3.0 options in 3.5 games [Archive] - Wizards Community

3.0 options in 3.5 games [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
jktrondarr
11-30-04, 08:49 PM for the most part, i think that 3.5 is better than 3.0.
however, there are several things from 3.0 that i wish they hadn't changed.
the refocus combat option, improved crit & keen weapon not stacking, ambedexterity feat as a prereq for TWF, and the general down-grading of several spells just to name a few.
do any of you still use 3.0 options in your 3.5 games? and if so, which ones have you kept?
DwarvinJedi
11-30-04, 09:44 PM normally I play 3.0, because one of my friend's is adamant about hating 3.5, even though he uses the 3.5 ranger and 3.0 toad familiars :D , but if I were DMing, (soon, hopefully) I will play 3.5 with 3.0 keen/imp crit and spell focus, and maybe some other things
MerricB
12-01-04, 12:21 AM for the most part, i think that 3.5 is better than 3.0.
however, there are several things from 3.0 that i wish they hadn't changed.
the refocus combat option, improved crit & keen weapon not stacking, ambedexterity feat as a prereq for TWF, and the general down-grading of several spells just to name a few.
do any of you still use 3.0 options in your 3.5 games? and if so, which ones have you kept?

They got rid of Refocus? The fiends! I hadn't noticed that before...

There is actually not much of a difference between Refocus and Delay, so the game hasn't lost anything.

Interesting that you object to the downgrading of certain 3.5e spells, whilst preferring the weaker TWF of 3e. :)

I've been using certain 3e prestige classes, but those are likely to be upgraded as the new Complete books are acquired. Mostly, 3.5e all the way.

I've made one house rule, though: Spell Focus gives a +1 to DC if the spell has a non-harmless save, and a +1 caster level otherwise. (I do agree that +2 to DC is Too Good, but I think +1 DC is Too Weak, especially for spells that don't have a DC!)

Cheers!
Arquinsiel
12-01-04, 11:27 AM I pretty much just use 3.0 with a few 3.5 mods. Ranger and bard have been changed to 3.5, fighters can get intimidate as a class skill, the spell changeing for spontaneous casters and a few other minor changes around the place. Overall though it's pretty much the same old game for me.
KelanenPrinceofSwords
12-01-04, 12:30 PM My group plays 3.5, but we've retained some feats that haven't been revised from 3.0, specifically Dirty Fighting - an extra 1d4 damage on every melee attack - what fighter wouldn't take this feat? We apply a stipulation that any damage reduction greater than 3 soaks the extra 1d4 dmg. up, and any creature not subject to critical hits is not subject to Dirty Fighting. There is also an elf fighter/rogue in the campaign who uses a feat from BoED, I forget what its called, but it converts sneak attack dice to d8. We also use a few prestige classes that, so far, haven't been updated, like ninja of the crescent moon. Maybe we will see those roguish prestige classes updated in the Complete Adventurer.
jktrondarr
12-02-04, 08:25 PM Interesting that you object to the downgrading of certain 3.5e spells, whilst preferring the weaker TWF of 3e. :)

i just think that TWF is pretty powerful, and that ambedexterity as a prereq makes alot of sense. that's just the DM side of me tho...the player side is glad it got nixed.
MerricB
12-03-04, 04:01 AM My group plays 3.5, but we've retained some feats that haven't been revised from 3.0, specifically Dirty Fighting - an extra 1d4 damage on every melee attack - what fighter wouldn't take this feat?

You have misread the feat. It only works if you make only ONE attack in the round. Whee. You'll find it clarified in the Sword and Fist FAQ.

From the FAQ:

How does the Circle Kick feat work for a monk or other character with multiple attacks? Or for a monk who uses a flurry of blows? Does each successful unarmed attack roll allow a second attack against a different
opponent?

A character using Circle Kick makes one attack. If this single attack hits, the character makes a second attack at the same attack bonus as the first.

How does the Dirty Fighting feat work with multiple attacks?

Just as with Circle Kick (see previous question), a character using Dirty Fighting makes one attack and adds an extra 1d4 points of damage if the attack succeeds. Dirty fighting is not effective against opponents that are not subject to critical hits.

Dirty Fighting isn’t a bad deal if you’re allowed only one attack a round, but it’s not a great option for high-level characters.

