Monte Cook reviews 3.5

[BryonD]

So far I have been right in most of my predictions as to what I will and will not like.

But I have found in the past that sometimes things are a lot better (or a lot worse) than they first appear. There is no harm in trying them for 4 or 5 sessions to see.

To me there is nothing OBVIOUSLY hopeless. (Well, maybe the MT and EK, but there is no real chance for those to come into my game now anyway)

But if one of the changes was a requirement that you put bag of potato chips up my nose, I would house rule that before trying it.
Fortunately, I don't find that analogy to fit any of the changes for me.

 

[DaveMage]

I didn't see it posted here yet, but if anyone is interested, here is Sean K. Reynolds commentary on Monte Cook's review.

 

[Urbannen]

My 2 cp

I was very gung-ho about 3.5 because I see a lot of little problems with 3.0 that I would like changed. I like/can live with the vast majority of changes in 3.5. However, if 3.5 is what I read it is, I think I agree with a lot of Mr. Cook's criticisms. It doesn't seem that backwards compatibility is of utmost importance to this new edition, regardless of what WotC might say. It's not like they are just fixing some of the glaring problems that most players can already list by name, or adding some features to the problem classes. They are changing the basic functioning of many, many spells, spells being the bread and butter of the game. They are changing gnomes' favored class, fundamentally altering many existing characters. They are changing the weapons system in what seems will be a fairly drastic way. I like the current mechanic of weapon size - maybe the new system will be an improvement, but right now it seems a profound change that would only be appropriate under a totally new edition. I am also disturbed by some of the editing errors that Mr. Cook mentioned, mainly the omission of the fact that PrCs don't evoke XP penalties and the fact that the given magic items aren't priced under the revised system.

I understand that WotC is there to make money for Hasbro, but I think that there is a fair amout of manipulation going on. It seems that the PHB has been tweaked just profoundly enough that really you do have to have the new books. They do have a monopoly on this intellectual property after all. It is in their best interest to change the official d20 rules periodically to ensure continuous sales. A multitude of little tweaks and a few profound ones is a good formula that ensures continuous sales. People won't really be able to play the old version as a stand-alone à la 1st Edition because newer revisions will be so similar to older ones, and if they want to continue to play, they will want to get the newer version because of the profound changes. "That'll be 29.95 a piece, thank you for shopping at WotC, source for your "official" Dungeons & Dragons rules set. Oh, and make sure to visit our website to pick up all the latest errata, completely free of charge."

The criticism isn't really for the new edition's design and editorial team - nothing is perfect and they have a lot of different people to please. I do like a lot of the changes and would expect some of them in a 4th edition at the proper time. The criticism is for the corporate business practices, which right now feel kind of icky.

 

[DaveMage]

Same here. I still use old books and am not looking forward to buying tons of stuff for a new edition any time soon. Thanks for clearing that up.

The d20 system has been a blessing for the game, but a bottomless pit for my wallet.

 

[Tsyr]

Things that I know I won't like:

Changes to Druid Wildshape (Unless we aren't being told something about Scent and so forth, but no indication of that thus far)

Changes to Call Lightning

Changes to buff spell duration (I agree they were too long. Now, however, they are too short. There should have been a middle ground).

The fact that paladins and monks still have stupid multiclass restrictions.

Some of the implications of the changes to Damage Reduction (IE, golfbag of weapons syndrom). I think what drove that home for me was a comment by a friend at my last gaming session... "Ok, I was brought into DnD by Baldur's Gate, but I like that... I always thought you were supposed to carry around a weapon for every situation." Gyeh.

 

[Belen]

The worst things is that Sean Reynolds just confirmed that the ERRATA FROM 3E DID NOT GET INCLUDED IN 3.5!!!! I am really angry at this. So they published a book without the official errata that they promised back when they mentioned the third printing.

As the third printing is 3.5, then I am highly pee'd off. Jerks. Enough said.

 

[MikeWilliams]

As something of a rebuttal to all of the folks who have said that they aren't going to purchase the 3.5 books because of Monty's review, I'd like to comment that I'd been planning to pick up the 3.5 PH and DMG, but Monty's review was enough for me to decide that I need to pick up the MM as well.

 

[Tom Cashel]

Here's the statement from Monte that no one has yet quoted:

Should you buy 3.5? Frankly, of course you should.

So there you have it.

Not plugging in the errata? Well...Sean says that "he'd guess" this was the case. Still, if I discover that this is true I will not be buying the new books, just like I didn't buy the black-cover 2.5 books.

You can still "keep up with D&D" by waiting until 4.0 to upgrade. (If it's any good.)

 

[Anubis the Doomseer]

Originally posted by BelenUmeria
The worst things is that Sean Reynolds just confirmed that the ERRATA FROM 3E DID NOT GET INCLUDED IN 3.5!!!!

This seems strange given that the whole point of 3.5 was in essence to be an errata and band-aid edition.

Artwork I could care less about (I'm not a big fan of putting out a new edition just for the sake of new art), but when the stated purpose of the edition was to fix problems, and the errata is left out... then what exactly is the point of the revision again?

This sort of thing seems to be an epidemic in the US now.

- Ma'at

 

[JacktheRabbit]

Regardless of if that was his goal or not, he should be applauded for what he has done.

Even skimming out the "bias", on purely the basis of the facts he presents, I was able to make a descision.

From the facts I have obtained elsewhere (This board, for example), I was sitting on the line. I wanted it to satisfy my "Must get new stuff!" urge, but I could already tell I probably would be mad at myself for buying it later. Now I know I just wont get it, at least until I find it used or in the discount rack somewhere, or something. I'll gank the ranger, bard, and monk classes off the SRD, see if I like them or not, and take a few new spells off it, but I can't justify the new books now.

And I suspect I wasn't the only one sitting on the fence... I've talked to a lot of people who felt similar to me.

So does this mean you are going to become one of the "Mac Users" of the D20 world?