* * * Wizards Community Thread * * * -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Thread : Those were the days - what's it like now? Started at 03-15-04 09:49 PM by TheVillageofHommlet Visit at http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=202044 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 1] Author : TheVillageofHommlet Date : 03-15-04 09:49 PM Thread Title : Those were the days - what's it like now? Well, I was going through my old gaming stuff the other day. I got into D&D with the blue book in the dragon on the box. Wow. That was 21 years ago. I was really keen on Blackmoor. What is the new 3.5 like in comparison to the AD&D system? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 2] Author : Edgewaters Date : 03-15-04 11:07 PM *scratches head* Why would you ask this in the out of print forum, of all places? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 3] Author : TheVillageofHommlet Date : 03-15-04 11:16 PM Thread Title : Well, obviously because some of you might relate. And maybe be able to tell me what v3.5x is all about. Surely to god someone can give me a simple "well, this is what is different". After all, the WOTC site is crap, and is just chock-full of products, without so much as a simple "Getting Started" section. Blech. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 4] Author : Greyhack Date : 03-16-04 04:45 AM Thread Title : Re: Well, obviously because some of you might relate. Originally posted by TheVillageofHommlet After all, the WOTC site is crap, and is just chock-full of products, without so much as a simple "Getting Started" section. Blech. There used to be a section of the site (reached at www.playdnd.com) that was just that, but it seems to be gone now. Here's the basic breakdown of the differences between 3e/3.5e and earlier editions. Armor class is "backwards" now: Instead of starting at 10 and going down, it starts at ten and goes up. To attack someone, you roll d20, add your hit bonuses and try to get equal or higher than their AC. All game mechanics use that generic "d20 + modifier >= target number": Skill checks, saving throws, etc Saving throws have been condensed into 3 basic categories; Willpower, Reflex and Fortitude Skills are now an integrated focal point of the game, instead of an optional add-on In addition to skills, there are now feats, which are essentially just "super skills" that give you new abilities, enhance existing ones, etc Everyone can multiclass now, but the actual mechanic used is more similar to 1e and 2e human dual classing. Basically, whenever you gain a level, you can switch classes, going back and forth and mixing it up however you like. There's other minor things, and a lot of "differences" that really depend on your style of play, like power level of PCs and Monsters, emphasis on multiclassing, etc. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 5] Author : beavis123 Date : 03-16-04 05:55 AM Thread Title : the voice of reason I have to agree. This is the out of print section. I think the discussion of 3e should be somewhere else. Not a lecture, but a sermon -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 6] Author : Edgewaters Date : 03-16-04 06:29 AM Thread Title : Re: Well, obviously because some of you might relate. Originally posted by TheVillageofHommlet And maybe be able to tell me what v3.5x is all about. Surely to god someone can give me a simple "well, this is what is different". After all, the WOTC site is crap, and is just chock-full of products, without so much as a simple "Getting Started" section. Blech. Well the problem is, if I tell you my honest opinion, it will likely start some kind of thing with all the fans, who can't stop talking about it. I simply suggest that it's not for everyone, alot of players of older editions really don't think much of it, etc. But if we go too deep into this discussion of course a gaggle of fans will be here in moments to yip yap. Doesn't matter that they trash older editions with abandon on their 30 billion forums, they have to be allowed to do it on ours too or we're being "unfair", and God forbid we should say anything bad about their precious video game on paper. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 7] Author : Algolei Date : 03-16-04 06:38 AM Thread Title : Re: Re: Well, obviously because some of you might relate. Yes, most of us will have only bad things to say about 3rd edition. And with good cause! ;) Originally posted by Greyhack many points There's also the difference in XP--characters gain a level pretty much every gaming session now. no racial limitations on classes available or level limits--anybody can be anything. every monster gets compete stats--Str, Dex, Con, Int, Wis, Cha. most numbers are enlarged--for instance, Fighters begin with the equivalent of a 19 THAC0, regular two-handed swords do 2d6 damage, and monsters get more HD than in previous editions and also gain Constitution bonuses, just like PCs, on every HD. critical hits are a core rule, no longer optional. (I hope that does it justice. Tried not to say anything bad about it, but my own personal opinion is that they did most of this stuff the wrong way.) