGL as they did not include the copyright notice of the Creature Collection the OGC monsters were from.
 

Orius

Legend
UA was meant to be a toolkits for DM's to customize their games, not a buffet for players looking for cool new tricks.

Not like charopers are going any attention to that idea.

Anyway, I'm firmly in the DM authority camp, so I definitely feel stuff should be kept controlled.

Gestalt was for tuning a campaign to have PCs be broadly more competent for their level without adding on increased HD, BAB, spell level, and gear that goes with just bumping up levels. It was a great way to bump up a group with fewer characters so they could handle things closer to baseline challenges for their level and cover more of the normal character role bases.

Yeah, that's what the book says, it's generally there for smaller groups. But I think the base idea could still be useful for recapturing an aspect or feel of AD&D that was lost in 3e.

Recharge meant less daily tracking of spell resource management and more consistent combat to combat magical resources. The resource of using one spell per spell level every fight versus a daily allotment with multiples at each spell level created a tradeoff of consistent use of a single top level spells in a fight versus losing the ability to nova spectacularly. This is a playstyle preference option, whether you prefer vancian daily resource management and 15 minute workday incentives or predictable magic powers being brought to bear against challenges. I dislike a lot of daily resource management and prefer the choice of which of these three options do I use this round in this situation. As a DM I prefer the predictability of setting challenges against a more consistent PC baseline. There were some issues with spell durations though.

Well, I don't really have a big problem with the Vancian system anyway. The idea behind recharge magic doesn't look bad, but I'm not a fan of the idea of casters being able to use their most powerful spells on a more regular basis. It's kind of similar to the reasons Gary didn't like spell points, though there are a few differences. Having to track recharge times for each individual spell does look like it would add more bookkeeping, though that could just be my impression of looking at it without using it. Still, it seems like something that gives casters at least a moderate boost, and 3e already makes casters pretty powerful.

For spontaneous divine casters I preferred having casters be generally specialized in their spells known and the flexibility of total spell list casting coming from scrolls and not automatic full range daily preparation choice. 5e went the full everybody casts their prepared spells as a 3e sorcerer applying slots instead of full vancian casting, but in 3e it was generally either this option or specific classes having baseline sorcerer type casting if you didn't want full Vancian casting.

Well, that's the big issue with divine spells, that a cleric or druid can prepare anything on the spell list. Now in the old days, that wasn't a big deal. Look at the classic D&D game, where clerics only have 8 spells per level, and druids add 4 more and that's not really a lot. I don't remember offhand how many spells they had in 1e. 2e restricted things by sphere, but there were a good number of priest spells at the end of 2e, enough that the first volume of the Priest's Spell Compendium strongly advises DMs to exercise caution when introducing new spells to the game. Now with 3e, theoretically there's no limit and that can be a problem. My approach falls along the lines of PHB only for all characters, and anything outside generally is only known to certain cleric orders or druid circles. Certainly I'm not about to allow divine casters to pick anything at will from the PHB, SC, and whatever other splats they dig through.

The spontaneous casting option could be a useful method to rein things in too I suppose, but putting spontaneous casting on clerics and druids might sort of conflict with the classes from Complete Divine. I'm not sure about that though.
 

My approach falls along the lines of PHB only for all characters
That’s my approach to everything. I DM Core rules 3.5e, with rare extra rules allowed from UA, Net Book of Feats, splatbooks, and modified to power down from PF1. I did the same in AD&D 1e, and as a player that was the approach to groups I played 2e, 4e, and 5e.

Not into crunch and builds, but stories and character.
 

Debby

Explorer
3.5 is my favorite edition of the game.

Currently, I am one of the GMs in our group over on Roll20 using Pathfinder 1e rules. I run games over on Roll20 because I wanted more experience as a GM. So far, it's been fun. Nothing goes as planned and it doesn't matter as long as we're having fun. We started in 2020 and are still going.

Previously, I was the moderator on the Homebrew Forum over on WotC's forums before they were deleted a few years ago. Luckily, I had copied most of the stuff into Microsoft Word Documents (for my own use because I couldn't give actual credit to anyone since people didn't use their own names).

My own homebrew is currently on Rich Burlew's Giant in the Playground site in the Homebrew Design forum. Because that site is just more user friendly than this site. I also helped people design their own monsters back when we had contests for monster creation. That was a lot of fun. I'm designing less because I'm running games myself now.

I was also a contributor (chiefly as an editor) to the officially licensed Liber Mysterium: The Netbook of Witches and Warlocks for 3.5. I helped on other netbooks but they weren't official and most aren't available any more. I'm not even sure Liber Mysterium is available on the Internet.

