"Downgrading" to 3.0 (from 3.5) [Archive] - Wizards Community

"Downgrading" to 3.0 (from 3.5) [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
PoeticJustice
10-17-06, 10:36 PM I am unsure if this is the correct place to start this thread.

I run a small university club and am switching to 3.0 for financial reasons (Using Amazon, I can offer my members the books at about 20% the cost of 3.5 books). At this point the switch is inevitable, but I was wondering what concerns DMs had with 3.0 when it was the standard. I never ran 3.0, as I was still playing at that stage.
Anyway, what balance concerns are there within the original system? Anything other than power level concerns regarding Bards, Rangers (underpowered), and Haste(Overpowered). What should I look out for?
Are there any glaring, obvious contradictions, brain farts, and/or muddled rules that will trip me and my player's up? Any more so than the current edition (3.5)

Thanks in advance,
PJ
Inigo Carmine
10-17-06, 11:17 PM A lot of buff spells have very long durations in 3.0, making them much more powerful.
DraconsNighthawk
10-17-06, 11:47 PM Be sure to look at 3.0 harm. Then re-read it. Then read it a third time. Look at saving throw for it. Look at the fact that its a touch spell. No saving throw. That makes it so you haved 1d4 hp. No matter what. Give to all badguys and a quicken magic missile. PCs are screwed by a 12th level cleric.
Nom
10-17-06, 11:49 PM Side comment: the main things in 3.5 that are not in the SRD are:
* character creation and XP / levelling rules.
* Most of the guidance and advice in the DMG.
* Names, such as the iconics, deities, planes, etc.
* Examples and pictures.

Most of this stuff you only need 1 copy of the rulebook anyway. Assuming you have 1 3.5 PH, DMG and MM (MM can be worked around), the poorer players can get by just fine with an SRD copy.

Beyond that, my advice would be to take the 3.0 rules on their own merits. Just forget the 3.5 rules, and read the 3.0 rules. Mostly they'll be comparable, but you'll find it far less confusing if you don't do "like 3.5, but ...".
Thomar_of_Uointer
10-18-06, 02:46 AM I would just recommend you play with a laptop and www.d20srd.org at your side. It's 100% cheaper than the option you were going for in the first place, yes?
Xykon
10-18-06, 06:03 AM There are several differences between the core rule books when compared from 3.0 to 3.5.

1. Player handbook / Player related accessories:[\b]
a. Lots of spells have longer durations. I could remember a campaign when the party was at level 8, the party cleric would give the whole party bull's strength and that would last for the whole day or at least until the party rests again. Gauntlets of ogre strength? who needs those?

2. Stacking issues (i.e. keen + improved critical) I kinda miss my TWF fighter character who had a pair of +2 keen bladed gauntlet from sword and fist and with me having improved critical: bladed gauntlet, which allows me to crit with a roll of 9-20. Its like having a "light" greatsword 60% of the time, on both hands!

3. Nobody plays rangers. Players would just get fighters with the "track" feat if they want something similar to a ranger.

[b]2. Monster Manual / 3.0 Monsters
a. Lots of immunities. Especially outsiders i.e. immune to certain set of energy types. On 3.5 its been downgraded to energy resistance. Be careful if players start to want to be an outsider (i.e. cambion) PC.

b. More lethal abilities. For example: Githyankis can use telekinesis, dimension door, plane shift (i think?) as a level 16 sorceror... at 1 HD. With CR of 1 + class level (IIRC) it would be very lethal. Same with Githzerai, same with dragons. 3.5 had downgraded them.
sorites
10-18-06, 09:28 AM A lot of buff spells have very long durations in 3.0, making them much more powerful.

Yeah, aren't a lot of them 1 hour/level (3.0) instead of 1 min/level (3.5)?

Also, 3.5 makes a broader use of special kinds of DR, like 5/silver, etc. In 3.0 it's all about the enhancement bonus, so you'll see 5/+1 instead of 5/magic. This means you need to be careful about giving out higher enhancement bonus weapons too early. In my 3.0 game, I made the mistake of handing out a +4 weapon way too early; it meant the paladin could bypass almost any creature's DR because virtually no monsters have DR x/+5.

