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

[EricNoah]

I was discussing with another member of my gaming group (a player in my game, and my DM in a different group) and we agreed that there was one thing that could very well keep either of us from being interested in switching to version 3.5 of D&D: electronic support. We both agreed that if there are not adequate computer programs for generating characters, spell lists, and monsters (not just raw stats but adding classes, advancing, etc.), we'd be right back where we were when we had nothing. Yes, we might adopt a new rule or two (say, for example, if Harm gets changed). But we, as DMs, are not interested in limping around for months without computer support for this revised edition of the game, especially if the revisions make any substantial changes that trickle down through the rest of the game.

WotC, if you're reading this, know that as always I believe that adequate computer support of D&D is a very high priority. We don't want to wait two years for that support.

 

[haiiro]

Would you consider an update to E-Tools to be adequate support, or are you looking for something more robust?

 

[Fenes 2]

Hmm... I prepare all my adventures on computer, but at this point I don't really need e-tools or character generators. The NPC-table in the DMG as well as my collected Goons (NPC-stats from two campaigns) are enough for me to run my battles (with a lot of winging sometimes).

I don't expect that to change, as I don't expect D&D 3.5E to change much, and frankly, I don't lose much sleep over a few discrepancies that may creep up - in the end a couple skill points more or less, or a few more hitpoints for my NPCs don't matter much in my campaign.

 

[Squirrel Nutkin]

I think it says an awful lot about D&D 3E when there are gamers who wouldn't want to play 3.5E without some kind of computer support.

And you guys wonder why I like OD&D so much.

 

[Archer]

I don't think any hp will change and only the bard might get more skill points and bard is about the rarest class presently.

The options for monstrous races will likely remain unchanged. Most of the programs reverse engineered all the monsters from the guidelines in the books. 3.5 will just present the options in a standardized format.

 

[EricNoah]

I think it says an awful lot about D&D 3E when there are gamers who wouldn't want to play 3.5E without some kind of computer support.

And you guys wonder why I like OD&D so much.

Hey Nutkin, good to see you around here!

I'm at a point in my life where I probably won't play ANY RPG that doesn't have computer support. I use my computer for everything now -- it's my filing cabinet, artist's workshop, cartography table, telephone answering machine, and magic toy box all in one. I'll never go back to scrawling adventure notes on scraps of paper. So it's not 3rd edition -- I was a heavy user of the 2E Core Rules program as well...

 

[EricNoah]

Would you consider an update to E-Tools to be adequate support, or are you looking for something more robust?

For me that would be the ideal solution. E-tools, as flaky as it is, is adequate for most of my current needs. A 3.5 updated E-Tools patch would be just the ticket.

 

[Aeolius]

Try using the Mac OS; it's the same as having no computer support from WotC

 

[Fenes 2]

Hey Nutkin, good to see you around here!

I'm at a point in my life where I probably won't play ANY RPG that doesn't have computer support. I use my computer for everything now -- it's my filing cabinet, artist's workshop, cartography table, telephone answering machine, and magic toy box all in one. I'll never go back to scrawling adventure notes on scraps of paper. So it's not 3rd edition -- I was a heavy user of the 2E Core Rules program as well...

Well, I use my computer extensively, store all my notes on it, have tables etc., but I don't really need computer tools anymore, even if I run 3 weekly campaigns. I just don't need that much numbercrunching, I guess.

 

[Umbran]

...we'd be right back where we were when we had nothing.

A place where many of us quite happily gamed for a couple of decades, and still do. I'm sorry to say that this plea recieves little sympathy from me, for a number of reasons.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.