I keep wanting to come back

27 posts / 0 new
Last post
I don't know what it is but I'm always wanting to comeback to 3.5. I've been playing Pathfinder lately and while the game is fun I just can't help but shake the feeling that 3.5 felt better playing, even though it was mechanically shaky in some parts. As anyone that has played Pathfinder encountered this? It just feels different playing it, and not exactly mechanically.

Come to 4ENCLAVE for a fan based 4th Edition Community.

 

this will hard because 4.0 are more easy (to play and programming) then is more commercial that 3.5 maybe like the changes of the rules of Magic: the gatering but is right i was try to play pathfinder and some rules are great but not is the same, 3.5 have a lot, a lot of supplements that enhance not only the game, like the Race Books and the Eberron, Frogothem, Dragon Lance and ravenloft Campaings.

Maybe we can do a collection of firms for show to WofC that 3.5 still is profitably.
Pepe pecas pica papas con un pico con un pico pepe pecas pica papas si pepe pecas pica papas con un pico donde esta el pico con que pepe pecas pica papas.

I've played in two pathfinder groups (one is on going, one I left because they switched to rogue trader), and still play with my normal 3.5 group all the time. 


I know exactly what you mean. Even putting aside pathfinders (minor) changes that make 3.5 balance problems worse, there is somethign about the system I just don't like. 


I think its how they hate prestige classes and multiclassing and strongly discourage it. 

"In a way, you are worse than Krusk"                               " As usual, Krusk comments with assuredness, but lacks the clarity and awareness of what he's talking about"

"Can't say enough how much I agree with Krusk"        "Wow, thank you very much"

"Your advice is the worst"                                                  "I'd recommend no one listed to Krusk's opinions about what games to play"

Play 2nd edition and all will be OK. Roleplaying is encouraged and there are tons of supplements. Tongue Out

Joking of course (I hate edition wars) but it felt the same for me when I tried 3.5 after 2.
I'm starting to think one of the reasons is becasue I actually enjoy reading 3.5 books. I normally find Pathfinder books a bit dry to read.

And I have played 2e I have all the corebooks and some supplements. I wouldn't mind playing in a game... 

Come to 4ENCLAVE for a fan based 4th Edition Community.

 

I have to start Pathfinder to comment on that and I really want to. Its materials look pretty shiny and tempting.
I like 3.5 because it's familiar and comfortable, although I have house rules I've made over time. I learnt on 2E, through Baldur's Gate to be exact, then discovered 3.0, then 3.5, and I fell in love. I find 2E just illogical - don't get me started on THACO - and I would definitely houserule the hell out of it. I find 4E silly and fanboyish, but I will not get involved in edition wars because it's stupid to and I have no hatred for the editions that I haven't played. But I do have edition loyalty to 3X, 3.5 specifically. This is because I think that, except for a few issues, they got it right. They didn't need 4E from that point of view. I believe they only did it - and I hear they rushed it - because it'd been 5-10 years since the last edition and they wanted to cash in on a new generation of gamers. 

Pathfinder is pretty tempting though. Except it feels like it's really just houserules and minor tweaks to 3.5. On the other hand, it's got lots of freebies to entice you in. 

Incidentally, my friend wants 'something new', my brother wants 'something with dragons' and I want 'something Eberron', so I'm doing a dragon campaign set in Eberron, which is new to both of them AND accomodates dragons as a significant part of the world. Win-win-win situation! 
:D another 2nd edition hater.

thac0 is:
if your thac0 is 19 and your enemy's ac is 6, you just need to roll more than 13 on d20. (19-6=13) (dont tell me it's complicated)

but haters gonna hate anyway :P
:D another 2nd edition hater.

thac0 is:
if your thac0 is 19 and your enemy's ac is 6, you just need to roll more than 13 on d20. (19-6=13) (dont tell me it's complicated)

but haters gonna hate anyway :P

well the only thing that i can rescue from 2.0 is the race minimum and maximum limitation of the ability score.

but i want to play again i was young when i played 2.0 and for too little.
Pepe pecas pica papas con un pico con un pico pepe pecas pica papas si pepe pecas pica papas con un pico donde esta el pico con que pepe pecas pica papas.
I can't never tell that 2nd edition is perfect. people just hate this edition so much and I don't understand why.

for example the books of 2nd edition I find very complicated to find everything. especially when you're a beginner and creating a new character. or as you said those minimum and maximums are there just to be there. but lots of its rules are optional and you don't have to apply however people think that it's so complicated as a system.

