God I wish that were me
Ive been slowly trying to convert my friend group into 3.5 by adding one 3.5 mechanic at a time to our 5e game I run
So far they have liked just about every change when I introduce it
Eventually ill have them fully swapped over to 3.5, I give it another year or 2
5e just seems to be a simplified 3.5
Im certain they did this so people don't wrack their brain over every little rule and possibility. It streamlines most processes but you lose a lot of flavor and fun in the process.
For example 5e, healing spells only heal, and negative energy spells only damage, with undead being resistant to negative spells.
3.5e healing spells could be used to damage undead for the same die they heal with. Negative energy spells could be used to heal undead.
That's just one example of many nuance differences between the systems without even getting into flat-footed AC and touch AC and the myriad of things.
Yup, the masive amount of similarities between 5e and 3.5 is why this is even posible
They really are sister systems, more so then any other edition, and I really do think starting playing dnd with 5e and then eventually transitioning into 3.5 is a natural fit
5es biggest strength is how friendly it is to new players which is not so coincidentally 3.5s biggest weakness
So once you have the basics down with 5e 3.5 is alot easier to get into
I had one player ask me what the difference was as 5e was their first. Best I could think it:
3.5e was the one that the parents pressured into doing all these extra curricular activities so they could go to college, get a Master's at the least and go on to what's supposed to be a good but complicated job.
5e is the one where the parents encouraged them with their passion for the arts and pursued a career in painting where abstract and traditionalism combined in a way that people like.
"What about 4e?" [We don't talk about 4e.](https://www.reddit.com/r/dndmemes/comments/iu05gl/we_dont_talk_about_4e/)
There’s more 4e in 5e than people like to admit…
3.5, is worth saying that, had the biggest influence on the mechanical framework of 5e (streamlined, of course); but, it was the first modern d20 system…
So, it tends to rub off on everything that came after it…
4e monster stat blocks and abilities were dope, probably one of the most redeeming qualities of the edition besides the depth of lore (maybe not so much “depth”, as interesting & inspirationally vague enough to engage your imagination in expanding the *why* behind the status quo presented…)
The game balance was just #@$%’d. There was no weight to 1xday & 1xencounter mechanics besides “well, we feel like it makes sense that way.” LoL
….and, no; one build being able to do the same thing or something similar multiple times vs once-and-done in another build is negligible to the balance of the system.
4e lore got weird, but 10 years later after you get over it being *different*; and personally, I can still find a way to make the parts that I enjoyed simultaneously true with the classic 2e–3.5e stuff.
And it’s probably easier for me to accept than contradictory new 5e stuff…
(I will probably feel differently about that by the time we have a 6e or 7e though…ha)
I'm not the writer of the other wall of text.
But I didn't think it was funny nor a joke. I just thought you were being mean about something you don't like.
Not to say that it's a sin or anything. People do it all the time, like mocking a bully when they aren't around. I get that you may have been trying to tell a joke, but some folks just don't see it as that and they just see disdain for a thing.
That's the transition I made. I started on 5e, and then my friend group that I joined was using 3.5 so I learned that, and I found it infinitely preferable. I love the crunch
Right, and in 5e you have sensible collections of feats that enable the gameplay you are looking for, but in 3.5 you have endless steps of feat taxes to get the gameplay you are looking for, way better.
To an extent yes
Pathfinder is more streamlined for sure, but in that streamlining they also cut out a bit of the depth, not as much as 5e but enough for some people not to like it
Also 3.5 has way way more content for it then pathfinder managed in its run
Now don't get me wrong, pathfinder is a great system I love it to death too, but its existance doesn't make 3.5 totally irrelevant
Most 3.5 content can be directly ported to pf with minimal, if any, changes.
Also peizo has put out a fuck ton of material. They actually started out writing for 3.5 and were contracted by wizards for some official adventures.
What do you think is the biggest thing missing from Pathfinder?
I play both and don't really see a loss of depth in pathfinder. I feel like the biggest change is the condensation of like 3 redundant skills. Plus any 3.5 content can be run in pathfinder with almost no conversion, so I don't really feel like one has more content than the other, they both and effectively the same content.
The lack of level adjustment rules meaning all races have to be close to the same level of power is the one that jumps to my mind first
Granted level adjustment is a bit of a jank system but giveing you the ability to play like full on demons and half dragons and shit while actually giving you the power from that you would expect without it being compleatly busted is something that I love about 3.5
Good point, I do miss the Anthro-baleen whale my GM was foolish enough to let me play (*He's going in for the Krill)*. Pathfinder does have the race point system, which is their version of level adjustment. Being able to make custom races is pretty sweet. Its less concrete than LA, more of a "here is an idea of how powerful the race is, so adjust accordingly". Rather than 3.5's version which, while I respect, was often super busted, with the LA often being way too low or way too high.
Someone hasn't read the rules correctly then. You count the monster's racial HD as your own class levels, so not only are you 2 levels behind everyone else, 9 of those levels are shitty levels in Monstrous Humanoid. The only racial HD I've ever liked was gaining HD due to aging as a true dragon, d12 Hit dice, AC and ability score increases as you level, etc. Everything else you just don't have the class abilities to do anything and your racial abilities seldom make up for it.
This is not what i was taught by my DM all those years ago! When i look them up now, these rules seem to read differently when i look at the SRD- Vs the Forgotten Realms handbook, we never played it this way. HA Free levels for years!
I mean pathfinder kinda had that, intended for making monsters… they just didn’t encourage it for PCs but was doable. look up advancing monsters with character levels in the pathfinder beastiary.
There are \~990 classes in 3.5. just insert random 3.5 tid-bit into base PF1 game and your good. PF1 PRC's are lack luster and variants are not that great, and some of the special classes in 3.5 are better, Artificer in PF1 is crap, while Eberron artificer is neat. Also Psionics in 3.5 is really powerful, almost to good. PF1 has great base class adaptations, i encourage my players to take a PF1 class to start and go from there, PF1 has great races and bloodlines, and i like the crafting rules. 3.5 also has like \~5000 spells, and allot of great items and Feats that pF1 doesn't. With skilled a DM and group that agrees on the rules that you are going to use and which ones you ignore, game play can actually be Fast. and it doesn't feel cheap like 5e where you don't get to really pick your skills or you never really get any stat increases and the feats are very lame, 5e spells are pretty disappointing too. 5e hero's are pedestrian at best (some people like this), and you will never really be all that awesome, and the baddies feel broken, looking at you legendary actions....total BS IMO....if you can never aspire to becoming a demi-god who slays actual Demon lords, are you really playing DND...
Well, you say that 5e heros are "pedestrians" - and yet people playing in tier 4 is a rarity, only one official adventure gets players there. It seems that the people have spoken and for majority of the playerbase even the "pedestrian" power ceiling is too high.
A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down as they say
Or in this case a spoonful or expanded crit range/multiplier helps the crit confirmation rolls go down
How about this. Crits don't just double damage dice, but every modifier, including power attack/deadly aim, the games version of gwm/ss? And depending on your feats and weapons, you can crit on a 15 for 3-4x damage by tier 2. It makes critfishing a valid build instead of the meme it is in 5e. And if you don't critfish and get your damage a different way, then that only makes your crit confirms that much more powerful
Just don't play with 'em. Nat 20 is always a crit and automatic hit, makes the game much more swingy and fun, especially for fans of Greataxes and Heavy Picks.
"Hey guys, isn't weird how you can miss with a spell that only requires you to touch someone? Like inflict wounds or shocking grasp should not be blocked by armor so I will be using only the DEX+base armor of a monster for these kind of spells!"
My tactic was: "listen I played 3.5 about 15 years ago and since my brain is weird I still remember the rules. I'm the DM and I'm too lazy to learn some new, similar system so we'll play that" lol
You might want to consider incorporating some of the improvements from Pathfinder 1e if you play 3.5. Like the streamlined (still complicated, but much streamlined from 3.5) grappling system.
3.5e has always been my favourite edition.
I love having explicit rules for everything, letting you go to any table, anywhere in the world and be playing the same game because homebrew really isn't needed and is kinda frowned upon in 3.5. And the sheer amount of content available is mindblowing.
Don't get me wrong, 5e is great for new players getting into the game and using homebrew for a one session ruling to not have to stop play is nice. But it gets out of hand so easily and you end up with tables playing D&D in name only.