Mostly, I like to create monsters, convert monster from other systems to 3.5 and Pathfinder 1e, and help other people make better designed monsters. Occasionally, I design other things but monsters are still my favorite thing.
 
Last edited:

payn

He'll flip ya...Flip ya for real...
3.5 is my favorite edition of the game.

Currently, I am one of the GMs in our group over on Roll20 using Pathfinder 1e rules. I run games over on Roll20 because I wanted more experience as a GM. So far, it's been fun. Nothing goes as planned and it doesn't matter as long as we're having fun. We started in 2020 and are still going.

Previously, I was the moderator on the Homebrew Forum over on WotC's forums before they were deleted a few years ago. Luckily, I had copied most of the stuff into Microsoft Word Documents (for my own use because I couldn't give actual credit to anyone since people didn't use their own names).

My own homebrew is currently on Rich Burlew's Giant in the Playground site in the Homebrew Design forum. Because that site is just more user friendly than this site. I also helped people design their own monsters back when we had contests for monster creation. That was a lot of fun. I'm designing less because I'm running games myself now.

I was also a contributor (chiefly as an editor) to the officially licensed Liber Mysterium: The Netbook of Witches and Warlocks for 3.5. I helped on other netbooks but they weren't official and most aren't available any more. I'm not even sure Liber Mysterium is available on the Internet.

Mostly, I like to create monsters, convert monster from other systems to 3.5 and Pathfinder 1e, and help other people make better designed monsters. Occasionally, I design other things but monsters are still my favorite thing.
Ever try Foundry?
 

ldvhl

Villager
I had hoped that 3E would be good but I didn't like the previews in Dragon and the release I liked even less. They filed off so much, altered world lore and flavor for reasons, and continued the video gamification of D&D by bringing in feats.

I was stuck playing 3E for years because everybody in my area had "moved on", but I'm glad I'm able to play TSR editions again in the present day.
 

GrimCo

Explorer
I started playing D&D around the time 3.5 came out. And i liked it. It was on the crounchier side. But over time, it became bloated and with more choices came more trap options ( classes and feats that looked good on paper and kinda or straight out sucked in game).

But, to this day, Book of Nine Swords had, by my opinion, best version of fighter ever. Warblade. D12 HD, full bab, all weapon and armor proficiencies, 4+int skill points and stances/maneuvers. It gave frontline melee guy options to do cool things, not just - full attack round after round. Also, improved uncanny dodge, clarity (int bonus to reflex), bonus feats, int bonus to confirm crits, changing weapons in weapon feats ( you have WF and WS: longsword but find cool magic great sword, no problem, you switch WF and WS to great sword).

Also, Crusader was cool. You draw your maneuvers at random, mimicking divine inspiration.

Swordsage could be down right OP. They had manuvers that mimic spells, and unlike spells, you recover one manouver by spending one full round action. Plus their rogue/fighter stuff from class.

I see someone mentioned gestalt characters. We played one campaign all the way to the mid teens, with gestalt characters. It was so much fun at first, but then i became tedious, since our damage output was crazy so dm buffed monsters (double max hp). I vividly remember one fight that lasted for 3! hours. It was grinding slog fest. My character was dual wielding rogue/figher with derwish and shadowdancer Prestige clases. Can you spell attack spam? With ton of sneak attack damage. I know that at one point i just asked DM if we could do average cause rolling 10D6 for 6 attacks was just tedious.

One 3rd party setting that we used a lot and i really liked was Dawnforge. You progressed in your race. So every level 1-10 you got some cool new stuff.
 

Thomas Shey

Legend
My feeling was that 1. It was all too much still the exception-based-design-is-everything with the price that goes with that (especially if you want there to be any reasonable range of options) and 2. About level 14 it became an impossible bear to run (and the fact it was serious about those upper levels actually being something you could reasonable see was one of the virtues of the system).
 

xigbar

Explorer
Played 3.5 for years mostly by play by post and loved it, moved on to pathfinder with many of the same players because it was more popular for a while and we wanted to keep fresh faces coming in at the LGS.

I loved all the options personally. I'm 30 now vs a high school/college age person I was playing 3e so I respect how 5e is a faster experience but sometimes it feels lacking and I wish I had more options.

I also miss all the cool non vancian casters in 3.X like Binder, Incarnate, and that editions Warlock. Spell slots are fine but changing the way you manage resources created some appreciable differences in gameplay from one campaign to the next.

Many people complained about the min/max potential and while the ceiling for power was certainly high I have found as I play with a wider variety of people and systems that min/max is a mindset and if someone in you group has it they're going to try and 'win' no matter balanced the rules system is. Id rather have tons of options and talk about what kind of game we want among my players than dumb down the game and restrict options.
 


AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Upcoming Releases

Top