Impressions on 3.5?

[Eldragon]

I have been uneasy on 3.5e from the beginning.

When I first heard of it i thought: "Whoo hoo! WotC is going to finally fix the three H's, and put all of the other errata into a new printing of the book".

A few weeks later I learned of other rules changes, things that have never struck me as broken, and how 3.5e was no longer backwards compatible with 3.0e. I began thinking WotC was only doing this for the money. Because lets face it, all the hard-core players are going to buy new books.

Now, thanks to Roytheodd and Shadowstar we know most of the rule changes in the PHB. Some I like, some I don't. I went through and edited my house rules .doc file. I found that I cut about 2 pages of "fixes" out, and added another page of house rules that are specific to 3.5e. Sure there are a lot of fixes here, but the fact that there are some changes I hate so much I won't play with them leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

I don't really want a second set of core books that are incopatible with the first set I have. So I am not going to buy them. Plain and Simple.

 

[jaldaen]

Hey all,

On the Power Attack change...

At first I didn't like it, but after having the math explained to me by Andy Collins and a couple of my math oriented friends I realized that the double damage was a neccessary change with the exception about the light weapons not benefiting from the feat (because that means no power attacking monks, which doe not sound right)...

For those who are not math folks... essentially the 3.0 version of the feat was actually better for two weapon weilders and caused 2-handers to actually decrease their damage ratio in comparision to 2-weapon wielders.

Wow... I said "damage ratio"...

For buff spells... well... I do wish they were 10 minutes/level...

There are a few feats that seem to be a little over the top... like Endurance and Improved Precise Shot... and I do wish they'd just make one +2/+2 feat and save on space (not to mention give us more feats in that saved space)...

As for damage reduction... I'm waiting to see the full system I like the concept, but there might be a few problems... like the protection from arrows spell...

My 2 cents,
Jaldaen

 

[Wormwood]

3.5 looks so good that I wouldn't even *consider* a straight 3.0 game.

Period.

I only hope that they continue the trend with 4.0---and I don't want to wait more than 3 years for the next edition.

 

[Dr. Zoom]

I showed one of my players all the 3.5 changes I have been listing, and the one he really disliked was the no stacking rule for projectile weapons and ammo. He asked a good question. If you have a +2 bow, it will shoot normal arrows and magic arrows with the same degree of accuracy? and do the same damage?

He said he understood the reasons why they changed it, but suggested a better fix might be to let them stack, but cap the stacking at +5. So the +2 bow shooting the +1 arrow is still +3 total, but the +3 bow shooting the +3 arrows stops at +5. What do you all think of this?

 

[BryonD]

I like about 90% of the changes.

I certainly think it is an overall improvement.

Power Attack bug me a bit. I think nerfing it for one handed weapons would have been a better solution to the issue.

I find Monte's comments a bit amusing. Is he making AU because it is best for gaming or for economics? ENworld has a whole board dedicated to house rules for the system that HE designed.
So if the two categories for rules are A) Good and B)never use in a million years, then a lot of people seem to think that a lot of his rules do not fit in the "Good" basket. Obviously, I don't think that is really the case. What I do think is that the dichotomy he established is a bit petty.

 

[Fenes 2]

I was enthusiastic when I heard about 3.5E, but now I am sceptical. I already know I won't use the new ranger, the new barbarian alos seems overpowered for my game, and I am unsure on the bard and monk changes. I don't like the new weapon familiarity for dwarves and gnomes, and a couple feats and spells look overpowered to me.

Other spell and class changes I like, but those I had already house ruled or compensated for.

 

[Sir Whiskers]

I'll wait for the actual books before forming a definite opinion on the changes. My feeling right is best summed up by saying I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

That said, does anyone else feel that WOTC hasn't handled this change as well as the original 3E roll-out? I'm referring to the marketing of the system - for an entire year prior to 3E we saw snippets of information, mostly out of context, but enough to make (most of) us interested. I remember being excited when 3E came out, even while wondering if they could possibly have gotten it right. Now, mostly all I hear is griping about specific changes - the "wow" factor seems to be missing.

Compare this to Arcana Unearthed - over the past few months there has been a consistent increase in the buzz over this product. More to the point, a lot of the comments have been of the type, "Wow, I may not play AU, but I'm definitely stealing that idea for my 3E game..." How many snippets from WOTC have inspired such a reaction?

Maybe I'm being unfair about this: it's much easier to hype a new system than a revision. But then again, if they're going to all this trouble to change the game I play (and apparently change it a lot), I would hope I'd get more than a little "wow" out of it. Just my two cents'.

 

[MerricB]

I was excited about the 3.5E revision when I first heard about it.

Now, I'm really excited. (I've pre-ordered the books from my FLGS, handed over money and everything, just so I can get them as soon as they come in... probably in August, given where I live. )

There are so many things that just appeal to me - the changes to the Druid, the Ranger, the Paladin's mount to name three.

The one set of rules I'm unsure about (mainly because I don't know its implementation) is the weapon size thing.

Cheers!

 

[Pants]

It looks better than the chicken, but not as good as the beef.

 

[rhammer2]

This sounds like a good house rule.

I showed one of my players all the 3.5 changes I have been listing, and the one he really disliked was the no stacking rule for projectile weapons and ammo. He asked a good question. If you have a +2 bow, it will shoot normal arrows and magic arrows with the same degree of accuracy? and do the same damage?

He said he understood the reasons why they changed it, but suggested a better fix might be to let them stack, but cap the stacking at +5. So the +2 bow shooting the +1 arrow is still +3 total, but the +3 bow shooting the +3 arrows stops at +5. What do you all think of this?