Why is 3.X still so popular?

[Vhaidara]

I generally agree with everything you said, except this

Paizo cleaned up psionics.

Paizo had NOTHING to do with PF psionics. That was Dreamscarred Press. Paizo's "psychic magic" is just reskinned vancian casting. Now please apologize for insulting those wonderful people for calling them Paizo.

[druid91]

For me, and a lot of gamers I know, 3X is the last traditional D&D game. It is the closest to 1E/2E. 4E really went the wrong direction with all the video game and new ways of thinking crap. And 5E is just boring and too full of the new way of thinking.

3X does not have the video game/new wave stuff as rules. So sure a lot of people play the game with that mind set, they do so by house rules, but it is not forced on everyone by the rules.

4E/5E are great for the casual gamers. You want to sit in someones basement for a couple hours and fight monsters? They are the games for you. 3X is much better made for long campaign lasting years.

3X is the only one that feels like D&D.

I'm gonna call bull here. 5e is basically 3.5 - the ridiculous level of rules bloat.

[daremetoidareyo]

I generally agree with everything you said, except this
Paizo had NOTHING to do with PF psionics. That was Dreamscarred Press. Paizo's "psychic magic" is just reskinned vancian casting. Now please apologize for insulting those wonderful people for calling them Paizo.

"The right sort of people do not want apologies, and the wrong sort take a mean advantage of them."
-Darth Vader

That said...
My bad.
Things happen when you don't own sourcebooks and play in one offs.

[StreamOfTheSky]

I'm gonna call bull here. 5e is basically 3.5 - the ridiculous level of rules bloat.

Every time i look at 5E, it seems like a frankenstein mixture of the "old school" D&D where characters were more simplistic and less customizable, and 4E where mechanics are dissasociated for everything and the only concern is balance and almost never trying to model things in a logical, comprehensible way.

It seems even less like 3E than 4E was.

EDIT: Also, this was excellent.

Some points that might account for 3.5e's appeal to some audiences over other systems with marketing power behind them...
*snip*

[Curmudgeon]

Do the number of options actually affect people's interest to buy into a game?

What does that have to do with the question? Shelves bowing under the weight of D&D books is, for me, why 3.X is still so popular; I can pick some book at random and find something that interests me now, though it didn't really register when I bought the book more than a decade ago.

[martixy]

It provides something wholly unique.
And it appeals uncannily to that certain type of person(of which this forum is comprised almost exclusively) that thrives on complexity and picking apart the inner workings of things. Nerds.

~snip~

2. Yes. Feature. Totally.
4. Hope is lost. WotC is a corporation. This will never happen.

Of the unnameable's database: That would mean them acknowledging it and it will also never ever happen.

[Piedmon_Sama]

3.x/Pathfinder remains the most modular, detailed and customizable version of D&D that exists. How the system works is very clear, allowing GMs to get "under the hood" and tweak everything from combat rules to creating new monsters. Due to the fairly high level of complexity it's possible to create many minor tweaks (who, for example, hasn't tweaked the Dodge feat or allowed a level 1 rogue to take Weapon Finesse?) without unbalancing the system. While 5e gives you a nice range of archetypes, it's still 3.5/Pathfinder that allows you to create characters specifically tailored to your vision. Swappable class abilities, paragon levels, flaws, prestige classes, all these things mean that within a single class you can explore a huge variety of characters.

[GPuzzle]

As a guy that mainly plays 4E, this is my vision on why 3.X became so damn popular.

The new edition brought forth many people to D&D, and it was a resurgence in D&D in general. Unlike TSR, WotC was somewhat inclusive of the community rather than shunning it completely. Combine that with a massive overflux of new players, and suddenly you have this massive fanbase. The main concept (d20 system) was simple, and people liked it. It also had free 3rd party, and suddenly everyone was releasing their scenario or expansion to 3.X. It was a massive, massive thing.

4E was awfully recieved due to several reasons - it being seen as videogamey when it was actually more card-game based and the relationship between videogames and 4E is borderline the same as videogames and say 3.X but I digress. This led to many, many, many people sticking with 3.X, and others that were joining would most likely play things like 3.X or PF.

5E came out trying to unite both, but it seems to piss people off more than anything. 3.X veterans feel the game lacks the same depth as 5E. The game is too bloated with rules to be rules-light and too light on rules to be rules-heavy. 4E players really like tactical combat and feeling powerful against a screwed up world - 4E doesn't work so much on LotR levels of power but rather TTGL levels of power - and both ways. The end-game villains aren't evil liches or evil overlords - they're more literal gods or eldritch abominations to the power of Cthulhu. 5E doesn't really work on that level and it makes players feel less powerful or with less agency - or at least that was what I felt when I played a small campaign on it.

