I definitely have to vote for the love. You're talking about a system that gave us campaign settings like Scarred Lands and Eberron. OGL games like Conan, Mutants & Masterminds, and Spycraft. Some of the concepts are outdated, but you can't help but love what the system inadvertantly created.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Love it or hate it, 3e style
- Thread starter haakon1
- Start date
Just to add something, the fantasy book Warriors & Warlocks for Mutants and Masterminds stands a good chance of falling into the "love" grouping for myself due to the Conan style pace of the story line - it is a wicked system to play if you are a Conan fan.
Love it, big time. My favorite edition.
Shemeska
Adventurer
Definately in the "I like it" camp.
It's my preferred system for running straight up fantasy games, though I think that WotC was oftentimes overshadowed in the fluff department for a long while by the late 2e material (plus it seemed that they had some folks who didn't like some of that material, and seemingly still do in 4e). And there was a bunch of OGL junk initially, but at the same time here were some amazingly done OGL products like the Arthause 3e Ravenloft and Masque of the Red Death, the Scarred Lands material, and now Pathfinder which I'm really liking. I didn't do 3.5, and really it was flavor text that attracted my $ during the entirety of the period, and still does with respect to any other games.
It's my preferred system for running straight up fantasy games, though I think that WotC was oftentimes overshadowed in the fluff department for a long while by the late 2e material (plus it seemed that they had some folks who didn't like some of that material, and seemingly still do in 4e). And there was a bunch of OGL junk initially, but at the same time here were some amazingly done OGL products like the Arthause 3e Ravenloft and Masque of the Red Death, the Scarred Lands material, and now Pathfinder which I'm really liking. I didn't do 3.5, and really it was flavor text that attracted my $ during the entirety of the period, and still does with respect to any other games.
Dragonbait
Explorer
Mixed bag.
As a player, it was pretty good. It gave a lot of options.. I mean a LOT of options since my group had access to every WoTC book. I think I still prefer it as a player than to 4E, especially with the changes that Pathfinder brought about for characters.
As a DM it was a book keeping nightmare by the time the group was level 8. I timed it once when I tried to update a book adventure (Expedition to the Demonweb Pits) to a higher level adventure (4 levels to be exact). I tried to use all the books I had to actually challenge the PCs. It took me 1 hour to modify an existing NPC with a prestige class, equip them, chose spells, pre-buff them and then make their animal companion the PrC grants. Great. Done. Then I had 6 more NPCs, and that was the 1st encounter.
Most people I know that claimed that 3E is very easy to GM ended up ignoring a good portion of the rules and houseruling a lot (much like 1E and 2E). My group tried to stick to the RAW whenever possible. I prefer 4E to 3E as a DM.
All in all, if 3E looked more like 4E behind the screen (greatly simplified NPCs, monsters, and traps) I'd still be running 3E.
As a player, it was pretty good. It gave a lot of options.. I mean a LOT of options since my group had access to every WoTC book. I think I still prefer it as a player than to 4E, especially with the changes that Pathfinder brought about for characters.
As a DM it was a book keeping nightmare by the time the group was level 8. I timed it once when I tried to update a book adventure (Expedition to the Demonweb Pits) to a higher level adventure (4 levels to be exact). I tried to use all the books I had to actually challenge the PCs. It took me 1 hour to modify an existing NPC with a prestige class, equip them, chose spells, pre-buff them and then make their animal companion the PrC grants. Great. Done. Then I had 6 more NPCs, and that was the 1st encounter.
Most people I know that claimed that 3E is very easy to GM ended up ignoring a good portion of the rules and houseruling a lot (much like 1E and 2E). My group tried to stick to the RAW whenever possible. I prefer 4E to 3E as a DM.
All in all, if 3E looked more like 4E behind the screen (greatly simplified NPCs, monsters, and traps) I'd still be running 3E.
Dice4Hire
First Post
Well, I went with liked it on the 4E poll and mixed bag here, mainly due to the melee/caster unevenness that botehrs me more and more since 4E came out.
I like that in 4E melee guys don't wiat for the casters to make decisions, and that teh party actually walks places uinstead of teleporting and stuff when a certain level is reached.
Sometimes I miss the utility spells of 3.5, but feel this can be acheived by changing rituals.
I like that in 4E melee guys don't wiat for the casters to make decisions, and that teh party actually walks places uinstead of teleporting and stuff when a certain level is reached.
Sometimes I miss the utility spells of 3.5, but feel this can be acheived by changing rituals.
TheAuldGrump
First Post
Hmmm, I like the rules, and love the OGL.
Really, the OGL was the best part, opening up a smorgasbord of options. I could pick and choose to create the game that I wanted, borrowing the rules for Libraries from Quintessential Wizard, alternate critical hits and loss of limbs from Swashbuckling Adventures, adding steampunk goodness from Steam & Steel and Sorcery & Steam, etc..
The Auld Grump, rules tinker
Really, the OGL was the best part, opening up a smorgasbord of options. I could pick and choose to create the game that I wanted, borrowing the rules for Libraries from Quintessential Wizard, alternate critical hits and loss of limbs from Swashbuckling Adventures, adding steampunk goodness from Steam & Steel and Sorcery & Steam, etc..
The Auld Grump, rules tinker
Last edited:
Similar Threads
