D&D 3E/3.5 The original SRD

[Yora]

I sometimes think back to the original 3rd edition before the 3.5e revision and that in hindsight the game seemed quite different, and I might have even liked it better. Apparently, the original three rulebooks aren't available anywhere as pdfs, and all the SRDs I know about have the 3.5e rules.

But I remember quite clearly that there used to be OGL books long before the revision (I think even more than after), and so there must have been an SRD for the original rules, right?

How the OGL works, the SRD is a public document for free use within the limitations of the license, which can not be revoked. So that original SRD would be just as legal to circulate now as it was back then.
Does anyone know of surviving and accessible copies?

 

[TerraDave]

SYSTEM REFERENCE DOCUMENT

 

[Yora]

Oh, wow. The original site.

Still not updated to include 3.5e and d20 Modern, but listing them as "coming soon".

 

[Alzrius]

If you don't feel like downloading and opening a bunch of RTF files, you can use this 3.0 SRD site.

 

[Yora]

That's even better.

 

[kenada]

One problem with using a site that republishes the SRD is you have to include it in your section 15 declaration. If you don’t want to do that, someone here found them on the Wayback Machine.

MSRD and RSRD down

I don't know if anyone has pointed this out, but even though the Revised System Reference Document (3.5) and the Modern System Reference Document pages are still on Wizards.com, all of the download links are dead. You will have to use the Wayback Machine to get them. I'm not sure if they'll...

www.enworld.org

 

[Yora]

What is my section 15 declaration? I'm not declaring anything.

 

[Blue]

I sometimes think back to the original 3rd edition before the 3.5e revision and that in hindsight the game seemed quite different, and I might have even liked it better.

Think carefully on what the distinction is.

I got burnt out on 3.5 and won't run it again. In retrospect I had more fun with early 3.0.

But I examined that, and realized that a big part of it was the "we allow everything" push and the proliferation of source books, and the power creep from putting features together in novel ways.

So it wasn't 3.0 I liked better, it was "a lean 3.x". As a system, the most of the changes made to 3.5 were for the better. (Well, I could debate the weapon size change.) But even from the first publication of 3.5 it was touted as "backwards compatible" with 3.0 splat books,a nd definitely had the expectation (later fulfilled) of more to come. So it never had that "lean" period.

TL;DR: I think base 3.5 improved over base 3.0, but came with expectation of splat books that may change how one remembers at it vs. 3.0-when-published.

 

[kenada]

What is my section 15 declaration? I'm not declaring anything.

Ah. If you’re just referencing it, I suppose it doesn’t matter. I was thinking of the case where one wants to use the SRD in a work under the OGL.

 

[Yora]

Think carefully on what the distinction is.

I got burnt out on 3.5 and won't run it again. In retrospect I had more fun with early 3.0.

But I examined that, and realized that a big part of it was the "we allow everything" push and the proliferation of source books, and the power creep from putting features together in novel ways.

So it wasn't 3.0 I liked better, it was "a lean 3.x". As a system, the most of the changes made to 3.5 were for the better. (Well, I could debate the weapon size change.) But even from the first publication of 3.5 it was touted as "backwards compatible" with 3.0 splat books,a nd definitely had the expectation (later fulfilled) of more to come. So it never had that "lean" period.

TL;DR: I think base 3.5 improved over base 3.0, but came with expectation of splat books that may change how one remembers at it vs. 3.0-when-published.

I think perhaps the biggest shift in 3.5e is the idea that "dead levels are bad". The idea that levels can be dead is already one I completely disagree with. CharOps was already a thing before that, but I think this one change really put it into overdrive.
It also furthers the assumptions of "the answer to every obstacle is somewhere on your character sheet". This removes incentives to think of the game as scenes in which the characters can act as people in a world. Roleplaying.

I can absolutely see why people love the revised Damage Reduction system, but one consequence of this is that +2 or +3 weapons lose most of their meaning and usefulness. Also, the amount of damage reduced was significantly cut down, often to just half. The idea here being that even if you don't have the right weapon, you can at least do some damage. Sounds of course good on paper, but having monsters that you have to defeat with means other than weapons are an interesting element for creative tactics, which are a valuable aspect for an RPG.

And another big thing for me, which is really not easy to pinpoint to specifics, is a significant shift in tone. Original 3rd edition had it's one tone, which I think in some ways still resembles AD&D 2nd edition. In contrast, 3.5e feels like the Eberron game.