I have a problem: I need arguments!!

[Darklone]

Simply make a list how many of your houserules 3E oder 3.5E incorporated. In my case 3E invalidated 50% of the houserules I had for 2nd edition (and only because I never dared to introduce more) and brought some long yearned flexibility into the classes by multiclassing. 3.5E made 80% of my 3E houserules core. I love it.

 

[Mystery Man]

Somebody had an idea to shoot one player per hour until they agree with you. Can't remember where that came from. Damn fine idea though! Of course you may run out of gamers to play with...dilemma.

 

[Dirt]

I think that WayneLigon had the right question - what arguments have you tried that have failed? If you give us an idea on what they disagree with, that might help.

As another suggestion: If the group seems bent on playing something other than 3E, you might suggest Hackmaster (if you're willing to give it a try). The game mechanics are solid. Hackmaster is essentially 1E merged with 2E, and pushed forward in the direction it would have gone had 3E not come out instead. Really, it's a great game, and very nostalgic for those who played each new incarnation of the D&D game. Many people consider the game to only be a parody. While there ARE humorous elements, that certainly won't impede someone from using some great game mechanics for a serious game. Just a thought...

 

[Henry]

Somebody had an idea to shoot one player per hour until they agree with you. Can't remember where that came from. Damn fine idea though! Of course you may run out of gamers to play with...dilemma.

I believe the phrase was, "Shoot one player per hour until they agree with your authority as DM."

Michael, the best advice I could give is to see if at least two or three others in the group agree with you - it's no fun being the "sole champion" of a system the others don't like. If you can at least get a small block of people in group talking reasonably, and willing to do 75% of the work, then most people will at least TRY it.

My group for instance, will try ANY system once - as long as I've made up a quick reference rules sheet, and already pre-generated the characters.

 

[diaglo]

Michael, the best advice I could give is to see if at least two or three others in the group agree with you - it's no fun being the "sole champion" of a system the others don't like. If you can at least get a small block of people in group talking reasonably, and willing to do 75% of the work, then most people will at least TRY it.

solid advice for any edition.

now if i can only get my group to give up 3.11ed for Workgroups.

 

[Djeta Thernadier]

If you're the DM, you can just say that its too hard for you to keep doing, since you're doing 90% of the work for the campaign.

I second this. You need to know what rules are being used to help come up with your game ideas to run the game. If they keep switching between editions, I could see this easily becomming hard to follow.

 

[kkoie]

make it 12-4 and offer to buy/make them lunch(can we say pizza?). Then durring that time, introduce them to the greatness that is 3e/3.5e

 

[Voadam]

1 better skill resolution system applicable for all characters (not just thieves and auto success for high stat characters with nonweapon proficiencies).
2 rogues are balanced against the other classes (sneak attack and uncanny dodge are better than backstab).
3 better multiclassing and racial limits rules.
4 monsters have full stats
5 initiative is easier and speeds up combat.
6 better mechanical tactical options for fighter characters
7 attributes are better when they mean something at every stat level
8 no class weapon restrictions
9 currently supported with new sourcebooks and adventures for use
10 no minimum ability prereqs for core classes.
11 it is easier to keep straight one system than a mash of multiple ones
12 CR and EL are good approximate DM tools for evaluating an encounter versus a party's capabilities
13 feats are fun
14 saving throws make more sense

 

[kengar]

Challenge their masculinity. "Real men play 3E."

Real men play Savage Worlds.

 

[AeroDm]

I don't understand why people do this. Houserule 3e to hell and back, but don't houserule an inferior system. Besides, the logical progression of 3e makes house rules very simple to come up with, employ, and balance (to some degree). Everything we did to 2e turned it into a monstrosity... even more so than it was with players option.