So what did you think of 3.5 overall?

[Mark Chance]

Hmm, I notice that despite a fair number of nay sayers, the number 4 choice is easily in the lead.

The voices of those with complaints are often the loudest, even when we, ummm, I mean they are in the minority...

In this case I was one of the many 4s, but I know that I get loud and cranky when I have complaints.

The Auld Grunp

Good point. It is also important to keep in mind that many, if not most, of the so-called improvements in 3.5 resulted from a loud, cranky minority of complainers.

As a result, praise of 3.5 is circular:

"The bard is useless! It needs to be changed!"

The bard gets changed.

"The bard has been changed! It is no longer useless."

That no one can demonstrate the truth of the first statement leaves the huzzah! about the change suspect at best.

 

[La Bete]

Voted a 5.

Internal conistency of the game is sounder than previously.

SRD is available for those who feel pressured into buying the books.

Not converting old campaign, however thoroughly enjoying new game that we started with 3.5.

 

[MeepoTheMighty]

No but since our group is 3 vs 1 for 3.5 with 3 more who don't care I am forced to play this @#$%^ system. There are no 3.5 police, just my friends who are forcing me to play 3.5 or go home and not play at all. At least I can choose to not buy any 3.5 products and just use the SRD. I await the end of the campaign and the start of HERO system for us. Hopefully enough people don't buy into thier marketing scheme to make hasbro sell the brand.

So let me get this straight - WoTC puts out a product for, apparently, 7 potential customers. Three of those customers like the product, three don't really care one way or the other, and ONE person is violently against the product, and that makes it a piece of crap?

I think *any* product which can please six out of seven gamers is a runaway success. It's like the sugarless gum of the gaming world.

 

[Will]

I voted 5. While there were a few things that I might do differently, most of those fall under 'things I don't like about D&D in general.'

I am very very happy WotC decided to come out with this edition, and quite pleased they did so now, rather than later.

Thinking over things, there is pretty much nothing I liked better about 3.0 than 3.5, with the possible exception of weapon size. While weapon size doesn't fit my tastes, it makes sense.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

So let me get this straight - WoTC puts out a product for, apparently, 7 potential customers. Three of those customers like the product, three don't really care one way or the other, and ONE person is violently against the product, and that makes it a piece of crap?

It does to me. And since I am the only one who can decide what I like and what I don't this statement is correct for me. I don't tell you what you should like or not.

I think *any* product which can please six out of seven gamers is a runaway success. It's like the sugarless gum of the gaming world.

Except that the previous product made 7/7 people happy so in comparison it is not a runaway success.

 

[Pants]

I voted a 4, because I really like it. Now, I can't wait to play a Ranger or a Barbarian (I always loved the Bard, despite its weaknesses). However, it's not all perfect, but I like it more than 3.0.

One of the complaints about 3.5 that I see everywhere that makes me laugh, is the apparent *weakening* of the wizard, especially considering the fact that countless fans said that the wizard dominated higher levels.
Also funny, is how even more countless fans thought that the classes shouldn't have to rely on magic/magic items to be effective. But what happens when a few buffs become slightly less desirable? POOF! General outcry.

 

[MerricB]

Except that the previous product made 7/7 people happy so in comparison it is not a runaway success.

That is laughable. Did 3E make 7/7 people happy? Not a chance. Go and ask people at Dragonsfoot what they feel about 3E.

Even for those who liked 3E, if given a choice between buying 3E or 3.5E (with no previous investment), which do you think they'd choose?

Cheers!

 

[Carceri]

re

I voted 5 because I immediately upgraded to the new edition. I found it a marked improvement over the old edition. There were only a few things about 3.0 that I liked better, but not enough to want to keep the old edition.

The new PHB is worth its weight in gold soley for the improved skill clarifications and the improved Ranger, Barbarian and Bard. The MM because of the new stat blocks and easier Monster advancement, and the DMG because of the clarification on Magic Item creation and additional prestige classes. 3.5 is a great improvement.

 

[Mark Chance]

That is laughable. Did 3E make 7/7 people happy? Not a chance. Go and ask people at Dragonsfoot what they feel about 3E.

He meant 7/7 people in his group.

This goes back to what I posted above: The only people who like 3.5 are the people who like 3.5. Those who don't, don't. What is at work are tautologies based on opinion constantly mistaken for fact.

It is not a fact that 3.5 is better than 3.0. Nor vice versa. To demonstrate this obvious point, I'll answer your question:

Even for those who liked 3E, if given a choice between buying 3E or 3.5E (with no previous investment), which do you think they'd choose?

For 5 out of 7 people in my gaming group: 3.0.

 

[Psion]

You're funny when you are stupid.

I am sure you are fully aware of the board's policy on personal attacks.