Personally, it's a mix of a very, very loyal fanbase that shuns the directly next edition for attempting a different take on D&D and doesn't really like the one that tried to get close to it because of a lack of options compared to the edition people are used to.

[daremetoidareyo]

It provides something wholly unique.
And it appeals uncannily to that certain type of person(of which this forum is comprised almost exclusively) that thrives on complexity and picking apart the inner workings of things. Nerds.



2. Yes. Feature. Totally.
4. Hope is lost. WotC is a corporation. This will never happen.

Of the unnameable's database: That would mean them acknowledging it and it will also never ever happen.

Corporations chase dollars. A series of focus groups that target's 3.5 and 5th edition players would allow them to make a simple up down decision on whether or not they can obtain money from the holdouts without affecting the prospects of 5e. As a corporation, they have a fiduciary duty to chase the bottom line. Demonstrate that they are failing to do so is a compelling reason to make them switch tactics.

The unnamable database as a concept is being expertly deployed by the pfsrd. Gamers want access to the info, preferably for free. People generally want their consumer goods to be easy to obtain and use: arbitrary barriers is what makes rogues of us. I mean, that is the entirety of the netflix vs. torrents model. Imagine the ad-revenue of a 3.5database. Especially one that allows you to search for certain terms within the text of feats, class descriptions, pre-requisites. Considering that they are paired with Hasbro, and I am willing to bet that most 3.5 grognards are 25+, there is a cartload of ads for toys for kids aiming at parents that can be freely hosted on such a thing.

[Grinner]

If I may throw my two coppers in, I'd say it's probably a result of several factors, all of which have already been mentioned.

• Investment: I think a fair number of people here have already bought into D&D 3.5 extensively, and there's been little reason for them to change. They've invested into the game heavily, and the investment they've already made can't really be repurposed easily...
• Familiarity: ...Moreover, they're content with what they've got, and nothing has been sufficiently compelling to draw them away.
• Accessibility: Besides the game's raw inertia, D&D 3.5 is fairly easy to grasp. It isn't necessarily well-designed nor is it as flexible as other systems. Compared to games like Mutants & Masterminds, GURPS, or the HERO System, it's positively straitjacketed. However, it provides the means to relatively quickly and easily fit character-building modules (race, class, feats, etc) together, and there are tons of variations on that basic theme to explore.

[Darth Ultron]

I'm gonna call bull here. 5e is basically 3.5 - the ridiculous level of rules bloat.

Sure, 5E is basically 3.5E with 4E and the ''new modern way of thinking'' ideas thrown in to make a modern fair game for casual gamers to play in-between video games.

[Kurald Galain]

I ask this sort of as an outsider, because despite having played and enjoyed the game (my last attempt to start an ongoing campaign was 3.5 for that matter) I don't prefer it to a number of other systems. But here I think I can find its supporters. So preach to me, what is it all about?

Clearly, it's because everybody's favorite webcomic is based on the 3.5 ruleset.

[Eldan]

Do the number of options actually affect people's interest to buy into a game?

I can't think of a time when I've said "I wasn't into that game until I heard it had 20+ splatbooks!"

Not necessarily. I don't think I'd ever have the time to read that many splatbooks. However, for 3.5, I have read them already, so those options are around.

[Pluto!]

What does that have to do with the question? Shelves bowing under the weight of D&D books is, for me, why 3.X is still so popular; I can pick some book at random and find something that interests me now, though it didn't really register when I bought the book more than a decade ago.

A lot of the responses address elements of the game which aren't apparent from the outside - character customization, optimization elements, relative structure or lack thereof.

Those are elements which are only visible to folks who are already indoctrinated, who have already sunk uncountable hours into sifting through books or fiddling around with monster stats. They're only visible after being hooked into d20 by some other element, which does a poor job explaining what the element is which hooks players in the first place.

What is apparent from the outside are things like existing playgroups (going back to the OP's easy answer) or the big heaps of books, but I don't think there's a clear distinction in subject matter from one pile of AD&D books mostly about monsters, knights and wizards to the d20 or 4e piles of books, again mostly about monsters, knights and wizards. I feel a little skeptical that the relative sizes of those piles have a meaningful pull on folks who aren't already initiated.

