I won't be switching to D&D 3.5e

[Bendris Noulg]

For example, Blackshirt recently implemented a nice rule that makes the idea of characters getting better at evading attacks as they gain levels reasonable. Just add half of your base reflex save to your AC, rounding up if odd before dividing. Of course he does the same for our foes, but it makes the game a bit more beliveable.

I do similar: Full Reflex, Armor doesn't count (gives Damage Absorbtion), combined with Defense Rolls. Works great.

 

[Zaruthustran]

For example, Blackshirt recently implemented a nice rule that makes the idea of characters getting better at evading attacks as they gain levels reasonable.

I use the system that's built into the game. It's called "hit points", an abstract measurement of a character's ability to withstand attacks.

It works okay.

-z

 

[Angcuru]

You sir, follow the philosophy of Nietzsche WAY too closely.

Hit points is being able to withstand damage, as specifically stated, not avoid it.

 

[Angcuru]

I do similar: Full Reflex, Armor doesn't count (gives Damage Absorbtion), combined with Defense Rolls. Works great.

I tried using a similar system with my first attempt at DMing. Instead of a d20 and +(whatever) to attack per level, and having AC, you would use a d100, and you would get 5% per level to distribute between your dodge bonus and your attack bonus. armor acted as DR. The system was quite good, but it REALLY prolonged the combat.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

I use the system that's built into the game. It's called "hit points", an abstract measurement of a character's ability to withstand attacks.

Blech... Wounds & Vitality all the way.

The system was quite good, but it REALLY prolonged the combat.

Sounds like it, on both counts.

 

[WizarDru]

You sir, follow the philosophy of Nietzsche WAY too closely.

Hit points is being able to withstand damage, as specifically stated, not avoid it.

"What hit points represent: Hit points mean two things in the game world: the ability to take physical punishment and keep going, and the ability to turn a serious blow into a less serious one.

{snip}

Why the difference? Partly because the fighter is better at rolling with the punches, protecting vital areas, and dodging just enough that a blow that would be fatal only wounds him."

-excerpted from the D&D Player's Handbook, page 128

Sounds pretty explicitly stated, to me.

 

[ForceUser]

3E is awesome, but there has been so much errata since it came out that I am ready for a comprehensive revised set of core books with all the right answers in a new, easy-to-reference format.

I am ready. I am waiting. The money is burning a hole in my pocket

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I'm buying. This time special care was taken to playtest higher level characters.

 

[Wormwood]

I'm *definitely* on board. I love most of the new changes...some I could (and will) live without. . .*coughweaponfamiliaritycough*

Out of curiosity: after we get a look at 3.5, will the boards be flooded with converts, or will the naysayers become further entrenched?

Morbid curiosity, more like.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

3E is awesome, but there has been so much errata since it came out that I am ready for a comprehensive revised set of core books with all the right answers in a new, easy-to-reference format.

I am ready. I am waiting. The money is burning a hole in my pocket

First off lets hope that the new books don't have as many errors as the first ones and every other book released by WotC so that there won't be errata for them.

Second there have been so many changes to the rules that unless you use only 3.5 books you will have tons of errrata to use the other 3.0 books with 3.5. It has already been anounced that they would be releasing errata for the Fiend Folio to make the DR compatible.