Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Petrosian" data-source="post: 695458" data-attributes="member: 1149">Man, are my ears burning.As for how silly it is or how bad an outlook it is for me to say ... "i wont be using 3.5e for my current campaign"... which i have said twice at least now, lets examine my reasons.BTW, if you had asked for my reasons before making you jump to conclusions check, you might have been able to speak reasonably about it.My game is in its third year with players having advanced from 2nd to 12th. over the final year, i expect them to rise to around 18th level. The estimated conclusion date is Feb 2004. Over the course of the campaign, the issues with HASTE (ubiquitous as poios, very effective and "why not" issues) have been already acknowledged and dealt with. Similarly any DR issues were long ago solved. Heck i implemented the 10 per level cap on harm over a year ago and have never split the partial action/half-action hair so the "self-destruct" literalists issues were not a problem for my game.Both the DR and the haste changes would, if impemented in mid-stream into a campaign 2/3rds done that has alrwady addressed them, would be disruptive. Most of the "history" would be changed and decisions made by the PCs including soprcerer spell choices and items kept vs items sold would be in one fell swoop made unreasonable. The 3.5e changes so far released are NOT being limited to 'easy grandfathering" (note that i do not consider this a fault. Some things need fixing) and thus there are clear INTEGRATION issues.So, after seeing the haste change and the DR change and reading the other design goals and realizing that easy grandfathering was not a design limitation, i made the cld hard decision that adding 3.5e to my 2/3-done campaign was going to create more issues of integration and inconsistency than it provided benefits.In case you don't realize it, this is a decision made EVERY DAY by thousands of companies and managers across america. One of their tools, hardware or software, is "upgraded" and they have to examine and weigh off the benefits of upgrades (new features and bug fixes) against the downsides (money for the upgrade, revision incompatabilities, training time with new version and the inevitable new bugs with newest features.)So, i have made the decision to NOT upgrade.This should not be taken as a condemnation of 3.5e, merely an assessment of the migration difficulties based on what we know.had you bothered to inquire as opposed ro assume, you might have known this.Viewing everyones ideas thru your own "i know better" glasses is skewing your conclusions.</blockquote>

Verification