Monte Cook reviews 3.5

[Kevin O'Reilly]

Miniatureless Combat

Jodi/Kenji

I'm really interested in how you run miniatureless combat. For me so many feats are designed to take advantage of the space based battlemat, that to ignore exact positioning reduces, or elimates their value.

However, I'm becoming tired of the slow pace of high-feat combat.

Feel free to email me, rather than hijack the thread

 

[Jody Butt]

Aren't you a 1e fan? wasn't that game based on minis? Using 1 inch measures and all?

I never DMed 1E (only played it once). I liked a lot of the later 1E artwork, though. I played much 2E, mainly. 2E was definitely not done from a minis point of view.

 

[Jody Butt]

Re: Miniatureless Combat

Jodi/Kenji

I'm really interested in how you run miniatureless combat. For me so many feats are designed to take advantage of the space based battlemat, that to ignore exact positioning reduces, or elimates their value.

However, I'm becoming tired of the slow pace of high-feat combat.

Feel free to email me, rather than hijack the thread

House Rule: All movement is abstract. All rules related to movement no longer exist. Common sense rules the day.

 

[dcollins]

Aren't you a 1e fan? wasn't that game based on minis? Using 1 inch measures and all?

Short answer: no (oddly enough). Ranges were in inches that were converted to different scales whether indoors or outdoors. AD&D 1st Ed. DMG p. 10 had a short suggestion for using miniatures at yet another scale which didn't match either of the others.

 

[Nightfall]

My gripe with a more "mini" focused game is really quite simple. In an age when we communicate on a electronic level...and more often than not, people JUST can't find the right players or something similiar, just how in the name of Demogorgon's blue balls am I supposed to use facing when NO ONE sees these damn things except in their mind's eye?! So to me WotC is sincerely missing the boat when it comes to dealing with gamers that play online. The day they can build me software that can not only generate maps and build realistic combat sims, is the day we all end up doing D&D in "virtual" style.

 

[Sirius_Black]

Kerrwyn noted:

Listening to him, I think my games are going to be a 3.0/3.5 crossbreed. Almost like 3.25, if you will.

Oh Cyric. The minute I read your post I got this horrible image in my head:

Scene: Gamer's Table in some public area

Gamer 1: "What are you?"

Gamer 2: "I'm just 3.0. You?"

Gamer 1: "I'm a 3.2, no, maybe a 3.25."

Gamer 3: " I'm 3.5, definitely."

Girl 1 as she walks by the table: "Did you hear that?"

Girl 2: "Yeah. I'm never going to date any of those guys if that's all they have down there."

 

[Nightfall]

And yet Sirius I think that's exactly what will happen...

 

[pogre]

In the end Monte's buying 3.5 and so am I. Well, OK, he did not have to buy his, but you know what I mean.

There's things he likes and dislikes so he will homerule them. Just like the rest of us I suspect.

Not a big difference from 3.0 for me - I liberally homeruled on it as well once I knew the system.

I do hope this is not a Games Workshop situation - with revolving editions. However, I recognize that may be a decent business strategy.

I hope 4.0 pulls a lot of new people into the hobby. I nominate for the designers of 4.0:

Robin Laws
Charles Ryan
John Tynes

Get to work men!

 

[Psiblade]

After reading the review by Monte, I definitely disagree with him regarding the buff spells. I hate all the die rolling every mourning! I also happen to like the changes for DR and classes esp. the ranger. I am worried about the square facings and less about the weapon handedness changes. I definitely do not like the MT. Other than these issues, I am happyly awaiting my order for 3.5.



-Psiblade

 

[tleilaxu]

folks, mince words if you like, but that review was an absolute reaming of 3.5.

tis a sad thing that has happened.