3.0 vs. 3.5 what's your opinion? [Archive] - Wizards Community

3.0 vs. 3.5 what's your opinion? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Corzat_the_Gray
09-12-06, 10:09 AM :confused: I don't know if this the right place to post this, but I was wondering what other's opinions are on the topic of bringing 3.0 rules up to 3.5 in relation to Prestige Classes and Equipment. I see on the Char Opt threads that some think that if it is 3.0 and hasn't been updated that it can't be allowed in a game. On the other hand is the side that 3.0 can be used if it hasn't been updated because if it hasn't been updated then it must work with the 3.5 rules.
I'm of the opinion that if it hasn't been updated then it must work, such as weapons in the A&EG, or xyz prestige class from the "Guide to" series that has yet to see the light of day in a 3.5 book.

Just throwing this out there to see what the consensus is on the subject of using 3.0 in a 3.5 world.

Cheers! :pint:
rilem
09-12-06, 10:21 AM Generally speaking, regulars here often use the handful of PrCs that haven't been updated to 3.5 when they're looking for something specific (Survivor, Lasher, etc.). But most requests that I see often include a DM-imposed prohibition on 3.0 stuff.

WotC's stated goal with 3.5 was that it was 90 percent or so backwards-compliant. But there is some stuff that obviously doesn't work anymore. The one that leaps to mind is the Blindfold of Perfect Darkness from A&EG, totally underpriced by 3.5 rules, which nerfed nearly all instances of blindsight to the less-powerful blindsense.
FriendlyFrog
09-12-06, 10:32 AM I think that the A&EG is the book that has biggest problems with 3.5. There are dozens of items there that are way too underprized for what they do (well, most of those items were underprized in 3.0 already).

There are also a few things that probably shouldn't be allowed because they have become so much stronger with the new rules (like Disciple of Dispater stacking with Improved critical and Foe hunter with Favored enemy: Evil), and some things that simply don't work with the new rules, but in general 3.0 material is still as usable as it used to.
Corzat_the_Gray
09-12-06, 10:40 AM Generally speaking, regulars here often use the handful of PrCs that haven't been updated to 3.5 when they're looking for something specific (Survivor, Lasher, etc.). But most requests that I see often include a DM-imposed prohibition on 3.0 stuff.
I can see where you're coming from with this... I've seen it myself while lurking in the shadows here. Looking at the "Hey check this out!" builds often use 3.0 PrC, and the "Can you help me..." builds have the DM-imposed nix on 3.0.
I think that the A&EG is the book that has biggest problems with 3.5. There are dozens of items there that are way too underprized for what they do (well, most of those items were underprized in 3.0 already).

There are also a few things that probably shouldn't be allowed because they have become so much stronger with the new rules (like Disciple of Dispater stacking with Improved critical and Foe hunter with Favored enemy: Evil), and some things that simply don't work with the new rules, but in general 3.0 material is still as usable as it used to.
This must be the 10% that isn't so backwards compatible.
Lokathor
09-12-06, 11:55 AM If you nixed the blindfold down to Blindsense as well it'd be ok to use.
Book
09-12-06, 12:00 PM And yet there are still a decent number of diamonds in the rough in 3.0 that never really got much traction here at CharOp. Like the Watch Detective PrC in Song and Silence.
GDarius
09-12-06, 12:23 PM And yet there are still a decent number of diamonds in the rough in 3.0 that never really got much traction here at CharOp. Like the Watch Detective PrC in Song and Silence.

Watch Detective is actually (oddly) in Masters of the Wild, on pg. 75. Not in Song and Silence.

To the OP: In my games, I tend to disallow 3.0 stuff that wasn't updated. I do so because the only reason anyone in my group goes to 3.0 is to get underpriced, or unbalanced items and I really don't want the headache of updating them myself. I'm talking about things like the already mentioned Blindfold of Perfect Darkness, the 3.0 Ring of Jumping, and the Sparring Dummy of the Master.
Skadrian
09-12-06, 02:29 PM But I dont think there is a good reason to forbid most of the non updated prc's, like the lasher and the oozemaster, both filling niches that cant otherwise be filled
prototype00
09-12-06, 02:58 PM Its a complicated matter to be sure. Being as how this is the optimization board, it of course rankles not to be able to optimize with absolutely every resource out there.

However, I personally believe that the best optimization makes use of what is universally accepted and not by cherry picking from controversially ruled options. By this, we produce builds that DMs everywhere should not regard as *breaking the rules* somehow. Furthermore, we demonstrate how efficient the community of optimizers is at dissecting and integrating the current and growing body of gaming literature.

If we were to allow 3.0 rules in, by the same token, builds using third party sources or even 2.0 and DnD red box rules should be fair for plunder. After all, they are just older versions of exactly the same game. Heck, even starward d20 should be open for use, because the force is exactly like magic isn't it?