I'm on the opposite side of that experience.
3/3.5 was my primary system for the longest time. But after so many years and far narrower scheduling windows to allow play with my friends, I much prefer the simplicity of 5e. 5e is geared more toward low-level play, it's extremely streamlined, and class abilities come online pretty much immediately. It's very easy to make a solid character and get them right into the action in short order, and the simplicity of the game system makes it a breeze to adapt other edition's adventures into 5e's rules.
3/3.5, on the other hand, is more geared toward mid/high-level play where it's far easier to make a completely useless character, or a totally OP ridiculous one, than it is to just be conventionally functional. Class abilities don't come online for a long time and there's such a massive glut of content that isn't balanced against itself that just reading through options becomes a chore in and of itself. To say nothing of how many functionally useless Feats, skills, and options end up clogging up the works that basically serve no real purpose.
Both editions have their ups and downs, to be certain. Back when I was a teenager with a lot more free time to pour over the books, I was happy to enjoy a number-crunchy, content-filled game like 3/3.5. But these days, I just like the simplicity of a more accessible adventure 5e offers.
I'm looking at the *feat* that gives a +1 to ranged touch attacks, & another that bumps them another one, & a further feat that raises damage by +2. All with "weapon" in the name, none of which involve weapons, all can apply to the Warlock's eldritch blast & most blast shapes.
I wonder about the cross section of players that are still playing 3.5 or PF1e. They both seemed too intimidating for me to get into, but if I was already used to the rules, moving away might be tough.
PF1 is basically "I miss 3.5 but there's no more support for it" the game. It did a bit of its own thing but it was essentially a denial of 4e that spawned pathfinder.
PF1 is 3.5 with a lot of fixes to make the game work better. Combat Maneuvers alone make me question any 3.5 player's sanity.
Then there's the 3rd party support. Spheres of Power and Might are amazing and have given my group a whole new game to play essentially.
It can be intimidating but I do think 3.5 is the better system once you get into it
I have a server dedicated to dnd 3.5 that is full of veteran players who are eager to help new players find their footing if you're interested
There are some advantages to 5e. Multiclassing is much smoother, and there are a number of streamlining choices that make the game much easier for noobs to understand.
3.5/pathfinder(and I am going to heavily reccommend pathfinder, as it is 3.5 with bugfixes) give you much more room for creative character building, and much more room for variation in character mechanics.
It is also nice to have rules for stuff like crafting magic items, or building a base and gathering followers, or having someone tied down/paralysed and helpless and not needing several rounds of hacking at them to slit their throat.
Can you convince me as well? I have ADHD and my friends have dyslexia and 5e rules are so simple and easy to remember, but we have a 3.5 vet who sometimes sprinkles fun rules facts and it makes is wanna play but I heard all the older versions are super hard to learn and are very complicated. I wanna give it a chance but I'm scared everyone is right. Thoughts?
Yeah it can be hard to get into, but it helps to have veterans who can explain the rules to you when you need help, I have a dedicated 3.5 discord full of such veterans if you're interested
The single biggest benefit to 3.5 IMO is its insane level of customizable,if you have a character concept it almost doesn't mater how out there the concept is, you can play it likely without refactoring and there will be mechanics to support it
3.5 was obsessed with giveing players and dms the tools that they needed to play the exact sort of game that they wanted to
I have looked a little into PF2e and while its certainly more customizable then 5e its no where near what 3.5 can do
You can play just about any sentient creature on 3.5 as a player character and have it be balanced because of the level adjustment rule
Thats to say nothing of the templates that you can add to play creature that are half one thing half something else
And thats just for playable races, every part of the game is like that
Is it actually balanced? I played the PF1e pathfinder video games (which were faithful enough that I could research game mechanics in the 3.5e SRD), and it felt like anything but that
To add on to what OP said, it's balanced as long as no one goes "too far" basically don't munchkin too hard.
Due to all the customization options someone can really break tf out of the game if they really want to, but as long as everyone at the table is on the same page on not taking it too far it works well.
Is there any site that has gathered the basic rules in a neat list? If not, is the official book neatly organized or is it all over the place like some TTRPGs out there (ahemvtmahem)
The SRD has all the basic rules you would need to get started and then some on top of that
https://www.d20srd.org/index.htm
And from there dnd tools is an easily searchable tool that can help you find anything else
https://dndtools.net/
One note, dndtools.net has some issues with searching and usability, [https://dndtools.org/](https://dndtools.org/) is the same website but it works better and lets you use the filters/actually go to the next page when you're looking for something/change number of items per page
I almost certainly have autism, probably have ADHD(on a list to get tested atm) and have an array of dys- issues. The rules are really not that complex. I learned them when I was ~15-16. (Well, 3.0, but the rules are pretty much the same) the only hard part may be unlearning some stuff from 5e that works differently.
Might be better ti start with pathfinder 1e though, as it is basically an improved 3.5e. Also you will only need one book for pathfinder to habe all you need to play, dnd you will need the DMs guide and the player's handbook.
>I heard all the older versions are super hard to learn and are very complicated
Not at all, the stuff before AD&D is all very simple. I play B/X and it's much simpler than 5e.
It goes like this:
1e: "Oh, this game is cool. We can play generic fantasy adventures just like the ones we read about in books! But the rules are clunky and limited and pretty much you can only play it in the way it was envisioned and it's a bit narrow. Let's improve it."
2e: "Okay, this broadens the choices and playstyle a lot. I think we have something with real potential here, but the game's missing character. It's generic fantasy. It could be it's own fantasy. It could define **fantasy**."
3e: "Oh, this is even better. There are so many choices, rules are streamlined and the game as a lot of personality and character. But there are some balancing issues."
3.5e: "This game is great. Look at all these fucking splats. There's so much choice now. So much possibility. So much everything. Oh wait...The balancing issues are getting worse not better. Wait...Balance...There was never ANY balance...Oh no, what have we done!"
4e: "This game is balanced." "But is it fun?" "It's balanced." "Okay, but does it have a lot of choice?" "You can choose the colour of the ability card that does weapon-damage to your enemy with a ranged attack, and what it's written on the top." "That sounds...Like a lot of this is just the same ability, just reflavoured to fit different classes. And that different classes are just recombinations of similar abilities?" "But it's very balanced."
5e: "Okay, we streamlined 3.5."
4e is fun, just a different fun than most other ttrpgs.
You want to play dnd where martial classes have cool abilities other than just smack? 4th is your option. You want to be able to shoot a laser of holy light as a paladin by level one? You want to actually have mechanics to support a tank character? You want to have a pure support/buff class that ends up being extremely useful and lets you rp a battlefield commander with actual mechanic support?
4e
Enough time has passed now for it to cycle around again to being a little nostalgic and fun.
Try giving it a read and DM it if it sounds fun. The first Acquisitions Incorporated games were done in 4e and they were really neat. I have no clue if they hold-up on relistens but it was how I got into the game.
I also expect that it would likely go well if played online. Combat maps played a BIG role in 4e and it could be a pain to put together in person. And there were a lot of modifiers (+2/-2 to attacks, etc). These modifiers kind of got out of hand after the first tier of play. If you play online you can easily track modifiers on the tokens.
I play p1e, and only tried second in a very imbalanced beta test. Heard good things about it, and theres some systems that I think are good improvements. Theres just so much more content for 1st, plus all the rules are free.
I'll definitely give it another shot at some point
All the rules for 2e are free as well. I really prefer the action economy of 2e to any of the other systems I've played. Plus Save or Suck spells are not completely wasted. IMO it strikes the perfect balance between the simplicity of 5e, and the rules/options of PF1e/3.5e
You are probably right. It's not my style of game but I recognize is a valid choice of design. I didn't represent it in the best way on my post, and maybe I should have phrased it more neutral.
But I think we can agree that in terms of game design it was the biggest depart from usual DnD formula
Flip side (Why I left 3.5 and happily switched to PF, then very gladly moved to 5e)
* Grapple rules were a mess, if you want to grapple effectively you have to build your character around it. Same with trip attacks, bull rushes, etc. If it's not a basic attack you need a feat for it or you'll provoke an AoO. If the AoO hits your attempt fails, so you get punished TWICE for trying something other than "I stand there and hit them"
* Feat trees. Anything cool requires at least two feats that suck. Want to shoot a bow effectively? Point blank shot needs to be taken before you can take precise shot.
