Why re-release 3.5?

[Desdichado]

If 2e is being snubbed, I would guess because it was the least popular. Nostalgia for 2e is something that I've only seen in the last couple of years or so. Before that, it seemed like it was almost universally panned.

 

[Reynard]

If 2e is being snubbed, I would guess because it was the least popular. Nostalgia for 2e is something that I've only seen in the last couple of years or so. Before that, it seemed like it was almost universally panned.

A quick look at the retro oriented sites like Dragonsfoot backs up this point of view. I am inclined to think it is because 2E was bolstered by its settings and people played it despite its rules, not because of them. It is far more likely to see and hear folks wax nostalgic for al Qadim, Planescape or even Spelljammer than 2E in general.

That said, the 2E Monstrous Manual (the black bordered one, not the binder -- which was a great idea that sucked in practice) is still hands down the best D&D MM ever.

 

[mach1.9pants]

For me 2E core wasn't that bad, it was the splats that ruined it.

But I'd certainly like a special edition 2E core and RC to add to the 1E and 3E sets.

 

[Jhaelen]

I honestly don't know anyone who thinks 3.5 is superior or prefers it, though I do know some people who prefer 3.0 to either 3.5 or PF.

Well, I think they're about equally good.

When I bought Pathfinder I hoped to get a 'fixed' version of 3.5 but it's more like a mix of improvements and changes for the worse.

I wouldn't consider playing either again, except if there was no alternative.

 

[Gilladian]

I prefer MY version of 3.5 (E6'ed) to any previous version (and I've been playing since 1976).

I don't need a reprint of 3.5, and probably wouldn't buy it if they did, though, because I've made my own copy of the rules incorporating all the ways I do things.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

When I bought Pathfinder I hoped to get a 'fixed' version of 3.5 but it's more like a mix of improvements and changes for the worse.

(3.5Ed fan here)

That's my take on all the 3.5Ed clones.

And even if I took all the changes I liked, I'm not sure it would be an improvement significant enough for me, since I don't think any of them touch the areas I think needed the most work!

For instance, while I really like Vancian mages, I could sympathize with the position of many who felt that mages shouldn't have to rely on mundane weapons when their spells ran out. I didn't agree, but I understood ("feature, not bug"). So when the Reserve feats came out, I was really excited at the way some of them worked by letting casters use watered down magical effects based on keeping a spell of s certain kind & level "in Reserve". I thought that when 4Ed came out, they'd expend on them, maybe even make them a class feature for mages or specialists- possibly replacing the bonus feats. That way, they could do something magical all the time...but still ran the risk of simply running out of magic options if pressured.

That didn't happen, obviously.

But if I designed "my 3.75Ed", it would include my favorite 3.5Ed clone variant rules, plus some kind of revised Reserve feat/class feature rules.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

When I bought Pathfinder I hoped to get a 'fixed' version of 3.5 but it's more like a mix of improvements and changes for the worse.

(3.5Ed fan here)

That's my take on all the 3.5Ed clones.

And even if I took all the changes I liked, I'm not sure it would be an improvement significant enough for me, since I don't think any of them touch the areas I think needed the most work!

For instance, while I really like Vancian mages, I could sympathize with the position of many who felt that mages shouldn't have to rely on mundane weapons when their spells ran out. I didn't agree, but I understood ("feature, not bug"). So when the Reserve feats came out, I was really excited at the way some of them worked by letting casters use watered down magical effects based on keeping a spell of s certain kind & level "in Reserve". I thought that when 4Ed came out, they'd expend on them, maybe even make them a class feature for mages or specialists- possibly replacing the bonus feats. That way, they could do something magical all the time...but still ran the risk of simply running out of magic options if pressured.

That didn't happen, obviously.

But if I designed "my 3.75Ed", it would include my favorite 3.5Ed clone variant rules, plus some kind of revised Reserve feat/class feature rules.

 

[Desdichado]

My "fixed" 3.5 has houserules from all kinds of sources. It uses E6. It has Pathfinder archetypes and CMB/CMD. It combines Move Silently and Hide, as well as combining Listen and Spot. It removes a lot of classes that I don't like, and replaces them with others from third party sources or elsewhere. It has action points, with a few houserules of my own and from Trailblazer to expand how they work. Magic is more Lovecraftian, and is based on the Incantations rules from Unearthed Arcana and Urban Arcana. It has a sanity mechanic, but I like the more "native to d20" version found in Freeport than I do the "native to BRP/d%" system included in d20 Cthulhu and Unearthed Arcana. It has the Heal Skill, but it really works more like the Treat Injury skill from d20 Modern. It's got a class/level based Defense bonus to AC like... well, like every d20 game except D&D. It's got a chase system (mine is borrowed from Five Fingers; written by Wolfgang Baur.) I've made a minor change to the way BAB and iterative attacks work to help facilitate more mobile, swashbuckling combat rather than stand still and bang on each other because you get two attacks that way. I've got almost all custom races, some of them with mechanics that are heavily tweaked by me, only one of which (besides human) is actually in print anywhere.

I'm not likely to really pick up reprints of the books, although I might get another PHB just because frankly I could use one. With the SRD in place, and as many houserules I have, I'm better off crafting my own PDF with copy and paste and edit, frankly, out of the SRD.

But the point, I think, is that WotC recognizes that there's a lot of folks that never stopped playing 3.5, and also didn't necessarily migrate to Pathfinder or any other system. While maybe reprints of books these guys probably already have isn't the best way to sell to them again, I dunno, maybe it is a good way to reach out to them. One way or another, I'm sure WotC wants to reach them again.

 

[TerraDave]

This thread and various polls confirm that it remains popular. And with the return of e-products, it will, again, be one of the best supported.

Seems like a smart move.

 

[IronWolf]

I tend to think it is for a couple of reason, one of the big ones being they need to generate some revenue while they work on D&D Next.

In addition it is as others have said, a possible way to gauge some interest in the various editions. Though I am not too sure how well that will work or if it will be accurate. But it might give them some ballpark numbers.