3.0 vs 3.5 Discussion. [Archive] - Wizards Community

3.0 vs 3.5 Discussion. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Ramius_Mordale
02-23-04, 12:52 PM Alright I've been reading the boards and some people A) like 3.0 or B) like 3.5. Now without making things personal people (that means no emotions just rational conversation), lets just have a good clean fun discussion on the matter. Now personally I thought some spells were unnecessarily changed for 3.5 but for the most part I liked the changes made. It seems to me, at least, that it focuses more on RPing then just the mechanics. Plus they revised those prestige classes I thought always looked a tad off. But I believe the way the DR system is set up now is a heck of a lot better then 3.0. Yeah it sucks that you have to get certain materials and weapons to kill things, but to me that brings more role playing to the table. Say you are going to the nine hells, better go on a little side quest in order to find some cold iron weapons enchanted to take those beasts of darkness down.

Plus I like how they condensed some skills and feats into each other. They give you a little more room to make the sort of character you invision in my opinion.

Well thats a little of what I believe. Now as I said before keep the conversation clean and unemotional, and respect other people and their posts. Thanks.
StormKnight
02-23-04, 01:05 PM Changes I have noticed from 3.0 to 3.5 so far -

Ranger Changes - hit dice down from d10 to d8, more different abilities, more skill points. Makes the ranger much more interesting and different of a class to play.

Skill Changes - rolled a few skills into others. Great change; they were all redundant.

Formatting - much, much nicer. The tables have nice alternating highlight bars which are much easier to read, weapons and such are more condensed.

Weapon Sizes - hm. Can't comment, have yet to have a non-medium sized character in either system. New way seems a little more complicated, but more realistic.

DR - a huge improvement. One of the great staples of fantasy style is that you sometimes need a certain kind of weapon to fight a certain kind of monster.

Spells - well, I haven't really seen any of the nerfs in play in either set of rules, but everything I have heard sounds like they changed some unbalanced, overpowered spells into balanced out but still handy spells. I can't imagine why this would be a bad thing.

Switching to square sizes on all creatures - hurray! A little abstraction is well worth not having to muddle out facing rules for some kinds of creatures.

I haven't yet seen anything that I liked less about 3.5.
Sir Elton
02-23-04, 05:29 PM I don't like miniatures, so I don't use them. So some of the rules in 3.5 don't apply to my game.
q'afuu
02-23-04, 07:13 PM I don't use them either. I don't see how not using minis (or anything to do with a battle grid and markers) in any way invalidates 3.5 rules. Could you tell me which rules you had to toss out because you didn't want to use minis?
Sir Elton
02-23-04, 09:40 PM Just Space (which entirely depends on minis), especially when I do my games on MSN Messenger.

I use Face/Reach from 3.0. Everything else in 3.5 I keep. Grapple is okay, the new rules about DR are fantastic. I keep attacks of opportunity (which reminds me, my brother fell victim to an AoC in real life, so i use them. AoCs are very realistic).

So it's really Space that I totally ignore. Miniatures, to me, are a waste of time since I want to focus more on the roleplaying aspect. Heh, must be the Thespian in me.
NestroEmichae
02-23-04, 09:53 PM About the only thing from 3.5 I use is the Item Creation Rules, and my players (who didn't say a word when we converted from 2E to 3E) spent three months straight :censored::censored::censored::censored: :censored:ing about that and still bring it up at times. An attempt to convert to 3.5 failed because they gave up partway through the conversion process.

That said, I've already stated my opinions of 3.5. There is quite a bit of it that doesn't quite match up to sense. The old DR system, while still needing work, didn't need to be converted that much.

Why do I say that? One person once said that magic beats magic. That is true in that equal magics cancel and stronger magics beat weaker magics. The differing weapon enhancement requirements reflect that. So does SR. However, the current system leaves the reason why SR was left in questionable for other than challenge.

Another thing is the way they played with Clerics. I actually like the mass inflict and cure spells (it would make sense for them to develop certain mass spells to save spell usage), but I don't like how clerics have a more damaging spell selection now. They simply seem to have more powerful spells than the wizards have (note this is my opinion).

Another thing I have a problem with is how dragonhide is now core. That means you can have a druid wearing full plate and still able to cast spells, and they already had a powerful set-up without some of the buffing. But, that is just my personal taste.

One thing I do like about class changes is how they changed the ranger. I've been thinking about implementing that but haven't gotten around to it yet.

That's just the start of the list. It only gets worse, and more likely to result in a flamewar, if continued.
Sir Elton
02-23-04, 10:01 PM It's okay Nestro. A public board invites inquiry and debate on the Web. Some people still play AD&D, AD&D 2nd, and D&D 3rd. And they are all welcome to talk about D&D on these boards.

The rules system doesn't matter, it's how you play the game. :D
Kaya Kenobi
02-23-04, 10:19 PM http://www.users.bigpond.com/steven_cooper/dnd/dnd-revised.htm

Shows a lot of the changes in the PHB and DMG..

