I may not be switching to D&D 3.5 (Crossposted)

[Piratecat]

I'll never go back to scrawling adventure notes on scraps of paper.

I'm not sure why, but my notes scrawled on paper always seem to be more creative than my notes written on computer. Weird.

 

[EricNoah]

I do a lot with monster/class combos, advanced monsters, and classed NPCs, and all of that stuff is made possible because of current electronic tools. So, yeah, lots of number crunching for me -- I don't run monsters straight out of the books very often, and I've never used the NPCs from the DMG tables. I don't like cracking open books during games, and so having that stuff all in my own computer-prepared notes is my preferred method.

 

[Leopold]

i can garundangtee that pcgen will be supporting the new books. Heck we are going to be supporting D20 modern soon and since this will all be in the SRD changes anyway we kinda haveto...

but fear not my faithful fellows and fellowettes! you can still use your old data files with pcgen and have the new 3ER files too!

 

[Sir Whiskers]

This was my first reaction when I heard about the revised books. If WOTC changes so little that the electronic aids aren't affected, why would anyone get the new books? If they make some substantial changes, they've broken most or all of these aids. And I just don't have the time (or inclination) to do everything by hand anymore.

On the question of updating e-tools, what about all the community add-ons and updates? I was under the impression that most of the work in making the program truly usable was *not* done by Fluid. If they update the orginal version of the program, won't the community have to make wholesale changes once again? OTOH, if Fluid tries to include these changes, how much will that delay an updated product?

I admit I haven't kept up on e-tools (I use a modified Heroforge spreadsheet), so I may be exaggerating the difficulties. Ideally, we'd see an updated version that includes all the community work - that would probably convince me to give the program another chance.

 

[EricNoah]

Re: Re: I may not be switching to D&D 3.5 (Crossposted)

It sets a bad precedent - that a game simply won't be worth playing if it doesn't have computer support. What does that mean for all the companies smaller than WotC, who can't manage software?

As far as I'm concerned, the precedent has already been set. 2E AD&D had computer support, and now that's how I play. As far as other game companies go ... I don't play their games, and probably won't play any game that doesn't provide computer support. It doesn't have to be official, fan-created stuff will often do in a pinch.

Plus, as the history of E-Tools pretty clearly shows, even larger RPG companies don't do software well. Don't put the burden on those who produce the game - they've already shown that they aren't up to the challenge.

Again, I'm not saying WotC has to do it themselves, but if they leave us hanging with an E-Tools that is a) still buggy and b) doesn't move up to D&D 3.5, then that's less of an incentive for me to go ahead and adopt 3.5. And I think, with appropriate resources and vision from the top, that they could indeed be up to the challenge.

And lastly... well, to me it says that we won't exercise our imaginations without our computers anymore. Perhaps our parents are right, we've grown inexorably attached to the keyboard. Pencil and paper still function, but they aren't enough for us. If it requires the greater effort of writing by hand and flipping through the books ourselves, we won't do it? That's a bandwagon that I'm not willing to jump on.

I'm not asking you to! I'm just saying that for me, I need my computer tools. I'm not willing to sit down and spend 30 minutes work on writing out the stats for an advanced smoke elemental of Xvim. Call it lazy, call it what you will, but to me doing that math and typing all of that stuff up isn't creativity -- it's drudgery. D&D, more than ever before in its past, is about tools for creating and combining stuff. I want computer support for those options.

And yes, when I was "in the loop" on e-Tools progress and it came perilously close to being cancelled, I had to seriously consider whether I would be able to go on being a DM. I could probably limp along as a player with the current spreadsheets and whatnot available, but as a DM I need to be cranking out lots and lots of weird combos in a pretty short order.

Computer support is nice, but it's icing. If we start requiring that our lillies be gilded, we aren't going to get very far.

It's not icing to me, it's essential.

Okay, I now see that I veered off into ranting. My apologies, but the heart of the matter is still sound. We don't need computers to play RPGs. While they may be helpful, we're getting spoiled if we won't play without them. 'Nuff said, I guess.

