Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="dimonic" data-source="post: 1783908" data-attributes="member: 10666">3.5 why notThe trouble with this question is that there are enough people out there that there will be someone who will disagree with every change. This will then be multiplied by the fact that only the people who feel strongly will bother to reply. You will then get mostly opinionated rants by people who have been personally hurt by the changes, who will mostly be people who have been taking advantage of a 3.0 weakness in the first place.At least 9/10 people prefer the ranger, but there is always one person who hates him. Probably every DM is happier with crit increases not stacking anymore, but every player who built their character round them will hate them. People who actually played their Paladin, and had the DM say, &quot;no your horse will not go there&quot;, will like the new mount. The DM, and perhaps other &quot;realism conscious&quot; players will dislike it. Wizards will hate the changes most: their uber-build spell focus wizards, with daily buff spells that lasted all day suddenly have to start thinking. Druids will hate the new polymorph, because they cannot totally dominate game-play. The weapon sizes make much more logical sense, but halfling players are crying foul. DMs will prefer the new DR rules, players will not.Some things people are complaining about are more or less flavour text anyway. It makes no difference to game balance if you ditch the new square facings and play with the old ones. They even suggest this, and also the old weapon size system as /options/ in the new DMG.What this all says is that you will have to deal with your group's complaints. This will be your biggest problem with 3.5. I just pushed it down their throats (after all, none of them wanted to DM). After a while, they realized they liked it better.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="dimonic, post: 1783908, member: 10666"] [b]3.5 why not[/b] The trouble with this question is that there are enough people out there that there will be someone who will disagree with every change. This will then be multiplied by the fact that only the people who feel strongly will bother to reply. You will then get mostly opinionated rants by people who have been personally hurt by the changes, who will mostly be people who have been taking advantage of a 3.0 weakness in the first place. At least 9/10 people prefer the ranger, but there is always one person who hates him. Probably every DM is happier with crit increases not stacking anymore, but every player who built their character round them will hate them. People who actually played their Paladin, and had the DM say, "no your horse will not go there", will like the new mount. The DM, and perhaps other "realism conscious" players will dislike it. Wizards will hate the changes most: their uber-build spell focus wizards, with daily buff spells that lasted all day suddenly have to start thinking. Druids will hate the new polymorph, because they cannot totally dominate game-play. The weapon sizes make much more logical sense, but halfling players are crying foul. DMs will prefer the new DR rules, players will not. Some things people are complaining about are more or less flavour text anyway. It makes no difference to game balance if you ditch the new square facings and play with the old ones. They even suggest this, and also the old weapon size system as /options/ in the new DMG. What this all says is that you will have to deal with your group's complaints. This will be your biggest problem with 3.5. I just pushed it down their throats (after all, none of them wanted to DM). After a while, they realized they liked it better. [/QUOTE]

Verification