Say NO to 3.5

[King_Stannis]

Man, it's a great thing that people can speak out about things they don't like - even (and especially!) when they don't have any actual knowledge on the topic. Rumors and theories abound, mixed in with random bits of truth. This is the basis for which to found a decision?

All I can say is: How do you like your Troll? Flamebroiled or just Well Done?

Yeah, he should just shut up and pay his $90 before he can have an opinion on it, right? Why rely on the review of one of the guys who actually wrote the 3rd edition anyway?

Have you ever not seen a movie based on a friend or professional critic's review of it? Like most people, you probably have. I'd equate that to this.

If you read Monte's review he's pretty much implying that for people to pay $90 for the type of changes WotC is making (and not making) is excessive. That last little throwaway line to cover/ass aside, I think Monte's review was pretty clear - you don't really need 3.5. Whether you want to pay $90 is up to you, of course.

Personally, I understand that Wizards is making a free, downloadeable 40 page PDF with all of the changes from 3.0 to 3.5. This will be fine with me. This is true, isn't it?

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

I think what's REALLY bad here, is that Monty didn't say the Revision was BAD at all. He just said some of the changee HE DIDN'T LIKE. Not "you won't like", but "I don't like". His review, was actually, GOOD. He just fleshed out the things he considered bad, to explain WHY he thought they were.
Maybe WotC had this planned from the start...wouldn't surprise me. But you know what, that doesn't mean the DESIGNERS who actually do the Revision don't CARE about the game, and aren't going to make it 'better'.
As for this '4E will be here in 3 years!' crap. I've about had enough. Maybe it will be, but how can you predict that? There is NO PATTERN. You cannot just find a 'pattern' from a single event like this. It would only be a pattern if it happened again, which may be true...but then again, may not. Don't like the Revision? Don't buy it. But you have just as much a right to complain as the people who want new things for 2e.

 

[gamecat]

I for one am with shadowlord. I do think WotC is out to make a sickening profit by tweaking the rules 16 degrees and making us buy all new books.

But hey, rules suck anymore anyway, so freeform rp all the way!

 

[HellHound]

Yeah, he should just shut up and pay his $90 before he can have an opinion on it, right? Why rely on the review of one of the guys who actually wrote the 3rd edition anyway?

No, he should stop launching random insults at a majority of the users here. According to him:

There's only two kinds of people who will buy those books:
1. Those who are new to the game which is OK.
2. Those fanatic enough to take whatever WOTC throws at them. I wouldn't wanna eat dirt like that...

Since I'm not new to the game, by his definition I am 'fanatic enough to take whatever WOTC throws at me'.

Which is bull, plain and simple.

And insulting.

And WRONG.

 

[Aeolius]

There's only two kinds of people who will buy those books:
1. Those who are new to the game which is OK.
2. Those fanatic enough to take whatever WOTC throws at them. I wouldn't wanna eat dirt like that...

Add to the list those of us who wish to give our original 3e books to our children, so we'd be buying new books anyway.

Also, the revised 3e DMG finally has basic rules dealing with undersea adventuring. That's worth the price of admission, to me, as I run an undersea game and wish to begin putting finished adventures on my website.

 

[Thorntangle]

Big Picture - If you like D&D, buy the books. Keep the line profitable. Make the execs happy. Ensure the longevity of the product. Allow future generations to enjoy the game we love.

 

[Tom Cashel]

For me it all depends on whether the contents of the FAQ and the errata are included. They should be, and if they weren't I'll wait for 4.0.

 

[AngusSmith]

Mind you, MANY people simply buy the books because it's D&D. I know quite a few who order(ed) them months before their release. Now how silly is that?

Let me reassure you this comment comes from someone who totally LOVED 3e from the first moment it came out! I also saw what products appeared every month and I noticed the evolution where D&D was/is going. And it's a step backwards. I know what I'm speaking about even though it's hard for me to express it all in English.

Then call me silly. I pre-ordered them for two reasons.

1) It saved me some money.
2) I am very active in the RPGA and will need the new books.

Granted, I could just print out the SRD and run with it. But I prefer to have the books. One thing I will say about 3.5, my wife's home campaign will probably stick with 3.0 and only adopt some of the changes. There are some changes that, to me at least, are just change for change's sake.

Angus

 

[Lamoni]

I am excited for edition 3.5 I will only be getting the PHB, but our DM will be getting all 3. And the total comes to about $60, not close to $100.

If Wizards of the Coast wasn't releasing it to make money, then I would be very surprised. That is what Wizards of the Coast tries to do (make money). I hope that they continue to make lots of money because as long as they are in business, they seem to put out pretty good products.

I have heard complaints about there not being enough changes to be worth the money. About there being too many changes to want to upgrade. Now Monte says that edition 3.0 wasn't broken so therefore we shouldn't upgrade... until when? not until edition 3.0 gets worse?

Sorry, but most new editions make changes and improvements. 99% of the time they are released to make more money. WordPerfect 3.0 worked very well. I am very glad that I am not still using it though. It doesn't make you bad if you still like the old version and don't upgrade, but you should upgrade if you like what the new version offers. That decision is best made when you can see what it offers for yourself.

If you like the changes, but to you it isn't worth the price of new manuals, fine. But if someone else likes the changes and they have money to spend on the new manuals, that is fine too. Especially when the current manuals are getting worn out.

If WoTC releases edition 4.0 in 2006, that will be just fine with me. It won't change 3.5 at all and as long as edition 3.5 works well, there is no need to change. But having the choice to change is never bad IMO.

 

[Li Shenron]

I find it ironic that some dislike 3.5 because there aren't enough changes for the money, while others dislike 3.5 because there are too many changes.

I don't think it's ironic. I think it's Monte's point: 3.5 is enough change to be considered more than a revision, and not enough change to be considered a new edition. Somehow it puts you like in the middle of the road: if you don't buy it, you're going to be left behind for further products, official tournaments and community support (surely someone in WotC's forums will scorn off questions about 3.0 as "outdated"); if you buy it, it will cost you quite some effort to upgrade your campaign.

Monte's concerns are honest and serious, IMHO. As well the concerns of all the people in this board. A lighter revision would have had much a lesser impact on existing gaming groups: obviously, if it was really that light, there would have been much less profits reason to do it at all for WotC. A clearly new version could have put the gamer in front of the fair choice between two games: I know people who still play 2ed in one party and 3.0 in another, and they love both. It might be more confusing if you play in a 3.0 and a 3.5 group.

3.5 being somehow midway (I think the name says it all) will certainly see most of the groups find their best compromise between 3.0 and 3.5, but few will stick completely to 3.5 IMHO. It's possible that I am wrong, and instead a lot of people like really all the changes, but in my experience the vast majority of people of this forum have always used house rules, and I can't believe they will stop using them. If this is so, 3.5 is quite effectively a bunch of variants, only averagely better than 3.0 but not nearly as completely. Which I guess will possibly shorten the time before 4ed.

For myself after all it won't change much, for the same reason: our current DM has his own HR and uses DM's call A LOT, and too much IMHO. But the above is still my sincere opinion.