I do need the computer, and if that makes me spoiled, then so be it. Just as I wouldn't want to go back to living without the Internet, I wouldn't want to run a D&D campaign without my computer tools.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Seems like a minor reason to reject the new revision (recall opposition to switching to 3E from 2E, which was a much more dramatic and significant change than the revised 3E).

- I'm sure 3rd party adjustments will follow shortly -- how long did you have to wait for E-tools? What did you do until E-tools came out?

- Nothing I've seen thus far (aside from rampant speculation on messageboards) would indicate that the changes would signifcantly impact most electronic tools. We know that the revision is intended to be as "backward compatible" as possible. I expect we'll see more "how to" do things -- like reverse-engineering monsters -- than explicit changes. I expect the explicit changes will primarily be in the realm of spell descriptions and clarifications, which have little impact on most electronic aids.

- Have the releases of splatbooks, the FRCS, etc changed your game dramatically? You can find automated tools that support most of them (albeit unofficially). How is this revision really any different?

"I'm not switching to 3.5!" is likely to become a mantra only because people fear change when they don't know what the changes involve. I suspect the real changes (if any) will not be worth us worrying ourselves into a frenzy over.

 

[Severion]

Screw electronic support, i won't be going to 3.5e because i already have almost all the 3e books and am not looking foward to buying them again. But then my only electronic support is "Tablesmith" and an electronic dice roller.

*crush, crush*

 

[EricNoah]

Seems like a minor reason to reject the new revision (recall opposition to switching to 3E from 2E, which was a much more dramatic and significant change than the revised 3E).

- I'm sure 3rd party adjustments will follow shortly -- how long did you have to wait for E-tools? What did you do until E-tools came out?

Well ... I spent a long time gathering all of the news and rumors about the project. I also got into alpha testing approximately a year before release, so for that year I had a fairly workable program for making characters, monsters, etc. I also used a variety of fan-created tools -- anything from huge Word files of all Monster Manual monsters in stat block format, to Stat Block programs, stuff like that. It was a major pain and an era I'm not eager to go back to.

- Nothing I've seen thus far (aside from rampant speculation on messageboards) would indicate that the changes would signifcantly impact most electronic tools. We know that the revision is intended to be as "backward compatible" as possible. I expect we'll see more "how to" do things -- like reverse-engineering monsters -- than explicit changes. I expect the explicit changes will primarily be in the realm of spell descriptions and clarifications, which have little impact on most electronic aids.

Even a little change done at the core class level could trickle down. Let's say Bards get more skill points. That's going to be something that needs to be changed in parts of the database that don't export/import easily (or maybe at all). So either WotC needs to patch it, or we'll need instructions on how to get in and change those numbers/settings.

- Have the releases of splatbooks, the FRCS, etc changed your game dramatically? You can find automated tools that support most of them (albeit unofficially). How is this revision really any different?

As mentioned above, changes to core classes could be the most problematic. Let's say the 3.5 Ranger has his abilities spread out a little differently than the original. We'll need some way (whether in an official patch, or a set of instructions) to edit the original Ranger.

"I'm not switching to 3.5!" is likely to become a mantra only because people fear change when they don't know what the changes involve. I suspect the real changes (if any) will not be worth us worrying ourselves into a frenzy over.

It's very true that the point may be moot if the changes aren't many or significant. But if there are changes that affect, say, every Ranger you create, or every spellcaster, or something like that, then I would want those changes addressed in my computer tools.

Believe me, this isn't about not wanting change. This is about wanting WotC to support the change.

 

[Sixchan]

I've tried using my computer for various gaming stuff, but I personaly prefer having books that I can use. I feel more comfortable with something scrawled in my own illegible handwriting than something that I've printed off of the computer.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Believe me, this isn't about not wanting change. This is about wanting WotC to support the change.

Which is why I suspect that there will be few substantial changes (not that I wouldn't mind a little revised ranger or bard action myself). It's too hard to maintain continuity with a myriad of other products if the changes are too dramatic, and I don't see WOTC making that effort. So there are two possibilites:

1. Many changes unsupported by the rest of the system, or

2. Minor changes that don't affect the rest of the system.

My money's on #2.