Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 1160139" data-attributes="member: 1465">I am a bit disappointed by some players who actually say "why do you complain about how 3.5 changed this one rule? It's not so different than before!". This is one of the points where dcollins and Monte Cook are right: too many changes were not strictly necessary, but were MINOR changes that didn't really turn the thing different. So why change it?We are still playing 3.0 because we haven't bought the new books yet, and already we are making confusion because some of us have read the 3.5 SRD. It's about minor changes, because the major ones we are able to easily remember how they are in 3.0 and 3.5.After 2 years of playing 3.0 I was very satisfied that I could DM a game without being constantly looking up for rules in the books, although of course I always did to some extent, but I thought I had learned how to play basically. I haven't bought 3.5 and already I am confused and have to look up all the time... Why changing little things like spell's duration or range or saving throws unless it was really needed?Indeed I think that most of the changes, even the minor ones, are improvements, but had they waited a couple of more years for the revision, they would have had time to correct ALL the minor things. Now they have not even corrected half, and they have changed things that are not better than before, and some are even blatantly worse (Deflect Arrows and standing up from prone come to my mind).</blockquote>

Verification