D&D 3.x The "I Love 3.5 because..." thread

[Wormwood]

With very few exceptions...everything.

 

[Mercule]

DR is the biggie. My house rule is now official.

The ranger is an improvement.

A host of minor things that just seem to make things run more smoothly.

 

[MoonZar]

Now, I'd like to hear from those who prefer 3.5.

What is it (rules-wise) that you really like about 3.5 now that you have had a chance to play it for a while ?

What do you think it does better than 3.0 ?

Thanks.

Hello,

I think that 3.5 is far more balanced beside 3.0.

In 3.0 you had many prestige class and feat and combination of spells who was too much powerful to be real that had been adjusted in 3.5.

Some core class had some amelioration in 3.5 that make them more use by the players, like the ranger who had many change.

I think that the biggest difference between the edition.

 

[Voadam]

Monster rules are all consistent with levelling rules instead of sometimes having feats and skills be based off of wierd formulas or just stats.

Having LA in a bunch of the monster stat blocks.

I like the variety of types but lower overall levels of DR. It is nice to still do something useful even without the right material weapon.

Demons that are tougher and appropriate for their CR.

Better advancing monster rules.

classes are not so front ended as in 3.0 (ranger, monk)

haste is once again a physical combat booster instead of a pseudo meta magic spell casting booster.

Less egregiously cheap but powerful skill boosting magic items, etc.

Fewer wierd shaped spells (burning hands is a cone instead of the 1 spell only fan).

Individual levels modifying xp instead of just group average.

 

[werk]

Someone said the term 'minimal frontloading' 3.5 spread out the class skills so you don't get a ton of stuff at level one. That was a major fix for me/easy way to break/cheez 3.0.

Fixed Haste.

I would think it comes down to a question of what is the problem? If your party is overpowered and the DM can't control it, then 3.5. If it's underpowered or uses a ton of non-D&D 3.5 material, then you need to stick with 3.0.

My biggest beef is that I had to buy 3.5...they should give you a discount or rebate if you send in the PoP from your 3.0 products. And now all the 3.0 material, which is still being sold, is obsolete. Terrible Customer Experience!

 

[sfedi]

It is much more balanced than 3.0

I can play it with very few house rules.

 

[The_Universe]

I like everything but the loss of the cover charts to "cover and improved cover" and I'm not a huge fan of square spaces - but other than that, I like everything that 3.5 did to fix 3.0.

 

[MoonZar]

i agree that we was stole with the release of 3.0 who was totaly unbalance and then they do a new edition only 2 years later...

I had buy many 3.0 books and now they are all to waste except when i need to consult something as dm.

 

[Yeoman]

Basically everything.

The specific points I like the most are

New DR System.
The HHH spells were toned down.
Ki Strike!
Easier to Fight with Two Weapons.
New Ranger.
Much better Psionic System.

 

[KarinsDad]

I don't like the fact that 3.5 went overboard in nerfing some spells (they didn't just weaken them, they practically looted them): specifically, buff spells could have dropped to 10 minutes per level instead of 1 minute per level and Hold Person was totally nerfed.

I like what most everyone else likes about 3.5 core (especially DR). It is, quite frankly, better than 3E.

I dislike the bigger, better, badder syndrome of the Companion books, course, 3E has that as well in it's add on books.