Just to note, it will be impossible to have a good and polite discussion because to date almost every thread has erupted into a flame war save a few...
Draco Argentum
02-23-04, 10:30 PM Dragonhide is in my 3.0 MM Nestro.
NestroEmichae
02-23-04, 10:40 PM Originally posted by Draco Argentum
Dragonhide is in my 3.0 MM Nestro.

To be honest, I never bothered to read that before. The fact it is there, and mixed in in that way, almost suggests it was hidden on purpose. However, it wasn't in the DMG and thus prevented most people from using it. Now it is in the DMG.
Krissy
02-23-04, 10:50 PM Why I DO NOT play 3.5:

[list=1]
Just got all the 3.0 books, and started my campaign last year. Having to re-write and adjust all the Character Sheets would a pain in backside.
All my source books are 3.0, except for two: Complete Warrior and Savage Species.
I'm COMPLETELY broke. To pick up another $130.00 Canadian in BOOKS is absolutley NUTS! Even with a job, I wouldn't make nearly that much.
If I buy 3.5, when the 4.0 books come out, I'll be obliged to burn a hole in my bank account to buy those too. I'm a conservative, stubborn donkey when it comes to this kind of stuff
[/list=1]
Ramius_Mordale
02-24-04, 02:15 AM HELLO! Whoa! Slow down there bettsy! Alright people lets not make this a shouting match and get a riot started. Cause some of these post are getting borderline and I'm sure a moderator is watching this post out of the corner of their eye (Sssshhhh! They are watching.) *Chuckles* All I wanted was a friendly debate on 3.0 vs 3.5 ladies and gents. Not a holy war massing the cosmos to the ultimate battle for dominance. *Grin* Thats why you play video games =P. No this is just about asking some questions of what you like and/or dislike about either one. Hey I'm here to agree I blew a load of cash on 3.0 but of course I got it when it first hit the shelves. Heh... my group calls me the Portable Candlekeep/Library.

Hey and I still love 3.0 people just as I love 3.5 but some things gotta change in order to improve on it. Hey and sometimes I and whoever in my group is DMing at the time usually still use 3.0 for somethings 3.5 doesn't explain well. And yes I don't use Minis either cause I already have blown my money away with a nuke. Primarily I enjoy it when I have to visualize the battle in my imagination, then on a board. 'Cause from my point of view if I wanted to play a board game I probably wouldn't need to play D&D. And again I say thats my opinion.

So please people keep it clean and just talk about your opinion of the game and don't think your opinion is wrong. Because no opinion can be wrong =P. Just discuss how you personally view 3.0 vs 3.5. Thanks.