I like and I can play on every system man, why do you hate my favourite one? makes no sense.
I can't never tell that 2nd edition is perfect. people just hate this edition so much and I don't understand why.

for example the books of 2nd edition I find very complicated to find everything. especially when you're a beginner and creating a new character. or as you said those minimum and maximums are there just to be there. but lots of its rules are optional and you don't have to apply however people think that it's so complicated as a system.

I like and I can play on every system man, why do you hate my favourite one? makes no sense.

well maybe is because many are played 3.0 - 3.5 for long time, i try to read the index of PH2.0 and many rules are confused XD i dont remember well the rules of THAC0 (this sound like taco Tongue Out)and 3.5 have a lot but a lot of Class, feats, Equipments atc. and divine magic only reach level 7 u.u
Pepe pecas pica papas con un pico con un pico pepe pecas pica papas si pepe pecas pica papas con un pico donde esta el pico con que pepe pecas pica papas.
:D another 2nd edition hater.

thac0 is:
if your thac0 is 19 and your enemy's ac is 6, you just need to roll more than 13 on d20. (19-6=13) (dont tell me it's complicated)

but haters gonna hate anyway :P

There is a lot to "dislike" in 2nd edition but a lot of those reasons are perhaps the same reasons to like 2nd edition.  The rules may have been confusing at time and there were a LOT of "optional" rules floating around even before Skills and Powers came along.  At the same time a lot less was "set in stone" so there was a lot more wiggle room to let things get done and more ways to do things.

The way THAC0 and Armor class worked in 2ed were confusing to many but not really all that complicated IF you could actually figure out what they mean.  Some of use know that those are based on the idea of "tables" where you'd roll your attack and then look to see what you hit; your "Thac0" was just the number you need to hit the default AC 0 while the various ACs modified what your roll was.

I actually think 3.0 was a pretty good evolution of DnD from 2ed in that once you looked at things it wasn't hard to convert 2ed stuff to 3ed.  While I think 2 to 3 was evolutionary I believe 3.5 to 4 was REVOLUTIONARY in that it completely trashed so many things; I may not have followed 4e but I believe it was many supplements later before it actually became possible (if it ever did) to convert 3.5 characters to 4e while maintaining most of their essence.  When going from 2ed to 3ed the basic conversions were actually pretty easy but you often had additonal options open up but the next edition required full changes.
 
I just think roleplaying material is more important than combat rules and every system has a lot to offer for roleplaying. I just choosed 2nd edition because all those supplements and campaign settings were for that edition.
A thing about "all those supplements and campaign settings" is that they basically all get recycled each time there is a "new" edition.  The cruch (game mechanics) in each new book may change but much of the fluff ("roleplaying" information) stays more or less the same.
I can't never tell that 2nd edition is perfect. people just hate this edition so much and I don't understand why.

for example the books of 2nd edition I find very complicated to find everything. especially when you're a beginner and creating a new character. or as you said those minimum and maximums are there just to be there. but lots of its rules are optional and you don't have to apply however people think that it's so complicated as a system.

I like and I can play on every system man, why do you hate my favourite one? makes no sense.


I mainly don't like it becasue the CEO of TSR at the time... That and IMO mechanically its all over the place.

Come to 4ENCLAVE for a fan based 4th Edition Community.

 

Well actually all those supplements and campaigns were not recycled after WotC bought TSR. Look at the product lists.

I still don't see the reason behind the offensive attitude on 2nd edition AD&D.

It's like choosing to play Oblivion after it came out and attacking Morrowind. It's Morrowind, will not be bad at anytime. Eventhough it might be wrong in some of the game mechanics or graphics might be bad. But Oblivion is good too. I wouldn't choose between, I would just play both or the one I want to. I saw a person who said "I don't play Baldur's Gate cause it's second edition." What the hell..

"Oh god, archer's dps is a lot better, I don't want to play mage anymore." is the same with "Oh god, level advancement in 3.5 edition is a lot better, I don't want to play 2nd edition anymore." It is roleplaying game. The win situation is when you have fun. Any system is completely ok as long as you know how to roleplay and have fun.

I hope you people don't play with minis and grids. Because that's when it is a board or video game, and all rules are so important even exactly how long you can move in a round.
You people are like you'll be happy to see everyone stop playing 2nd Edition AD&D. 3.5 edition players are so much like "2nd edition sucks! It's so bad! It's so unbalanced!". Well I didn't say it's the best or anything like that..
I am one of those who keeps coming back to 3.5.  It's not a matter of which edition is 'better.'  It's just an expression of what is 'preferred.'

I got my gaming start with the Basic/Expert rules for D&D (sometimes referred to as 0E) as well as the Star Frontiers game.  I later played AD&D (1E) and 2nd edition AD&D (2E).  For years, I ran what could best be described as a hybrid of D&D and AD&D.  I had a lot of fun for many years playing with 'to hit' tables and THAC0, negative ACs, demihumans, and the Known World.

When 3/3.5E came out, I found that it meshed well with my style of gaming -- and so did many of my core gaming groups.  We played many long-running campaigns with the 3rd edition ruleset.

After following the development of 4E and reading through the core books, I concluded it wasn't for me.  I kept playing 3.5.  I essentially sat out 4th edition.  Not because it was a 'bad' ruleset, but because it wasn't a good fit for me.

Reading through Pathfinder, I found a game that felt familiar, but not quite right.  Again, nothing 'bad' just not right for me.

Along the way, I've played a lot of other games: Deadlands, Star Wars d6, Traveler, Fading Suns, Dresden Files, just to name a few.  I really enjoyed those campaigns, but in between, we would play another 3.5 game.

Today, I am following the Next development with a casual interest.  So far, I'm seeing a game that I would play occassionally, but not one that will draw me in long term.

Over the last five to ten years, the only two game systems I have consistently returned to over and over are D&D3.5 and Star Wars d6.  These two rulesets just fit well with my gamemastering and playing style.
Over the last five to ten years, the only two game systems I have consistently returned to over and over are D&D3.5 and Star Wars d6.  These two rulesets just fit well with my gamemastering and playing style.


Although it too in now OOP and some of the books are hard to find at a reasonable price have you tried/looked at the StarWars SAGA Edition?  I believe most people found it very enjoyable and it's always what many of use hoped 4e would be closer to.  It has a lot of 3.5 mechanics but also has a LOT of freedom on how you can build things with the tools the game provides.
Not that I'd have anybody to play with, aside from mayhaps my wife, but I've always wondered about the Dresden Files game. Not that we have any interest in the (a) new game or gaming system, but I loved the books and she liked the SyFy tv bit.  And I can only speak for the books, but that's about how our D&D wizards are played.  I mean, "normal people", not uber-overpowered BS characters. We (I mean us, our players) hate optimization shite.  (I know you all play different, like a competitive sport).
I'd really like to try Pathfinder out, but cannot find a time to read the core books at least. I know it's somehow developed version of 3.5 and it has some tempting artwork. I think we even have a society here in Turkey which organizes conventions just for Pathfinder. I might read or join a beginner game in a convention one day. Not that I'll be a Pathfinder dm but I really wonder.

Another game I wanna try out is this: Trail of Cthulhu. Well, it's based on GUMSHOE system and Cthulhu mythos. Call of Cthulhu is only game I played among games with modern settings. I loved it and I red a little of this new version too. Sounds cool to me.