Cheers!

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
jktrondarr 11-30-04, 08:49 PM	for the most part, i think that 3.5 is better than 3.0. however, there are several things from 3.0 that i wish they hadn't changed. the refocus combat option, improved crit & keen weapon not stacking, ambedexterity feat as a prereq for TWF, and the general down-grading of several spells just to name a few. do any of you still use 3.0 options in your 3.5 games? and if so, which ones have you kept?
DwarvinJedi 11-30-04, 09:44 PM	normally I play 3.0, because one of my friend's is adamant about hating 3.5, even though he uses the 3.5 ranger and 3.0 toad familiars :D , but if I were DMing, (soon, hopefully) I will play 3.5 with 3.0 keen/imp crit and spell focus, and maybe some other things
MerricB 12-01-04, 12:21 AM	for the most part, i think that 3.5 is better than 3.0. however, there are several things from 3.0 that i wish they hadn't changed. the refocus combat option, improved crit & keen weapon not stacking, ambedexterity feat as a prereq for TWF, and the general down-grading of several spells just to name a few. do any of you still use 3.0 options in your 3.5 games? and if so, which ones have you kept? They got rid of Refocus? The fiends! I hadn't noticed that before... There is actually not much of a difference between Refocus and Delay, so the game hasn't lost anything. Interesting that you object to the downgrading of certain 3.5e spells, whilst preferring the weaker TWF of 3e. :) I've been using certain 3e prestige classes, but those are likely to be upgraded as the new Complete books are acquired. Mostly, 3.5e all the way. I've made one house rule, though: Spell Focus gives a +1 to DC if the spell has a non-harmless save, and a +1 caster level otherwise. (I do agree that +2 to DC is Too Good, but I think +1 DC is Too Weak, especially for spells that don't have a DC!) Cheers!
Arquinsiel 12-01-04, 11:27 AM	I pretty much just use 3.0 with a few 3.5 mods. Ranger and bard have been changed to 3.5, fighters can get intimidate as a class skill, the spell changeing for spontaneous casters and a few other minor changes around the place. Overall though it's pretty much the same old game for me.
KelanenPrinceofSwords 12-01-04, 12:30 PM	My group plays 3.5, but we've retained some feats that haven't been revised from 3.0, specifically Dirty Fighting - an extra 1d4 damage on every melee attack - what fighter wouldn't take this feat? We apply a stipulation that any damage reduction greater than 3 soaks the extra 1d4 dmg. up, and any creature not subject to critical hits is not subject to Dirty Fighting. There is also an elf fighter/rogue in the campaign who uses a feat from BoED, I forget what its called, but it converts sneak attack dice to d8. We also use a few prestige classes that, so far, haven't been updated, like ninja of the crescent moon. Maybe we will see those roguish prestige classes updated in the Complete Adventurer.
jktrondarr 12-02-04, 08:25 PM	Interesting that you object to the downgrading of certain 3.5e spells, whilst preferring the weaker TWF of 3e. :) i just think that TWF is pretty powerful, and that ambedexterity as a prereq makes alot of sense. that's just the DM side of me tho...the player side is glad it got nixed.
MerricB 12-03-04, 04:01 AM	My group plays 3.5, but we've retained some feats that haven't been revised from 3.0, specifically Dirty Fighting - an extra 1d4 damage on every melee attack - what fighter wouldn't take this feat? You have misread the feat. It only works if you make only ONE attack in the round. Whee. You'll find it clarified in the Sword and Fist FAQ. From the FAQ: How does the Circle Kick feat work for a monk or other character with multiple attacks? Or for a monk who uses a flurry of blows? Does each successful unarmed attack roll allow a second attack against a different opponent? A character using Circle Kick makes one attack. If this single attack hits, the character makes a second attack at the same attack bonus as the first. How does the Dirty Fighting feat work with multiple attacks? Just as with Circle Kick (see previous question), a character using Dirty Fighting makes one attack and adds an extra 1d4 points of damage if the attack succeeds. Dirty fighting is not effective against opponents that are not subject to critical hits. Dirty Fighting isn’t a bad deal if you’re allowed only one attack a round, but it’s not a great option for high-level characters. Cheers!