Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Thumbs Down to 3.5 Edition
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="teitan" data-source="post: 1157695" data-attributes="member: 3457"><p>"It’s striking how much this resembles the case of AD&D 2nd Ed. – in 95% of the text it resembled the prior edition"</p><p></p><p>Ok, I am with you on the superiority of the 1E material over the poorly thought out mess that 2E became, but you really must not have given the 2E books a solid read through or something because they were far from 95% of the original text, and in fact the presentation and everything was very different.</p><p></p><p>2E started out decently. I was one of the Gygax guys back then, very upset at the loss and still loving the game, until 2E started to really roll along. What was 2E really? It was 1E with all the rules in the Wilderness GUide, Dungeoneers GUide and Unearthed Arcana trimmed down, rewritten and clarified, put into three books, including the atrocious Monstrous Compendium idea. Some of the less than great rules were done away with, like comeliness and HUGE amounts of classes, replaced by Kits (GROAN) that were a mixed batch of powergamer goodness and roleplayer sweetness, but never the twain shall meet. </p><p></p><p>2E was much more than a reprint of the old books, as a 95% would indicate. Maybe 2E revised, sure, that would indeed be a 95% reprint of the original 2E or the revised 1E books.</p><p></p><p>As to some of your complaints:</p><p></p><p>Challenge ratings needed to be increased in some places and decreased in others, and they were. A CR 7 Dragon in 3.0 annihilated a group of 7th level pcs, when it should have been an even challenge, not having them run in fear or die. That has been fixed. Some monsters were just easier than their Challenge Ratings idicated.</p><p></p><p>Damage REDUCTION was a cool idea and 3.5 really made that idea that much cooler to be honest. I can certainly understand your problem with the changes, but when you have a party of 6th level PCs they all seem to have magic weapons and the 9CR werewolf I just sent them after was a real wuss in comparison. You complain about the removal of fantasy flavour in one sub topic and previously argue about the changes in the Damage REDUCTION system, and the changes are based on MYTH AND FANTASY. You contradict yourself man, do you want to be able to slay a werewolf without breaking a sweat even though he should be tearing flesh from their rotting corpses or do you want the mythological beast that inspires fear in both the NPCS and PCS?</p><p></p><p>Subdual Damage, non-lethal damage... semantics man. COnsider this, 3.0 and now 3.5 (especially) were designed to attract new gamers to RPGs and DnD in particular. Now the project has been a big success but mostly in attracting older roleplayers and the Storyteller fanatics have converted in droves in my area, but not a lot of new people are getting into gaming. The terminology of gaming is very thick, especially with DnD, making it hard for new players to get into the game. Lets make it a little easier to explain so we don't have to have a huge glossary. Does the common man understand the word subdual? Probably not and it is a reference to a mechanic no longer used in the game. Subdual damage was damage dealt when fighting dragons back in the pre AD&D days. Non-Lethal damage doesn't require a definition because it is a self defined word. Lethal means killing, non mean not, so NonLethal is Not Killing damage. But hell, it is a semantical arguement.</p><p></p><p>Your complaints about magic items is irrelevant because it has been there for 3 years and is actually a nice innovation. Most of my players won't create magic items because of the cost in gold and the XP cost being somewhat high. I think that the inspiration for mythologizing magic items should be the GMs job and not a books. I rarely use the random charts for creating magic weapons and armour etc. I create them using the examples in the DMG as inspiration. That is what a DM is supposed to do. The abandoning of magic items because they don't do what you need at the time or are weaker is a HUGE problem with DnD style play. You find a +2 sword and you are carrying your father's ancient +1 sword, sure, you are going to abandon the heirloom or quit using it altogether. Been a problem since 1E.</p><p></p><p>The debate on Open Gaming is really pointless unless you are a publisher, having a huge impact on games only in options available as opposed to just the WOTC material. OGL affects very few gaming groups I know of, my group the only one in my area that extensively uses D20 STL products from companies other than WOTC. A lot of groups only want to use OFFICIAL material for some reason. Wanting to protect its Intellectual Property is only natural on the part of WOTC, allowing Mordenkainen, the names of the gods of Greyhawk etc could hurt them, causing trademark loss and resulting in lack of control over that intellectual property, in much the same way that Kleenexx is no longer the property of the Kleenexx corporation. Greyhawk is still profitable, or potentially profitable. Part of my excitement for 3.0 was that Greyhawk looked to be getting more support as to me GH=DnD more so than any other world. Sadly they let that horse get away and focused on FR, but GH could easily return and become a profitable company. Taking D20 into trademark protects the license itself from being abused or confused with other less than reputable products.