Other than that, I want to dm the old modules of 2nd edition that I haven't done yet. Now I'm on Ravenloft again. Next one is Dragonlance, then I hope Darksun. Modules are always so limited but include pretty neat ideas. Last week we tried "The Created" module and the plot is an awesome idea for an adventure I believe. You may want to check it out.
One of my favorite printed adventures was Wyrmskull Throne from FR.
"Today's headlines and history's judgment are rarely the same. If you are too attentive to the former, you will most certainly not do the hard work of securing the latter." -Condoleezza Rice "My fellow Americans... I've just signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. Bombing begins in five minutes." - Ronald Reagan This user has been banned from you by the letters "O-R-C" and the numbers "2, 3, 4, and 6"
User Quotes
56788208 wrote:
I do, however, have one last lesson on this subject. That last one? The only build in this post that can one-shot average opponents[by dealing twice as much damage as they have HP? I would argue that it is not optimized. Why isn't it optimized? Because it's overkill. Overkill is NOT optimizing. This means that there are portions of this build dedicated to damage which can safely be removed and thrown elsewhere. For example, you probably don't need both Leap Attack AND Headlong Rush at the same time. You could pick up Extra Rage feats for stamina, feats to support AoO effects, feats that work towards potential prestige classes, and so on. However, you could also shift our ability scores around somewhat. I mean, if you're getting results like that with 16 starting Strength, maybe you can lower it to 14, and free up four points to spend somewhere else - perhaps back into Charisma, giving you some oomph for Intimidating Rage or Imperious Command if you want. You can continue to tune this until it deals "enough" damage - and that "enough" does not need to be "100%". It could easily be, say, 80% (leaving the rest to the team), if your DM is the sort who would ban one-hit killers.
Tempest_Stormwind on Character Optimization
So when do you think Bachmann will be saying she met a mother the previous night that had a son who got a blood transfusion using a gay guy's blood, and now the son is retardedly gay?
When she meets CJ's mom?
Resident Pithed-Off Dragon Poon Slayer of the House of Trolls
Neue, have you seen the Dresden Files TV show?  Well acted and pretty funny.  I never knew that there was an RPG based on it, though...
Yeah Alsebra, I've seen the tv show, mayhaps 4 of the 12 or so episodes anyways.  I pretty much tried to avoid watching them with my wife so as to not ruin any of the books for me, as I was only on #7 or so at the time.  Yes, it's a good show as well as a good read.
Neue, not something you needed to worry about; the shows have a completely different storyline from the books.
"Today's headlines and history's judgment are rarely the same. If you are too attentive to the former, you will most certainly not do the hard work of securing the latter." -Condoleezza Rice "My fellow Americans... I've just signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. Bombing begins in five minutes." - Ronald Reagan This user has been banned from you by the letters "O-R-C" and the numbers "2, 3, 4, and 6"
User Quotes
56788208 wrote:
I do, however, have one last lesson on this subject. That last one? The only build in this post that can one-shot average opponents[by dealing twice as much damage as they have HP? I would argue that it is not optimized. Why isn't it optimized? Because it's overkill. Overkill is NOT optimizing. This means that there are portions of this build dedicated to damage which can safely be removed and thrown elsewhere. For example, you probably don't need both Leap Attack AND Headlong Rush at the same time. You could pick up Extra Rage feats for stamina, feats to support AoO effects, feats that work towards potential prestige classes, and so on. However, you could also shift our ability scores around somewhat. I mean, if you're getting results like that with 16 starting Strength, maybe you can lower it to 14, and free up four points to spend somewhere else - perhaps back into Charisma, giving you some oomph for Intimidating Rage or Imperious Command if you want. You can continue to tune this until it deals "enough" damage - and that "enough" does not need to be "100%". It could easily be, say, 80% (leaving the rest to the team), if your DM is the sort who would ban one-hit killers.
Tempest_Stormwind on Character Optimization
So when do you think Bachmann will be saying she met a mother the previous night that had a son who got a blood transfusion using a gay guy's blood, and now the son is retardedly gay?
When she meets CJ's mom?
Resident Pithed-Off Dragon Poon Slayer of the House of Trolls
Although it too in now OOP and some of the books are hard to find at a reasonable price have you tried/looked at the StarWars SAGA Edition?  I believe most people found it very enjoyable and it's always what many of use hoped 4e would be closer to.  It has a lot of 3.5 mechanics but also has a LOT of freedom on how you can build things with the tools the game provides.


I did investigate the SAGA edition -- read through it and discussed it at length with a couple friends who liked it.  For me, it didn't feel right for the Star Wars universe.  From the day I first read and played West End Games' d6 game, I felt that it was a near perfect fit for replicating the flavor of the Star Wars universe in an RPG.
Not that I'd have anybody to play with, aside from mayhaps my wife, but I've always wondered about the Dresden Files game. Not that we have any interest in the (a) new game or gaming system, but I loved the books and she liked the SyFy tv bit.  And I can only speak for the books, but that's about how our D&D wizards are played.  I mean, "normal people", not uber-overpowered BS characters. We (I mean us, our players) hate optimization shite.  (I know you all play different, like a competitive sport).


The Dresden Files RPG takes a simple, rules-light approach.  There really is little if any 'optimization' prossible in it.  In our experience, the rules also strongly promote team play.  Various team members would use their abilities (powers, skills, etc) to create a circumstance that benefits the team.  At the most opportune moment, one PC would essentially tap all those benefits to gain the bonuses, ensuring success.

I do look forward to the next time we get a chance to play this game.
Sign In to post comments