Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="wingsandsword" data-source="post: 5974157" data-attributes="member: 14159">I will certainly agree there.3.5e was best overall, but it clearly was more complicated in the math and technical details than 3.0eNow, I understand why, in theory, they did this.  I played plenty of 3.0 with powergamers who took 3.0e and broke it hideously through multiclassing combinations, poorly worded class abilities and spell descriptions, and other rules loopholes, but in making a game powergamer-resistant, they increased the typical player and GM math workload and in some other ways made classes less fun for players (preventing front-loading was good for beating some insane multiclass combos that were out there, but it made players wait several levels for class abilities that seemed like key aspects of their class.3.5 had an advantage on 3.0e in the supplemental materials generally being better, and the rules were mechanically more sound, but with a group of friendly, relaxed players who weren't going to intentionally break the game by rules lawyering, I would probably actually prefer 3.0e, with maybe some favorite bits of 3.5e supplimental crunch retrofitted and some of the better (non-math-impacting) 3.5e rules changes brought back along with it.</blockquote>