We have OSR now. How long until there is a 3SR, reviving 3.5 and friends?
Hopefully never. 3.x was the single greatest catastrophe to ever hit TTRPGs. The sooner it and its ilk die off and are forgotten, the better.
>>96916425but that's not 4e or 2e?
While 3e fans no doubt feel that 5e is utterly totally different than 3e, it's still the same sort of build-focused, character-focused, scene-based storytelling heroics and combat game. That 3e fans build like this but 5e fans build like this is not the basis for a movement dedicated to reviving a dead sub-version of a living game.The OSR came about because of huge differences in both rules and philosophy compared to modern D&D, but Radiant Wafflemaker doing +5 anti-necrotic damage to constructs vs provoking an attack of opportunity or whatever the fuck isn't going to create any kind of "we must go back" rallying cry.
>>96916430Nice opinion, who did you copy it from, a redditor?
>>96916390Hypothetically, 3.0, 3.5, 4e and 5e would all join the OSR community if WotC went under but the fans kept it alive the way the nascent OSR community did with the TSR games.Though I don't think most OSR fans define the subject as broadly as I do.
>>96916613>Though I don't think most OSR fans define the subject as broadly as I do.There's bunch of OSR fans that think any random old game is OSR (where even old just means "I personally feel that it's old, in relation to my personal age"). Not surprisingly for such a shit design foundation, these people produce nothing, but they're loud on social media spaces.As for OG OSR types, 2e and up could be a thousand years old and they still wouldn't be OSR, because it's not just about random arbitrary age feels but a very specific design ethos coupled with rules to enable it. And I think until 3rd ed fans manage to develop a clear statement or understanding as to what's fundamentally different about their game than newer versions (i.e. not just a laundry list of relatively minor mechanical differences), they're never going to be anything more than a minority of D&D players dragged along behind whatever the current edition is. To be fair, that's all the OSR is too, but at least they have people making content that actually matches what they want, instead of only posting "remember whens" in various spaces.I'd be curious to see a 3rd ed mission statement that sets some hard "this is us but not them" boundaries as 3e fans see it.
>>96916390As I understand it, Paizo leveraging its magazine license and the OGL gave that urge a banner to gather behind right as the 4e edition war got started, and the nature of the online communities made it trivial for people to just keep playing. As a result, there just isn't any buildup of nostalgia waiting for a system to call upon.>>96916451>While 3e fans no doubt feel that 5e is utterly totally different than 3e, it's still the same sort of build-focused, character-focused, scene-based storytelling heroics and combat game.Not really? 5e doesn't have the content volume or numeric spread for build-focused storytelling to fuel the community the way the depths of splatbook purgatory keep contests for 3.5 running to this day, and for the same reason character-focused storytelling has been shoveled into a rancid mound of "the DM figures it out" because there is FUCKING NOTHING for ludonarrative resonance or emergent narrative.>The OSR came about because of huge differences in both rules and philosophy compared to modern D&D, but Radiant Wafflemaker doing +5 anti-necrotic damage to constructs vs provoking an attack of opportunity or whatever the fuck isn't going to create any kind of "we must go back" rallying cry.This is a decent point regarding a revival centered on the mechanical customization of 3.X, particularly given how much of that is specific to accreted content onerous to any attempt, but it does still have a different approach to power-scaling and rules trying to be comprehensive about likely situations the DM is "expected" to follow than TSR-era D&D, 5e, or PF2e.
>>96916505NTA, but your response is painfully ironic
>>96916936>5e doesn't have the content volume or numeric spreadThankfully, that's one of 5e's core strengths. The lack of material to overwhelm the player base. This also compels the community to draft and share their own content as well.
>>96916390>How long until there is a 3SR, reviving 3.5 and friends?the hot take is that 5e was basically that; down to the reintroduction of level by level itemized multi classing and quadratic spell scaling. >but it's still simplified 95% of OSR shit is also simplified and streamlined and baby-fied compared to actually running 1E or 2e AD&D too. Even grognard bait shit you only see recommended on /tg/like ACKS has the same simplified level scaling and normalized XP between classes that normalfag shit like Shadowdark or Dungeon Crawl Classics has. 5000 XP doesn't make you a fourth level Thief but only a third level Wizard like in AD&D
>>969163903e worked in the early 00s when people were still playing it organically, it doesn't work now when people just use guides to make game breakingingly OP characters that trivialize every encounter until the DM quits.
