30 replies to this topic

[Ayre el KaBeer]

Ok so what are you're opinions of Dungeons and Dragons 3.5 edition?

[Bahamut810]

*note- I have not bought or read this yet*

It is just another way for WoTC to get our card earned cash for something that should either be errata or included in the first edition of that edition.

[SnakeEyes]

Well, I've got the third edition. So I don't see the point in buying 3.5, as I have all three core books from #3. I have to agree with Bahamut on the errata issue.

And I don't particularly like the third edition anyway. It's designed for complete hack 'n slash, which got boring, which is why I went for the Storyteller system.

Is 3.5 any better? I have a friend who might (that's only a might though) be interested in getting it... (I had to lend him mine.)

[Finbar]

And I don't particularly like the third edition anyway. It's designed for complete hack 'n slash, which got boring, which is why I went for the Storyteller system.

First time I've ever seen defeating a guard by fooling him (and geting full XP for it)defined as hack and slash....

No offense, Snake Eyes, but whereas there are a number of combat feats, there a huge number of feats that are best used either away from combat or even in non-combat situations. Also, the skills system is a definite step up from the previous versions, and encourages more non-combat role-playing (such as going to parties and trading)...But I'm guessing your games see a lot of full-contat chess ::sneaky2 ?

FR

[Joseph]

This debate was covered in another topic, Finbar. Please leave well enough alone.

Thank you.

-Joseph

[SnakeEyes]

Finbar- DnD was designed for Hack n Slash. Have you ever read the Dungeon Master's Guide? It was written with combat in mind. Why do you think they brought out the Monster Manual? For extra traders in the market place? No. More violent enemies. Sure you can outwit an orc, or a group of goblins, but as you read through the books, you see more and more combat or dungeon crawl rules.

But I'm guessing your games see a lot of full-contat chess  ?

What's full contact chess? Is it like rugby, but with nights an queens? (Imagine going up against a castle)

Ok. I'm through with this argument. Anyone for Elderflower tea?

[Ayre el KaBeer]

Ok I'll try that again, are 3.5 rules any better than 3.0? Have they caused more problems in your dnd games or instead streamlined them?

[Finbar]

1) Sorry...It's just that D&D players have put a lot of work on things like alternative societies, discussions re: alignment, and worried about the social implications of a lot of magic, but these get lost in the hack 'n' slash stereotype. It just gets annoying because, whereas most of the on-line people praise the ST for role-playing, most of the ST players I know want to know who has the biggest gun/most powerful ability. It doesn't help that most of my players role-play in D&D and kill-maim-destroy in ST...

Basically, you can role-play or power-game any game, but way too many people are stuck on "D&D=hack 'n' slash, ST=role-play" stereotype...

2) I like some of the changes (the ways actions have been streamlined, for example), but we're still getting used to some of the spell durations, which is causing some minor chaos with are spell-casters. Also, I like the expanded prestige classes (I liked someo of the ones given, but wasn't able to pick up the book they first appeared in, like the arcane trickster)...

Also, I like the re-design of the character sheet, even though there's not enough room for some spells (I like writing up different lists for different situations (like the marketplace vs. dungeon), and too much for weapons/ammo. It would have been nice to an expanded notes section as well...

Overall, it's not bad, and I definitely like the new rules overall, but I wish they would have just put out a book with all of the changes in it. It's good to have the revised books out there for new players, but it gets sorta old to buy a new set of books just keep up to date...


FR

[Bahamut810]

Ok...I would like to reiterate that this is not a DnDer=hacknslash/ dosent like to RP person.  I have always found that it is in the players the decide which it is, but thats not the discussion here.

THanks for that info there finbar.  Any more revelations come abuot...please tell us.

So far though, you havent said anyhting in there that couldent have been put in as errata...or hey...why not have had them in the first print.

OF course im singing the same old tune as my last post...but hey...thats how I feel.

[Aninemity]

hey guys, i think this one has been beat into the ground....

...again and again and again and again.....

let's all just agree to disagree, shall we??  hmmm?  

now everyone go and play nice.

[Bahamut810]

play nice?  Why would we want to do that?

[Ayre el KaBeer]

Because the moderator told you too   .

[Bahamut810]

And do you always do what your momm...errr...moderator tells you to do? ::devilangel

[Ayre el KaBeer]

Yes. Yes I do. I am a moderators boy, you see?

