Misconceptions about 3.5...Answers

[Desdichado]

Can you point me to these critics? They are, as you say, woefully underinformed.

The "Why do you still play 4e?" thread was full of claims that 4e did x, y or z, and that's why the poster likes it. There was a brief discussion in that thread that pointed out that many of those things 3e did too, so it doesn't really answer the implied question of why 4e (as opposed to sticking with 3e---and I say 3e meaning 3.5 as well). The discussion jumped briefly to Circvs Maximvs, then Imaro started a new thread for it here.

I suspect many of the people who were making those claims would, indeed, agree with Imaro that the support in 3e was there. As always, the reasons one plays a given game are difficult to describe objectively, because someone can always come along and say, "well this other game does that too; why did you quit playing it, then?" but honestly, that's not really the point. You play a game because it clicks with you and that's it.

But, many of those complaints did, at least, give the impression that folks who were playing 4e didn't understand the scope of what 3e could do and support, though. Whether that was intentional or not.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

I can understand that, so far, the ones I listed don't help the problems you are citing here... but I never claimed they did. And I never claimed I could fix every problem everyone had with 3.5...

I claimed they gave rules support to eliminate certain problems I specifically cited (and these are really only problems for some people, which is why I love the options approach as opposed to the we decided and "fixed" everything for you approach.)

NOTE: Some of these don't lead to rules bloat as they are replacing other rules, not adding to them...but that's really just a side point.

I feel like some people are using this as an opportunity to throw out how much they don't like 3.5 with irrelevant dislikes

I don' find my problems irrelevant to your solutions though. The solutions you listed may not directly cause rules bloat or rules mastery issues, but because of rules bloat/mastery those five simple solutions can cause unforseen implications because of rules bloat/mastery. I agree that not all of your points are affected by RB/M, but I'd say 1, 3 and 5 at a minimum could be influenced negatively. And I'm sure my rule master players could find a way to exploit 2 & 3 if they tried hard enough.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

The "Why do you still play 4e?" thread was full of claims that 4e did x, y or z, and that's why the poster likes it.

4E does x, y and z != 3E doesn't do x, y and z

And, as I've tried to say, IMO, my xyz items may be integrated to my liking better in 4E than they were in 3E.

 

[Imaro]

You sure about that?

And calling something "revolutionary" while pointing out that it already existed is quite sarcastic. Could you maybe see how someone might draw the conclusion that "pro-3e = anti-4e?" I don't believe it's true, but comments like this lend creedence to those who do. I also feel many people believe that pro-4E people that are anti-3E are only so because they are pro-4E. (Confused yet?) I personally was ready to quit 3E before 4E was announced.

Ok, I did mention 4e, you're right and I shouldn't have. As far as it being sacastic, it's not. Complex skill checks =/= skill challenges (and I never claimed they were). They are not the same thing complex skill challenges end the one roll skill checks but do not do the same thing skill challenges do, so skill challenges are revolutionary for D&D (Honestly I am being serious I like thew idea of these alot). But again it was kind of a side crack about their clarity in 4e, and so I apologize for that. I shouldn't have brought it up.

 

[Desdichado]

4E does x, y and z != 3E doesn't do x, y and z.

But, many of those complaints did, at least, give the impression that folks who were playing 4e didn't understand the scope of what 3e could do and support, though. Whether that was intentional or not.

And, as I've tried to say, IMO, my xyz items may be integrated to my liking better in 4E than they were in 3E.

No doubt. No argument there from me.

 

[Imaro]

I don' find my problems irrelevant to your solutions though. The solutions you listed may not directly cause rules bloat or rules mastery issues, but because of rules bloat/mastery those five simple solutions can cause unforseen implications because of rules bloat/mastery. I agree that not all of your points are affected by RB/M, but I'd say 1, 3 and 5 at a minimum could be influenced negatively. And I'm sure my rule master players could find a way to exploit 2 & 3 if they tried hard enough.

Come on, are you serious...this is your argument, my players could exploit complex skill challenges? You as a DM control the DC, set them up and even what skill is used. This just seems disingenuous to me. But I guess these solutions aren't for you...though in the end your problem seems to be, I don't like 3.5 as a whole as opposed to I don't like rolling just one die for skills. If that's the case... why do you care about proposed solutions for those who may want to play 3.5?

EDIT: And yes I hate to say it but you do control rules bloat, you have the choice to play a PHB 1 game with some UA rules or everything from WotC and 3PP it's called controlling your game. I guess a company can do that for you if you want them too, but some would rather be left to their own devices wiothout everything being safety-proofed for them. Different strokes and all that...YMMV of course.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

...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.

Complex skill checks =/= skill challenges (and I never claimed they were).

This is why I misunderstood you. "Almost the exact same rules" =/= "Complex skill checks =/= skill challenges" when I read it. I apologoze for any misinterpretation of sarcasm.

 

[Imaro]

This is why I misunderstood you. "Almost the exact same rules" =/= "Complex skill checks =/= skill challenges" when I read it. I apologoze for any misinterpretation of sarcasm.

I'm confused by this post...have you read or tried out any of the rules I'm listing, since you seem to already know what their effect on your game will be and how they could be exploited... do you have any experience with them to back any of this up?

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Come on, are you serious...this is your argument, my players could exploit complex skill challenges? You as a DM control the DC, set them up and even what skill is used. This just seems disingenuous to me.

No, I wasn't serious about points 2&3, hence the smiley emo.

But I guess these solutions aren't for you...though in the end your problem seems to be, I don't like 3.5 as a whole as opposed to I don't like rolling just one die for skills. If that's the case... why do you care about proposed solutions for those who may want to play 3.5?

No. I made my two major problems clear in earlier posts. The variance of feat power and multiclassing rules, IMO, led to rules bloat and rules mastery issues. I liked 3E in the beginning, but because of these two major issues I came to dislke running the game anymore. I also stated (or at least eluded) before that those with the time and resorces to enjoy rules mastery might still enjoy 3E. I care to inform those who may still want to play 3E what problems I encountered and how those in a similar situation to mine might become frustrated with 3E.

 

[Imaro]

No, I wasn't serious about points 2&3, hence the smiley emo.



No. I made my two major problems clear in earlier posts. The variance of feat power and multiclassing rules, IMO, led to rules bloat and rules mastery issues. I liked 3E in the beginning, but because of these two major issues I came to dislke running the game anymore. I also stated (or at least eluded) before that those with the time and resorces to enjoy rules mastery might still enjoy 3E. I care to inform those who may still want to play 3E what problems I encountered and how those in a similar situation to mine might become frustrated with 3E.

Well here's a suggestion as far as rules mastery... have your less rules savvy PC's make up their characters and progress them along the lines given in the PHB2 appendix "Quick PC and NPC Creation". It shows how to build different classes into a certain role (like blaster for a Wizard or Defender for fighter.) with specific skill, feat, and even best race choices already spelled out. Won't necessarily be optimized, but a casual character won't have to worry about being sub-optimal in their function.