D&D 3E/3.5 Differences between 3.0 and 3.5

[evildmguy]

After a long hiatus from DND, my group has switched back. I never played a 3.5 game, though, and while I prefer some aspects of it, I like some aspects of 3.0 as well. So, I am trying to create my "3.25" and take what I like from both. To that end, I am trying to figure out what the design philosophies were for each game.

This is what I have:

3.0 Emphasized spells over items
Classes are "top heavy"

3.5 Emphasized items over spells
Classes are spread out with abilities to the point of one a level

Hmm. That's all I can think of at this moment.

What I mean by spells vs items is that this is how I describe the changes in spells to 3.5. In 3.0, an extended Bull's Strength by a 7th level character lasted all day. In 3.5, it only lasts a "scene" but it gives a static high bonus.

As for the classes, 3.0 put a lot of abilities at first level. In contrast, 3.5 spread the abilities out over many levels and I think later supplements tried to give an ability per level.

So, do I have things about right with those? What other differences am I missing?

I am looking for ideas on what I need to do to convert stuff to me and my group's taste and so that's why I am posting this. Any help would be appreciated!

Thanks!

edg

 

[irdeggman]

3.5 DR was totally revamped along with the corresponding material types.

 

[evildmguy]

Oh, good point. What would adamantine be equal to? +3? +4?

And then there are weapon sizes in 3.5 but I think that's easily ignored.

Thanks!

edg

 

[irdeggman]

Oh, good point. What would adamantine be equal to? +3? +4?

And then there are weapon sizes in 3.5 but I think that's easily ignored.

Thanks!

edg

Doesn't work that way anymore.

DR: X/magic is the standard not X/+

There is X/silver, X/Cold iron, X/Adamantine, X/good and magic, etc.

You really can't make the the comparison to a relative + (from 3.0) things are much more specialiazed.

 

[Baumi]

Another Change was the Weapon Sizes, also some of the Prizes from magical Items have been changed.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Thanks to the might of the search function and the diligent work of Olgar Shiverstone, you can find here a compiled thread of the 3.5e changes

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=53488

Regards,

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

After a long hiatus from DND, my group has switched back. I never played a 3.5 game, though, and while I prefer some aspects of it, I like some aspects of 3.0 as well. So, I am trying to create my "3.25" and take what I like from both. To that end, I am trying to figure out what the design philosophies were for each game.

This is what I have:

3.0 Emphasized spells over items
Classes are "top heavy"

I am not sure that the "top-heavy" part was an intentional design goal.

If I was to make a 3.25, I think I would also try to keep the flexible 3.0 and the longer-running 3.0 buffs in the game. (Once the PCs grew so incredibly dependent on these spells in 3.0, shorter buffs just mean they rest earlier, not that they use it less often. I would probably just reduce the bonus of such buffs instead of the duration...)

Items seem prevalent in both games, though you might be correct that 3.5 focuses on it a bit more, as you can't empower your Bull's Strength etc. buffs anymore, and their duration is lessened...

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

3.0 Emphasized spells over items
Classes are "top heavy"

3.5 Emphasized items over spells
Classes are spread out with abilities to the point of one a level

Many spells were revamped for 3.5, but does that make 3.5 more item focused? I am not sure what you mean.

Do you mean "top heavy" or "frontloaded"? Frontloaded implies very significant class benefits in the first 1 (or 2) levels.

 

[evildmguy]

Thanks for all of the responses! I really appreciate it!

Yes, for "top heavy" I mean that 3.0 has lots of abilities at level 1 but 3.5 spread them out a bit.

I am defining 3.5 more item focused because it was my understanding that the reason the buff spells were switched to 1 min / lvl was because at 1 hour / lvl and an extend feat, it could last all day and have no reason to get the magic item. I thought the designers said they wanted to make items "viable again" and so that's why they changed all of the buff spells. I figured the trade off was the range, 2-5, instead of a flat +4, and the spell slot that is always used for it. I liked that as a choice. In 3.5, it's better to have the item because the spell can't do what the item does. Could be me.

Thanks for the link to the changes. However, what, in your opinion, is the reasons for the changes, such that I can look at something that's 3.5 and say, "Oh, they did this to follow the new paradigm but this is common to both." Maybe it's not that easy to say but that's what I am hoping to hear.

Thanks again for all of the responses!

edg

 

[krissbeth]

Spells got ALL changed up. Lots of durations got cut down (e.g. Charm Person went from being 1 day/level to 1 HOUR/level) which certainly points to less focus on spells.

Class features got shuffled around too (including prestige classes). The monk and duelist are the ones that immediately pop to mind for me (mostly because that's what I played in 3.0).