So you see, the slippery path of *Close enough but not legal as of now* is one that I personally believe in not treading. Better to produce superlative builds with the latest of wizard's offering rather than rehash with nostalgia the cherished builds of previous iterations.

prototype00
solbergb
09-12-06, 03:03 PM Just do your own conversion of the stuff that wasn't updated. (eg, Oozemaster). Strip out the obvious stuff (eg, scrying skill reqs) and look it over for the larger balance shifts (critical stacking, blindsense) or new material (spell lists, can a warlock qualify, blah blah).

I don't recommend using the stuff blindly. You need to think about what your'e doing. Eg...there is a place for Deepwood sniper - none of the 3.5 PRC's really capture the concept of a long range sniper that sometimes does decent damage. It's the mirror of OOTBI (an archer that reliably can do short range sniping or close quarters volley fire). Cragtop Archer does the REALLY long range stuff, but isn't really appropriate for a woodland setting.

But the stacking crits isn't the right way to go...you probably should replace that ability with some +damage on a crit or something, that improves as the various critboosting class abilities improve. I'd also make woodland archer tactical feat a prereq instead of or in addition to Far shot, and might only give the bonuses on damage when doing the sniping maneuver (not on volley fire), depending on how good it was.
Corzat_the_Gray
09-12-06, 10:45 PM But I dont think there is a good reason to forbid most of the non updated prc's, like the lasher and the oozemaster, both filling niches that cant otherwise be filled

Here! Here! :clap:

If we were to allow 3.0 rules in, by the same token, builds using third party sources or even 2.0 and DnD red box rules should be fair for plunder. After all, they are just older versions of exactly the same game. Heck, even starward d20 should be open for use, because the force is exactly like magic isn't it?

I would have to disagree with any mention of 2.0 and red box because comparing them to 3.x is like trying to compare apples and oranges. While they are older versions of the same game and that's where the similarity ends. Apples and oranges are both fruits and that's where the similarity ends.
As for third party sources... what are those? :rolleyes: I guess I don't even consider third party sources when playing due to the lack of availability in my area and the fact that no one I know and play with would even be able to tell me one other publisher of d20 material besides WoTC.
In my opinion, Star Wars and DnD just aren't the same flavor. I enjoy both, but just don't see them mixing.

I don't recommend using the stuff blindly. You need to think about what your'e doing.

If one goes updating on their own, these are sage words indeed. :tiphat:
fnord
09-12-06, 10:56 PM If you have questions about anything in particular, we should be able to answer them. It really does need to be done on a case by case basis.
Corzat_the_Gray
09-12-06, 11:08 PM Wasn't really going for anything specific, I was just wondering what everybody here on the CO boards thought about incorporating 3.0 stuff into 3.5 because of the differing opinions I've seen while lurking. I guess I was trying to see if I could get some sort of consensus on the subject, but from what I'm getting in reply is that it is just too much of a case by case issue to really come to a consensus on whether some 3.0 material that hasn't been updated officially is acceptable or not in 3.5.
prototype00
09-13-06, 04:49 AM I would have to disagree with any mention of 2.0 and red box because comparing them to 3.x is like trying to compare apples and oranges. While they are older versions of the same game and that's where the similarity ends. Apples and oranges are both fruits and that's where the similarity ends.
As for third party sources... what are those? I guess I don't even consider third party sources when playing due to the lack of availability in my area and the fact that no one I know and play with would even be able to tell me one other publisher of d20 material besides WoTC.
In my opinion, Star Wars and DnD just aren't the same flavor. I enjoy both, but just don't see them mixing.

I'm just pointing out that different systems don't mix, and I can see you agree. Though similar, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who will say that 3.0 and 3.5 are the same system. Hence, they don't mix.

prototype00
Gurney_Halleck
09-16-06, 01:03 PM It really is case by case. In general I let 3.0 material slide. At least as far as nonupdated PrC's and feats, but I usually dissalow it for items. Items in 3.0 seem to be of much lower price.

As an aside, is there any 3.5 class that is a updated/good replacement for BeastMaster from MoTW?

I really liked being able to control a crud load of critters as a druidesque charachter.
Skadrian
09-16-06, 01:22 PM the beastmaster from complete adventurer gives a bonus to your animal companion and gives some more, weaker animal companions
Gurney_Halleck
09-16-06, 01:37 PM Thanks, that seems to be an official replacement. It's a pity it got seriously nerfed, I liked being able to have 20HD worth of animal companions at level 10 :). I mean 80 Ravens rock lol. And the nice Int bonuses are missing too.

