Say NO to 3.5

[rounser]

Wizards of the Coast, Games Workshop would be proud of you - the merry-go-round has begun to spin, and should do so for years as you turn over players when they lose interest as their rulebooks and campaigns become obsolete. Brand management has done the math on the average time spent staying with the game, so they don't care. Pity that D&D doesn't yield as much obsolescence as miniature wargaming, but with the miniatures rules just around the corner, perhaps that will change.

Well done, played us like a harp...and will probably continue to do so.

 

[HiLiphNY]

I couldn't care less if the whole 3.5 ed. products is a major improvement on the game - I enjoy it as is and it is the market that will decide if it's a flop or not. That said, this whole process has a bad stink to it. My hunch is that this is going to suck for us all - and that we will all be spending the majority of our next 6-month's-worth of posts on EN world, trying to justify the outlay of $60-$90.

However, let me tell you a little story. From what I have seen of gamers, there is a lot of denial. How many times have I listened to some sad sack tell me how great the tv series Lexx was, or how inspiring Chevy Chase's talk show was. . . . .or how great 3.5 is vs. the alternative.

I'm gonna leave it to gamers to put a LOT of lipstick on this pig. Got get it boys and girls, it's feedin' time! Suey!

 

[King_Stannis]

I'm gonna leave it to gamers to put a LOT of lipstick on this pig. Go get it boys and girls, it's feedin' time! Suey!

"Smithers, who is this HiLiphNY? I like the cut of his jib."

I'm sticking to 3.0 and using the list of changes only to convert any 3.5 adventures that I buy or to have in case I would like to submit something for publication.

Other than that, 3.0 works just fine for our group thanks.

 

[jasamcarl]

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official tournaments and community support (surely someone in WotC's forums will scorn off questions about 3.0 as "outdated"); if you buy it, it will cost you quite some effort to upgrade your campaign.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.

Unfortunatly, Monte doesn't really define what his idea of a good revision is. Because simple clarifications apparently wouldn't be worth the money. Yeah right. Poorly disguised rant...

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

I just thought about something here...

Nearly every single thing Monte said in that review, we already knew. It was a bit of new information, but NOTHING like the multitude we got here on the boards when people picked up the books and other reviewers got a hold of them. Now...wait a second, why does Monte's opinion suddenly make it a good reason to say 'I won't buy the books!!', when we already knew this stuff? Just hearing Monte say it makes the Revision bad? Don't get me wrong, I like Monte's work and all, and I can't wait for AU...but people, he barely told us anything new, and we've got a lot claiming they now won't buy the Revision.

....HUH?

 

[rounser]

The weirdest thing about the revision is that SKR reckons that not even all of the 3.0 errata made it into the new books. Eh?

 

[King_Stannis]

The weirdest thing about the revision is that SKR reckons that not even all of the 3.0 errata made it into the new books. Eh?

Duh. You know there is a version 3.67 planned, don't you?

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

I'll be honest. I'm reading this thread and it saddens me.

The point is, if I buy the books, its because I have a good enough reason that I'm willing to put my money down for them. It doesn't even matter WHY I buy them. I could be spending $90 on the books just to burn them because I like the smell of smoking gloss paper.

Nobody has a right to tell me I shouldn't do whatever I want.

WOTC is a company. They want to make money and they have to to survive. While the designers may love the game, the bean counters probably don't. The designers were told that they would have to revise the game, they didn't have a choice. I think they did the best they could with what they were given.

So don't buy the books if you don't want to. Hold a protest. Burn the buildings. But be prepared to watch as all support for D&D is pulled and the inventory is sold off cheap to fuel the next CCG. If you don't like the revision thats fine. But if you don't want to see the D&D brand take a crippling blow, you had better hope someone else is willing to pay for them. You may not like the books, but it seems crazy to encourage others to not like it as well.

For example, I didn't like Ghostwalk. I hope others do though and I hope it sells well. Why? It fuels the industry and provides WOTC incentive to go in new directions. We gain nothing from failed prosucts.

You don't want the books? Fine. You don't think they are worth the price? Fine. But don't call me names if I do want the books and don't judge me if I do think they are worth it.

I'm so tired of seeing negativity everywhere. If you want to rant and insult people take it somewhere else. ENWorld isn't the place.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I'm not buying it for two reasons.

1. It does nothing to remove the more powered up, Ninja Scroll, tactical miniature wargame feel that dominates the game now. So it's just different makeup on the same pig.

2. I think that if 3.5e is a huge sucess then we will see WOTC go the GW route. This isn't a small company run by gamers for gamers it's Hasbro. In 2 years when sales of the 3.5 books is sagging and the line manager needs to boost his bottom line what will he do? He's been there for 3 months and needs to look good. He will look back at how the last revision went over so well even with the amount of changes they made so quickly to the system. Why not do it again? Does it even matter if it's necessary from a gaming standpoint? Not in the least. Gamers are "geeks*" they tend to buy whatever they can get thier hands on for their favorite games and tend to devolp fanatical brand and designer loyalty. Add in new tie ins for a new mini line that have just enough differences in the bases or something to make people feel it's necessary to buy them to "keep up" and not complicate things.

4.0 three years after 3.5? I'm as sure as I can be that it will happen becuase based on what the sales look like they are going to be for 3.5 it will be a huge financial sucess in D&D terms for Hasbro. The D20 SW game was revised about 2-3 years after it was put out, and that was sucessfull too. Gamers will buy them, so they will make them.

*I'm one of them, I used to be a D&D geek.

 

[jasamcarl]

Again, would someone like to carry Monte's 'thinking' through and suggest changes that would not have changed a character sheet but would still have been attractive to the majority with 3.0 books? Supplements would have been a better buy if one was to want new material. But then, some just don't want to buy new books at all and would like to add some fake moral backbone to their desciscion by proclaiming 'conspircacy', Monte included.