Another thing: I think some powerful spells are easier to cast in 3.0 than 3.5. Like Lesser Planar Ally has no XP cost in 3.0, and I think True Resurrection is more accessible in 3.0 too (but can't remember why off the top of my head).
PoeticJustice
10-18-06, 02:25 PM First I'd like to thank you all for your wonderful input. My DM'ing style lends itself to challenging combat. Given that, I'm really curious about monsters. Are there any other, besides the Gith and Dragons, that are a lot more lethal in 3.0?

I would just recommend you play with a laptop and www.d20srd.org at your side. It's 100% cheaper than the option you were going for in the first place, yes?

That is a fantastic website and anyone who's in a similar postion would do well to make use of it.

However, the books have been ordered, and while using the SRD would be cheaper than a Handbook, Amazon sells 3.0 PHBs for $1.98+shipping. Add in some dice which I will happily sell them from my collection and you can get started on D&D for less than ten bucks.

Given the low cost, it's just more conveniant to have the hardcover sitting in front of you than flip through 200 pages of printer paper.
lears_fool
10-18-06, 02:29 PM You can also just buy the books and print out these. . .

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dnd/20030718a

:)

Though yes, D20srd rocks my world :)
Thomar_of_Uointer
10-18-06, 04:36 PM Given the low cost, it's just more conveniant to have the hardcover sitting in front of you than flip through 200 pages of printer paper.

Ah, too bad. Amazon doesn't do returns? Well, at least check this out:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dnd/20030718a

3.5 is better than 3.0, and would be worth it, especially with the new psionics rules.
PoeticJustice
10-18-06, 07:07 PM Context: My university club (D&D at VCU) consists of 50 members, 40 of which have no prior experience to paper & pencil RPG'ing, much less D&D. Many of those have little or no experience with video game RPGs either. They have little interest in supplemental rules, paying more than ten dollars to game, or what version they play. Nor do I.

3.5 is better than 3.0, and would be worth it, especially with the new psionics rules.

People have suggested the addendum, but I'm not wholly convinced that 3.5 is an improvement on the game. Even if I were, we would again run into the problems faced by using a printed SRD: too much loose paper for me to keep track of, for people to lose, and for too little benefit.

That said, I am still very interested in being as forewarned as possible about 3.0's flaws. Particularly monsters. If anyone has any experience and would like to inform me, I'd be grateful.
lears_fool
10-18-06, 07:21 PM To be honest, I've been playing 3.5 since it came out and still have the 3.0 books. I have a binder somewhere with the upgrade document but between the SRD and that I ended up pretty much memorizing it ;)

The monsters honestly won't be much of an issue for you, the most important changes were in the classes (Ranger and Bard especially) and the mechanics in general.

If you're going with psionics at all the 3.5 system's practically mandatory as it's infinitely superior and better balanced.

The good news is that lots of the changes are things you can handle before the game (since they're tied to the character stats and the spells. .and every player should have all that finished and ready before you start to game), so not having the 3.5 books isn't TOO crippling really.
PoeticJustice
10-19-06, 10:27 AM Since I need to start deprogramming myself from 3.5, I'd like to ask a few questions.

How have weapon sizing rules changed?

Were there any differences in two weapon fighting?

Can anyone offer a good technique for plotting out a semicircle on a hex grid? (sorcerer loves his burning hands)
babysamurai
10-19-06, 11:28 AM Since I need to start deprogramming myself from 3.5, I'd like to ask a few questions.

Were there any differences in two weapon fighting?

Ambidexterity was folded into Two-Weapon Fighting in 3.5.
Thomar_of_Uointer
10-19-06, 11:59 AM Since I need to start deprogramming myself from 3.5, I'd like to ask a few questions.

How have weapon sizing rules changed?

Were there any differences in two weapon fighting?

Can anyone offer a good technique for plotting out a semicircle on a hex grid? (sorcerer loves his burning hands)

There's no penalty for using weapons of different sizes, a Small longsword is the same as a Medium short sword.

Two-Weapon Fighting has another feat that drops the off-hand penalty, Ambidexterity. It's kind of a no-brainer, and part of the reason the Ranger was so weak.