[Bahamut810]

Haha!!  Moderators boy!

*attaches Ayre's underware to a flag pole and hoists them up for all to see...it looks really painful too as Ayre is still in them*

Thats what j00 get for being a moderators boy!

[Ayre el KaBeer]

Just remember these faitfull words...

ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US!

[Bahamut810]

I thought that was

ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO BAHAMUT810

[Ayre el KaBeer]

Nah that was a typo.

[Bahamut810]

Are you sure?  They sing that in thier little song I think.  And you have to remember...there are apparently 810 Bahamuts, so US would more accuratley referto...well...us.

[Defender]

Don't make me pull this forum over and come back there. . .

-Defender.    

[Finbar]

Gee...I wanted to know how you felt about the ranger class changes, and see that the AYB joke has taken over...AUGH! ::crazy

FR

[Ayre el KaBeer]

HEHEHEHE...


Ok finbar tell me about the ranger class, is it better than the Mote Cook ranger (it would have to be better than the 3.0 ranger that's for sure)? I heard there was some change to the monk, sorcerer, and the blackguard but noone had the time to give me any info or opinions about them... Hate to say it  but I'm actually interested, the only fun DnD give me is character creation, it always gets my hopes up for a good game.

[Finbar]

If you're ever in Sacramento...

You seriously need to look at the pdf from Wizard of the Coast, which summarizes a lot of the changes. I think you'll be very, very happy....(fighting on staircases; time to crank up that Errol Flynn campaign idea ).....

FR

[Finbar]

BTW, I take back some of what I said about the character sheet; I just took a closer look, and it has spaces for info that would have been nice to see on the original (like how much a load is fo the character and grapple info)...Still too many spaces for attacks/defenses, and I wish there was a notes, section, but overall it's got some nice improvements...

FR

[harlequin]

Yes. Yes I do. I am a moderators boy, you see?

*thud*

            

[Dr. Arbitrary]

I'm pretty sure that the reason for 3.5 is the open content thingy. I've heard that 3.5 is not supposed to be compatible with previous supplements (or independent ones). I guess they decided that they weren't happy with the way D20 was working out financially. Furthermore, rumor has it that WotC is offering distributors 50% of the price of 3rd Ed in exchange for 3.5th edition, the same thing they did with 2nd.

Don't take this as fact, just speculation

By the way, anyone want to make a bet that Steven Jackson Games makes a Munchkin 3.5?

Dr. A

[Finbar]

1) So far it looks like it is somewhat compatible; most of the changes were just little tweaks. Also, Dragon magazine has been publishing updates on the revision, so any publishers that paid attention should be okay. About the only exception are those that depended heavily on the ranger class, and I can only think of a few...

2) You need to keep in mind that the OGL has basically been such an explosion that I doubt that WotC would really do something that silly. Besides, enough of the supplements are D&D-related that I think the OGL was a really good idea...

FR

[Dr. Arbitrary]

The question is, however, did they make ENOUGH money. It's obvious that there had to be a financial (or something else -not- related to making the game better) reason for the change, otherwise they would have called it D+D 4th Ed.

Dr. A

[Bahamut810]

You see thing is that is that im sure they *were* making as much (if not more) money as they were in the hey-day of 2e.  They are just getting greedy.  It would have been a lot more player-frriendly to just put out a "official errata" book with changes.

[Ayre el KaBeer]

Just had a look through the new Players Handbook 3.5, I was unimpressed to say the least... Though I like what they've done with the classes, especially the druid, and some of the abilities (err... skills) overall it clearly wasn't worth the money many people (several friends of mine included) spent on the PHB. The book looks and feels the same as the last, except with far more typo's, I've checked the net and found that there are over 100 pieces for the errata that'll be updated in later releases... Really 100 wouldn't be all that much for a newly released game but 3.5 is so similar to 3.0, that there shouldn't have been that many mistakes. I've yet to look through the DMG (Dungeon Masters Guide) and MM (Monster Manual), though I'm told as updated books go they're better than the PHB as the changes go... More on this when I wrench those books from the hands of the evil DnD'er freinds of mine (it's gonna be a while).

P.S. WOTC are making an absolute killing with the new release of DnD, despite the number of people refusing to buy the books, it seems people (you know.. the gamer type) who were always currious about DnD are loading up on the books. I think 3.5 is currently in it's 3rd print.