*Snap* Get going you damn horses. Whoohaa! ;)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Ramius_Mordale 02-23-04, 12:52 PM	Alright I've been reading the boards and some people A) like 3.0 or B) like 3.5. Now without making things personal people (that means no emotions just rational conversation), lets just have a good clean fun discussion on the matter. Now personally I thought some spells were unnecessarily changed for 3.5 but for the most part I liked the changes made. It seems to me, at least, that it focuses more on RPing then just the mechanics. Plus they revised those prestige classes I thought always looked a tad off. But I believe the way the DR system is set up now is a heck of a lot better then 3.0. Yeah it sucks that you have to get certain materials and weapons to kill things, but to me that brings more role playing to the table. Say you are going to the nine hells, better go on a little side quest in order to find some cold iron weapons enchanted to take those beasts of darkness down. Plus I like how they condensed some skills and feats into each other. They give you a little more room to make the sort of character you invision in my opinion. Well thats a little of what I believe. Now as I said before keep the conversation clean and unemotional, and respect other people and their posts. Thanks.
StormKnight 02-23-04, 01:05 PM	Changes I have noticed from 3.0 to 3.5 so far - Ranger Changes - hit dice down from d10 to d8, more different abilities, more skill points. Makes the ranger much more interesting and different of a class to play. Skill Changes - rolled a few skills into others. Great change; they were all redundant. Formatting - much, much nicer. The tables have nice alternating highlight bars which are much easier to read, weapons and such are more condensed. Weapon Sizes - hm. Can't comment, have yet to have a non-medium sized character in either system. New way seems a little more complicated, but more realistic. DR - a huge improvement. One of the great staples of fantasy style is that you sometimes need a certain kind of weapon to fight a certain kind of monster. Spells - well, I haven't really seen any of the nerfs in play in either set of rules, but everything I have heard sounds like they changed some unbalanced, overpowered spells into balanced out but still handy spells. I can't imagine why this would be a bad thing. Switching to square sizes on all creatures - hurray! A little abstraction is well worth not having to muddle out facing rules for some kinds of creatures. I haven't yet seen anything that I liked less about 3.5.
Sir Elton 02-23-04, 05:29 PM	I don't like miniatures, so I don't use them. So some of the rules in 3.5 don't apply to my game.
q'afuu 02-23-04, 07:13 PM	I don't use them either. I don't see how not using minis (or anything to do with a battle grid and markers) in any way invalidates 3.5 rules. Could you tell me which rules you had to toss out because you didn't want to use minis?
Sir Elton 02-23-04, 09:40 PM	Just Space (which entirely depends on minis), especially when I do my games on MSN Messenger. I use Face/Reach from 3.0. Everything else in 3.5 I keep. Grapple is okay, the new rules about DR are fantastic. I keep attacks of opportunity (which reminds me, my brother fell victim to an AoC in real life, so i use them. AoCs are very realistic). So it's really Space that I totally ignore. Miniatures, to me, are a waste of time since I want to focus more on the roleplaying aspect. Heh, must be the Thespian in me.
NestroEmichae 02-23-04, 09:53 PM	About the only thing from 3.5 I use is the Item Creation Rules, and my players (who didn't say a word when we converted from 2E to 3E) spent three months straight :censored::censored::censored::censored: :censored:ing about that and still bring it up at times. An attempt to convert to 3.5 failed because they gave up partway through the conversion process. That said, I've already stated my opinions of 3.5. There is quite a bit of it that doesn't quite match up to sense. The old DR system, while still needing work, didn't need to be converted that much. Why do I say that? One person once said that magic beats magic. That is true in that equal magics cancel and stronger magics beat weaker magics. The differing weapon enhancement requirements reflect that. So does SR. However, the current system leaves the reason why SR was left in questionable for other than challenge. Another thing is the way they played with Clerics. I actually like the mass inflict and cure spells (it would make sense for them to develop certain mass spells to save spell usage), but I don't like how clerics have a more damaging spell selection now. They simply seem to have more powerful spells than the wizards have (note this is my opinion). Another thing I have a problem with is how dragonhide is now core. That means you can have a druid wearing full plate and still able to cast spells, and they already had a powerful set-up without some of the buffing. But, that is just my personal taste. One thing I do like about class changes is how they changed the ranger. I've been thinking about implementing that but haven't gotten around to it yet. That's just the start of the list. It only gets worse, and more likely to result in a flamewar, if continued.
Sir Elton 02-23-04, 10:01 PM	It's okay Nestro. A public board invites inquiry and debate on the Web. Some people still play AD&D, AD&D 2nd, and D&D 3rd. And they are all welcome to talk about D&D on these boards. The rules system doesn't matter, it's how you play the game. :D
Kaya Kenobi 02-23-04, 10:19 PM	http://www.users.bigpond.com/steven_cooper/dnd/dnd-revised.htm Shows a lot of the changes in the PHB and DMG.. Just to note, it will be impossible to have a good and polite discussion because to date almost every thread has erupted into a flame war save a few...
Draco Argentum 02-23-04, 10:30 PM	Dragonhide is in my 3.0 MM Nestro.
NestroEmichae 02-23-04, 10:40 PM	Originally posted by Draco Argentum Dragonhide is in my 3.0 MM Nestro. To be honest, I never bothered to read that before. The fact it is there, and mixed in in that way, almost suggests it was hidden on purpose. However, it wasn't in the DMG and thus prevented most people from using it. Now it is in the DMG.
Krissy 02-23-04, 10:50 PM	Why I DO NOT play 3.5: [list=1] Just got all the 3.0 books, and started my campaign last year. Having to re-write and adjust all the Character Sheets would a pain in backside. All my source books are 3.0, except for two: Complete Warrior and Savage Species. I'm COMPLETELY broke. To pick up another $130.00 Canadian in BOOKS is absolutley NUTS! Even with a job, I wouldn't make nearly that much. If I buy 3.5, when the 4.0 books come out, I'll be obliged to burn a hole in my bank account to buy those too. I'm a conservative, stubborn donkey when it comes to this kind of stuff [/list=1]
Ramius_Mordale 02-24-04, 02:15 AM	HELLO! Whoa! Slow down there bettsy! Alright people lets not make this a shouting match and get a riot started. Cause some of these post are getting borderline and I'm sure a moderator is watching this post out of the corner of their eye (Sssshhhh! They are watching.) Chuckles All I wanted was a friendly debate on 3.0 vs 3.5 ladies and gents. Not a holy war massing the cosmos to the ultimate battle for dominance. Grin Thats why you play video games =P. No this is just about asking some questions of what you like and/or dislike about either one. Hey I'm here to agree I blew a load of cash on 3.0 but of course I got it when it first hit the shelves. Heh... my group calls me the Portable Candlekeep/Library. Hey and I still love 3.0 people just as I love 3.5 but some things gotta change in order to improve on it. Hey and sometimes I and whoever in my group is DMing at the time usually still use 3.0 for somethings 3.5 doesn't explain well. And yes I don't use Minis either cause I already have blown my money away with a nuke. Primarily I enjoy it when I have to visualize the battle in my imagination, then on a board. 'Cause from my point of view if I wanted to play a board game I probably wouldn't need to play D&D. And again I say thats my opinion. So please people keep it clean and just talk about your opinion of the game and don't think your opinion is wrong. Because no opinion can be wrong =P. Just discuss how you personally view 3.0 vs 3.5. Thanks. Snap Get going you damn horses. Whoohaa! ;)