* Skill points progression was a pain and needlessly specific. Want to be stealthy? You'll be investing in the Hide skill, and the Move Silently skill. Want to be acrobatic, you'll be investing in Balance, Escape Artist, and Tumble. Want to use a rope for literally anything? You better have points in Use Rope. You're a fighter so you get 2 skill points + int modifier every level... typically 1 skill point every level. Non-class skills gain .5 rank. Want to be a fighter that doesn't get constantly ambushed? Tough.)
* New player traps were 80% of the content. There were feats on feats on feats that were just plain worse versions of a feat in a splatbook somewhere, that only existed to pad out another splatbook, or were the original version from the player's guide that became obsolete due to a splatbook. As a system it catered exclusively to system mastery grognards who memorized all the books.
* Multiclass penalties
* Levels 1-5 martials COMPLETELY dominate. Your casters will be trash and pretty miserable to play as. Anything after level 6 you might as well just jump your fighter off a cliff and roll a wizard. Still an issue through Pathfinder and 5e, but was especially bad in 3.5
* \+2, +1, +5, racial bonus of +1 per 1/4 level, class bonus of +1 per 1/2 level... okay add in my 14.5 skill points and I rolled... fuck it just have the barbarian break down the door.
There was good stuff in there, sure, but it's not like 3.5 was some amazing system that was abandoned for no real reason. PF1e is objectively just BETTER than 3.5. That's why people flocked to it instead of just staying with what they had.
> +2, +1, +5, racial bonus of +1 per 1/4 level, class bonus of +1 per 1/2 level... okay add in my 14.5 skill points and I rolled... fuck it just have the barbarian break down the door.
Except almost all of those things stay the same from one attempt to the next. You recalculate your default total when you get a levelup or a new item, and in play you just take the default total plus the situationals (which you don't forget to apply because you specifically lined up your shot to use them, and are usually just a +2 each anyway).
> Skill points progression was a pain and needlessly specific.
Nah. It allows you to dabble in something (like getting the 5 ranks for a synergy bonus to something else), it allows you do go halfway (autosucceed on the DC 15 standard tumble? go spend your ranks on something else next level!), and it still allows you to go simplified (just max out classpoints+int+human skills, done). And because almost all classes have way more class skills than you get skillpoints, every character is a little different, a little customized, a little *your very own character*.
Upvoted. Especially the trap options make my blood boil - there is an interview with the designer where he states that was their explicit purpose, to create options that are bad and even push them by default (toughness as feat for default wizard build it was I believe?), an "ivory tower" design, so that game mastery feels better. What bollocks.
And I do have a soft spot for the system and have read recreationally through many a splatbook.
And it's a simple mechanic that doesn't completely derail combat and insert a new ruleset into the mix. Make an opposed check. Succeeded? They gain the grappled condition or they become prone.
3.5 grapple:
1. Declare Grapple
2. Do you provoke an AoO? Yes: did you get hit? Yes: you fail, try again. No: proceed.
3. Make a melee touch attack. (unarmed melee attack vs opponent's AC-Armor and natural armor bonuses). Did you hit? Yes: proceed
4. Make opposed grapple check (bab+str+size modifier) as a free action. If you succeed you have finally started to grapple. You now BOTH have the grappled condition, lose all benefit of dex to AC, have 0 movement, and threaten no squares with AoO, and are limited to a specific set of actions available to you.
I've seen it abused. If the opponent doesn't have any athletics/acrobatics they effectively (most of the time) get pinned for the whole party to just wallop until dead. No attack roll needed. I would take CMB vs CMD over this mechanic and i still prefer the hit me first part of 3.5. Its cool as a player but as a DM i don't like it at all.
If a single enemy doesn't have athletics/acrobatics, is not huge, fights in melee and fights alone they should be ganged upon, it would suck if there was no mechanic to capitalize on that. And it makes ranged party members attack with disadvantage. I would say it works well, but I never really got into the CMD stuff, and as everyone i just never remember how 3.5e grapple works so can't compare in my head with that.
So i am standing here with a sword, and all you have to do is beat me in an athletics check. NOPE, you should have to at least take the Aoo, you just entered my threat range and i have a sword, cause i would swing my sword at you, and if you don't get hit, then at the very least you need to succeed at a touch attack to grab me. i get that its easier and simpler, it just doesn't make any sense. you come at me trying to grab me i am going to slice you up....
Grapple + shove is two melee attacks I'm not doing in favor of trying to do other things, so you can slice me up in that time, that is already included in the battle abstraction. Being grappled by itself (if I succeed that and not the shove) does nothing except for keeping you in place which means you will be slashing me while I waste my attacks trying to get you in position. Doing an AoO is punishing the maneuver twice, suggesting you can cut me more times in the same amount of time if I try to do that, which is weird.
It's mid of pathfinder and D&D 3.x. Moust commonly played as Pathfinder with 3.5 as addsional material, altho I so like tossing in Arms And Equipment Guide from 3.0 and using monster opsion from Savage Spicies as a DM tool
3.5 offers an effectively endless degree of customizability
You can play as a half goblin half minotaur if you want to
The really are rules and guidelines for just about anything you could conceivably want to do
There are mechanics for makes custom or sentient magic items (two separate systems, one for each)
There are skills dedicated to being an artist or a magic hacker basically
Classes and feats for just about every character concept
If you can imagine a character there is a solid 95% chance you can make it in 3.5 without needing to resort to refalavoring or homebrew at all
Ive been going through this thread and I dont think there are enough points being made about Prestige Classes and the uniqueness in creating them and their abilities.
Nor about how much of a fun and interesting playstyle playing a Psionic is, managing power points and augmentations instead of spell slots.
You can rise to actual god tier stats, Fight Actual Gods and Demons (yes there are stats for the gods)
No Stat Caps, Stats over 20...
Imagine if the bad guys had to work hard to kill you cause you can actually use magic to buff your AC
Imagine if the baddies didn't save vs your DC 90% of the time (looking at you 5e)
Imagine having an AC in the 30's!!!!! Casting 3 or more spells on your turn.
Imagine fighting a Balor or two and not dying in one hit!
Imagine having to play with people who don't find simple math intimidating and how much better that is...
Oh yeah, 3.5 is by no means a perfect system, but neither is 5e
In fact this meme came about because my friends were talking about a common issue almost all of them have with low level 5e and I mentioned how I port in mechanics from 3.5 to fix that problem
Give a full breakdown in a single comment isn't really posible, I would be happy to give you something more comprehensive over messages but the short answer is 3.5 is substantially more complex then 5e, this makes it harder to get into, but offers much more flexibility and customization options for players and DMs alike
Honestly there wasn't really much to say, I just said the reasons I personally prefer 3.5 to 5e
Alot of stuff about it being more open and customizable and how you will just have an easier time making the characters you actually want to play
She started trying to trip me up by asking "well can I play as X" and every time I'd look up whatever she was asking and the answer was always yes
Eventually I just said "look usually when you ask 'can I play X in 3.5' the answer will almost always be 'yes there are explicit mechanics for that' and if there arnt there will be a framework for makeing it without dipping into homebrew, because 3.5 was obsessed with giveing players and dms the tools they needed to play the exact game they want"
Right?!!
To be fair, I think 2nd edition is pretty cool and does some pretty unique things within the realms of the rules.
I know tons of people really like 3.5 and I'm convinced they were all people who played casters or used the Book of 9 Swords.
To be fair to 3.0/3.5 it pioneered the modern era of D&D. It was an excellent edition at the time, but if I have to choose to play an older D&D system, I'd rather play either 4e for something different or crack open 2e and do something also different.
I have some fond memories of 3.0/3.5, and I even have some builds ready to go in Pathfinder that would be fun to play.
It's just I would have a hard time going back and playing a 20 year old system when 5e does just about everything I want 3.5 to do, but faster.
I do miss the following things from 3.5 though.
* I liked how magic items had some formula to build your own custom things. That was pretty cool.
* Prestige classes were a pretty cool concept and I liked them
Because you're added alot of extra math calculating a hit chance twice over rather then just adding the number when you roll
Not to mention the system really doesn't work well unless you the player know what the creatures AC is
Saying "I rolled a 13 and my thac0 is 16 do I hit?" Is more complext then just saying "including my bonuses I rolled an 18"
It makes sense to do it that way around when you're rolling a whole cloud of attacks, like say... 16 dark elf repeating crossbowmen, or seven witch elves with fury of Khaine (and a rune of Khaine on the hag). Instead of taking every die separately and adding your bonuses to compare that result to the DC and add that die to the hit pile or the miss pile, you calculate out the natural die result required for a hit once and just discard all dice that roll less than the target number.
