D&D 3E/3.5 The 20th Anniversary of 3rd Edition D&D

Twenty years ago this month, the Dungeons and Dragons Players Handbook, 3rd Edition, was released.

I thought this might be a good time to remember the release of 3e and talk about the release and the changes it brought to gaming.

The release was the focus of this website when it was originally founded as a 3rd Edition news and rumors page.

First, for the first time, D&D had a single coherent system. Before that, it was simply an ad-hoc combination of rules and subsystems. You'd roll low on a d20 for one thing, but high for another thing. There was very little consistency.

Second: This gave us the OGL and the SRD's. This was an immense breakthrough for several reasons. For those who played D&D in the 1990's while TSR owned the game, we could remember when TSR was jokingly said to mean "They Sue Regularly". They were openly hostile to fans trying to publish their own D&D materials online. Fans (or their web hosts) would get Cease and Desist letters for simply hosting a page about their homebrew campaign setting, or posting their own spells, character classes, monsters and such. Now WotC was bringing a completely different mindset to fan-created material.

They also opened the door wide-open to third parties making games comparable with, or derived from, D&D. No longer did every game company that had an idea for a setting, or bought a license for a property, have to kludge together a mediocre attempt at a game system to go with their setting idea. . .a popular and decently written system was now available to everyone for free. WotC would even make more D&D-derived games in the coming months and years, like their d20-based editions of Star Wars (the first version of which came out a few months after 3e, in November 2000), or d20 Modern, their D&D compatible game for modern-day (and sci-fi) adventuring.

This even put the basic "DNA" of D&D into the open in perpetuity. There was a time in the late 1990's, shortly before WotC bought TSR, when it seemed D&D might vanish forever, that the company that made it might just go out of business and the game would permanently go out of print. The OGL and the SRD's meant that 3rd edition D&D could live on and be reprinted (albeit without the name "Dungeons and Dragons" and a few "product identity" creatures like Illithid) in perpetuity no matter what happened to the company that made it. If someone wanted to reprint the entire 3e core rules today, with just those few "product identity" elements (a few D&D specific monsters and the wizard names in some spell names) removed, they could. That very idea was unthinkable beforehand.

Third: It revitalized D&D in a way that hadn't been seen in almost 20 years. While D&D had a surge of popularity in the early 80's, that popularity faded over time, and throughout the 90's, many gamers drifted from D&D to other games. 2nd Edition AD&D looked painfully archaic compared to games published only a few years later, and there was a time in the 90's when White Wolf was the biggest name in RPG's, not D&D. By 2000, D&D seemed positively outdated compared to most other games on the market. I know most gaming groups I played with at the time had to heavily house rule AD&D 2e to even make it anything they wanted to play. However, D&D 3e got people that hadn't played D&D in many years to come back, it got groups that had skipped the change to 2nd edition to adopt 3rd, it created a huge resurgence of interest in D&D.

Fourth: Demons, Devils, Assassins, Barbarians, Half-Orcs, and Monks were all back in the core rules. AD&D 2nd edition had sanitized many things that TSR had feared would offend "moral guardians", like assassins, demons & devils, or half-orcs. They removed Barbarians from the core rules as well, saying it was redundant compared to the fighter, and they removed the Monk, specifically saying it should be confined to the realm of "Oriental Adventures" supplements. 3e celebrated the classes and lore of the 1e era in that sense and introduced a new "Dungeonpunk" aesthetic, breaking away from a trend in 2e's of making D&D into "Medieval Western Europe with Magic", by explicitly removing elements both of fantasy, and non-western cultures from the game. They also removed many arbitrary restrictions on character creation. Paladins no longer required a 17+ Charisma, and could be races other than Human. Rangers could be alignments other than Good. Druids didn't have to be just True Neutral anymore. Humans could multi-class freely now. Any multiclass combination was allowed (alignment restrictions permitting).

What are your memories, experiences, and thoughts on the 20th anniversary of D&D 3e?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Cadence

Legend
Supporter
In a lot of ways 2e to 3e felt similar for me to 1e to 2e. It took a lot of things that were clunky and made it seem smooth and natural, without losing the heart of the game. Granted, 2e to 3e changed a lot more than 1e to 2e.

The biggest thing for me about 3 in retrospect might be the OGL, and the return of a lot of things by outside publishers (that reminded me of what I would see around the local game/comic shop in the very early 80s for D&D and AD&D). I can't imagine putting a lot of work into making gaming materials for a system that doesn't have something like an OGL (even if I never plan to publish it).

I think in a lot of ways 3/3.5/PF is the one that comes closest to laying down what I like about the feel of a fantasy RPG - and that some of the more recent 4e/13thage/5e have gone a bit farther than where my sweet spot is.
 

Xeviat

Hero
3E was the first edition I played/ran as an actual PnP system. I played a lot of Baldur's Gate/Icewind Dale, which ran on the 2E rules, and I had read one of the monster manuals from AD&D, but I never got the chance to play them. It was definitely my foundational D&D experience.
 

Weiley31

Legend
Well for me, I "finally got into" DND when 3.0/3.5 was the current edition. I have that in quotes because I didn't play DND for the first time until 5E of this year. I was only familiar with 2E due to Balder's Gate/Planescape/Icewind Dale.

