Misconceptions about 3.5...Answers

[Imaro]

Well I have seen various posts that often talk about things 3.5 doesn't support. Some of these posts are correct... but I have seen just as many that are not correct and decided to create a thread where misconceptions about 3.5 can be dispelled. This isn't a thread about houserules, but about the wide berth of options 3.5 gives and how some people may discover what they are looking for if they just took the time to explore them... so here are a few, and anyone else feel free to jump in, but remember these are actual rules not houserules...

Misconception 1 "I am stuck with a bad choice in 3.5" ... contrary to popular belief WotC created retraining and rebuilding rules for PC's in the PHB 2.

Misconception 2 "In 3.5 skill checks are decided by one roll of the die." ...actually in Unearthed Arcana, there are rules for complex skill checks...they are almost the exact same rules (only explained in a more concise manner) that 4e uses for their revolutionary skill challenges. Seriously if you have the book read up on them.

Misconception 3 "3.5's skill system is too complex/fiddly" ...well again Unearthed Arcana has two alternate and more simplified systems for skills in 3.5.

Misconception 4 "NPC's have to be complicated and time consuming in 3.5." ...PHB2 actually has an appendix with a system for quick NPC creation, seems pretty straightforward and uncomplicated to me.

Misconception 5 "low-level Wizards are reduced to using a crossbow, once their spells are gone." Try using the recharge magic system in UA. They won't be hurling Magic Missile around every round, but they will be able to cast spells throughout the day. It's also really easy to tailor this system (adjust the recharge times for what one considers especially unbalancing spells) for customization in one's campaign.

Well these are just 5 so far...might come back and post some more later. Also, if there are any problems people are having using 3.5, feel free to post them and maybe there's something I come across that may help you out.

 

[WizarDru]

Misconception 2 "In 3.5 skill checks are decided by one roll of the die." ...actually in Unearthed Arcana, there are rules for complex skill checks...they are almost the exact same rules (only explained in a more concise manner) that 4e uses for their revolutionary skill challenges. Seriously if you have the book read up on them.

I personally wouldn't classify that as a misconception, as much as say that a set of alternate rules existed in a book for 3.5 that you could use. It's no more correct than saying 3.5 used hit points and then saying that Unearthed Arcana had alternate damage rules. It's technically true, but I don't think saying that 3.5 uses a hit point system is a misconception.

It's nice that 3.5 had options from UA and other locations, but I wouldn't label them as misconceptions.

 

[Oni]

Is it fair to call them misconceptions when all your fixes seem to have been tacked on in additional books outside the core rules? I reckon if you create enough splatbook subsystems and optional rules you can accomadate just about anything with any system.

 

[hopeless]

3.5 myths and answers query

Well I have seen various posts that often talk about things 3.5 doesn't support. Some of these posts are correct... but I have seen just as many that are not correct and decided to create a thread where misconceptions about 3.5 can be dispelled. This isn't a thread about houserules, but about the wide berth of options 3.5 gives and how some people may discover what they are looking for if they just took the time to explore them... so here are a few, and anyone else feel free to jump in, but remember these are actual rules not houserules...

Misconception 1 "I am stuck with a bad choice in 3.5" ... contrary to popular belief WotC created retraining and rebuilding rules for PC's in the PHB 2.

Misconception 2 "In 3.5 skill checks are decided by one roll of the die." ...actually in Unearthed Arcana, there are rules for complex skill checks...they are almost the exact same rules (only explained in a more concise manner) that 4e uses for their revolutionary skill challenges. Seriously if you have the book read up on them.

Misconception 3 "3.5's skill system is too complex/fiddly" ...well again Unearthed Arcana has two alternate and more simplified systems for skills in 3.5.

Misconception 4 "NPC's have to be complicated and time consuming in 3.5." ...PHB2 actually has an appendix with a system for quick NPC creation, seems pretty straightforward and uncomplicated to me.

Misconception 5 "low-level Wizards are reduced to using a crossbow, once their spells are gone." Try using the recharge magic system in UA. They won't be hurling Magic Missile around every round, but they will be able to cast spells throughout the day. It's also really easy to tailor this system (adjust the recharge times for what one considers especially unbalancing spells) for customization in one's campaign.

Well these are just 5 so far...might come back and post some more later. Also, if there are any problems people are having using 3.5, feel free to post them and maybe there's something I come across that may help you out.

Do you think getting an extra spell really helps a sorceror for the loss of being able to spontaneous cast in relation to the wizard?

I do like the recharge rules but not the way they forget about the sorceror's capabilities are drastically cut, now if they said unless the wizard used spell mastery they would have to relearn spells they could recast as a result of recharging perhaps that would be a better option.