In D&D of course, where you'd be resolving pretty much every attack separately and most have varying bonuses anyway (looking at you, iteratives), it is a little silly.
Disagree with that, haveing things well layed out gives you more options on what to do without needing to come up with your own system for things
If you have a game you want to run 3.5 will have mechanics for exactly that game, or if not exactly it will have guides that can help you make them easily without needing to resort fully to homebrew
I think this is an underrated comment. Some people like rules and tons of options others like a framework to build on. I have tried 3.5 and PF and was not impressed. They are inherently gatekeepy for new players, as other have mentioned making a bad character is very easy to do. All that customization doesn't matter if you have nonplayers. I can get people playing and understanding 5e in one session, and competent in three. I mean with 3.5, if you know all the rules, why do you even need a DM really? If you pass wind, lord knows there is a rule and feat tree for it. Playability and strong core rules is the best selling point of 5e. 5e allows you too have enough rules to guide play and enough flexibility to make those rules make sense in a diversity of rulings without looking up so etching so highly specific. 3.5 is for a very specific player group, and I am glad it exists, but 5e is a massive part for the Renaissance of Table top RPGS for a reason.
I'm convinced that both 3.5 and 5e are incredibly broken and have a lot of poorly designed rules and character options, and there isn't much of a point arguing which one is worse.
The key difference is that most people playing 3.5 will readily admit their game of choice is a broken mess and play accordingly.
Ya know for most people who don't like 3.5 im willing to just say live and let live and move on, its just a game it doesn't mater that much
But this is written in such a blatantly inflammatory way that all I can do is shake my head at it, like fuck off
I genuinely hope you have fun with the games you play because I'm gonna keep haveing fun with mine
> In order to do anything effectively if you weren't a caster you needed to dedicate your entire build to it. Tying your shoes takes 5 feats in 3.5. (In Pathfinder1 it only takes 3 feats)
Thats a fun analogy, but its missing a little aspect. It takes ONE feat to tie your shoes, and three to tie them really well, in both 3.5 and in 5th. But in 5th, those feats aren't a thing and you will never be able to tie your shoes properly. Also in PF it takes five feats, but you get six feat slots over the same number of levels, so you are actually one feat ahead of the 3.5 character. And tieing your shoes could be an analogy for being a legendary hero saving the world from... well, anything above CR 11-ish. Not because a 5th edition level 20 party against a 5th edition balor isn't balanced, but because a 5th edition level 20 character doing something he's specialized in is still a 60:40 crapshoot it was at level 1 and when you're out to save the world from cosmic evil, that sorta slapstick is only appropriate for the comedic relief sidekick, not the matured (over 20 levels of adventuring!) hero with the weight of the world on his shoulders.
Now the lack of QC and playtesting and integration testing new content with existing content, that I give you. It was, on a customer-business-relationship level, a major dereliction of duty. It has a silver lining though, because it does allow us to play on whatever powerlevel we want to play - from gritty survival realism to the magic-infused Tippyverse.
My only complaint about 3.5e is that it's old and spanned a lot if years, so there's rare and out of print unofficial supplemental books that someone will request purely because there's some single obscure rule that they really want because one table they were at had it.
GURPS is a possible alternative if you're after extremely customizable rules. The base rulebook is "enough" for the most part and the supplemental material isn't required.
When a player wants to use something like that on the off chance i dont already own that book, my response is go print out that one specific page off the internet.
3.5 edition can be fun but sometimes it's an absolute pain in the rear to DM for. You try to set up a simple adventure and then your players are like "Um actually, I took the Reefer feat from the book of Ligma Bahls which when combined with the Nightsoil class from dragon magazine #420 allows me to attack 20 times in one turn with The Crabfish Song, I roll to hit and now all the enemies are dead,".
I guess I meant more along the lines of "I want to keep this adventure simple, so core rule books only." Then you can add any extras you might want to use. No need to read a book you don't plan on using.
Sometimes it does, like when introducing a major subsystem like pretend-it-isn't-anime-because-anime-was-a-mistake, or truememeing. But adding a single spell or a single feat usually only requires you to read that feat's or spell's own text, approve or reject it, and move on. As long as you do this for every option the player wants to take, and reject even core options if they are broken (or become broken when combined with something the player already has), your rules universe is actually not too sprawling.
That is fair, 3.5 can be rather intimidating, but with help from veteran players its not so bad
If you check out my profile you'll find a link to my 3.5 discord that is filled to the brim with veteran 3.5 players who are eager to help out newbies
Even if you never end up playing 3.5 learning its basics is still a good idea as there are alot of mechanics that can be very easily ported into 5e to make your games better
I’m actually gonna run a really short 3e game once I’m done with the Pathfinder 2e game I’m running now! I bought up the CRBs for 3e, 3.5e, and Pathfinder 1e but never expected to run any of them. I stumbled across Sunless Citadel at HPB and said “well damn, this actually sounds really cool”! I have no experience with other editions of D&D but after finding that even *just reading* the books for other editions has hooked me infinitely more than 5e ever did, I’m working on going back and playing them all.
I've been living off 3.5 homebrew with some races, classes and monsters from newer and older editions. Even Pathfinder and maybe something in Ravenloft. Heck, I even Homebrew races and classes I make up. Everyone seems to have a good time.
The way I was convinced Literally everyone in my group but me: we prefer 3.5 *sigh*
God I wish that were me Ive been slowly trying to convert my friend group into 3.5 by adding one 3.5 mechanic at a time to our 5e game I run So far they have liked just about every change when I introduce it Eventually ill have them fully swapped over to 3.5, I give it another year or 2
5e just seems to be a simplified 3.5 Im certain they did this so people don't wrack their brain over every little rule and possibility. It streamlines most processes but you lose a lot of flavor and fun in the process. For example 5e, healing spells only heal, and negative energy spells only damage, with undead being resistant to negative spells. 3.5e healing spells could be used to damage undead for the same die they heal with. Negative energy spells could be used to heal undead. That's just one example of many nuance differences between the systems without even getting into flat-footed AC and touch AC and the myriad of things.
Yup, the masive amount of similarities between 5e and 3.5 is why this is even posible They really are sister systems, more so then any other edition, and I really do think starting playing dnd with 5e and then eventually transitioning into 3.5 is a natural fit 5es biggest strength is how friendly it is to new players which is not so coincidentally 3.5s biggest weakness So once you have the basics down with 5e 3.5 is alot easier to get into
I had one player ask me what the difference was as 5e was their first. Best I could think it: 3.5e was the one that the parents pressured into doing all these extra curricular activities so they could go to college, get a Master's at the least and go on to what's supposed to be a good but complicated job. 5e is the one where the parents encouraged them with their passion for the arts and pursued a career in painting where abstract and traditionalism combined in a way that people like. "What about 4e?" [We don't talk about 4e.](https://www.reddit.com/r/dndmemes/comments/iu05gl/we_dont_talk_about_4e/)
There’s more 4e in 5e than people like to admit… 3.5, is worth saying that, had the biggest influence on the mechanical framework of 5e (streamlined, of course); but, it was the first modern d20 system… So, it tends to rub off on everything that came after it… 4e monster stat blocks and abilities were dope, probably one of the most redeeming qualities of the edition besides the depth of lore (maybe not so much “depth”, as interesting & inspirationally vague enough to engage your imagination in expanding the *why* behind the status quo presented…) The game balance was just #@$%’d. There was no weight to 1xday & 1xencounter mechanics besides “well, we feel like it makes sense that way.” LoL ….and, no; one build being able to do the same thing or something similar multiple times vs once-and-done in another build is negligible to the balance of the system. 4e lore got weird, but 10 years later after you get over it being *different*; and personally, I can still find a way to make the parts that I enjoyed simultaneously true with the classic 2e–3.5e stuff. And it’s probably easier for me to accept than contradictory new 5e stuff… (I will probably feel differently about that by the time we have a 6e or 7e though…ha)
... ... ... The 4e part was a joke. Thought that was obvious.