>>96916846>As for OG OSR types, 2e and up could be a thousand years old and they still wouldn't be OSR, because it's not just about random arbitrary age feels but a very specific design ethos coupled with rules to enable it.The difference of design ethos and playstyle does not align with edition boundaries, but instead a very blurred distinction of trends in supplements and community utilization thereof. No few seminal works of "proper" OSR post-date very clear foundations of loathed 2e material.>And I think until 3rd ed fans manage to develop a clear statement or understanding as to what's fundamentally different about their game than newer versions (i.e. not just a laundry list of relatively minor mechanical differences), they're never going to be anything more than a minority of D&D players dragged along behind whatever the current edition is.The character generation hooks and depth of word-sim rules combine for a pretty obvious "challenge the party's toolbox and skill at applying it" use-case that the TSR-era doesn't scale quite right for, but that's diving head-first into ALL the balance issues.>>96916978Conversely, the dearth of content also leaves lower-information DMs abandoned for basic considerations like what the fuck beating a given skill DC gets you.>>96917104>the hot take is that 5e was basically that; down to the reintroduction of level by level itemized multi classing and quadratic spell scaling.The balancing on the 5th-level power-spike and upcasting make that functionally a skinsuit to recover IP value after late-4e seriously risked losing it, especially when you dig into how its natural flow compares to Essentials. Apparently ends up a weirdly effective compromise for "everybody's second choice".>>96917109Wrangling the numbers to make it non-trivial to optimize the fun out of the game probably WOULD be the biggest value to a 3e-retroclone.
>>96916390One problem I could see is that WotC has threatened to wage lawfare against those who use OGL content, and even though they don't actually have a legitimate case for doing so they do have more money than you and can starve you out with legal fees.
>>96916846I wouldn't say it's a matter of "age" but a matter of whether the company that originally made it is around or not and if fans have taken over distribution and play of the game.
>>96916846This poster is a troll and a liar, Ignore everything he says.
>>96916505He's shittalking 2e, he's worse than a redditer. He's an OSRtard.
>>96916846>There's bunch of OSR fans that think any random old game is OSRNo, that's not the case. The basic definition of OSR is "Pre-WotC D&D and related games." No point in saying that line is arbitrary and leads to a slippery slope where "any old game" is OSR, all just because you are so fixated on trying to exclude 2e.The OSR happened because people thought pre-WotC books would become increasingly hard to get after 3e came out, because WotC held all the rights and it didn't seem like they were going to reprint anything any time soon. It's not because of some specific design ethos, in no small part because people who played older editions of D&D didn't subscribe to any specific design ethos.That's why the OSR started not long after 3e was released, instead of not long after 2e was released.
>>96917468He's just a BrOSR, Even most people in the OSR don't like the BrOSR.
>>9691639016 years ago? People are still playing Pathfinder 1e.
I don't think there will ever be a 3SR. Reasons being:>pathfinder already existsLike it or not, a lot of people went to PF 1e. That WAS the 3SR. It's not the same game, but it was close enough for those people.>people don't want a "system" anymore5e has different rules for PCs and NPCs. Drove me nuts at first, but I eventually accepted it. 3.5 was the last edition to have a truly coherent "system" for handling both players and monsters. You could add cleric levels to a minotaur and suddenly he was a whole new challenge. Add a prestige class to a rakshasa and make him something unexpected. But now, you can still do that, there's just no framework for it in the rules: you just make it up and tack on whatever you want, and figure out its challenge rating afterward. That's okay too but that was the closest there was to a "design philosophy" in 3.5e. >too complicatedNo one is pining for a separate BaB, skill points, and save progression system, when proficiency exists and it was an easy way to wrap everything together. That's not to say a revised 3.5e couldn't have a 1/2 level progression like 4e, or something akin to 5e proficiency where everything's on a unified track for the most part. But that, plus complicated subsystems for everything, makes it harder and harder for new players to learn. >most 3.5 content isn't OGLThis is a big one, a lot of what made 3.5 great was the insane number of classes an feats and prestige classes and monsters. But most of them outside of core aren't OGL. Can't use any of that stuff. You can make your own, and something like Arcana Unearthed that's an entire alternate player's handbook is really cool, but unless everyone rallies around someone's OGL-dodging 3.5e retroclone with a ton of extra content, it's not happeningThat said I still love 3.5 and if anyone wants to listen to an autist droning on about old 3.5 material I do it on youtube sometimes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wqL3S6cTes
Isn't that pathfinder 1?
>>96916846Most people consider GM philosophy and design philosophy. Don't lump me in with spergs please.
