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

[DeadlyUematsu]

3.X has rules issues but it pales in comparison to the people issues. I've had numerous players who just wouldn't reign themselves in despite pointing out the problems they were causing. When I took the opposing tact of just strengthening the world, players would also get upset that they couldn't just roll over opposition which lead to them asking for more and more options and allowances and arguing incessantly over the rules before having a fit that they couldn't keep up (in a campaign with no real PC deaths or deus ex machina saves). So when some DMs say they are still having a blast running 3.X, I can believe them. They're playing with the RIGHT people.

 

[teitan]

One thing I hated in the 3.0-3.5 switch was that while they touted compatibility it wasn't really compatible. It looked the same but it wasn't really. It wasn't like grabbing a Vampire character sheet for 1e and playing Revised Vamp. Same sheet, different interpretation. Conversion was a chore and using 3.5 era books in 3.0 was almost a non-starter without reverse engineering that stuff. Like LIbris Mortis. I think I already mentioned the Elemental Evil conversion document being almost as long as the module itself.

 

[Thunderfoot]

So, I remember when it dropped. I remember when it updated. I remember the issues of level bloat on combat and I remember that I STILL ran a group of 13 players. That's right. Games were long, drawn out and in combat...tedious at times, but I and another guy tag-teamed DM'd a 1E sized group through 3E combat pitfalls. And it was GLORIOUS.

 

[teitan]

So, I remember when it dropped. I remember when it updated. I remember the issues of level bloat on combat and I remember that I STILL ran a group of 13 players. That's right. Games were long, drawn out and in combat...tedious at times, but I amd another guy tag-teamed DM'd a 1E sized group through 3E combat pitfalls. And it was GLORIOUS.

Man I loved running huge groups in 1/2e... no, never again, not even in 5e. Maybe DCC.

 

[billd91]

One thing I hated in the 3.0-3.5 switch was that while they touted compatibility it wasn't really compatible. It looked the same but it wasn't really. It wasn't like grabbing a Vampire character sheet for 1e and playing Revised Vamp. Same sheet, different interpretation. Conversion was a chore and using 3.5 era books in 3.0 was almost a non-starter without reverse engineering that stuff. Like LIbris Mortis. I think I already mentioned the Elemental Evil conversion document being almost as long as the module itself.

Having experience with both 3.0 and 3.5, I think running Elemental Evil (I take it the Monte Cook 3.0 adventure?) in 3.5 could probably have been done with a little hand waving and a less nitpicky conversion. That said, there really were a disappointing number of changes between the two editions. Some things needed adjustment (bards, rangers, harm spells, stat buff spells, and so on), but the change was much broader and full of little details - very few of which were game breaking if you didn't use them, but which could easily wrong-foot you if some players were using one version of the books and others the other version. Changes I liked least included weapon sizing (pain in the ass for small characters and DMs) and reducing the duration of spells too much in line with an encounter focus.

 

[HammerMan]

Man I loved running huge groups in 1/2e... no, never again, not even in 5e. Maybe DCC.

yup 2e I ran 13+ players in multi campaigns (every other Saturday alternating with a LARP WoD) the biggest I ran I had a co DM, we ran 26 players. In 3e we tried (I can't remember if it was right before or right after 3.5 change over) and it was harder but doable... 4e (as much as I love it) and 5e (my current game) I would not even try an 8 person table.... let alone a basement campaign.

 

[HammerMan]

3.X has rules issues but it pales in comparison to the people issues. I've had numerous players who just wouldn't reign themselves in despite pointing out the problems they were causing. When I took the opposing tact of just strengthening the world, players would also get upset that they couldn't just roll over opposition which lead to them asking for more and more options and allowances and arguing incessantly over the rules before having a fit that they couldn't keep up (in a campaign with only no real PC deaths or deus ex machina saves). So when some DMs say they are still having a blast running 3.X, I can believe them. They're playing with the RIGHT people.

problem players have been problem players since at least the late 80's... I would be SHOCKED to hear that in 1979 they were not present already...

Having said that the internet (for all the good it does) has magnified some of it. I think I still run into problems with throw back games too, and I will with new games (8th edition D&D wont have less problem players).

I will never forget the first time I heard (and yes it was heard at a table at Gen Con) "Peasant rail gun"
I will never forget the look on my buddies face when I brought a 20+page print out and put it down and asked "Do you want to hear the most powerful kobold ever?" (by then I was into the op boards for fun)

having said that, I want to share what I think is the worst gamer story ever... and it comes in 2 parts

1) I sat to play a 2e (they called it 3e, combat and tactics, skills and power and a bunch of other option books) in mid 90s. The game had a binder of house rules... some where basic, some was a new homebrew class (heck I stole some of there ideas for years) and I skimmed them... then I asked why a few times, I was told "Because of ART!!" I didn't know Arthur yet though... SO I sat and rolled my stats and got really good ones, and thought I would try a fighter/mage/theif... so I asked "Can I be a half elf?" and got 3 players and the DM all stop and scream no... what BS are you trying for... then the DM calmed down and asked "What kind of half elf?" I didn't understand... until "Because ART" A few years earlier Art had said "Gonna make a half elf" and the DM said OKAY, but then Art made a half drow half deep dragon with a bunch of books... made her a necromancer and took necromancer boons from another book... and then claimed "You said I could not my fault you didn't ask more"

2) that DM sat to play at my table... His character sheet (he had made before game at home I might add) was all covered in bad writting... I knew something was the matter he never scibbled this bad. I got down to the notes and it was such a mess I asked "What is this?" His answer was "That's elven" I just sighed and kept going assuming he meant the character knew elven... first fight he pulls out a Vorpal Long sword... and explains he wrote in elven (tolkeen not even D&D) vorpral sword and I was stuck cause I couldn't take back approval of a sheet... then he got mad when I laughed and said "Sure I can"

that whole group (and others I meet) didn't have any good faith, they were full of trouble players I have long since learned to avoid... and none of them were on a TSR website I promise...

 

[Lyxen]

problem players have been problem players since at least the late 80's... I would be SHOCKED to hear that in 1979 they were not present already...

Having said that the internet (for all the good it does) has magnified some of it. I think I still run into problems with throw back games too, and I will with new games (8th edition D&D wont have less problem players).

The internet, but also the objective of having a player-centric edition in 3e was a real catastrophe. It took 2 editions to put the reigns firmly in the DM's hands where they belong (by going through a "referee" first approach in 4e), and even now, we still have players in 5e coming to tables or forums with a "but the rules say ... so my DM is a bad DM"... sigh

 

[Thunderfoot]

yup 2e I ran 13+ players in multi campaigns (every other Saturday alternating with a LARP WoD) the biggest I ran I had a co DM, we ran 26 players. In 3e we tried (I can't remember if it was right before or right after 3.5 change over) and it was harder but doable... 4e (as much as I love it) and 5e (my current game) I would not even try an 8 person table.... let alone a basement campaign.

And this is one of the things that makes the newer editions both more amd less accessible. Which is a shame.

 

[Thunderfoot]

The internet, but also the objective of having a player-centric edition in 3e was a real catastrophe. <Snip> and even now, we still have players in 5e coming to tables or forums with a "but the rules say ... <Snip>

Rules lawyers are still lawyers and should be beaten thoroughly (Sri @Dannyalcatraz, love you man).