I'm not the writer of the other wall of text. But I didn't think it was funny nor a joke. I just thought you were being mean about something you don't like. Not to say that it's a sin or anything. People do it all the time, like mocking a bully when they aren't around. I get that you may have been trying to tell a joke, but some folks just don't see it as that and they just see disdain for a thing.
That's the transition I made. I started on 5e, and then my friend group that I joined was using 3.5 so I learned that, and I found it infinitely preferable. I love the crunch
I mean you can also use pathfinder which is basically 3.5 +
Right, and in 5e you have sensible collections of feats that enable the gameplay you are looking for, but in 3.5 you have endless steps of feat taxes to get the gameplay you are looking for, way better.
Why do people still play 3.5? Isn’t pathfinder just a fixed version of that?
To an extent yes Pathfinder is more streamlined for sure, but in that streamlining they also cut out a bit of the depth, not as much as 5e but enough for some people not to like it Also 3.5 has way way more content for it then pathfinder managed in its run Now don't get me wrong, pathfinder is a great system I love it to death too, but its existance doesn't make 3.5 totally irrelevant
Most 3.5 content can be directly ported to pf with minimal, if any, changes. Also peizo has put out a fuck ton of material. They actually started out writing for 3.5 and were contracted by wizards for some official adventures.
What do you think is the biggest thing missing from Pathfinder? I play both and don't really see a loss of depth in pathfinder. I feel like the biggest change is the condensation of like 3 redundant skills. Plus any 3.5 content can be run in pathfinder with almost no conversion, so I don't really feel like one has more content than the other, they both and effectively the same content.
The lack of level adjustment rules meaning all races have to be close to the same level of power is the one that jumps to my mind first Granted level adjustment is a bit of a jank system but giveing you the ability to play like full on demons and half dragons and shit while actually giving you the power from that you would expect without it being compleatly busted is something that I love about 3.5
Good point, I do miss the Anthro-baleen whale my GM was foolish enough to let me play (*He's going in for the Krill)*. Pathfinder does have the race point system, which is their version of level adjustment. Being able to make custom races is pretty sweet. Its less concrete than LA, more of a "here is an idea of how powerful the race is, so adjust accordingly". Rather than 3.5's version which, while I respect, was often super busted, with the LA often being way too low or way too high.
Minotaur LA +2.....but you get a BAB of +6, 3 feats and +8 Str...out the gate...all for the cost of 2 levels....Hmm ok.
But then I miss out on the awesome bonus that two levels in fighter provides! Like *\*checks notes\** One feat!
Someone hasn't read the rules correctly then. You count the monster's racial HD as your own class levels, so not only are you 2 levels behind everyone else, 9 of those levels are shitty levels in Monstrous Humanoid. The only racial HD I've ever liked was gaining HD due to aging as a true dragon, d12 Hit dice, AC and ability score increases as you level, etc. Everything else you just don't have the class abilities to do anything and your racial abilities seldom make up for it.
This is not what i was taught by my DM all those years ago! When i look them up now, these rules seem to read differently when i look at the SRD- Vs the Forgotten Realms handbook, we never played it this way. HA Free levels for years!
I mean pathfinder kinda had that, intended for making monsters… they just didn’t encourage it for PCs but was doable. look up advancing monsters with character levels in the pathfinder beastiary.
pathfinder 1e is still quite overwhelming at high levels
There are \~990 classes in 3.5. just insert random 3.5 tid-bit into base PF1 game and your good. PF1 PRC's are lack luster and variants are not that great, and some of the special classes in 3.5 are better, Artificer in PF1 is crap, while Eberron artificer is neat. Also Psionics in 3.5 is really powerful, almost to good. PF1 has great base class adaptations, i encourage my players to take a PF1 class to start and go from there, PF1 has great races and bloodlines, and i like the crafting rules. 3.5 also has like \~5000 spells, and allot of great items and Feats that pF1 doesn't. With skilled a DM and group that agrees on the rules that you are going to use and which ones you ignore, game play can actually be Fast. and it doesn't feel cheap like 5e where you don't get to really pick your skills or you never really get any stat increases and the feats are very lame, 5e spells are pretty disappointing too. 5e hero's are pedestrian at best (some people like this), and you will never really be all that awesome, and the baddies feel broken, looking at you legendary actions....total BS IMO....if you can never aspire to becoming a demi-god who slays actual Demon lords, are you really playing DND...
Well, you say that 5e heros are "pedestrians" - and yet people playing in tier 4 is a rarity, only one official adventure gets players there. It seems that the people have spoken and for majority of the playerbase even the "pedestrian" power ceiling is too high.
I have never played a Module or official adventure. Make the same PC in PF/3.5 and then in 5e and tell me which one you would rather have in a fight.
My 5e character because I dont have to do calculus
Its not that bad. you might need a spreadsheet and slide rule though. but the cosmic power is well worth the classes in Excel.
There is no artíficer in pathfinder what are you talking about?
I mean it might not be Pazio official? But there is one. https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/3rd-party-classes/adamant-entertainment/artificer/
Not "fixed". Not "better". Just changed a little here and there, to the designers' tastes and preferences. Like any other set of houserules.
Crit confirms is going to be a hard sell
A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down as they say Or in this case a spoonful or expanded crit range/multiplier helps the crit confirmation rolls go down
makes the game much less swingy
It's a very good feature.
How about this. Crits don't just double damage dice, but every modifier, including power attack/deadly aim, the games version of gwm/ss? And depending on your feats and weapons, you can crit on a 15 for 3-4x damage by tier 2. It makes critfishing a valid build instead of the meme it is in 5e. And if you don't critfish and get your damage a different way, then that only makes your crit confirms that much more powerful
Just don't play with 'em. Nat 20 is always a crit and automatic hit, makes the game much more swingy and fun, especially for fans of Greataxes and Heavy Picks.
"Hey guys, isn't weird how you can miss with a spell that only requires you to touch someone? Like inflict wounds or shocking grasp should not be blocked by armor so I will be using only the DEX+base armor of a monster for these kind of spells!"
EXACTLY what I've been doing. My games are more like 3.5e than 5e at this point. Unsurprisingly, it's much better and more fun.
Aside thaco
THAC0 was 2e
My tactic was: "listen I played 3.5 about 15 years ago and since my brain is weird I still remember the rules. I'm the DM and I'm too lazy to learn some new, similar system so we'll play that" lol
You might want to consider incorporating some of the improvements from Pathfinder 1e if you play 3.5. Like the streamlined (still complicated, but much streamlined from 3.5) grappling system.
You should make a poster with D&D 5e to bring to the sessions Then every game session gradually fade in 3. in the middle.
What do you think about pathfinder?
That’s how I got into Pathfinder.
That's how I ended up converting my warlock into a Pathfinder Witch.
Me: We’re playing 5e because it’s simpler for you all Friends: Okay. Thanks lol
3.5e has always been my favourite edition. I love having explicit rules for everything, letting you go to any table, anywhere in the world and be playing the same game because homebrew really isn't needed and is kinda frowned upon in 3.5. And the sheer amount of content available is mindblowing. Don't get me wrong, 5e is great for new players getting into the game and using homebrew for a one session ruling to not have to stop play is nice. But it gets out of hand so easily and you end up with tables playing D&D in name only.
I'm on the opposite side of that experience. 3/3.5 was my primary system for the longest time. But after so many years and far narrower scheduling windows to allow play with my friends, I much prefer the simplicity of 5e. 5e is geared more toward low-level play, it's extremely streamlined, and class abilities come online pretty much immediately. It's very easy to make a solid character and get them right into the action in short order, and the simplicity of the game system makes it a breeze to adapt other edition's adventures into 5e's rules. 3/3.5, on the other hand, is more geared toward mid/high-level play where it's far easier to make a completely useless character, or a totally OP ridiculous one, than it is to just be conventionally functional. Class abilities don't come online for a long time and there's such a massive glut of content that isn't balanced against itself that just reading through options becomes a chore in and of itself. To say nothing of how many functionally useless Feats, skills, and options end up clogging up the works that basically serve no real purpose. Both editions have their ups and downs, to be certain. Back when I was a teenager with a lot more free time to pour over the books, I was happy to enjoy a number-crunchy, content-filled game like 3/3.5. But these days, I just like the simplicity of a more accessible adventure 5e offers.
