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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Orius" data-source="post: 5690845" data-attributes="member: 8863">I understand what the OP is saying, or at least trying to say.  I tried running a 3.5 game recently and felt frustrated with how optional stuff from 3.0 was rereleased in 3.5 across a number of new splats.  My books are 3.0, and while I can use the SRD with no problem for the core rules, using optional material from splats was more difficult, because there were places where stuff had been changed just a little bit.  They're not big huge changes, but it's enough to affact game mechanics just a little bit.Then there's the moderately extensive 2e library I have.  A lot of material there, but it's not all immediately portable to 3e because of edition changes.  A good deal of the stuff did get converted to 3e over the years, but the stuff is scattered throughout many different rulebooks, and in some cases, the 3.0/3.5 split raises its ugly head once again.  It doesn't help that I like a lot of the 2e flavor but prefer the structure of 3e's rules.But I agree with what other have already said in this thread about a One True Edition: it' not going happen.  You got the 4e crowd and the 3.x/PF crowd who hate each other's games.  You got the old-school crowd who hates anything that's newer than AD&D.  You got the Basic crowd that doesn't want to mess with the more complicated stuff.  And finally there's diaglo.  Unfortunately, these splits were built into D&D long ago when the Basic and AD&D lines were allowed to evolve independantly of each other.  WotC didn't make things any better with the releases of 3.5 and 4e either (some gamers seeing 3.5 as nothing but a money grab, and 4e's promotion alienating some hardcore 3.5 fans).</blockquote>

Verification