What changes from 3.0 to 3.5 should *not* have been made?

[dead]

I still play 3.0 but was considering updating.

From what I can see, there's a lot of good changes and the game is now even more streamlined.

However, I'd like to know if there were any changes that people think just should NOT have been made.

Thanks.

 

[Alhazred]

My only real beef with 3.5 is the weapon size category. In my opinion, half a step back to 2e (where a weapon's damage dice depended on the size of the opponent). However, weapon size is easy enough to ignore, which I and my players do.

 

[Staffan]

Dwarves getting weapon familiarity and stability bonuses. It's not like dwarves were weak in 3.0.

Polymorph/wildshape finally got errataed to something useful before 3.5 was released, and then they make yet another version that ruins it.

Improved Trip might be too good in 3e, with both removing AoO, giving +4, and giving a free attack if you succeed, together with standing up giving an AoO now.

Hmm. Those are the things that immediately come to mind.

 

[Buttercup]

Weapon size, the nerfing of buff spells, bard as a gnome's favored class, pokemounts, the changes to the sorcerer class (although the 3.0 sorcerer isn't any better, it's just that they didn't fix the problem with 3.5) and the bard class and facing, off the top of my head, although there are more.

The list of things I like about 3.5 is shorter than the list of things I don't. I like the changes to skills, such as survival & sleight of hand. I like some of the new feats. I like the 3.5 Harm and Haste spells. That's it.

 

[GlassJaw]

Yeah, the only thing I have a problem with is weapon sizes. They are easy enough to ignore though. I think druids should get the Ex abilities of forms they assume but again, that's easy enough to deal with. Other than that, I like 3.5.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Weapon Sizing
Weapon Familiarity
Some spell durations
Power Attack 2-for-1 deal without a shield-wielder getting 2-for-1 AC from Combat Expertise

Other than that, mostly good changes. I like the new Ranger and Bard. I do think the Paladin could use some filling out at higher-levels.

 

[Alzrius]

At first weapon sizes bothered me a lot, but I grew to like them. Before, you had to start with a medium weapon and use some rather esoteric rules for scaling it up when you wanted a larger version of the same weapon. Who could use it and what category it was for them then became wonky. Now (mostly thanks to the handy chart in the FAQ) it's a lot easier.

What I don't like is the Space entry for creatures. Why does every monster have to take up an exact square? I don't care for minis, so that throws out the only real justification, making the entire thing seem ridiculous.

As far as DR goes, I like all of it, except for how they altered the pre-existing DR...namely various plusses necessary. While it's great to have DR versus damaging types, alignment, or special materials, I don't like at all that magic has been reduced to two groups: "magic" and "epic". In essence, as far as DR goes, you have +1 through +5 weapons, and +6 and up. Not only does this take a lot away from magic enhancement bonuses (since there are easier ways to increase damage), but it also de-emphasizes "levels" of magic weapons. It made plenty of sense to me that some creatures needed only a +1 to hit, and others needed a +4...not all magic was equal. Now, it is, at least as far as weapons go. This leads to a plethora of weapons that are +1 with a huge number of special qualities stacked on.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

The ranger
Square horses
The ranger
Pokepaladins
The ranger
Small greatswords (wtf?)
The ranger
Darkness makes a light now?
The ranger
Gnomes favored class is now bard?
Did I mention the ranger?
Unlearning spells
The ranger
Animal companions
The ranger

 

[Mouseferatu]

I'm going to go against the grain here. The weapon size rules are great. A longsword for a small creature is not and should not be the same as a short sword for a medium creature. Anyone who argues that they should be has clearly never held an actual longsword or short sword.

I like the new sorcerer. I like the new skills. I like the spell nerfs, for the most part. I like the new ranger, a lot. I love the new DR rules.

I can take or leave the new paladin's mount rules. I use them for high-magic campaigns, and go back to the old format for lower-magic ones.

In fact, if I have any single major complaint, it's the attempt to make 3.5 even more miniatures-reliant than 3.0.

However, I find that I like the vast majority of changes.

 

[dead]

I've noticed the Scrying rules have changed.

How's that working out for people?

It looks like an improvement. Far less chance for PCs to scry the BBEG if he gets a Will save!