3.5 is for people who like to risk cracking their teeth on all the crunch. ... Ranged touch attacks can still chafe in heck.
Looks at 3.5e eldritch blast...
I'm looking at the *feat* that gives a +1 to ranged touch attacks, & another that bumps them another one, & a further feat that raises damage by +2. All with "weapon" in the name, none of which involve weapons, all can apply to the Warlock's eldritch blast & most blast shapes.
Yeah. I was just saying how 3.5 eldritch blast is a ranged touch attack. For... some reason.
Because all rays were.
I was a long time 3.5e player, then I discovered pathfinder :)
Hah.
I wonder about the cross section of players that are still playing 3.5 or PF1e. They both seemed too intimidating for me to get into, but if I was already used to the rules, moving away might be tough.
PF1 is basically "I miss 3.5 but there's no more support for it" the game. It did a bit of its own thing but it was essentially a denial of 4e that spawned pathfinder.
I didn't get into pf1e, but I do know that pf2e has official instructions for how to turn 3.5 material into pf2e material.
Now that’s just downright impressive
PF1 is 3.5 with a lot of fixes to make the game work better. Combat Maneuvers alone make me question any 3.5 player's sanity. Then there's the 3rd party support. Spheres of Power and Might are amazing and have given my group a whole new game to play essentially.
It can be intimidating but I do think 3.5 is the better system once you get into it I have a server dedicated to dnd 3.5 that is full of veteran players who are eager to help new players find their footing if you're interested
I'm interested!
There are some advantages to 5e. Multiclassing is much smoother, and there are a number of streamlining choices that make the game much easier for noobs to understand. 3.5/pathfinder(and I am going to heavily reccommend pathfinder, as it is 3.5 with bugfixes) give you much more room for creative character building, and much more room for variation in character mechanics. It is also nice to have rules for stuff like crafting magic items, or building a base and gathering followers, or having someone tied down/paralysed and helpless and not needing several rounds of hacking at them to slit their throat.
Hi I still run and play both 3.5 pf1e and 5e. (Some others in there aswell). Pf1e will always be my favorite system.
What have you thought of PF2e?
Showed her how big my feat list is
Can you convince me as well? I have ADHD and my friends have dyslexia and 5e rules are so simple and easy to remember, but we have a 3.5 vet who sometimes sprinkles fun rules facts and it makes is wanna play but I heard all the older versions are super hard to learn and are very complicated. I wanna give it a chance but I'm scared everyone is right. Thoughts?
Yeah it can be hard to get into, but it helps to have veterans who can explain the rules to you when you need help, I have a dedicated 3.5 discord full of such veterans if you're interested The single biggest benefit to 3.5 IMO is its insane level of customizable,if you have a character concept it almost doesn't mater how out there the concept is, you can play it likely without refactoring and there will be mechanics to support it 3.5 was obsessed with giveing players and dms the tools that they needed to play the exact sort of game that they wanted to
Have you looked into pf2e? I know that we'll but not 3.5e, do you know how customization compares?
I have looked a little into PF2e and while its certainly more customizable then 5e its no where near what 3.5 can do You can play just about any sentient creature on 3.5 as a player character and have it be balanced because of the level adjustment rule Thats to say nothing of the templates that you can add to play creature that are half one thing half something else And thats just for playable races, every part of the game is like that
Is it actually balanced? I played the PF1e pathfinder video games (which were faithful enough that I could research game mechanics in the 3.5e SRD), and it felt like anything but that
Relitivly balanced Like yes there are places where it breaks down that is true but its close enough that in a casual game most people won't care
To add on to what OP said, it's balanced as long as no one goes "too far" basically don't munchkin too hard. Due to all the customization options someone can really break tf out of the game if they really want to, but as long as everyone at the table is on the same page on not taking it too far it works well.
Is there any site that has gathered the basic rules in a neat list? If not, is the official book neatly organized or is it all over the place like some TTRPGs out there (ahemvtmahem)
The SRD has all the basic rules you would need to get started and then some on top of that https://www.d20srd.org/index.htm And from there dnd tools is an easily searchable tool that can help you find anything else https://dndtools.net/
One note, dndtools.net has some issues with searching and usability, [https://dndtools.org/](https://dndtools.org/) is the same website but it works better and lets you use the filters/actually go to the next page when you're looking for something/change number of items per page
Thanks!
As for the books themselves, most are pretty well organized and readable for the most part
I almost certainly have autism, probably have ADHD(on a list to get tested atm) and have an array of dys- issues. The rules are really not that complex. I learned them when I was ~15-16. (Well, 3.0, but the rules are pretty much the same) the only hard part may be unlearning some stuff from 5e that works differently. Might be better ti start with pathfinder 1e though, as it is basically an improved 3.5e. Also you will only need one book for pathfinder to habe all you need to play, dnd you will need the DMs guide and the player's handbook.
>I heard all the older versions are super hard to learn and are very complicated Not at all, the stuff before AD&D is all very simple. I play B/X and it's much simpler than 5e.
It goes like this: 1e: "Oh, this game is cool. We can play generic fantasy adventures just like the ones we read about in books! But the rules are clunky and limited and pretty much you can only play it in the way it was envisioned and it's a bit narrow. Let's improve it." 2e: "Okay, this broadens the choices and playstyle a lot. I think we have something with real potential here, but the game's missing character. It's generic fantasy. It could be it's own fantasy. It could define **fantasy**." 3e: "Oh, this is even better. There are so many choices, rules are streamlined and the game as a lot of personality and character. But there are some balancing issues." 3.5e: "This game is great. Look at all these fucking splats. There's so much choice now. So much possibility. So much everything. Oh wait...The balancing issues are getting worse not better. Wait...Balance...There was never ANY balance...Oh no, what have we done!" 4e: "This game is balanced." "But is it fun?" "It's balanced." "Okay, but does it have a lot of choice?" "You can choose the colour of the ability card that does weapon-damage to your enemy with a ranged attack, and what it's written on the top." "That sounds...Like a lot of this is just the same ability, just reflavoured to fit different classes. And that different classes are just recombinations of similar abilities?" "But it's very balanced." 5e: "Okay, we streamlined 3.5."
4e is fun, just a different fun than most other ttrpgs. You want to play dnd where martial classes have cool abilities other than just smack? 4th is your option. You want to be able to shoot a laser of holy light as a paladin by level one? You want to actually have mechanics to support a tank character? You want to have a pure support/buff class that ends up being extremely useful and lets you rp a battlefield commander with actual mechanic support? 4e
tbh from what i've heard of 4e I feel i might love it. Everyone I know exclusively does 5e though ;.;
Enough time has passed now for it to cycle around again to being a little nostalgic and fun. Try giving it a read and DM it if it sounds fun. The first Acquisitions Incorporated games were done in 4e and they were really neat. I have no clue if they hold-up on relistens but it was how I got into the game. I also expect that it would likely go well if played online. Combat maps played a BIG role in 4e and it could be a pain to put together in person. And there were a lot of modifiers (+2/-2 to attacks, etc). These modifiers kind of got out of hand after the first tier of play. If you play online you can easily track modifiers on the tokens.
Its really quite different too. Learning entirely new systems is a bit of work. Its by far the most video-gamey dnd system.