>>96916390>We have OSR now.No we don't.We had an osr.What we have now is a bunch of people who collectively like playing, except on 4chan where it's mainly people who pretend to play but really just argue about, older versions of rpg and some new rpg that bear some mechanical similarity to these older games and/or some tonal similarity to how these avant garde progressives like to imagine games were played 40 years ago.Just as the Renaissance arrived, lasted for a few centuries then ended a few hundred years ago, the old school renaissance/revival arrived, peaked, and ended. The ongoing influence of the Renaissance is seen today with things like science, humanism, non-vocational education (not saying that liberal arts education and a lot of it is completely stupid like pic related), public libraries, printing, realistic art and perspective so I'm not saying that old school practices re-popularised by the osr went away but the renaissance period is over.The Renaissance ended as other cultural and artistic and intellectual movements arose to supplement or replace those that arose with the Renaissance. That's a key part of a renaissance, the new things that arise with it. The osr is stagnant. There was a resurgence in old school popularity, a few new ideas were introduced, they didn't have to be everyone's taste and didn't have to be universally adopted, but now it has calcified, particularly on this board. Old school is cool, it's much better than anything WOTC has offered under the DND label, but we're not in and old school renaissance now. Especially on this board it's a few people huddling around the dying embers of BX and AD&D 1e and maybe a few things that are very close to those, ignoring what the old school renaissance was. That's not a renaissance and neither it is tradition, they but preserve the ashes, not the flame
>>96917472>The basic definition of OSR is "Pre-WotC D&D and related games."That's a completely wrong definition that ignores that when the term OSR was new it had as one its cores C&C which was 3e only not quite as bloated.
I'm more interested in having a G.M.-less Revolution with games like Microscope as the foundation.
the d20 System SRD is basically just open-source 3.x to begin with. trying to make it the lingua franca of RPGs was a terrible period on the history of tabletop games.
>>96918310To clarify a few things, C&C was d20 system, not 3e D&D (there's minor differences and most of them regard legal matters), and the reason it was d20 was in order to try and use the OGL as a "backdoor" in order to be published without WotC coming after them with legal stuff.But, it was d20 with heavy inspiration from pre-WotC D&D, incorporating elements from AD&D 1e and 2e. That makes it a related game, especially because it was specifically designed so people could convert old D&D adventures into it.
>>96916390Sorry that game is called DUNGEON CRAWL CLASSICS>AND ITS OSRalso I am sad this is not an eberron general.
>>969163903.5 already had pathfinder. We've almost moved past the 4e knockoffs. Prepare yourselves for 5e nostalgia. Its going to be wild.
>>96917276Wait, seriously? I thought they massively backtracked over the OGL fiasco?
>>96917276I don't think we can discount the Pinkertons, either.
>>96918743Like with all corporations they push until they get backlash. Then take a while and do something only slightly better and act like they’re Jesus Christ himself for it.
>>96916390Never, because character building autism and loot treadmills is better fulfilled by videogames now.
>>96916390>3SR, reviving 3.5 and friends?3.5 is still being playedPathfinder 1e is 3.75 in all but name due to copyright issuesC&Crusades is partially 3.5
>>96917109https://www.enworld.org/threads/the-most-powerful-character-ever-pun-pun.469041/
>>96916390We've had this thread before. There are already several "OSR" games based on 3rd edition and even a few based on 4e. OSR is a meaningless word at this point especially since the FUCKWITS in /osrg/ don't see 2e as one.
>>96919909Only SOME fuckwits in the /osrg/. It's too bad they tend to be quite loud.
>>96919951They wouldn't let me talk about C&C either on there. Fuck em. It used to be a welcoming place now it's filled with trolls, shills, and browns.
>>96917109why exactly did not 99,9% of dms just tell the players that infinite loops and mechanics bug-like computer exploits do not work in the tabletop?seems everyone has become utterly retarted. the dm is the law, no the phb/dmg and certainly not the player idiocies generated by retards that think they are in a computer game world and the dm is software in a computer and not human.
>>96916390>3.5we play 2e and 3.5, tried almost all other editions and pathfinder and these work the best for us. 2e for simplicity and 3.5 for complexity. Seems an amalgam of both, with tiny bits from other editions and games, may yield the "perfect" system.
>>96920297The wild disparity of how relevant different characters are doesn't have to be a big math blowout that's easy for the DM to spot. Asking for any conscious consideration of relative spotlight-time from the low common denominators is... Not wise.