However, a lot of the DND Splatbooks I did read, whether the very few books I purchased and "certain methods"of online digital viewing or 3PP, was during 3rd Edition basically. My first DND book ever was Sword And Fist. And Races of Destiny and Tome of Battle directly influenced my very first PC and his background. Read none of the novels though. Hence, my games are heavily Forgotten Realms because of that and a lot of the lore that is available out there. And a lot of terms and stuff I use are from that edition. In fact my very first character ever, a Half-Elf Fighter, is a Battle Master but instead of using the term "Battle Master," I reflavored the name to Warblade from Tome of Battle. And that is mostly due to the fact that the Warblade of 3.5 and the Battle Master of 5E use Maneuvers. I also reflavor the Class Name of Clerics into the various Specialty Priests that existed, such as Silverstar of Selune, Demarch of Mask, Arachne of Lolth, Witness of Tharizdun, Doomguides of Kelevmor, Storm Lords of Tempus, etc, etc if I assigned a NPC to a certain Faerun faith.

Also the first DND game I've ever played was both Dark Alliance games on the PS2. On the PC was Neverwinter Nights. Then I got Temple of Elemental Evil. And those two games used the 3.0/3.5 rule set. It also made me realize how annoying it is to require a Masters Degree in System Mastery Math and the absolute combos of classes and prestige classes gave me the BIGGEST headache ever to the point where I appreciate 5E for making Single Class progression much better, outside of some quirks here and there, and the idea of Capstone abilities. It's also because of the large number of feats in the game that made me come up with the House Rule of letting Characters start off with a Feat/Racial feat at level 1. And this was before the Supernatural Gifts introduced via Theros.

Also for me, this was the edition that had the version of Psionics that I prefer/am used to. Also it gave us Eberron and we all know how awesome Eberron is. And lets not forget how AWESOME the Wizard of the Coast website was with it's Forgotten Realms/Eberron articles. A lot of great flavor and stuff was in there.

So 3.0/3.5 was basically my gateway into getting into DND and eventually leading me to playing 5E with my current group. and hopefully with some of my circle as I DM.

It's also why I'm gonna get the Goodman Games' Temple of Elemental Evil when it comes out too!

Now after all that being said, would I ever play 3.0/3.5? I'm not quite sure. I know if I did, Warblade, Crusader, and Swordsage would HAVE to be the replacements for the Fighter, Paladin, and Monk since they are much more superior martial options compared to the original three. And the Bladesinger would have to be modified to use the Races of Faerun versions' abilities with its Spell List being swapped out for the Complete Warrior's Bladesinger Spell List. I would probably also have to House Rule Pathfinder 1E skill point method, when it came to cross-class skills, as 3.0/3.5's Skills/Skill Points was kinda....annoying if you didn't know what you were doing when it came to class/cross-class skills. At least Pathfinder 1E had a better way of doing it so that way you weren't as screwed when it came to cross-class skills.
 
Last edited:

R_J_K75

Legend
3E was great when it came out, I liked the changes, but as it went on it got over complicated with PC options just by the shear number of books. I always felt that because so many rules were set in stone the edition favored the players over the DM if played RAW.
 

I still remember the day one of my friends brought the 3rd edition phb over, during our weekly 2e sessions. Almost everyone had a look of hostility on their face. A new edition, again? So we have to buy all new books? But then we decided, lets give it a try.

And I never changed back. Gone were the headaches of Tac0 and reverse armor class. The rules made so much more sense and there were so many character options. The many climate-specific books like Stormwrack, Sandstorm and Frostburn gave me so much inspiration for my own campaigns. Then Pathfinder came along, providing an even larger catalogue of material that was perfectly compatible with 3.5e. And we still play 3.5e today.
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
The release was the focus of this website when it was originally founded as a 3rd Edition news and rumors page.

That's not quite accurate. This site (originally called d20reviews.com) existed alongside Eric Noah's Unofficial 3rd Edition D&D News and covered non-WotC d20 games. When Eric closed his site, I took on covering the official D&D stuff too.
 

Zardnaar

Legend
20 years damn. We played 3E like 2E. At first.

In April 2001 I discovered forums. Started to shift more towards the form meta I suppose.

Game stopped resembling 2E with bells and whistles.

Met my wife a few months later.
 

Marandahir

Crown-Forester (he/him)
My first D&D game was 2e, run for me at my 11th birthday party in 2000, just months before 3e's release.

But the first edition I REALLY played significantly was 3e/3.5e. It's got a special place in my heart, even though I would be hard pressed to turn back the clock and return to it now. It's the version I played with my first consistent D&D group, with my first girlfriend, and it's the version that inspired my first worldbuilding attempts (the prototypes of my current setting, for which I'm so glad I still have the original maps I drew to look back at for inspiration).
 

3ed was way better than the 2ed system wise. Unfortunately, it also suffered from the too many books bloat. It had its strong points. Yet, some of its weakest point only showed after a few years when many campaigns went high level enough. Whenever a new edition or a new game is out and I decide to DM we make max level characters and we simulate a few dozen of combat with high level monsters. We immediately saw the number bloat but at that time, we thought we had done something wrong. We saw the Codzilla (it was not the name we gave it) and the power of the summoner type of caster. After a few years, we went back to 1ed or played Vampire the Masquerade because the number bloat was, well... tiresome?

The feats were the greatest addition to the game. Even if some feat were really a form of feat tax, the ability to make a truly unique character was there. Yes some characters were stronger than others, but over all, 3ed was good for character customization. Too good. The bloat of prestige classes became tiresome and the advent of Pathfinder only made it worst. Pathfinder was good. But it was a variation on what, near the end of 3ed, we saw as detrimental to the game: "A constant power creep in which numbers were always in greater numbers and too varied to control". The fact that many feats were in fact, feat taxes was also getting on our nerve and martial classes were there only to protect the Codzillas... And not counting the 5mwd that was introduced (or formalized?) in the edition.

Again, don't get me wrong. 3ed was great. The consistency and the normalization it brought was much needed in D&D. But the game was a bit too swingy for my taste. 4ed went too much into normalisation and we know where it led. I do think that 5ed is the best edition so far.
 

Remove ads

Top