[Vhaidara]

Here's the thing: You only need 1 person with system mastery. When I started my friends into Pathfinder, I was tasked with helping to build
A mad scientist dual wielding weapon claws (as in claws attached to your hands, not natural weapons), who pulls random tech gizmos out of literal hammerspace
A werewolf spellsword using a greatsword
A Sasuke clone who wielded kukris via telekinesis
And the classic, Mr. "I'm going to kill it with fire while my pet dragon eats it with fire"

Took me about an hour each to produce functional level 1 gestalt builds for each of them. For the interested
Human Vivisectionist Alchemist//Armorist (Spheres of Power)
Skinwalker Shifter//Mageknight (both Spheres of Power)
Sylph (player picked the race) Symbiat (Spheres of Power)//Harbinger (Path of War: Expanded)
Ifrit Incanter//Elementalist (Spheres of Power)

So because of the breadth of material, and the single person who knew what to look for, they were all able to create their concepts. Now I've got 3 of the four making their own alts, only coming to me if they want a minor houserule approved (usually stat/feat consolidation). And the only reason the fourth isn't is because he is 100% content to continue killing everything with copious amounts of fire.

[Telok]

Money.

Between the $300+ in books and the internet we don't need to spend any money on gaming to play 3.5 or PF. 4e required a couple hundred dollars of books and a recurring subscription cost. 5e wants another couple hundred of books and adventures already.

Sure $300+ sounds like a lot, but it's been spread out over seven people and eight or nine years with some of the purchases being used copies. 4e wanted that much in the first year and 5e is looking like it wants that in the first two years. Sure I could pick up all the 4e stuff used now but it's without errata and the subscription that makes the thousands of abilities searchable. Once you get over about 200 things spread across four or five books a searchable electronic version almost becomes a must-have. Plus we've already played 4th & 5th and weren't impressed enough to invest in them as a group, that means any investment is going to be on an individual level.

[Elderand]

Sunk cost and aversion to trying new things or learn new systems mostly, and a hefty dose of peer pressure.

[LudicSavant]

Also, this was excellent.

Thanks :)

Sunk cost and aversion to trying new things or learn new systems mostly, and a hefty dose of peer pressure.

While these are certainly factors, I think it's selling 3.5e short to say that's all there is to it. After all, people didn't stick with 1e, 2e, or 3.0 in any way remotely resembling the lasting traction 3.5e has shown.

[druid91]

Every time i look at 5E, it seems like a frankenstein mixture of the "old school" D&D where characters were more simplistic and less customizable, and 4E where mechanics are dissasociated for everything and the only concern is balance and almost never trying to model things in a logical, comprehensible way.

It seems even less like 3E than 4E was.

Then you haven't looked at it very hard. Because....

A.) If the only concern was balance they failed hard.

B.) Almost NONE of the mechanics are dissasociated. I mean the only one that pops up off the top of my head is spending hit-dice. But that's just 'hey, I took a breather and am no longer tired.' Care to elaborate on what you mean?

[Clistenes]

My answer in short: 3.5 allows you to do anything and everything.

The combination of great flexibility and great support allows you to create any kind of character, effect, item or whatever you can find in any work or fantasy or that you can imagine. A paladin who single-shots dragons with Wisdom-empowered arrows? You can do it. A wizard who uses his own skin as spellbook? You can do it. A barbarian empowered by ancestors-granted magical tattoos? You can do it. A half-djinn who uses sexy dances to focus her powers? You can do it.

The downside is that it gets bloated and clunky. At medium levels there is already so much magic that it looks more like a space opera than medieval fantasy, and at high levels you have to wonder why those people are still living in sword and sorcery kingdoms instead of intergalactic space stations... However, the point is, if you want to create an archmage who owns his own Death Star, you can do it.

A lot of the magic excess, of the power creep and of the rules bloating can be avoided by enforcing a few reasonable rules, mostly dealing with power loops and magic marts, and forcing players to justify their adquisition of Prestige Classes.

Every time i look at 5E, it seems like a frankenstein mixture of the "old school" D&D where characters were more simplistic and less customizable, and 4E where mechanics are dissasociated for everything and the only concern is balance and almost never trying to model things in a logical, comprehensible way.

It seems even less like 3E than 4E was.

EDIT: Also, this was excellent.

5th edition does wonders in keeping the game simple and preserving the medieval sword and sorcery fantasy feel. The lack of customization is its greatest weak point.

They should have made the adquisition of feats and bonus ability points dependant on HD, not class, and have made both independent from each other (you should not have to choose between feats and bonus ability points). Also, characters should receive more feats. That alone would have allowed a greater range of characters.

I also would like it more if all characters could make a roll to use any spell scroll, and if epic multiclassed charactes could complete all the 20 levels of each class.