Semicircles? Well, circles on the hex grid are just bigger hexes, simply cut a hex in half, thirds, or sixths. However, burning hands is a cone effect, so it's just a triangle. Just remember that you don't worry about diagonal distances on the hex grid.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
PoeticJustice 10-17-06, 10:36 PM	I am unsure if this is the correct place to start this thread. I run a small university club and am switching to 3.0 for financial reasons (Using Amazon, I can offer my members the books at about 20% the cost of 3.5 books). At this point the switch is inevitable, but I was wondering what concerns DMs had with 3.0 when it was the standard. I never ran 3.0, as I was still playing at that stage. Anyway, what balance concerns are there within the original system? Anything other than power level concerns regarding Bards, Rangers (underpowered), and Haste(Overpowered). What should I look out for? Are there any glaring, obvious contradictions, brain farts, and/or muddled rules that will trip me and my player's up? Any more so than the current edition (3.5) Thanks in advance, PJ
Inigo Carmine 10-17-06, 11:17 PM	A lot of buff spells have very long durations in 3.0, making them much more powerful.
DraconsNighthawk 10-17-06, 11:47 PM	Be sure to look at 3.0 harm. Then re-read it. Then read it a third time. Look at saving throw for it. Look at the fact that its a touch spell. No saving throw. That makes it so you haved 1d4 hp. No matter what. Give to all badguys and a quicken magic missile. PCs are screwed by a 12th level cleric.
Nom 10-17-06, 11:49 PM	Side comment: the main things in 3.5 that are not in the SRD are: * character creation and XP / levelling rules. * Most of the guidance and advice in the DMG. * Names, such as the iconics, deities, planes, etc. * Examples and pictures. Most of this stuff you only need 1 copy of the rulebook anyway. Assuming you have 1 3.5 PH, DMG and MM (MM can be worked around), the poorer players can get by just fine with an SRD copy. Beyond that, my advice would be to take the 3.0 rules on their own merits. Just forget the 3.5 rules, and read the 3.0 rules. Mostly they'll be comparable, but you'll find it far less confusing if you don't do "like 3.5, but ...".
Thomar_of_Uointer 10-18-06, 02:46 AM	I would just recommend you play with a laptop and www.d20srd.org at your side. It's 100% cheaper than the option you were going for in the first place, yes?
Xykon 10-18-06, 06:03 AM	There are several differences between the core rule books when compared from 3.0 to 3.5. 1. Player handbook / Player related accessories:[\b] a. Lots of spells have longer durations. I could remember a campaign when the party was at level 8, the party cleric would give the whole party bull's strength and that would last for the whole day or at least until the party rests again. Gauntlets of ogre strength? who needs those? 2. Stacking issues (i.e. keen + improved critical) I kinda miss my TWF fighter character who had a pair of +2 keen bladed gauntlet from sword and fist and with me having improved critical: bladed gauntlet, which allows me to crit with a roll of 9-20. Its like having a "light" greatsword 60% of the time, on both hands! 3. Nobody plays rangers. Players would just get fighters with the "track" feat if they want something similar to a ranger. [b]2. Monster Manual / 3.0 Monsters a. Lots of immunities. Especially outsiders i.e. immune to certain set of energy types. On 3.5 its been downgraded to energy resistance. Be careful if players start to want to be an outsider (i.e. cambion) PC. b. More lethal abilities. For example: Githyankis can use telekinesis, dimension door, plane shift (i think?) as a level 16 sorceror... at 1 HD. With CR of 1 + class level (IIRC) it would be very lethal. Same with Githzerai, same with dragons. 3.5 had downgraded them.
sorites 10-18-06, 09:28 AM	A lot of buff spells have very long durations in 3.0, making them much more powerful. Yeah, aren't a lot of them 1 hour/level (3.0) instead of 1 min/level (3.5)? Also, 3.5 makes a broader use of special kinds of DR, like 5/silver, etc. In 3.0 it's all about the enhancement bonus, so you'll see 5/+1 instead of 5/magic. This means you need to be careful about giving out higher enhancement bonus weapons too early. In my 3.0 game, I made the mistake of handing out a +4 weapon way too early; it meant the paladin could bypass almost any creature's DR because virtually no monsters have DR x/+5. Another thing: I think some powerful spells are easier to cast in 3.0 than 3.5. Like Lesser Planar Ally has no XP cost in 3.0, and I think True Resurrection is more accessible in 3.0 too (but can't remember why off the top of my head).