</p><p></p><p>Jason</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="teitan, post: 1157695, member: 3457"] "It’s striking how much this resembles the case of AD&D 2nd Ed. – in 95% of the text it resembled the prior edition" Ok, I am with you on the superiority of the 1E material over the poorly thought out mess that 2E became, but you really must not have given the 2E books a solid read through or something because they were far from 95% of the original text, and in fact the presentation and everything was very different. 2E started out decently. I was one of the Gygax guys back then, very upset at the loss and still loving the game, until 2E started to really roll along. What was 2E really? It was 1E with all the rules in the Wilderness GUide, Dungeoneers GUide and Unearthed Arcana trimmed down, rewritten and clarified, put into three books, including the atrocious Monstrous Compendium idea. Some of the less than great rules were done away with, like comeliness and HUGE amounts of classes, replaced by Kits (GROAN) that were a mixed batch of powergamer goodness and roleplayer sweetness, but never the twain shall meet. 2E was much more than a reprint of the old books, as a 95% would indicate. Maybe 2E revised, sure, that would indeed be a 95% reprint of the original 2E or the revised 1E books. As to some of your complaints: Challenge ratings needed to be increased in some places and decreased in others, and they were. A CR 7 Dragon in 3.0 annihilated a group of 7th level pcs, when it should have been an even challenge, not having them run in fear or die. That has been fixed. Some monsters were just easier than their Challenge Ratings idicated. Damage REDUCTION was a cool idea and 3.5 really made that idea that much cooler to be honest. I can certainly understand your problem with the changes, but when you have a party of 6th level PCs they all seem to have magic weapons and the 9CR werewolf I just sent them after was a real wuss in comparison. You complain about the removal of fantasy flavour in one sub topic and previously argue about the changes in the Damage REDUCTION system, and the changes are based on MYTH AND FANTASY. You contradict yourself man, do you want to be able to slay a werewolf without breaking a sweat even though he should be tearing flesh from their rotting corpses or do you want the mythological beast that inspires fear in both the NPCS and PCS? Subdual Damage, non-lethal damage... semantics man. COnsider this, 3.0 and now 3.5 (especially) were designed to attract new gamers to RPGs and DnD in particular. Now the project has been a big success but mostly in attracting older roleplayers and the Storyteller fanatics have converted in droves in my area, but not a lot of new people are getting into gaming. The terminology of gaming is very thick, especially with DnD, making it hard for new players to get into the game. Lets make it a little easier to explain so we don't have to have a huge glossary. Does the common man understand the word subdual? Probably not and it is a reference to a mechanic no longer used in the game. Subdual damage was damage dealt when fighting dragons back in the pre AD&D days. Non-Lethal damage doesn't require a definition because it is a self defined word. Lethal means killing, non mean not, so NonLethal is Not Killing damage. But hell, it is a semantical arguement. Your complaints about magic items is irrelevant because it has been there for 3 years and is actually a nice innovation. Most of my players won't create magic items because of the cost in gold and the XP cost being somewhat high. I think that the inspiration for mythologizing magic items should be the GMs job and not a books. I rarely use the random charts for creating magic weapons and armour etc. I create them using the examples in the DMG as inspiration. That is what a DM is supposed to do. The abandoning of magic items because they don't do what you need at the time or are weaker is a HUGE problem with DnD style play. You find a +2 sword and you are carrying your father's ancient +1 sword, sure, you are going to abandon the heirloom or quit using it altogether. Been a problem since 1E. The debate on Open Gaming is really pointless unless you are a publisher, having a huge impact on games only in options available as opposed to just the WOTC material. OGL affects very few gaming groups I know of, my group the only one in my area that extensively uses D20 STL products from companies other than WOTC. A lot of groups only want to use OFFICIAL material for some reason. Wanting to protect its Intellectual Property is only natural on the part of WOTC, allowing Mordenkainen, the names of the gods of Greyhawk etc could hurt them, causing trademark loss and resulting in lack of control over that intellectual property, in much the same way that Kleenexx is no longer the property of the Kleenexx corporation. Greyhawk is still profitable, or potentially profitable. Part of my excitement for 3.0 was that Greyhawk looked to be getting more support as to me GH=DnD more so than any other world. Sadly they let that horse get away and focused on FR, but GH could easily return and become a profitable company. Taking D20 into trademark protects the license itself from being abused or confused with other less than reputable products. Jason [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Thumbs Down to 3.5 Edition
Top