EDIT: Another problem with 5th edition is, you can't re-create the worlds of fantasy spinned by the previous edition using 5th edition's rules alone. You can't create Duke Rowan Darkwood [CG male human, ranger 12/cleric 14 (Heimdall), you can't create a Mythal, you can't create an Eberronian Lightning Rail or a Spelljammer ship, unless you homebrew everything.

[druid91]

My answer in short: 3.5 allows you to do anything and everything.

The combination of great flexibility and great support allows you to create any kind of character, effect, item or whatever you can find in any work or fantasy or that you can imagine. A paladin who single-shots dragons with Wisdom-empowered arrows? You can do it. A wizard who uses his own skin as spellbook? You can do it. A barbarian empowered by ancestors-granted magical tattoos? You can do it. A half-djinn who uses sexy dances to focus her powers? You can do it.

The downside is that it gets bloated and clunky. At medium levels there is already so much magic that it looks more like a space opera than medieval fantasy, and at high levels you have to wonder why those people are still living in sword and sorcery kingdoms instead of intergalactic space stations... However, the point is, if you want to create an archmage who owns his own Death Star, you can do it.

A lot of the magic excess, of the power creep and of the rules bloating can be avoided by enforcing a few reasonable rules, mostly dealing with power loops and magic marts, and forcing players to justify their adquisition of Prestige Classes.

Except 5e explicitly lets you do this as well. There are quite litterally rules in the DMG for making up classes wholecloth. Same with monsters, races, subclasses, spells, and magic items. It costs what... something like $90 bucks for the core set and that core set let's you use any concept you could do in 3.5 with a modicum of effort and significantly less digging through rulebooks for days.

[Cirrylius]

It costs what... something like $90 bucks for the core set and that core set let's you use any concept you could do in 3.5 with a modicum of effort and significantly less digging through rulebooks for days.

Unfortunately, none of us are designers, and the class-emulation of the system have historically done so well in that regard, so those rules DIY rules have never gotten much play, so we don't trust those rules, so we don't use those rules. The circle spins down.

[Clistenes]

Except 5e explicitly lets you do this as well. There are quite litterally rules in the DMG for making up classes wholecloth. Same with monsters, races, subclasses, spells, and magic items. It costs what... something like $90 bucks for the core set and that core set let's you use any concept you could do in 3.5 with a modicum of effort and significantly less digging through rulebooks for days.

You would have to homebrew everything, basically creating more content by yourself than you are given. Why not just creating your own system from the scratch?

Don't get me wrong, 5th edition is probably the best system for playing traditional sword and sorcery adventures. However, if you want to go crazy with weird crap, 3.5 is the way.

[Grinner]

While these are certainly factors, I think it's selling 3.5e short to say that's all there is to it. After all, people didn't stick with 1e, 2e, or 3.0 in any way remotely resembling the lasting traction 3.5e has shown.

That's not exactly an even comparison, though. The telecommunicative infrastructure (i.e. the Internet) which I imagine has helped perpetuate 3.5e wasn't really in place until the latter days of 2e, and 3e was cut short only a couple years after its inception. Plus, the existence of so many retroclones indicates that there's at least some remaining interest in pre-3e D&D.

[Solaris]

Leaving aside the fact that I like how they did the system (yes, even the huge variation in power levels)...

Money.

Between the $300+ in books and the internet we don't need to spend any money on gaming to play 3.5 or PF. 4e required a couple hundred dollars of books and a recurring subscription cost. 5e wants another couple hundred of books and adventures already.

Sure $300+ sounds like a lot, but it's been spread out over seven people and eight or nine years with some of the purchases being used copies. 4e wanted that much in the first year and 5e is looking like it wants that in the first two years. Sure I could pick up all the 4e stuff used now but it's without errata and the subscription that makes the thousands of abilities searchable. Once you get over about 200 things spread across four or five books a searchable electronic version almost becomes a must-have. Plus we've already played 4th & 5th and weren't impressed enough to invest in them as a group, that means any investment is going to be on an individual level.

So very much this.
I liked a lot of what I saw when 5E was first coming out... but the fact that I've already spent a buttload of money on d20 system books makes me very loath to jump ship.

Except 5e explicitly lets you do this as well. There are quite litterally rules in the DMG for making up classes wholecloth. Same with monsters, races, subclasses, spells, and magic items. It costs what... something like $90 bucks for the core set and that core set let's you use any concept you could do in 3.5 with a modicum of effort and significantly less digging through rulebooks for days.

But I've already spent the money on 3.5E, and "It lets you do what you could already do in the game you already own" isn't a good incentive for me to be dropping half of my monthly grocery bill on game books.
After all, 3.5E also has rules for homebrewing all the same stuff... and fifteen years of homebrewed material on the interwebs.