Don't forget in the UA there's an "Additional Favoured Class" feat for thos who aren't humans or half elves since not all of the favoured classes make sense when elves scream sorceror and gnomes illusionist and halflings seem more like bards than rogues...

 

[Imaro]

I personally wouldn't classify that as a misconception, as much as say that a set of alternate rules existed in a book for 3.5 that you could use. It's no more correct than saying 3.5 used hit points and then saying that Unearthed Arcana had alternate damage rules. It's technically true, but I don't think saying that 3.5 uses a hit point system is a misconception.

It's nice that 3.5 had options from UA and other locations, but I wouldn't label them as misconceptions.

They're misconceptions, IMHO, because people claim 3.5 doesn't support this, and it plainly does. I mean it's the same as claiming 4e doesn't support a Gish class... even though it's in the FRPG. Or am I missing something here.

 

[La Bete]

Well I have seen various posts that often talk about things 3.5 doesn't support. Some of these posts are correct... but I have seen just as many that are not correct

Interesting post. I do however note that all of your solutions are from outside the core 3 books (PHB2 and UA).

Also, I think that most people's issues with 3.5 are a little more nuanced than that, so to refer to them as 'not correct' seems a little unfair.

However - in the spirit of you post, one issue I have:

Due to the way the economy of actions work, I found most of the time the BBEG would only get one or two actions before he got nailed by the party. Related to this, those actions would often be very "binary" actions (SoD/SoS/ultra-high damage), which made combat a bit swingy for my taste.

Your thoughts on this? (your comment about NPC building would address the related point of poor return on investment on time building the BBEG)

Edit - Ninjaed, ninjaed, ninjaed....

 

[Imaro]

Do you think getting an extra spell really helps a sorceror for the loss of being able to spontaneous cast in relation to the wizard?

I do like the recharge rules but not the way they forget about the sorceror's capabilities are drastically cut, now if they said unless the wizard used spell mastery they would have to relearn spells they could recast as a result of recharging perhaps that would be a better option.

Don't forget in the UA there's an "Additional Favoured Class" feat for thos who aren't humans or half elves since not all of the favoured classes make sense when elves scream sorceror and gnomes illusionist and halflings seem more like bards than rogues...

Yeah but the sorcerer has reduced recharging times compared to the Wizard. So he does still keep an advantage and the Wizard still has to choose a subset of his spells ahead of time, while the sorcerer doesn't. Do you think that's still a big disadvantage...remember I'm talking about the recharge not spontaneous system.

 

[billd91]

Is it fair to call them misconceptions when all your fixes seem to have been tacked on in additional books outside the core rules? I reckon if you create enough splatbook subsystems and optional rules you can accomadate just about anything with any system.

It all depends on how you define tacked on vs core. I can play a druid with the 3.5 core books... can't with 4e. And the only reason I will be able to do so in the future (after PH2) is because the concept of "core rules" has been redefined to include what 3.5 covered in splat books.

 

[Imaro]

Interesting post. I do however note that all of your solutions are from outside the core 3 books (PHB2 and UA).

Also, I think that most people's issues with 3.5 are a little more nuanced than that, so to refer to them as 'not correct' seems a little unfair.

However - in the spirit of you post, one issue I have:

Due to the way the economy of actions work, I found most of the time the BBEG would only get one or two actions before he got nailed by the party. Related to this, those actions would often be very "binary" actions (SoD/SoS/ultra-high damage), which made combat a bit swingy for my taste.

Your thoughts on this? (your comment about NPC building would address the related point of poor return on investment on time building the BBEG)

Edit - Ninjaed, ninjaed, ninjaed....

First, and this is addressed to all the people saying it's unfair for me to use books outside the first three... Then will it be a fair complaint after the 2nd PHB and 2nd DMG are relesed to claim that 4e doesn't support the Ranger, Druid, Barbarian, etc. or rules for traps, etc.? If so then yes I will say I am in error for presenting this, but otherwise the point of splat books is to broaden a game, and once something is addressed, the game has support for it.

La Bete, haven't come across something to address that issue yet, but now I'll be looking for it and will post it if I do.

 

[Vocenoctum]

Misconception 5 "low-level Wizards are reduced to using a crossbow, once their spells are gone." Try using the recharge magic system in UA. They won't be hurling Magic Missile around every round, but they will be able to cast spells throughout the day. It's also really easy to tailor this system (adjust the recharge times for what one considers especially unbalancing spells) for customization in one's campaign.

I'll say the misconception here is that 4e is fundamentally different in this regard.

"I've used my spells up, now I need to spam crossbow attacks."
vs
"I've used my daily and encounter power, now I have to spam magic missile."

Sure there are some differences, but acting like it's some total redesign of the system to insert a new thing to default to, it just feels silly.