Identifying products as 3.5?

[JoeGKushner]

Is there a new logo or something that is going to be used to show which products are 3.5?

I'm a little uncomfortable with langauge that states, "Compatible with 3.5" because that doesn't really tell me anything. Is it 3.5 rules for skill terminology, spell durations, CR's, etc... or it it like 3.0 and is compatible with 3.5 with some tweaks.

 

[MEG Hal]

Is there a new logo or something that is going to be used to show which products are 3.5?

I'm a little uncomfortable with langauge that states, "Compatible with 3.5" because that doesn't really tell me anything. Is it 3.5 rules for skill terminology, spell durations, CR's, etc... or it it like 3.0 and is compatible with 3.5 with some tweaks.

There is no new logo, WotC did not want one and so we do not use one.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Could cause some confusion as people pick up the product thinking it's for 3.5 but I'll let the big boys worry about it.

Personally, I have three characters as a player and the conversions for them were very simple (but then again, I play simple, one classed characters).

 

[Brown Jenkin]

As someone who is not going to 3.5 I would very much like to see logos for both 3.0 and 3.5 compatibility. Some products would be one or the others while some could very easily be both. Without some way to know whether a product is 3.0 or 3.5 or both I will be unlikely to buy it since I don't want to waste money on products that I can't use easily.

 

[jmucchiello]

I plan to include version notes in my ad copy, on the product's web page, in any press releases for the product, and on the cover or title page of each product.

 

[Maraxle]

How about writing "Compatible with the Revised Core Rulebooks" or something like that?

 

[Grazzt]

How about writing "Compatible with the Revised Core Rulebooks" or something like that?

I believe something like that is what we have planned, but you'd have to ask Clark to be 100% sure.

 

[MEG Hal]

How about writing "Compatible with the Revised Core Rulebooks" or something like that?

Now the phrasing may be similiar to what is above but Joe asked about logos.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I guess it's just that this whole compatible doesn't sit well with me. Something is either 3.5 or it isn't.

Maybe I'm just looking at the word wrong?

I guess I'm afraid that since many companies have jumped on the, "Oh this product is still 3.0 but can still be used and is thus compatible" that people won't clearly understand what is and what isn't 3.0 and 3.5.

And I find Wizards not wanting to make a different icon ironic since instead of putting revised editions on their three core books they put 3.5 which is strange since the 3.0 editions didn't have that indication, i.e. 3rd edition, on them.