[druid91]

You would have to homebrew everything, basically creating more content by yourself than you are given. Why not just creating your own system from the scratch?

Don't get me wrong, 5th edition is probably the best system for playing traditional sword and sorcery adventures. However, if you want to go crazy with weird crap, 3.5 is the way.

> Playing 5e but want a thing from 3.5.
> Grab 3.5 book.
> Look at key features and convert, with the return of prestige classes via UA this is even easier.
> ???
> Profit.

But I've already spent the money on 3.5E, and "It lets you do what you could already do in the game you already own" isn't a good incentive for me to be dropping half of my monthly grocery bill on game books.
After all, 3.5E also has rules for homebrewing all the same stuff... and fifteen years of homebrewed material on the interwebs.

That's fair. And an ok reasoning. I was more arguing against the "5e is cool, but it doesn't have all the options 3.5 has." Sure it does. You just have to do a few minutes of work to convert them.

(And by a few minutes to convert I mean for whatever class/spell/race/whatever it is you want at that particular moment. Not the whole pile of books.)

[Solaris]

That's fair. And an ok reasoning. I was more arguing against the "5e is cool, but it doesn't have all the options 3.5 has." Sure it does. You just have to do a few minutes of work to convert them.

(And by a few minutes to convert I mean for whatever class/spell/race/whatever it is you want at that particular moment. Not the whole pile of books.)

Ahh, I see now. That makes more sense.

Tangentially, how good is the backwards compatibility between 5E and 3.X?

[Clistenes]

> Playing 5e but want a thing from 3.5.
> Grab 3.5 book.
> Look at key features and convert, with the return of prestige classes via UA this is even easier.
> ???
> Profit.



That's fair. And an ok reasoning. I was more arguing against the "5e is cool, but it doesn't have all the options 3.5 has." Sure it does. You just have to do a few minutes of work to convert them.

(And by a few minutes to convert I mean for whatever class/spell/race/whatever it is you want at that particular moment. Not the whole pile of books.)

At that point we are all playing our own homebrewed games. Which is great, but not for everybody.

And people who like to homebrew and who want to use a lot of options have probably already made their own fixes to 3.5 and Pathfinder. Why should those people leave the homebrew they have already worked in for years and start a new one?

EDIT: Just think about Psionics, for example. A player says "but I want to play a Psionist!" and 5th edition answers "You can do it! We give you permission to create your own Psionic rules!"...at which point the player has to say "What am I supposed to pay you for...?".

Ahh, I see now. That makes more sense.

Tangentially, how good is the backwards compatibility between 5E and 3.X?

There is not compatibility. You can convert stuff, the same way you can convert it from 2nd edition to 3rd edition, but you can't grab 3.5 stuff and use it in a 5th edition game the same way you can do in a Pathfinder game.

[Kurald Galain]

Except 5e explicitly lets you do this as well.

Not exactly.

Numerous character concepts, 3E subsystems, and even certain genres of fantasy clash with bounded accuracy. Simply put, by definition BA puts strict limits on what you can do within the 5E system. Not everybody likes BA, and not everybody likes those limits.

[sktarq]

...

What is apparent from the outside are things like existing playgroups (going back to the OP's easy answer) or the big heaps of books,.... I feel a little skeptical that the relative sizes of those piles have a meaningful pull on folks who aren't already initiated.

And if the books got people too pick one edition over another you'd be right, but people rarely join the hobby totally cold. Other players sell new people on the edition they prefer to play - many people hear stories of the adventures of various friends and the variey of stories all found in 3.5 D&D/d20 makes that seem appealing. Also if you are new and people are hosting a 3.5 game that's what you are likely to learn and then only switch to 4e if either availibilty or persuasion (via learning about it while familiarizing with new rules) if you have a reason to.

Also as a system more people are familiar with it and comfortable with it or its close relations so it is a lingua fanca and thus just easier logistically to set up games. More 4e players are comfortable with 3.5e than visa versa (especially when for several years after it first came out) and thus the occasional player who remembered the occasional 3.5 game could come and the guy who wanted to play a shadowcaster could-so guess what the two newbies learned? The momentum and variety drive people who are familiar to keep playing, to keep having fun, and thus keep drawing new blood.

EDIT: another point I should bring up-there was a push back when 3.0 came out. Not as loud but then platforms from which people challenged 4e were far less developed. I had no problem finding people who were not fussed over 3.0 in the 2000-2002 period. 3.5 brought many of those people into the fold and 2e started to become more of throwback thrill, nostalgia, type event. If the echo chamber and flame wars were as culturally dominant then as they were at the birth of 4e who knows if the divisions would have been worse.