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 8] Author : Yorlum Date : 03-16-04 07:56 AM One more thing about XP. Everyone levels at the same points, instead of having class-specific advancement charts. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 9] Author : TheVillageofHommlet Date : 03-16-04 08:58 AM Thread Title : Sounds like 1e for me. Well, I fully expected Beavis to show up. That guy is all over these OOP threads, to promote the "video game on paper". I can't see myself liking 3e after all that you guys have said. No restrictions on race and class? What is up with that? There are restrictions for reasons, like better gameplay and well-written flavour. No, I am quite happy with my 1e thanks. Just need to find some people to start up a game with again. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 10] Author : Edgewaters Date : 03-16-04 10:03 AM Thread Title : Re: Sounds like 1e for me. Originally posted by TheVillageofHommlet Well, I fully expected Beavis to show up. That guy is all over these OOP threads, to promote the "video game on paper". I can't see myself liking 3e after all that you guys have said. No restrictions on race and class? What is up with that? There are restrictions for reasons, like better gameplay and well-written flavour. No, I am quite happy with my 1e thanks. Just need to find some people to start up a game with again. There is sometimes a 1e or OD&D game open here: http://dndgamer.com/ -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 11] Author : Hugin Date : 03-19-04 06:38 PM I think the main point here is that 3.x is different . IMHO, it isn't worse and it isn't better, it's just different. I have the habit, as many DMs are, of creating a list of house rules that help with the flavour I'm aiming for. I have just as many of these house rules for my current 3.x campaign, which is set in an OOP setting, as I did with my ODnD campaign. I, personally, have changed a lot of the rules of 3.x to more emulate the feel of the old rules and setting. As for the skills, I love that aspect, being a huge fan of the general skills and all. The things that I don't like about 3rd edition I changed. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I took the square peg of 3.x and rammed it into the round hole of the ODnD mindset. The result was something I could live with. Like I said, 3.x is different, and not everyone likes "different". -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 12] Author : Drogo Danderfluff Date : 03-19-04 07:06 PM Pretty much all the main differences have been covered here so now for some editorializing. I play 3.5 and enjoy it. I do however agree with many of the criticisms leveled at it especially in that they are very free with the XP rewards. IMG it seems that folks go up a level pretty much every other session which seems a little much to me. That said I do think that they counterbalance it a little with being pretty stingy with treasure in the official adventures (WotC/RPGA ones). So whilst after 7 adventures completed in about 8 sessions (I play a lot of the short adventures from the RPGA and the freebies from WotC) everyone in the group is either level 5 or 4 (some new chars brought in). However, the group currently has (not including potions) 3 magic items between them (2 +1 weapons and a limited use lantern). Hearkening back to my 1E days I can reasonably assert that by level 5 everyone in the group would have at least 3 magic items each. Oh and they just recently broke the 1000 gp personal wealth barrier. So yeah, it's different from 1E and does possess a bit of a video-gamey feel for some (especially with all the Feats). However it can still be a lot of fun. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 13] Author : Hugin Date : 03-19-04 07:29 PM by Drogo I do however agree with many of the criticisms leveled at it especially in that they are very free with the XP rewards. This was one of the first things I changed. First, I just divided it 3 or 4, but now I give XP by using the CR chart and applying the encounter level instead of the CR of each individual creature. After playing for many years in the OOP Mystara setting in ODnD, I really haven't noticed any change in our games or the feeling; it's only a different system. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 14] Author : beavis123 Date : 03-19-04 09:10 PM Thread Title : I agree The xp seems too high. I have played each version and see good things about all three editions. I enjoy advancing levels as much as anyone else, but I like staying at the level I just advanced to for a while. I am not like other players who just want to run as fast the can through the levels to get to the high end levels and prestige classes. I also agree the granting feats versus handing out magic items is a good idea. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 15] Author : Warhead Date : 03-20-04 05:29 AM Thread Title : Re: Sounds like 1e for me. Originally posted by TheVillageofHommlet . No restrictions on race and class? What is up with that? There are restrictions for reasons, like better gameplay and well-written flavour. Beautifully put... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 16] Author : Incenjucar Date : 03-20-04 07:19 AM From someone who has twice as many 2e products as 3e, and quite a bit of those: Cons: The flavor is mulched. The Monster books are mostly just stat blocks. If you want flavor, you have to make it up all on your own, or look to older books. Icky=Evil: While 3.0 was lighter on it, 3.5 has made skeletons and zombies automatically evil, despite their lacking intelligence. Also, you have spells which are evil for no sane reason, while nastier spells are still fine and dandy. Ubergoodies: PrCs especially are way too common. This is, however, mostly an issue of editing. They take up a great deal of space, so they can charge more for less information. And, unlike kits, they aren't very clean to use. Flawed Multiclassing: Mostly involving saves and BaB (To hit), the progression doesn't flow right. A monk 1/wizard 1/cleric 1/rogue 1/druid 1 still has a +0 to hit. They do, however, have some seriously powerful saves. There's also the matter of the x4 skill points at level one which makes it much saner to start off in whichever class has the highest Skill points out of your chosen path. XP: As they said. Stat Bias: While in 2e, it was more or less true, the makers of 3e have some odd idea that it takes a -4 to Charisma to equal a +2 to strength. Seems that being able to smash things is more powerful than being able to talk a lich out of flaying you. Pros: Modulation: This I love. Most things work on a single system, so it's much easier to calculate how one thing effects another. Skills: While still a bit flawed, they're a huge improvement over Non-Weapon Proficiencies. Feats: Some are fricking annoying, but most are quite nice. It's an overall useful mechanic. Overall, I like 3e better as a system. I tweak the XP to my liking, avoid heavy multiclassing and PrCs, and use 2e-style flavor. Still, 2e rocks in and of itself, despite some of the quirks. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 17] Author : Algolei Date : 03-23-04 01:33 AM Inky, a few questions: Originally posted by Incenjucar Modulation: This I love. Most things work on a single system, so it's much easier to calculate how one thing effects another. What exactly is "modulation?" I've heard others state that 3.xE is "modular," but they don't seem to be using the definition of modular that I'm familiar with. To me something is "modular" if you can remove one section and replace it with another--in other words, the sections aren't corequisites of each other. For instance, if you could remove a Large Laser and replace it with two Medium Lasers and three Heat Sinks, I would say, "Hey, great! It's modular!" Skills: While still a bit flawed, they're a huge improvement over Non-Weapon Proficiencies. Have you tried using the proficiencies from Skills & Powers? I like the idea that some skills require more training to learn, while others are harder to achieve good results with. When 3.0 came out they seemed to be attempting the same thing by setting DCs differently for each skill, but it later seemed the DCs were all set at multiples of five: DC 15, 20, 25, etc. Do you have trouble setting DCs for skill checks not listed on any of the skill tables? How much accuracy do you usually try for when setting them? Feats: Some are fricking annoying, but most are quite nice. It's an overall useful mechanic. I find most of them to be rather odd. As a single example: Power Attack seems to be something everyone should be able to do without a feat, and the prerequisite of a 13 Strength seems odd--why can't a weak person do it too? Trading accuracy for increased damage seems like the sort of thing a 9-year-old does to a baseball with a baseball bat after failing to hit it a few times: "Arg! Wham! Wham! Wham!" Which feats do you find quite nicest and/or most sensible? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 18] Author : Yorlum Date : 03-23-04 07:46 AM Thread Title : Class balance My concern is that the way that the xp system is, the classes are more unbalanced than ever before. Back in 1st ed, a thief could level quicker than a Cleric, who was quicker than a fighter, who was quicker than a Magic User. Also, subclasses tended to advance slightly slower than the base class. This helped provide balance for the higher powers of the subclasses and the MU's and fighters v the weaker base classes. Even granting the absurdly quick advancement, and allowing that GM's can slow that if needed, the move to a uniform advancement table was one of the biggest mistakes of third ed, IMO -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 19] Author : Sildatorak Date : 03-23-04 01:12 PM The uniform advancement is somewhat necessary since they added more abilities to the classes that were typically lacking. Rogues (they changed thief to rogue, for any who aren't following yet) lost "backstab" and it got replaced with "sneak attack" which is much more useful. If they've got a buddy to flank you with they can basically put your dagger in the enemy's armpit for a good chunk of extra damage. Their evasion ability and a bunch of other things got added to improve them in other ways, too. Compare that to the wizard, who is basically unchanged (yes they get a few free metamagic or item creation feats, but that isn't really that powerful), and the changes to the advancement scheme approximately balance out. That reminds me of one change I really dislike, and I think it is a direct video game carryover (stupid Diablo): the commodification of magical items. The addition of magical item creation feats completely changed the magic from 2e (I can't speak for 1e). Instead of questing to find the roots of a mountain and the breath of a fish and forging them into some sort of item (casting "Enchant and Item" and "Permanency" of course) you can just spend xp and gp to craft an item (if you have the right feat). Economics takes over and you have magical items for sale instead of them being rare treasures found in ancient ruins. