Time to Reflect on 3.5 Disappointments

[maddman75]

barsoomcore - that's not what they did. If they'd fixed a few spells, redid a class or two, and incorporated all the errata, I'd be fine and dandy with some 3.5 books. When this was being discussed, I'd even envisioned giving my players a short list of the spells, classes, and feats that had changed so that for the most part they could continue using their 3.0 books.

But that didn't happen. The list would be listing every freakin spell in the book. They somehow managed to keep so much the same that it felt like the same game, yet change just enough to make using the old books impossible.

 

[barsoomcore]

There is nothing in 3.5 I don't own except for, MAYBE, 5-10 pages of minor rules changes, if you cut the fluff out.

So the heck what? If you already own it, don't buy it. Nobody's MAKING you buy this stuff -- it's available FOR FREE.

And I haven't heard any reports from people that WotC ninjas are invading their homes and stealing their 3.0 rulebooks, or that their old PHB's are self-destructing, so is there some reason why 3.0 suddenly doesn't work for you? Did you suffer a partial lobotomy and can't recall the rules anymore? Good grief.

I submit that as a purchaser of a rule book, I'd rather buy the one that DOESN'T require me to go out and find a 10-page errata document. Not having to do that represents significant value to me. Especially if the two rulebooks are of comparable price -- I'll buy the one WITH LESS errata, thank you very much.

 

[Tsyr]

Raise your hand if you think it's smarter to keep pumping out errata or if at some point you take all the errata and fixes and new ideas that have come along, and you create a new package so that when people buy your rules, they get the rules as they actually are now, instead of having to consult pages of errata in order to figure out what the rules are?

Of course you hit a point where errata is no longer sensible. My contention is we hadn't hit that point yet, and in any event, a number of the changes in 3.5 were senseless to begin with.

The 3.5 revisions weren't done for US, the people who already had 3.0. Sure, Wizards is more than happy if we'll buy the rulebooks, but they provided the SRD explicitly so we didn't have to. The revisions were done so that when NEW people buy the rulebooks, they get a better game. Better presentation, better rules, better tea bag, better tea.

I had a problem with this. If this is all they were after, a simple re-printing with errata stuck in would be fine. But no, they changed JUST ENOUGH to justify making it a "different version".

 

[Tsyr]

barsoomcore - that's not what they did. If they'd fixed a few spells, redid a class or two, and incorporated all the errata, I'd be fine and dandy with some 3.5 books. When this was being discussed, I'd even envisioned giving my players a short list of the spells, classes, and feats that had changed so that for the most part they could continue using their 3.0 books.

But that didn't happen. The list would be listing every freakin spell in the book. They somehow managed to keep so much the same that it felt like the same game, yet change just enough to make using the old books impossible.

Yeah. What he said.

 

[Kichwas]

What was 3E?

A money grab and an improvement. In many ways so was 3.5.

While people can accept a money grab from time to time, too much too often becomes too much.

New editions need to be spaced out more. Find other ways to money grab please, ways that genuinly give us something new. The new mini line is a good example of a valid money grab, even if the random nature of it does ruin the product for me.

 

[Desdichado]

barsoomcore - that's not what they did. If they'd fixed a few spells, redid a class or two, and incorporated all the errata, I'd be fine and dandy with some 3.5 books. When this was being discussed, I'd even envisioned giving my players a short list of the spells, classes, and feats that had changed so that for the most part they could continue using their 3.0 books.

But that didn't happen. The list would be listing every freakin spell in the book. They somehow managed to keep so much the same that it felt like the same game, yet change just enough to make using the old books impossible.

So, which is it? They redid all kinds of little things, or you can fit all the changes in five pages or less? I realize Tsyr said that, not you, but I find the striking inconsistencies about what it's ...unfans say about 3.5 to be fascinating. EDIT: And now Tsyr said both contradictory statements. I'm really confused!

Me? I don't have 3.5. I don't have any real need for it. I bought the new MM because I liked the new art and the new presentation and it seemed to be the most improved of the books in many ways. I can download the new classes from the SRD. I don't play spellcasters much, and prefer custom magic systems anyway, so I don't care much about the rejigged spells. Most of the new stuff in the DMG seems to already have been in print in other books I own, or else isn't very important to me personally.

So I'm not real excited about 3.5, to say the least. But I honestly don't understand the "my hat of 5.3 know no limit!!!!!1111!!" attitude I see around here so much. It really is relatively harmless, whether you want to buy it or not.

 

[barsoomcore]

barsoomcore - that's not what they did. If they'd fixed a few spells, redid a class or two, and incorporated all the errata, I'd be fine and dandy with some 3.5 books. When this was being discussed, I'd even envisioned giving my players a short list of the spells, classes, and feats that had changed so that for the most part they could continue using their 3.0 books.

But that didn't happen. The list would be listing every freakin spell in the book. They somehow managed to keep so much the same that it felt like the same game, yet change just enough to make using the old books impossible.

Well, I must be doing SOMETHING wrong, because I've been using my MM 3.0 right alongside my PHB 3.5 and very few disasters have befallen me.

And there's some reason why you can't just use the SRD, if you want?...

 

[Desdichado]

Well, I must be doing SOMETHING wrong, because I've been using my MM 3.0 right alongside my PHB 3.5 and very few disasters have befallen me.

And I can verify that the 3.0 PHB works just fine with the 3.5 MM, having gone the exact opposite route as 'core in my purchasing strategy relative to 3.5.

 

[barsoomcore]

Of course you hit a point where errata is no longer sensible. My contention is we hadn't hit that point yet, and in any event, a number of the changes in 3.5 were senseless to begin with.

Okay, so there weren't enough changes to justify a "different version". Got it.

I had a problem with this. If this is all they were after, a simple re-printing with errata stuck in would be fine. But no, they changed JUST ENOUGH to justify making it a "different version".

No, wait, there WERE enough changes to justify a "different version".

Am I the only one seeing some difficulties here?

 

[Desdichado]

Am I the only one seeing some difficulties here?

Nope, I posted the same thing a few posts above you.

Also, go check out the Kill Bill threads; I'm curious as to your take. Are you an anime fan, by any chance?