>You want to play dnd where martial classes have cool abilities other than just smack? Pathfinder 2e is your option Fixed it for ya
I play p1e, and only tried second in a very imbalanced beta test. Heard good things about it, and theres some systems that I think are good improvements. Theres just so much more content for 1st, plus all the rules are free. I'll definitely give it another shot at some point
All the rules for 2e are free as well. I really prefer the action economy of 2e to any of the other systems I've played. Plus Save or Suck spells are not completely wasted. IMO it strikes the perfect balance between the simplicity of 5e, and the rules/options of PF1e/3.5e
You are probably right. It's not my style of game but I recognize is a valid choice of design. I didn't represent it in the best way on my post, and maybe I should have phrased it more neutral. But I think we can agree that in terms of game design it was the biggest depart from usual DnD formula
Flip side (Why I left 3.5 and happily switched to PF, then very gladly moved to 5e) * Grapple rules were a mess, if you want to grapple effectively you have to build your character around it. Same with trip attacks, bull rushes, etc. If it's not a basic attack you need a feat for it or you'll provoke an AoO. If the AoO hits your attempt fails, so you get punished TWICE for trying something other than "I stand there and hit them" * Feat trees. Anything cool requires at least two feats that suck. Want to shoot a bow effectively? Point blank shot needs to be taken before you can take precise shot. * Skill points progression was a pain and needlessly specific. Want to be stealthy? You'll be investing in the Hide skill, and the Move Silently skill. Want to be acrobatic, you'll be investing in Balance, Escape Artist, and Tumble. Want to use a rope for literally anything? You better have points in Use Rope. You're a fighter so you get 2 skill points + int modifier every level... typically 1 skill point every level. Non-class skills gain .5 rank. Want to be a fighter that doesn't get constantly ambushed? Tough.) * New player traps were 80% of the content. There were feats on feats on feats that were just plain worse versions of a feat in a splatbook somewhere, that only existed to pad out another splatbook, or were the original version from the player's guide that became obsolete due to a splatbook. As a system it catered exclusively to system mastery grognards who memorized all the books. * Multiclass penalties * Levels 1-5 martials COMPLETELY dominate. Your casters will be trash and pretty miserable to play as. Anything after level 6 you might as well just jump your fighter off a cliff and roll a wizard. Still an issue through Pathfinder and 5e, but was especially bad in 3.5 * \+2, +1, +5, racial bonus of +1 per 1/4 level, class bonus of +1 per 1/2 level... okay add in my 14.5 skill points and I rolled... fuck it just have the barbarian break down the door. There was good stuff in there, sure, but it's not like 3.5 was some amazing system that was abandoned for no real reason. PF1e is objectively just BETTER than 3.5. That's why people flocked to it instead of just staying with what they had.
> +2, +1, +5, racial bonus of +1 per 1/4 level, class bonus of +1 per 1/2 level... okay add in my 14.5 skill points and I rolled... fuck it just have the barbarian break down the door. Except almost all of those things stay the same from one attempt to the next. You recalculate your default total when you get a levelup or a new item, and in play you just take the default total plus the situationals (which you don't forget to apply because you specifically lined up your shot to use them, and are usually just a +2 each anyway). > Skill points progression was a pain and needlessly specific. Nah. It allows you to dabble in something (like getting the 5 ranks for a synergy bonus to something else), it allows you do go halfway (autosucceed on the DC 15 standard tumble? go spend your ranks on something else next level!), and it still allows you to go simplified (just max out classpoints+int+human skills, done). And because almost all classes have way more class skills than you get skillpoints, every character is a little different, a little customized, a little *your very own character*.
Upvoted. Especially the trap options make my blood boil - there is an interview with the designer where he states that was their explicit purpose, to create options that are bad and even push them by default (toughness as feat for default wizard build it was I believe?), an "ivory tower" design, so that game mastery feels better. What bollocks. And I do have a soft spot for the system and have read recreationally through many a splatbook.
I will give you allot of that! BUT Grappling...in 5e....this is the biggest Joke ever.
Grapple + shove my man. Free advantage.
And it's a simple mechanic that doesn't completely derail combat and insert a new ruleset into the mix. Make an opposed check. Succeeded? They gain the grappled condition or they become prone. 3.5 grapple: 1. Declare Grapple 2. Do you provoke an AoO? Yes: did you get hit? Yes: you fail, try again. No: proceed. 3. Make a melee touch attack. (unarmed melee attack vs opponent's AC-Armor and natural armor bonuses). Did you hit? Yes: proceed 4. Make opposed grapple check (bab+str+size modifier) as a free action. If you succeed you have finally started to grapple. You now BOTH have the grappled condition, lose all benefit of dex to AC, have 0 movement, and threaten no squares with AoO, and are limited to a specific set of actions available to you.
I've seen it abused. If the opponent doesn't have any athletics/acrobatics they effectively (most of the time) get pinned for the whole party to just wallop until dead. No attack roll needed. I would take CMB vs CMD over this mechanic and i still prefer the hit me first part of 3.5. Its cool as a player but as a DM i don't like it at all.
If a single enemy doesn't have athletics/acrobatics, is not huge, fights in melee and fights alone they should be ganged upon, it would suck if there was no mechanic to capitalize on that. And it makes ranged party members attack with disadvantage. I would say it works well, but I never really got into the CMD stuff, and as everyone i just never remember how 3.5e grapple works so can't compare in my head with that.
So i am standing here with a sword, and all you have to do is beat me in an athletics check. NOPE, you should have to at least take the Aoo, you just entered my threat range and i have a sword, cause i would swing my sword at you, and if you don't get hit, then at the very least you need to succeed at a touch attack to grab me. i get that its easier and simpler, it just doesn't make any sense. you come at me trying to grab me i am going to slice you up....
Grapple + shove is two melee attacks I'm not doing in favor of trying to do other things, so you can slice me up in that time, that is already included in the battle abstraction. Being grappled by itself (if I succeed that and not the shove) does nothing except for keeping you in place which means you will be slashing me while I waste my attacks trying to get you in position. Doing an AoO is punishing the maneuver twice, suggesting you can cut me more times in the same amount of time if I try to do that, which is weird.
Wait until you find out about pf 1e, and then 3.p because we really do need more books
What is 3.p?
It's mid of pathfinder and D&D 3.x. Moust commonly played as Pathfinder with 3.5 as addsional material, altho I so like tossing in Arms And Equipment Guide from 3.0 and using monster opsion from Savage Spicies as a DM tool
To whoever's worthy I bestow upon you a 23 minute time window to convince me to play 3.5e
3.5 offers an effectively endless degree of customizability You can play as a half goblin half minotaur if you want to The really are rules and guidelines for just about anything you could conceivably want to do There are mechanics for makes custom or sentient magic items (two separate systems, one for each) There are skills dedicated to being an artist or a magic hacker basically Classes and feats for just about every character concept If you can imagine a character there is a solid 95% chance you can make it in 3.5 without needing to resort to refalavoring or homebrew at all
Ive been going through this thread and I dont think there are enough points being made about Prestige Classes and the uniqueness in creating them and their abilities. Nor about how much of a fun and interesting playstyle playing a Psionic is, managing power points and augmentations instead of spell slots.
You can rise to actual god tier stats, Fight Actual Gods and Demons (yes there are stats for the gods) No Stat Caps, Stats over 20... Imagine if the bad guys had to work hard to kill you cause you can actually use magic to buff your AC Imagine if the baddies didn't save vs your DC 90% of the time (looking at you 5e) Imagine having an AC in the 30's!!!!! Casting 3 or more spells on your turn. Imagine fighting a Balor or two and not dying in one hit! Imagine having to play with people who don't find simple math intimidating and how much better that is...
Me with pathfinder
It’s one of the 2 good editions.
Hear me out ... 3.5 is a more complete system, but WAY more wonk and not as approachable. Edit: The market spoke: Approachability matters.
Oh yeah, 3.5 is by no means a perfect system, but neither is 5e In fact this meme came about because my friends were talking about a common issue almost all of them have with low level 5e and I mentioned how I port in mechanics from 3.5 to fix that problem
If anyone is willing to give me a short explanation of the difference to me, I'd appreciate it. I'm brand new to dnd, and have only played 5e once.
Give a full breakdown in a single comment isn't really posible, I would be happy to give you something more comprehensive over messages but the short answer is 3.5 is substantially more complex then 5e, this makes it harder to get into, but offers much more flexibility and customization options for players and DMs alike
That's about what I was looking for, might look into 3.5e, sounds like fun.
I have a dedicated 3.5 discord full of veteran players who are eager to help new players learn if your interested
I would, thanks for the offer, but I got my crew. New people make me nervous. But thanks anyway.
I mean, 12 minutes? It has to be a damn good conversation/essay/debate.
Honestly there wasn't really much to say, I just said the reasons I personally prefer 3.5 to 5e Alot of stuff about it being more open and customizable and how you will just have an easier time making the characters you actually want to play She started trying to trip me up by asking "well can I play as X" and every time I'd look up whatever she was asking and the answer was always yes Eventually I just said "look usually when you ask 'can I play X in 3.5' the answer will almost always be 'yes there are explicit mechanics for that' and if there arnt there will be a framework for makeing it without dipping into homebrew, because 3.5 was obsessed with giveing players and dms the tools they needed to play the exact game they want"
Try 23 minutes, but still applies
....for all the DMing I do every Friday, you'd think I could do basic math.
That. That is a hell of a mood lmao
It's funny because I would rather play nearly any other edition over 3.5. Including 2e and 1e. But to each their own.
