D&D 3.x If 3.5 was so good...

[SteveC]

A few weeks ago no one was talking about math being a problem. This discussion all came from a WOTC designer blog. I guess my point here is that while we might have felt that something was wonky we didn't mind. It didn't ruin our game and was not a fundamental problem. We didn't really notice it and we didn't post to message boards about it effecting our games.

I just wanted to address this point: no one was talking about this point that people were listening to. This has been a real problem with the game for a long time, and one that has seriously impacted every game I've ever played in with the 3X rules, provided the game lasted long enough for there to be significant character leveling. The disparity between good and bad saves, as well as the problem with making skill checks for high level characters in campaigns where not everyone maxes the skill are two simple examples.

Many more people have noticed the problem since then, but some of us have been around for a long time.

--Steve

 

[Pygon]

3.5 was what I had to work with, and I was willing to see what it could do, and watch the game mechanics evolve as characters raised in levels.

As has been already mentioned, the problems with 3.5 include:

* The sweet spot for characters is in the 7-13 range. Outside of that, the mechanics seem to break down the overall balance and fun factor. Low level characters are too easy to kill, and high level encounters are do or die very quickly.
* It only takes a couple levels to trivialize an encounter, or make it too powerful.

If 4e makes good on the promise of spreading the sweet spot out to all the levels, and encounters are viable within about 4 levels, I'll be happy. Well, with those two aspects, anyway. If these concepts were never mentioned before, it's likely because there wasn't an attempt to redesign the system to solve these problems. Up until then, people accepted what 3.5 could do and just wrote it off as a by-product of the emergent effects of the rules.

As for the rest, we'll all just have to wait and see.

 

[KarinsDad]

Your 3.5 experiences differ from mine. I DMed 24th level gestalt characters and my combats always lasted several rounds.

Ours often lasted several rounds as well, but we also had nasty ones that ended real quick and real bad.

A single NPC with Anticipate Teleport, Greater along with readied actions can make for a real quick combat, especially with the 3.5 model of high level spell casters often getting a normal spell and a quickened or swift spell cast every single round.

 

[F4NBOY]

The point I'm trying to make is that I play 3.5E for 4 months and I start saving the world and plane hopping with my 10th level character.

In 4E I play 4 months and I start saving the world and plane hopping only this time with my 15th level character.

I didn't dwell in lower level adventures for longer. The amount of time it took to get to the plane saving adventures was exactly the same. All that happened was faster levelling. The power curve is still steep because you level faster. Playing to level 30 makes no difference.

You are wrong.
Leveling speed is not a factor on that equation. It's just power divided by levels.
If at level 20, in 3.5 characters have a power of 100p, then each level is an average 5p step.
If the same power is divided among 30 levels, then each level is an average 3.3p step.
So 4E is not so steep as 3.5 was.
In 4e the power divided among levels is probably gonna be greater, but a 30 level character in 4E won't be as powerful as a 30 level character in 3.5. I think Chris Perkins said something regarding that.

Anyway, all that really matters nothing. It's the distribution of power that matters.
Even if I just divide 100p among 30 levels the way 3.5 did it, it won't make the power progression less steep or just better. If I give:
20p to the first 10 levels
30p to the 11-20 levels
50p to the last 10 levels
the progression is gonna still be steep.

I believe that they are adressing this issue not by giving more or less power, or by creating more levels, but by dividing all that power more evenly among levels.

If we consider that in 3.5 it's too steep because characters gain 30p in the first 10 levels and 70p in the last 10 levels, 4E would fix it by giving:
30p in the 1-10 range
30p in the 11-20 range
40p in the 21-30.

Considering that the power in 4E is greater, let's say 150p, it could be 50p to the "heroic" tier, 50p to the "paragon" tier and 50p to the "epic" tier.

 

[Hussar]

High level play does see some serious problems. Cast a Dispel Magic at the party and watch everyone scramble for the next hour trying to rejigger their buffs.

 

[Ranger REG]

...why is 4e going to be so different? Now don't get me wrong, I like most of what I've seen hinted at so for for 4th edition and was never a huge fan of D20 D&D (overly complicated and mechanical feeling IMO). Nevertheless, D&D 3.5 is the king of the rpg world.

That's the same question when 3e was announced and information about it has been leaked to the public.

 

[Nifft]

1/ 3.5e was better than what came before it; and

2/ It's still not perfect; and

3/ The ways in which it is imperfect have long been discussed, have been house-ruled in a thousand different ways, and have given trouble to a lot of different campaigns; and

4/ These imperfections are deep and fundamental.

Cheers, -- N

PS: 5/ 4e will hopefully be better, but will certainly be imperfect in its own ways. We won't know what needs fixing until we play it for a while, though.

 

[freyar]

PS: 5/ 4e will hopefully be better, but will certainly be imperfect in its own ways. We won't know what needs fixing until we play it for a while, though.

I wonder if lack of options will be seen as a problem in comparison to 3.x. Could be a nice market for some third party publisher...

 

[Ranger REG]

I wonder if lack of options will be seen as a problem in comparison to 3.x. Could be a nice market for some third party publisher...

Depends on what WotC offers in the three core rulebooks (or more specifically, Player's Handbook).

Then again, WotC is not going to please everyone, so they can only hope for is the majority. The others will play the game as they see fit, including creating or borrowing optional rules (homebrewed or published).

 

[pawsplay]

...why is 4e going to be so different?

Because if it's that good, it's going to be hard to make it very similar yet much better.