>>96917472>he actually thinks the definition that 12 guys in /osrg/ circlejerk about always has been the majority-accepted onelollmaoKWAB
>>969163903.5 never died.
>>969163902055
>>96916425FPBP. I have a fondness for the 3.x era, but it was the equivalent of introducing crack into black neighborhoods. We are, to this day, still struggling with the damage caused by 3.x and Monte Cook's retarded bullshit.
>>96916978>The lack of material to overwhelm the player baseIt's a lack of material published by WotC. There's a glut of 3rd party products, published and digital, for 5e that dwarfs 3.5 and all its imitators combined. They decentralized the endless splatbook factory and now all the fans make all the splats for them.
>>96916846Hilarious how many infuriated rats this post drew, well done and also an accurate assessment.
>>96926328>samefag agrees with himself because no one else will
There will never be a 3.5 osr style revival simply because we have the internet now, in a way that didnt exist 20 years ago.As long as you can find every pdf available online and print them if you like, you will never be gatekept out of the old edition like people feared would happen with Adnd and wotc.I also dont see 3.5 as having a strong chassis to build stuff around or to structure a specific style of adventure that it does very well like the osr does dungeoncrawls. 5e is not that different straight up. It is practically the Basic version of 3.5 with some 4eismsAnd so, it will forever remain in the realm of personal homebrews
>>96916390There's a constant 3.5 general, it doesn't need reviving.
>>96925964Give an example.
>>96916390We already have 4e revival With both people playing for 4e again and also lancer, Icon and STRIKE! Among others.Skipped straight over 3.5 because the only people that like 3.5 are sour faced millennials that cannot accept that any deviation of what things were like when they were 13 is valid.To the point that you are now crying for a 3.5 revival when the current edition of the game is literally intended to be a return to3. 3.5 mechanics and Pathfinder was doing it for so long even paizo is tired of it now
>>96917104This. And that’s part of the reason 3.5 won’t get an OSR like revival5e was literally designed to mollify 3.5 fans yet they won’t accept it because all their splats don’t work.You can’t make a nostalgia heartbreaker for people who don’t want to play a new system.‘Pathfinder 1e IS the 3.5 revival
>>96917109>chatGPT make me an OP spiked chain user PCmodern player walks in with a char sheet full of hallucinated feats.I’d like to watch that
>>96917189The thing is: do you think there’s an appetite for it?The world sim crowd seems to have ACKS but ACKS is pretty much the opposite of 3.5 when it comes to chargen.Simulationism and weird MTG rules lawyering characters seems like an odd combination when viewed outside of the context of early 2000s ttrpg context.Maybe it has a comeback with people wanting the weeb isekai cheat protagonist expirience
>>96929673lol, nobody except brosr wants to play ackshit
>>96920297A lot of it didn’t happen at actual tables unless the DM was facilitating it.But 3.5 was a very player facing editions so retards on forums got a soapbox.t.talking out of his ass
>>96916390That was created by paizo ages ago.
>>96929575>3.5 mechanics and Pathfinder was doing it for so long even paizo is tired of it nowThis is a perfectly viable alternative to nobody being interested in it on its own merits, and the point I made in >>96916936.>>96929673>The thing is: do you think there’s an appetite for it?As per above, I don't think there is because Pathfinder and online playgroup dynamics prevented a gap in supply for demand to build up.>Simulationism and weird MTG rules lawyering characters seems like an odd combination when viewed outside of the context of early 2000s ttrpg context.The intersect is something of an "engineering" approach, where by having all these fiddly worldsim rules you can understand the in-setting impact of a lot of these rules-lawyered characters and apply their principles to "invent" whacky bullshit without homebrew. This is why so many tricks have ridiculous names like "arseplodomancer" and "Psionic Sandwich", because many of the "rules lawyers" WANT to show off the whacky bullshit that can be crafted from official and reasonable seeming rules.Sure, you can optimize yourself to God-superior by level 11, but you can also optimize things that at first glance ought to be complete dogshit if not outright impossible into solid contributors to a party. All that Attack bonus inflation makes the mountain of penalties on Heavy Crossbow Two-Weapon Fighting surmountable, for example.
The entire reason that the osr existed was firstly because people wanted to make shit for old games, but we're wary of publishing shit for old d&d, so they made clones like Labyrinth Lord under the OGL so they had a game they were publishing for, and secondly because those old editions were long out of print and getting harder to find and more expensive.You don't need to do that for 3.5, you can easily get a shitload of the 3.5 books in POD, