|
Author
|
Comment
|
Helderik
Faen
(8/26/03 5:37 am)
Reply
|
What do you guys think of 3.5?
Hi guys,
A while ago, I decided not to change to 3.5 for some time. I ordered the gift-set of rulebooks which is due for september. Till then, we'll be playing with the 3.0 rules and I'm still not sure if we should change soon. Within a month, I'm expecting to receive my copies of the core rulebooks. My players haven't bought any of the books yet. In fact, most don't know the difference between 3.0 and 3.5.
It's impossible to miss the great amount of work some of you guys are putting in the conversion to a 3.5 version of RttToEE. I guess some of you have already made the switch to the new edition. Without your conversion work, I probably wouldn't even think about switching to 3.5. Right now, however, I'm wondering if I should switch or not.
What are your experiences with the change to the new edition? Was it a great amount of work to change? Did you have to learn all the rules again? Or is adapting to 3.5 a matter of a few sessions. My group feels like only just now we know the 3.0 rules sufficiently. Then suddenly 3.5 enters. Can anybody give some advice on how to make the change the easiest? Can my players still use their 3.0 books or should they burn them instead? And how about the DM?
In short: Will the change to a RttToEE 3.5 be an easy one? And can I make the change any easier by preparing in a certain way?
|
msherman
Sibeccai
(8/26/03 5:57 am)
Reply
|
Re: What do you guys think of 3.5?
I'm really liking the new rules. A few caveats:
- Beware poor editing. I've been pretty disapointed with the number of errata I've alreay discovered. In particular, errata still in the books that were known in 3.0 is disappointing.
- The changes from 3.0 are subtle, and not at all highlighted. Some kind of "Changed!" icon or sidebar would have been very useful.
- If you have any characters in your party who's classes or spell lists have changed significantly (Wizards, Bards, Druids, and Gnomish Illusionists are the biggest ones), they'll have some big adjustments to make.
|
 Infiniti2000
Verrik
(8/26/03 5:59 am)
Reply
ezSupporter
|
Re: What do you guys think of 3.5?
With the conversion work done here, it will greatly simplify things for you. Not only will the document contain the 3.5 revisions, but it will also contain the errata, and not just a little new errata that people find. I don't think this errata is being fully reported for 3.0.
I won't lie to you, though, it is not a simple task. I'd advise you to reread everything in 3.5 because a lot of things changed, some just a little, but enough. IMO, overall the changes are good and the effort is worth it. The two system are roughly compatible, however, so I think it's okay to change over and "catch" things as you go. Even if you continue using the bad guys as is, you'll probably be okay. There's no huge differences until you get to the more powerful members of the CRM and later (I think Eeridik is probably the biggest change in rules, given his spells).
I switched mid-campaign after my group had taken out the main gate, fought Vranthis and taken out most of the Earth Temple. There is a minor continuity break, for sure, but IMO no big deal. A serious issue you will have to contend with is the space rules with Large and Huge creatures. For some of them, it will be cumbersome to fit them everywhere. In particular, last session my group fought the NBC, where Riu Lotaas used mass bull's strength and mass enlarge person on all the mooks and Oamarthis. There was very little room to maneuver. Riu later escaped via dimension door to bring Axred into battle. Axred had to squeeze through most of the combat until he got into the area (206 I think) in front of the bridge. He surely scared the bejeezus out of the party though and overall it was a great battle and everyone had fun. In fact, due to the space rule I think it made things more interesting and actually less deadly. If you use good tactics there and have a weaker party (my group is 6 characters of level 8 roughly), it's quite possible to achieve a TPK.
I would advise not using the 5 splatbooks at all. Drop them. This is your chance to toss out unbalanced rules and avoid A LOT of conflicting rules. Keep the role-play stuff in there, but drops the PrC's, items, spells, and feats. If you really want to, you can try to convert some PrC's, but it's difficult. Other books without a lot of crossover might be workable, but you need to be careful (I'm still using the BoVD). To ease the transition, you should give everyone the option to rework their characters. e.g. Perhaps the wizard no longer wants spell focus in two schools and wants one to be greater spell focus. I would also let someone create a whole new character if they wanted, without penalty (i.e. at the same XP), given some new options. This provides two benefits: gives the players a transition period making them happier about it, gives them a very good reason to reread all the rules again.
Sorry...rambling. 
|
Helderik
Faen
(8/26/03 6:25 am)
Reply
|
Re: What do you guys think of 3.5?
Thanx for the advice...
My group consists of
- female human paladin of Heironeous 4
- male human fighter 4
- male elven rogue 4
- male human wizard 2/ fighter 2
- male dwarven psionic warrior 4
The last one is the one I'm worried most about. Should I wait until the revised psionics handbooks is out? Is psionics treated any different? What other troubles should I expect with this group?
Anyway, first of all, I will read all 3 books before switching. I like the idea of giving my players the option of creating a new character, however, I guess most of them will stick with their old one....
But I do get the impression that switching is a good idea and should be improving my game, am I correct?
|
Infiniti2000
Verrik
(8/26/03 6:37 am)
Reply
ezSupporter
|
Re: What do you guys think of 3.5?
I can't comment too much on the psionic warrior, but I think you should let the player use it and consider revising it for the 3.5 PsiH when it comes out. Some of the stuff in there is broken and not well playtested (particularly beefy fighters who can suddenly use their physical stats to 'cast' spells of a sort). The biggest thing about the PsiH has nothing to do with the revision, however, its the total lack of support for it in the module, which uses only the core rules.
