D&D 3.5

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Buzz at 2004-09-08 08:06:38
Converted from Phorums BB System

<i>Whilst 3.5 was a dismal failure, and a much shoddier game.</i>
Sure. Was this really necessary?

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Ross Winn at 2004-09-08 10:08:34
Converted from Phorums BB System

yes, that was why I put it there.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Buzz at 2004-09-08 11:16:26
Converted from Phorums BB System

I didn't thik it was, but, hey, you're the author.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by RJ Grady at 2004-09-08 14:59:01
Converted from Phorums BB System

Last I saw, D&D 3.5 was dismally selling pretty well.

Also, a better game.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by NotMousse at 2004-09-09 07:00:38
Converted from Phorums BB System

3.5 was a dismal failure? This is big news to me.

The 3.5 version of the rules have been the single biggest data project for PCGen in at least three years. The demand and unusual amount of support for the 3.5 line was amazing.

While I know a couple rules I absolutely ignore in 3.5 (weapon sizing springs to mind), I much prefer how the useful and/or interesting spells were spaced apart instead of being stuck at (typically) 1(utlity spells and the Magic Missle), 4 (a good number of evocation spells), and 9 (boom boom you're dead spells).

But I'd like to see what you think is 3.5's great downfall.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Buzz at 2004-09-09 07:02:43
Converted from Phorums BB System

It was a cheap shot in what was otherwise decent article, albeit a bit of a WW love-fest. How about we hold off until we see if nWoD is a dismal failure?

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by NotMousse at 2004-09-09 07:39:43
Converted from Phorums BB System

I considered the old WoD a failure from the start. Then again I loathe it for bringing goths out into the light of day where I was peacefully not being goth. Something about a clique of 'lonely, friendless, losers' hanging out together just strikes me as absurd.

BTW Buzz, you somewhat frighten me with a reply within 5 minutes of my post.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Buzz at 2004-09-09 08:29:07
Converted from Phorums BB System

<i>BTW Buzz, you somewhat frighten me with a reply within 5 minutes of my post.</i>

My pleasure! ;)

FWIW, I am not a rabid WW-hater. I do think that it couldn't hurt RPG.net columnists, however, to curb their hat of d02 unless it's somehow relevant to the article at hand. The 3.5 dig certainly didn't help to sell me on nWoD. It just reinforces the stereotype of the WW gamer-snob.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Ross Winn at 2004-09-09 09:29:29
Converted from Phorums BB System

I understand your point. Far from hating D20 I like and play it quite a bit. I just think that the 3.5 revision was wrong from a couple of angles and I think I have shared those issues somewhat. I hope you also realize that one of my main points was that though things seem all friggin cheery right now, the proof is in the sustained sales of the nWoD, not the initial sales. On the whole, it doesn't matter how good it is, it matters how good people think it is.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Buzz at 2004-09-09 09:42:18
Converted from Phorums BB System

<i>Far from hating D20 I like and play it quite a bit. I just think that the 3.5 revision was wrong from a couple of angles and I think I have shared those issues somewhat.</i>

Understood. Still, realize that regardless of one's opinion of the quality or necessity of 3.5, it's sold very well. "Dismal failure" isn't accurate in an overall sense.

<i>I hope you also realize that one of my main points was that though things seem all friggin cheery right now, the proof is in the sustained sales of the nWoD, not the initial sales. On the whole, it doesn't matter how good it is, it matters how good people think it is.</i>

Very true.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Gabriel at 2004-09-09 10:44:07
Converted from Phorums BB System

If you have to have the changes pointed out to you, it probably isn't needed.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Ross Winn at 2004-09-09 12:12:20
Converted from Phorums BB System

While D&D 3.5 sold very well for a short period of time, the sales have been very disappointing to Hasbro and WotC overall. WotC projected sales 10% above the 3.0 revision. Also, twelve months later the sustained sales of 3.5 are at or below the sales of 3.0. So for Hasbro this has been a lose, lose.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Buzz at 2004-09-09 12:42:55
Converted from Phorums BB System

Interesting. I'm curious where you got your info.

Also, I'm not sure if "didn't sell as big as 3.0" necessarily makes 3.5 "lose, lose".

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Admiral_C at 2004-09-09 18:05:05
Converted from Phorums BB System

Dismal failure may be a bit of an overstatement. Replace "Dismal Failure" with "Biggest Gouge" is more appropriate. I bought 3.5 but I wasn't happy about it and I think alot of players felt the same way. In this case sales figure don't reflect how the fanbase actually feels. 3.0 was fine with some quirks, 3.5 would be a fine upgrade after 7-8 years of 3.0. I would have preferred 10 with a deluxe edition along the way to fix little things like haste and spellcasting or giving Harm a save.

Not in just under 4!

Adm

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Bahimiron at 2004-09-10 06:13:38
Converted from Phorums BB System

I wish I found it harder to believe that they honestly expected 10% sales over 3.0. That's just ludicrous.

Then again, I remember telling Justin Achilli that I thought that while Vampire: the Dark Ages was clever and evocative, attempting it with all the project lines was doomed to failure cos it was just going to split his audience rather than build on it. He assured me that Werewolf: the Wild West would draw in new fans who hadn't purchased WW: the Apocalypse due to its setting, but who did like the idea of a Wild West setting, and they would more than fill in those WW fans who didn't like the Wild West setting.

Haha. Oh man, THAT worked out!

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Robinmotion at 2004-09-14 07:56:47
Converted from Phorums BB System

Regardless of WotC's projected sales, they managed to produce an entire new line of the three core books for the price of some new art, a few edits, and a little playtesting. All of the major work and investment had already been done in 3.0. Even if sales for 3.5 have been below 3.0, it's a huge profit margin for them.

Add to that the fact that, to the distributors and retailers, 3.5 is just the continuation of 3.0. 4 or 5 years after its initial publishing, OF COURSE the game's sales are going to start to smooth out. That doesn't mean it wasn't a hugely profitable venture.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by NotMousse at 2004-09-15 04:34:43
Converted from Phorums BB System

Howdy Buzz,

I'm not a WW hater exactly. I simply hate what the Wad has done to the community in which I live.

A group of LARPing goths is not a pretty sight, and much worse to have to walk through.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by NotMousse at 2004-09-15 05:16:02
Converted from Phorums BB System

Admiral_C wrote:
-------------------------------
Dismal failure may be a bit of an overstatement. Replace "Dismal Failure" with "Biggest Gouge" is more appropriate.

You have a point about WotC cannibalizing their previous work for another buck. But for me it works out great! Now instead of buying all the class books for 3.0 (6 if memory serves) I can buy 3 and get essentially the same content, only playtested!*

*Naturally this does not include the Bladesinger, as we all know it's meant to be horribly uberpowerful and hence playtesting it would prove futile as the tofu farting elf lovers would be all over it and clamoring for even more powers, like getting Wish 20 times per level per day at first level as an innate spell with no XP cost.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Adrienne at 2004-09-27 12:21:18
Converted from Phorums BB System

Just as a note -- if you go back and read Ross' columns, he's never talked about WoD before now, and he's talked about a *lot* of d20 stuff.

In fact, it's sometimes hard to get him to shut up about Testament, which was one of his favourite products released last year. Not quite as hard as getting him to stop talking about Wushu or Dead Inside, but still.

Of the two of us, *I'm* the one with the preference for the WoD. He really has no use for the old WoD, and dislikes the aspects of the new WoD that have been salvaged from the old.

hel (Ross' wife and editor)