PS I just noticed that the PrC from MoTW was called Tamer of Beasts, not sure where I got beastmaster from. So maybe this isn't a replacement. Aw well I don't want to hijack an already finished thread any further.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Corzat_the_Gray 09-12-06, 10:09 AM	:confused: I don't know if this the right place to post this, but I was wondering what other's opinions are on the topic of bringing 3.0 rules up to 3.5 in relation to Prestige Classes and Equipment. I see on the Char Opt threads that some think that if it is 3.0 and hasn't been updated that it can't be allowed in a game. On the other hand is the side that 3.0 can be used if it hasn't been updated because if it hasn't been updated then it must work with the 3.5 rules. I'm of the opinion that if it hasn't been updated then it must work, such as weapons in the A&EG, or xyz prestige class from the "Guide to" series that has yet to see the light of day in a 3.5 book. Just throwing this out there to see what the consensus is on the subject of using 3.0 in a 3.5 world. Cheers! :pint:
rilem 09-12-06, 10:21 AM	Generally speaking, regulars here often use the handful of PrCs that haven't been updated to 3.5 when they're looking for something specific (Survivor, Lasher, etc.). But most requests that I see often include a DM-imposed prohibition on 3.0 stuff. WotC's stated goal with 3.5 was that it was 90 percent or so backwards-compliant. But there is some stuff that obviously doesn't work anymore. The one that leaps to mind is the Blindfold of Perfect Darkness from A&EG, totally underpriced by 3.5 rules, which nerfed nearly all instances of blindsight to the less-powerful blindsense.
FriendlyFrog 09-12-06, 10:32 AM	I think that the A&EG is the book that has biggest problems with 3.5. There are dozens of items there that are way too underprized for what they do (well, most of those items were underprized in 3.0 already). There are also a few things that probably shouldn't be allowed because they have become so much stronger with the new rules (like Disciple of Dispater stacking with Improved critical and Foe hunter with Favored enemy: Evil), and some things that simply don't work with the new rules, but in general 3.0 material is still as usable as it used to.
Corzat_the_Gray 09-12-06, 10:40 AM	Generally speaking, regulars here often use the handful of PrCs that haven't been updated to 3.5 when they're looking for something specific (Survivor, Lasher, etc.). But most requests that I see often include a DM-imposed prohibition on 3.0 stuff. I can see where you're coming from with this... I've seen it myself while lurking in the shadows here. Looking at the "Hey check this out!" builds often use 3.0 PrC, and the "Can you help me..." builds have the DM-imposed nix on 3.0. I think that the A&EG is the book that has biggest problems with 3.5. There are dozens of items there that are way too underprized for what they do (well, most of those items were underprized in 3.0 already). There are also a few things that probably shouldn't be allowed because they have become so much stronger with the new rules (like Disciple of Dispater stacking with Improved critical and Foe hunter with Favored enemy: Evil), and some things that simply don't work with the new rules, but in general 3.0 material is still as usable as it used to. This must be the 10% that isn't so backwards compatible.
Lokathor 09-12-06, 11:55 AM	If you nixed the blindfold down to Blindsense as well it'd be ok to use.
Book 09-12-06, 12:00 PM	And yet there are still a decent number of diamonds in the rough in 3.0 that never really got much traction here at CharOp. Like the Watch Detective PrC in Song and Silence.
GDarius 09-12-06, 12:23 PM	And yet there are still a decent number of diamonds in the rough in 3.0 that never really got much traction here at CharOp. Like the Watch Detective PrC in Song and Silence. Watch Detective is actually (oddly) in Masters of the Wild, on pg. 75. Not in Song and Silence. To the OP: In my games, I tend to disallow 3.0 stuff that wasn't updated. I do so because the only reason anyone in my group goes to 3.0 is to get underpriced, or unbalanced items and I really don't want the headache of updating them myself. I'm talking about things like the already mentioned Blindfold of Perfect Darkness, the 3.0 Ring of Jumping, and the Sparring Dummy of the Master.
Skadrian 09-12-06, 02:29 PM	But I dont think there is a good reason to forbid most of the non updated prc's, like the lasher and the oozemaster, both filling niches that cant otherwise be filled
prototype00 09-12-06, 02:58 PM	Its a complicated matter to be sure. Being as how this is the optimization board, it of course rankles not to be able to optimize with absolutely every resource out there. However, I personally believe that the best optimization makes use of what is universally accepted and not by cherry picking from controversially ruled options. By this, we produce builds that DMs everywhere should not regard as breaking the rules somehow. Furthermore, we demonstrate how efficient the community of optimizers is at dissecting and integrating the current and growing body of gaming literature. If we were to allow 3.0 rules in, by the same token, builds using third party sources or even 2.0 and DnD red box rules should be fair for plunder. After all, they are just older versions of exactly the same game. Heck, even starward d20 should be open for use, because the force is exactly like magic isn't it? So you see, the slippery path of Close enough but not legal as of now is one that I personally believe in not treading. Better to produce superlative builds with the latest of wizard's offering rather than rehash with nostalgia the cherished builds of previous iterations. prototype00