Switching was good for me and in time to avoid the problem with the three H's (though I'm disappointed in not being able to use the Eeridik/Tac combo). Whether it'll "improve" your game is open to speculation, but quite honestly I doubt there will be a huge difference. The biggest difference IMC was the fact that we dropped the splatbooks. Those who read me log understand my group's "dependence" on splatbook spells, PrCs, and feats, so dropping them all changed a lot, for the better IMO. It was all about balance.
On a side note, your group will have trouble without a real cleric in the party, so be prepared to lend them Terjon when they get to 6th level. Most importantly though, it seems like your group will not have access to high level spells (if the wizard continues multiclassing). They will have serious difficulties in the Outer Fane and beyond. Perhaps, though, some will die and later characters will be single classed wizards or clerics. 
|
Helderik
Faen
(8/26/03 7:18 am)
Reply
|
Re: What do you guys think of 3.5?
Haha... Yes.. I already noticed the lack of spellcasters. However, until now, this has been a huge benefit since all have more than 20 hp and an AC of at least 20 (the wizard using shield and mage armor). But I've warned them a few times. I guess they will soon start searching for help (Terjon would be great, because the temple of Cuthbert would like to get a grip on the group). This will come at a price however...
Anyway... Thanx again for your response, though I'm still not sure what to do with the psionics.... 
|
Andorax
Verrik
(8/26/03 8:55 am)
Reply
|
Re: What do you guys think of 3.5?
Revised Psionics isn't due out until April of next year, and may well be a more "radical" change than the core 3.0 -> 3.5, from what I've read so far.
I'd stick with the PsiHB as writ, referring back to "copycat" spells/powers for the 3.5 revision. If a power exactly duplicates a spell, it should probably match the PHB 3.5 version.
Honestly, I find 3.5 an easier, cleaner play...once you get accustomed to the changes. Oddly enough, I actually recommend switching mid-campaign. There will always be some transition bugs, some things you discover between weeks...and one of the best ways to iron those out is from actual play rather than trying to put the start of a new campaign "on hold" for a month.
Try to be fair and generous with letting your players make minor "new system" changes...rechoosing a spell or feat, having one of their main weapons be Silver, etc.
Study it in detail. YOU need to be the expert on it, and if you don't have the background of having spent months hanging on every new rumor, new announcement, and ongoing discussion on the topic, there's a lot of minutia that won't be obvious at first.
"Whadda ya mean, Orcs get levels too?!?" |
Helderik
Faen
(8/26/03 10:02 am)
Reply
|
Re: What do you guys think of 3.5?
Mmm, so you guys recommend a thorough study of the new core rule books. This probably means that we won't be able to use 3.5 for the next few months. I guess that would be okay... By that time, some of the players will probably have bought a new PHB, which should make it easier for me also... A bummer though that the new PsiHB won't arrive earlier than april next year
But if I do get you guys right, my RttToEE won't change that much by using the converted NPC's. Most changes are small and changing wouldn't be much of a problem. I guess I will talk to my players next session and try to find out about their opinions. Thanx for the advice, however, more tips are always welcome .
|
Caedrel
Faen
(8/26/03 8:35 pm)
Reply
|
Re: What do you guys think of 3.5?
"Thorough study" is probably a bit of overkill - I had a read through and made some notes about changes that "stuck out" to me because they were in areas relevant to my group.
The lack of spellcasters in your group will actually make it easier, because they don't have to worry about all the spell changes. The main one for your group will probably be shield: it's changed from a +7 cover bonus in one direction to a +4 shield bonus all around (he probably still won't be happy at dropping those 3 points of AC, though... ) You also have no bards, monks or rangers, which are the three classes with the most changes.
In my opinion, 3.5 closes some of the "gaps" that allowed one character or tactic to dominate in almost every scenario eg. archers have been reined in, items like slippers of spider climbing have been limited, tanglefoot bags aren't as bad as they used to be, etc etc.
I'd finally gotten the meaning of the 3.0 "standard action" and "move action" when it changed in 3.5 - it's easier to understand in 3.5, but I'm still getting used to it
I also think the changes to Damage Reduction are pretty far reaching; I wouldn't try to run 3.5 Return without the 3.5 MM. For example, the bebilith demon released if you break Eeridik's magic circle was Bad News in 3.0 - hardly anyone would have had the right gear to beat its DR 30/+3, so it was basically "run away!" It's much more manageable now with DR 10/good. But the DR changes do mean your PCs may want to rethink the properties of their weapons - I second Andorax in this.
Oh, and succubi are no longer a 10% chance of a TPK - they can't summon balors any more...
|
smetzger
Faen
(8/27/03 4:49 am)
Reply
|
Re: What do you guys think of 3.5?
Quote:
But the DR changes do mean your PCs may want to rethink the properties of their weapons
What I did was I had a caravan of Dwarves come into Verona(my Verbabonc) that had come up with a new technique call infusion. This allowed one to infuse an existing weapon or armor with a new special material like Cold Iron, Silver, Mithral, Adamantium etc. Thus enabling characters to 'upgrade' weapons instead of throwing them away.
|
msherman
Sibeccai
(8/27/03 5:49 am)
Reply
|
Re: What do you guys think of 3.5?
Smetzger, that's a very good idea. I'm going to use it. I'm also going to give the party access to master bowyers who can reinforce existing composite bows to up the strength rating (at a cost of 100gp/STR+), or restring composite bows to weaken the pull (for a few gold for labour -- you can't extract gold out of a bow that's too strong).
|
|
Okay -- Your Turn
Email This To a Friend
Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies 
Click to stop receiving email notification of replies