Thumbs Down to 3.5 Edition
- Thread starter dcollins
- Start date
Oni
First Post
teitan said:
Not sure thats really a fair comparison. The differences in the time between 2nd ed. and 3e, as well as the type overhall to the system (as opposed to the changes from 3e to 3.5), and also the way WotC has handled things this time around are a bit different. Dnd is no longer in any great need of revitalization, the d20 market is in full swing. There aren't any major changes or chances being taken, simply change for the sake of change in many cases.
Anyway I'm sure there are people that could state this a much more coherently that I can right now. But I believe the 3e ---> 3.5 is a whole 'nother horse from the transition we all went though just a scant few years ago.
Olorin
Into the West
buzzard said:
People that complain about the golf bag are missing the point about the changes to DR. 3.0 DR was pretty much all or nothing, either you had the appropriate means to bypass DR (making it pointless) or the DR value was so high that you couldn't do enough damage to get past it, in the vast majority of situations (making it pointless). So it ended up being pretty pointless.
3.5 DR assumes you won't always have the correct means to bypass and adjusts the DR value to an amount appropriate for a creature of its CR, meaning characters that are able to challenge such a creature have a shot at doing enough damage to get past it (sometimes).
If you have that adamantine short sword when the golem comes a knockin', then great. If you don't, well the encounter just got tougher (but not impossible).
buzzard
First Post
Kershek said:
I know all this. However since LG has become living meat grinder, the fact that your attacks are at -5 or -10 damage means you are that much more likely to get killed. LG has become all about powergaming and tactical perfection. If you don't cut it in those areas, you will not survive long. Of course this is especially true with the cost of raise dead going through the roof.
buzzard
Kershek
Sci-Fi Newshound
There are many ways to kill an opponent with DR. Spells, element damage like alchemists fire, buff spells, tactical delaying (such as have the high-AC guy(s) try to keep the attention of the enemy with defensive attacking (or full defense if they can't get through DR) while the rest of the party prepares by buffing, etc. You could also use the environment against the opponent (bull rush off a drop, use Entangle in the woods, silent image to form a wall that divides the opponents or gives you extra time to prepare....
It's not hopeless, but it does take some imagination.
It's not hopeless, but it does take some imagination.
buzzard
First Post
Olorin said:
You assume a lot about the people who complain about the golf bag. Most of it is inaccurate. I understand the theory of the new DR rules. However taking 10 from every hit (or 15, or whatever) is a huge effect on a fighter who doesn't have much in the way of nice equipment or buffs (which with the new, nerfed buffs are going to be non-existant since they aren't worth a spell slot). If my LG character if fighting your golem he can do 1d6 +6 +1d6 cold (useless against a golem). Even on a flesh golem his damage is cut in half. Against a stone golem (more likely for his level-9th) he will only do damage 1/3 of the time and not much at all. Sure he can power attack, but he already needs a 12 or better to hit the golem, so any power attack basically removes his second attack. Also he uses a one handed weapon, so the new power attack change doesn't help him.
Yes, beforehand if I didn't have the +3 weapon, I couldn't do anything at all, but I could find a caster to solve that problem, or I could get sure strike on my weapon. Now there is no way to have one weapon which you can use all the time.
Yes, there are ways around the new system. Sure I could change to being a barbarian using a 2-handed weapon and power attack all the time when raging. Somehow that doesn't suit my character concept, but I guess that got thrown out with the bathwater.
buzzard
Psion
Adventurer
Olorin said:
Oh, I understand that, but don't think that addresses the golfbag syndrome. If players frequently find that they have tough fights because of DR, they will naturally seek out ways to overcome it. You don't have to have a creature be invulnerable to the weapon to encourage players to seek to tip the scales in their favor.
shadow
First Post
I really agree with dcollins's essay. IMHO, 3.5e has really hurt D&D. First and foremost, a new revision wasn't needed. I don't recall hearing anyone whining how 3e really sucked and needed to be fixed. Whatever problems there were, they could have fixed by simple DM rulings. (E.g. The problems with harm could have easily been fixed with the DM ruling a reflex save was necessary.)
Far from fixing what needed to be fixed, the authors of 3.5e tinkered with the whole rule set, and introduced more problems than they solved. Why the new weapon size rules? No one ever complained about the old ones! The new ones worked fine, but the new ones introduce an extra level of complexity. Also the authors took it upon themselves to not only fix harm, haste, and heal, but to completely redo NEARLY THE ENTIRE spell list. Many spells in 3.5e have been reduced to the point of being nearly useless.
Moreover, hellbent on revising D&D, the authors paid little heed to "backward compatibility". Although, superficially similar to 3e, I have found that 3.5e conversion often requires quite a bit of work. Some conversion is relatively easy-use the 3.5e monster instead of the 3e monster. However, many of the classes are significantly different. Your high level ranger is going to have to be rebuilt from ground up. Likewise, a wizard or sorcerer is probably going to have to redo his spell list.
Finally, 3.5e has fractured the D&D community. The situation is similar to the waning days of 2e with the advent of the Player's Option books. Players would use a hodgepodge of various rule sets, and no two groups ever played the same game.
Just my 2cp.
Far from fixing what needed to be fixed, the authors of 3.5e tinkered with the whole rule set, and introduced more problems than they solved. Why the new weapon size rules? No one ever complained about the old ones! The new ones worked fine, but the new ones introduce an extra level of complexity. Also the authors took it upon themselves to not only fix harm, haste, and heal, but to completely redo NEARLY THE ENTIRE spell list. Many spells in 3.5e have been reduced to the point of being nearly useless.
Moreover, hellbent on revising D&D, the authors paid little heed to "backward compatibility". Although, superficially similar to 3e, I have found that 3.5e conversion often requires quite a bit of work. Some conversion is relatively easy-use the 3.5e monster instead of the 3e monster. However, many of the classes are significantly different. Your high level ranger is going to have to be rebuilt from ground up. Likewise, a wizard or sorcerer is probably going to have to redo his spell list.
Finally, 3.5e has fractured the D&D community. The situation is similar to the waning days of 2e with the advent of the Player's Option books. Players would use a hodgepodge of various rule sets, and no two groups ever played the same game.
Just my 2cp.
JacktheRabbit
Explorer
dcollins said:
I stopped posting or visiting here a month ago because I was sick of every other topic being a DnD 3.5 whine session.
Have we not YET moved onto more interesting conversation items?
Similar Threads
- Locked