PoeticJustice 10-18-06, 02:25 PM	First I'd like to thank you all for your wonderful input. My DM'ing style lends itself to challenging combat. Given that, I'm really curious about monsters. Are there any other, besides the Gith and Dragons, that are a lot more lethal in 3.0? I would just recommend you play with a laptop and www.d20srd.org at your side. It's 100% cheaper than the option you were going for in the first place, yes? That is a fantastic website and anyone who's in a similar postion would do well to make use of it. However, the books have been ordered, and while using the SRD would be cheaper than a Handbook, Amazon sells 3.0 PHBs for $1.98+shipping. Add in some dice which I will happily sell them from my collection and you can get started on D&D for less than ten bucks. Given the low cost, it's just more conveniant to have the hardcover sitting in front of you than flip through 200 pages of printer paper.
lears_fool 10-18-06, 02:29 PM	You can also just buy the books and print out these. . . http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dnd/20030718a :) Though yes, D20srd rocks my world :)
Thomar_of_Uointer 10-18-06, 04:36 PM	Given the low cost, it's just more conveniant to have the hardcover sitting in front of you than flip through 200 pages of printer paper. Ah, too bad. Amazon doesn't do returns? Well, at least check this out: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dnd/20030718a 3.5 is better than 3.0, and would be worth it, especially with the new psionics rules.
PoeticJustice 10-18-06, 07:07 PM	Context: My university club (D&D at VCU) consists of 50 members, 40 of which have no prior experience to paper & pencil RPG'ing, much less D&D. Many of those have little or no experience with video game RPGs either. They have little interest in supplemental rules, paying more than ten dollars to game, or what version they play. Nor do I. 3.5 is better than 3.0, and would be worth it, especially with the new psionics rules. People have suggested the addendum, but I'm not wholly convinced that 3.5 is an improvement on the game. Even if I were, we would again run into the problems faced by using a printed SRD: too much loose paper for me to keep track of, for people to lose, and for too little benefit. That said, I am still very interested in being as forewarned as possible about 3.0's flaws. Particularly monsters. If anyone has any experience and would like to inform me, I'd be grateful.
lears_fool 10-18-06, 07:21 PM	To be honest, I've been playing 3.5 since it came out and still have the 3.0 books. I have a binder somewhere with the upgrade document but between the SRD and that I ended up pretty much memorizing it ;) The monsters honestly won't be much of an issue for you, the most important changes were in the classes (Ranger and Bard especially) and the mechanics in general. If you're going with psionics at all the 3.5 system's practically mandatory as it's infinitely superior and better balanced. The good news is that lots of the changes are things you can handle before the game (since they're tied to the character stats and the spells. .and every player should have all that finished and ready before you start to game), so not having the 3.5 books isn't TOO crippling really.
PoeticJustice 10-19-06, 10:27 AM	Since I need to start deprogramming myself from 3.5, I'd like to ask a few questions. How have weapon sizing rules changed? Were there any differences in two weapon fighting? Can anyone offer a good technique for plotting out a semicircle on a hex grid? (sorcerer loves his burning hands)
babysamurai 10-19-06, 11:28 AM	Since I need to start deprogramming myself from 3.5, I'd like to ask a few questions. Were there any differences in two weapon fighting? Ambidexterity was folded into Two-Weapon Fighting in 3.5.
Thomar_of_Uointer 10-19-06, 11:59 AM	Since I need to start deprogramming myself from 3.5, I'd like to ask a few questions. How have weapon sizing rules changed? Were there any differences in two weapon fighting? Can anyone offer a good technique for plotting out a semicircle on a hex grid? (sorcerer loves his burning hands) There's no penalty for using weapons of different sizes, a Small longsword is the same as a Medium short sword. Two-Weapon Fighting has another feat that drops the off-hand penalty, Ambidexterity. It's kind of a no-brainer, and part of the reason the Ranger was so weak. Semicircles? Well, circles on the hex grid are just bigger hexes, simply cut a hex in half, thirds, or sixths. However, burning hands is a cone effect, so it's just a triangle. Just remember that you don't worry about diagonal distances on the hex grid.