Having a quick read through (really a skim) of the books last night, I don't think that the sky will fall. I do think that the core-rules will feel less *core* than they have since 3e was released.
Where 3.0 felt self-contained and complete (must as 1e did and 2e didn't), 3.5 feels like a different but equal Core Rules. I mean, it is self-contained and it is complete. But just as a DM (or player) could argue that a 1e rule should trump a 2e rule and the premise of the argument seemed sound, a DM (or player) could argue that a 3.0 rule should trump a 3.5 rule and the premise is sound.
Of course, the DM makes the final decision. But every dispute of this nature has to be wieghed on its specific and individual merits, because 3.5 doesn't carry the absolute weight of being the precedent, the authority. 2e was a (major) revision of 1e, it was always the child. Even if the parent was very permissive and allowed the child to grow and establish its own identity it was still the pretender to the throne.
3e was a cousin that really just took the throne -- not by force, and not without pedigree or justification, but it just walked up and sat down and started to rule. Sure some people worked in facing and weapon speed but it was always clear that they were departing from a 3e baseline and there was little question about altering 2e to include 3e rules (although there was some, most notably the skill system).
3.5 is very much the progeny of 3e, and it will take a long time for it to establish its own identity -- if it ever can. Until it does, it will not really carry the weight of authority and there will feel like there are two systems of core rules in circulation.
It will happen, of course. By the mid 90s 1e had been out of print long enough for new players and many older players to forget that it ever existed. Years of playing, and it being the first set of rules for a *complete* generation made it its own game. But that took quite a bit of time. 3.0 will eventually fade far enough into the background for it to lose its status as the authoritative precedent and 3.5 will be the undisputed baseline, core rules.
Big Hairy Audacious Prediction ahead:
At almost the precise moment that 3.5 becomes the baseline, core rules, 4e will be released to wipe the slate clean again and 3.5e will be remembered with the bemused disappointment that the most forgiving people feel for 2e. Not a bad system but not the best, and not the first so you can't really pine for it. When 4e arrives, people will pine for 3e not 3.5, just as when 3e arrived people waxed nostalgic for 1e* not 2e.
All in my humble opinion, of course. Who really knows how all this will play out (which I suppose is a mild condemnation of the fundamental business decision, but that's a different issue.) It looks like my personal campaign will use modified 3e rules, though, not modified 3.5 rules.
Cheers
* Or OD&D in Diaglo's case.
Where 3.0 felt self-contained and complete (must as 1e did and 2e didn't), 3.5 feels like a different but equal Core Rules. I mean, it is self-contained and it is complete. But just as a DM (or player) could argue that a 1e rule should trump a 2e rule and the premise of the argument seemed sound, a DM (or player) could argue that a 3.0 rule should trump a 3.5 rule and the premise is sound.
Of course, the DM makes the final decision. But every dispute of this nature has to be wieghed on its specific and individual merits, because 3.5 doesn't carry the absolute weight of being the precedent, the authority. 2e was a (major) revision of 1e, it was always the child. Even if the parent was very permissive and allowed the child to grow and establish its own identity it was still the pretender to the throne.
3e was a cousin that really just took the throne -- not by force, and not without pedigree or justification, but it just walked up and sat down and started to rule. Sure some people worked in facing and weapon speed but it was always clear that they were departing from a 3e baseline and there was little question about altering 2e to include 3e rules (although there was some, most notably the skill system).
3.5 is very much the progeny of 3e, and it will take a long time for it to establish its own identity -- if it ever can. Until it does, it will not really carry the weight of authority and there will feel like there are two systems of core rules in circulation.
It will happen, of course. By the mid 90s 1e had been out of print long enough for new players and many older players to forget that it ever existed. Years of playing, and it being the first set of rules for a *complete* generation made it its own game. But that took quite a bit of time. 3.0 will eventually fade far enough into the background for it to lose its status as the authoritative precedent and 3.5 will be the undisputed baseline, core rules.
Big Hairy Audacious Prediction ahead:
At almost the precise moment that 3.5 becomes the baseline, core rules, 4e will be released to wipe the slate clean again and 3.5e will be remembered with the bemused disappointment that the most forgiving people feel for 2e. Not a bad system but not the best, and not the first so you can't really pine for it. When 4e arrives, people will pine for 3e not 3.5, just as when 3e arrived people waxed nostalgic for 1e* not 2e.
All in my humble opinion, of course. Who really knows how all this will play out (which I suppose is a mild condemnation of the fundamental business decision, but that's a different issue.) It looks like my personal campaign will use modified 3e rules, though, not modified 3.5 rules.
Cheers
* Or OD&D in Diaglo's case.