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 20] Author : Yorlum Date : 03-23-04 02:35 PM Originally posted by Sildatorak The uniform advancement is somewhat necessary since they added more abilities to the classes that were typically lacking. Rogues (they changed thief to rogue, for any who aren't following yet) lost "backstab" and it got replaced with "sneak attack" which is much more useful. If they've got a buddy to flank you with they can basically put your dagger in the enemy's armpit for a good chunk of extra damage. Their evasion ability and a bunch of other things got added to improve them in other ways, too. Compare that to the wizard, who is basically unchanged (yes they get a few free metamagic or item creation feats, but that isn't really that powerful), and the changes to the advancement scheme approximately balance out. You don't think going from 1 st level spell known to 3+ bonus spells is a boost? Plus, the creation of crossclass skills reduces thieving usefulness, as a lot of the talents can be taken by other classes now. I also think that the fighter's feats are more useful than the thief's... That reminds me of one change I really dislike, and I think it is a direct video game carryover (stupid Diablo): the commodification of magical items. The addition of magical item creation feats completely changed the magic from 2e (I can't speak for 1e). Instead of questing to find the roots of a mountain and the breath of a fish and forging them into some sort of item (casting "Enchant and Item" and "Permanency" of course) you can just spend xp and gp to craft an item (if you have the right feat). Economics takes over and you have magical items for sale instead of them being rare treasures found in ancient ruins. Which, more than any one thing, makes MU's super-powered. You can get a 'battery' full of magic missiles and be blasting them out right away! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 21] Author : Sildatorak Date : 03-23-04 06:06 PM Originally posted by Yorlum You don't think going from 1 st level spell known to 3+ bonus spells is a boost? How did you arrive at 3+ bonus spells at 1st level? If you have an 18 intelligence, you'll only get 1 bonus spell at spell levels 1-4. Are you thinking of the sorcerer? He gets more spells to cast per day, but is limited in the number of spells he can know (which gets really crappy at higher levels). Yes the sorcerer is a major change, but not a power boost. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 22] Author : Yorlum Date : 03-23-04 10:55 PM I was counting Cantrips. In effect, though, any Wizard has 2 1st level spells, setting aside Cantrips, which is the equivalent of a free level... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 23] Author : Sildatorak Date : 03-24-04 04:08 AM Originally posted by Yorlum I was counting Cantrips. In effect, though, any Wizard has 2 1st level spells, setting aside Cantrips, which is the equivalent of a free level... I still wouldn't consider that an overall power boost. It is nice at 1st level, making the first level wizard actually be useful to a party, but when you are 7th level or so an extra spell or three a day isn't much. I have thought about it more, though, and wizards did receive a boost to power, but I would still say that it isn't anywhere near the upgrade the rogue or cleric received. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 24] Author : Warhead Date : 03-24-04 04:30 AM Originally posted by Sildatorak but I would still say that it isn't anywhere near the upgrade the rogue or cleric received. Like the cleric needed an upgrade...:cool: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 25] Author : Yorlum Date : 03-24-04 07:01 AM Originally posted by Warhead Like the cleric needed an upgrade...:cool: Well, as I recall, the Cleric had Command at 1st level, and Hold Person at second. Those were the only offensive spells that they had until 5th level [Flame Strike] other than reverse cures that required a touch attack.... So yeah, they needed an upgrade, IMO -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 26] Author : Warhead Date : 03-24-04 07:54 AM All that armour and weapons though...and the undead turning, and the decent hit points, reasonable "To Hit"/THACO tables...they had it all going on... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 27] Author : Sildatorak Date : 03-24-04 04:03 PM If the cleric didn't need an upgrade then why was it the second fastest leveling class? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Downloaded from Wizards Community (http://forums.gleemax.com) at 05-10-08 08:21 AM.