Now that it has been a couple of years since the 3.5 switch over, I think it would be interesting to revisit what changes worked, what supposedly 'awful' changes had no real detrimental impact, and what changes do not work.
I'll start the ball rolling:
Power Attack: The 2 for 1 damage return for Power Attacking with a two handed weapon I think is the single biggest, and probably detrimental change to the 3.x rule set. The payoff is just too extreme. Most of the broken, almost absurd damage dealing monstrosities we see posted on the net, all rely on that 2:1 return with Power Attack.
In the history of D&D as a whole, the Two Handed Weapon was not the most popular choice. It was kinda risky to sacrifice a Shield for the Two Handed Sword. The Holy Grail was the Bastard Sword. Has anyone seen a player choose to take Exotic Weapon Prof Bastard Sword? If you want to deal damage as a meleeist you have to take Power Attack and use a Two Handed Weapon.
The change overwhelms the rules, encourages everyone to play a similar character, and exacerbates spells like Wraithstrike, or powers like those found in Bo9s.
On the positive side, the 10 minute buff duration for the core group of stat buffs, really did not have that disastrous of an impact. At around 10 level most people will have equipment that adds Enhancement bonuses to their primary stats anyway, so the spells fall into disfavor eventually.
Also though not explicitly released in the 3.5 revision of the Core Rule Books, I like the further use of Immediate and Swift actions. Encourages people to pay closer attention to what people are doing when it is not their turn, and it makes sense to be able to perform a full action with certain buff spells.
What are your battle tested opinions on the changes made by 3.5?
I'll start the ball rolling:
Power Attack: The 2 for 1 damage return for Power Attacking with a two handed weapon I think is the single biggest, and probably detrimental change to the 3.x rule set. The payoff is just too extreme. Most of the broken, almost absurd damage dealing monstrosities we see posted on the net, all rely on that 2:1 return with Power Attack.
In the history of D&D as a whole, the Two Handed Weapon was not the most popular choice. It was kinda risky to sacrifice a Shield for the Two Handed Sword. The Holy Grail was the Bastard Sword. Has anyone seen a player choose to take Exotic Weapon Prof Bastard Sword? If you want to deal damage as a meleeist you have to take Power Attack and use a Two Handed Weapon.
The change overwhelms the rules, encourages everyone to play a similar character, and exacerbates spells like Wraithstrike, or powers like those found in Bo9s.
On the positive side, the 10 minute buff duration for the core group of stat buffs, really did not have that disastrous of an impact. At around 10 level most people will have equipment that adds Enhancement bonuses to their primary stats anyway, so the spells fall into disfavor eventually.
Also though not explicitly released in the 3.5 revision of the Core Rule Books, I like the further use of Immediate and Swift actions. Encourages people to pay closer attention to what people are doing when it is not their turn, and it makes sense to be able to perform a full action with certain buff spells.
What are your battle tested opinions on the changes made by 3.5?