solbergb 09-12-06, 03:03 PM	Just do your own conversion of the stuff that wasn't updated. (eg, Oozemaster). Strip out the obvious stuff (eg, scrying skill reqs) and look it over for the larger balance shifts (critical stacking, blindsense) or new material (spell lists, can a warlock qualify, blah blah). I don't recommend using the stuff blindly. You need to think about what your'e doing. Eg...there is a place for Deepwood sniper - none of the 3.5 PRC's really capture the concept of a long range sniper that sometimes does decent damage. It's the mirror of OOTBI (an archer that reliably can do short range sniping or close quarters volley fire). Cragtop Archer does the REALLY long range stuff, but isn't really appropriate for a woodland setting. But the stacking crits isn't the right way to go...you probably should replace that ability with some +damage on a crit or something, that improves as the various critboosting class abilities improve. I'd also make woodland archer tactical feat a prereq instead of or in addition to Far shot, and might only give the bonuses on damage when doing the sniping maneuver (not on volley fire), depending on how good it was.
Corzat_the_Gray 09-12-06, 10:45 PM	But I dont think there is a good reason to forbid most of the non updated prc's, like the lasher and the oozemaster, both filling niches that cant otherwise be filled Here! Here! :clap: If we were to allow 3.0 rules in, by the same token, builds using third party sources or even 2.0 and DnD red box rules should be fair for plunder. After all, they are just older versions of exactly the same game. Heck, even starward d20 should be open for use, because the force is exactly like magic isn't it? I would have to disagree with any mention of 2.0 and red box because comparing them to 3.x is like trying to compare apples and oranges. While they are older versions of the same game and that's where the similarity ends. Apples and oranges are both fruits and that's where the similarity ends. As for third party sources... what are those? :rolleyes: I guess I don't even consider third party sources when playing due to the lack of availability in my area and the fact that no one I know and play with would even be able to tell me one other publisher of d20 material besides WoTC. In my opinion, Star Wars and DnD just aren't the same flavor. I enjoy both, but just don't see them mixing. I don't recommend using the stuff blindly. You need to think about what your'e doing. If one goes updating on their own, these are sage words indeed. :tiphat:
fnord 09-12-06, 10:56 PM	If you have questions about anything in particular, we should be able to answer them. It really does need to be done on a case by case basis.
Corzat_the_Gray 09-12-06, 11:08 PM	Wasn't really going for anything specific, I was just wondering what everybody here on the CO boards thought about incorporating 3.0 stuff into 3.5 because of the differing opinions I've seen while lurking. I guess I was trying to see if I could get some sort of consensus on the subject, but from what I'm getting in reply is that it is just too much of a case by case issue to really come to a consensus on whether some 3.0 material that hasn't been updated officially is acceptable or not in 3.5.
prototype00 09-13-06, 04:49 AM	I would have to disagree with any mention of 2.0 and red box because comparing them to 3.x is like trying to compare apples and oranges. While they are older versions of the same game and that's where the similarity ends. Apples and oranges are both fruits and that's where the similarity ends. As for third party sources... what are those? I guess I don't even consider third party sources when playing due to the lack of availability in my area and the fact that no one I know and play with would even be able to tell me one other publisher of d20 material besides WoTC. In my opinion, Star Wars and DnD just aren't the same flavor. I enjoy both, but just don't see them mixing. I'm just pointing out that different systems don't mix, and I can see you agree. Though similar, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who will say that 3.0 and 3.5 are the same system. Hence, they don't mix. prototype00
Gurney_Halleck 09-16-06, 01:03 PM	It really is case by case. In general I let 3.0 material slide. At least as far as nonupdated PrC's and feats, but I usually dissalow it for items. Items in 3.0 seem to be of much lower price. As an aside, is there any 3.5 class that is a updated/good replacement for BeastMaster from MoTW? I really liked being able to control a crud load of critters as a druidesque charachter.
Skadrian 09-16-06, 01:22 PM	the beastmaster from complete adventurer gives a bonus to your animal companion and gives some more, weaker animal companions
Gurney_Halleck 09-16-06, 01:37 PM	Thanks, that seems to be an official replacement. It's a pity it got seriously nerfed, I liked being able to have 20HD worth of animal companions at level 10 :). I mean 80 Ravens rock lol. And the nice Int bonuses are missing too. PS I just noticed that the PrC from MoTW was called Tamer of Beasts, not sure where I got beastmaster from. So maybe this isn't a replacement. Aw well I don't want to hijack an already finished thread any further.