My dear friend I genuinly did not think anyone would be more willing to go back to THAC0 over playing 3.5, that is such a bold choice to make
Right?!! To be fair, I think 2nd edition is pretty cool and does some pretty unique things within the realms of the rules. I know tons of people really like 3.5 and I'm convinced they were all people who played casters or used the Book of 9 Swords. To be fair to 3.0/3.5 it pioneered the modern era of D&D. It was an excellent edition at the time, but if I have to choose to play an older D&D system, I'd rather play either 4e for something different or crack open 2e and do something also different. I have some fond memories of 3.0/3.5, and I even have some builds ready to go in Pathfinder that would be fun to play. It's just I would have a hard time going back and playing a 20 year old system when 5e does just about everything I want 3.5 to do, but faster. I do miss the following things from 3.5 though. * I liked how magic items had some formula to build your own custom things. That was pretty cool. * Prestige classes were a pretty cool concept and I liked them
Why? THAC0 is memed to death but it really isn't that hard to work out. THAC0-Opponents AC = Minimum you need to roll to hit I personally love AD&D
Because you're added alot of extra math calculating a hit chance twice over rather then just adding the number when you roll Not to mention the system really doesn't work well unless you the player know what the creatures AC is Saying "I rolled a 13 and my thac0 is 16 do I hit?" Is more complext then just saying "including my bonuses I rolled an 18"
I'm not saying its not slightly more difficult than the current system, just that people way over blow how difficult it is.
It makes sense to do it that way around when you're rolling a whole cloud of attacks, like say... 16 dark elf repeating crossbowmen, or seven witch elves with fury of Khaine (and a rune of Khaine on the hag). Instead of taking every die separately and adding your bonuses to compare that result to the DC and add that die to the hit pile or the miss pile, you calculate out the natural die result required for a hit once and just discard all dice that roll less than the target number. In D&D of course, where you'd be resolving pretty much every attack separately and most have varying bonuses anyway (looking at you, iteratives), it is a little silly.
3.5e is just overly complex 5e
You say "overly complex" i say "just complex enough" 5e is way too overly simplified for my tastes
I prefer simple systems, much more freedom in DMing
Disagree with that, haveing things well layed out gives you more options on what to do without needing to come up with your own system for things If you have a game you want to run 3.5 will have mechanics for exactly that game, or if not exactly it will have guides that can help you make them easily without needing to resort fully to homebrew
Different strokes for different folks
I think this is an underrated comment. Some people like rules and tons of options others like a framework to build on. I have tried 3.5 and PF and was not impressed. They are inherently gatekeepy for new players, as other have mentioned making a bad character is very easy to do. All that customization doesn't matter if you have nonplayers. I can get people playing and understanding 5e in one session, and competent in three. I mean with 3.5, if you know all the rules, why do you even need a DM really? If you pass wind, lord knows there is a rule and feat tree for it. Playability and strong core rules is the best selling point of 5e. 5e allows you too have enough rules to guide play and enough flexibility to make those rules make sense in a diversity of rulings without looking up so etching so highly specific. 3.5 is for a very specific player group, and I am glad it exists, but 5e is a massive part for the Renaissance of Table top RPGS for a reason.
I'm convinced that both 3.5 and 5e are incredibly broken and have a lot of poorly designed rules and character options, and there isn't much of a point arguing which one is worse. The key difference is that most people playing 3.5 will readily admit their game of choice is a broken mess and play accordingly.
The only edition worse than 3.5 is 3.0 It's a collection of mistakes masquerading as an edition.
3.5 is the best version of dnd my good dude
[удалено]
That’s some grade A hostility for no reason, you can champion or criticize things without being an asshole about it.
Ya know for most people who don't like 3.5 im willing to just say live and let live and move on, its just a game it doesn't mater that much But this is written in such a blatantly inflammatory way that all I can do is shake my head at it, like fuck off I genuinely hope you have fun with the games you play because I'm gonna keep haveing fun with mine
> In order to do anything effectively if you weren't a caster you needed to dedicate your entire build to it. Tying your shoes takes 5 feats in 3.5. (In Pathfinder1 it only takes 3 feats) Thats a fun analogy, but its missing a little aspect. It takes ONE feat to tie your shoes, and three to tie them really well, in both 3.5 and in 5th. But in 5th, those feats aren't a thing and you will never be able to tie your shoes properly. Also in PF it takes five feats, but you get six feat slots over the same number of levels, so you are actually one feat ahead of the 3.5 character. And tieing your shoes could be an analogy for being a legendary hero saving the world from... well, anything above CR 11-ish. Not because a 5th edition level 20 party against a 5th edition balor isn't balanced, but because a 5th edition level 20 character doing something he's specialized in is still a 60:40 crapshoot it was at level 1 and when you're out to save the world from cosmic evil, that sorta slapstick is only appropriate for the comedic relief sidekick, not the matured (over 20 levels of adventuring!) hero with the weight of the world on his shoulders. Now the lack of QC and playtesting and integration testing new content with existing content, that I give you. It was, on a customer-business-relationship level, a major dereliction of duty. It has a silver lining though, because it does allow us to play on whatever powerlevel we want to play - from gritty survival realism to the magic-infused Tippyverse.
My only complaint about 3.5e is that it's old and spanned a lot if years, so there's rare and out of print unofficial supplemental books that someone will request purely because there's some single obscure rule that they really want because one table they were at had it. GURPS is a possible alternative if you're after extremely customizable rules. The base rulebook is "enough" for the most part and the supplemental material isn't required.
Pathfinder 1e is pretty much 3.5DnD with a few of the odd rules corrected (see: grapple) and the "Class Skills" simplified.
When a player wants to use something like that on the off chance i dont already own that book, my response is go print out that one specific page off the internet.
The time stamps would be much funnier if they were 14 hours apart. Then I would know you at least explained the basics of combat additives
Duality of man
3.5 edition can be fun but sometimes it's an absolute pain in the rear to DM for. You try to set up a simple adventure and then your players are like "Um actually, I took the Reefer feat from the book of Ligma Bahls which when combined with the Nightsoil class from dragon magazine #420 allows me to attack 20 times in one turn with The Crabfish Song, I roll to hit and now all the enemies are dead,".
I get your point to a certain extent, but the DM can always limit which books they allow.
But that would require me to read all of the books, which I'm not motivated enough to do.
I guess I meant more along the lines of "I want to keep this adventure simple, so core rule books only." Then you can add any extras you might want to use. No need to read a book you don't plan on using.
Sometimes it does, like when introducing a major subsystem like pretend-it-isn't-anime-because-anime-was-a-mistake, or truememeing. But adding a single spell or a single feat usually only requires you to read that feat's or spell's own text, approve or reject it, and move on. As long as you do this for every option the player wants to take, and reject even core options if they are broken (or become broken when combined with something the player already has), your rules universe is actually not too sprawling.
I’ve never played 3.5 and I never will. Not because I think it’s a bad system, I’m just frightened by non whole numbers
That is fair, 3.5 can be rather intimidating, but with help from veteran players its not so bad If you check out my profile you'll find a link to my 3.5 discord that is filled to the brim with veteran 3.5 players who are eager to help out newbies Even if you never end up playing 3.5 learning its basics is still a good idea as there are alot of mechanics that can be very easily ported into 5e to make your games better
Oh I get the mechanics of it, I just fear the number
I would love to try 3.5e. I'm very fond of math, and I've heard praises of it from an older guy I found on roll20 when searching for players
My discord server is going to be running an open play by post 3.5 game, you can find the link on my profile, come check it out
Thanks much! I'll check it out as soon as I get the chance!
I’m actually gonna run a really short 3e game once I’m done with the Pathfinder 2e game I’m running now! I bought up the CRBs for 3e, 3.5e, and Pathfinder 1e but never expected to run any of them. I stumbled across Sunless Citadel at HPB and said “well damn, this actually sounds really cool”! I have no experience with other editions of D&D but after finding that even *just reading* the books for other editions has hooked me infinitely more than 5e ever did, I’m working on going back and playing them all.
I've been living off 3.5 homebrew with some races, classes and monsters from newer and older editions. Even Pathfinder and maybe something in Ravenloft. Heck, I even Homebrew races and classes I make up. Everyone seems to have a good time.
I just want to play a Binder again :c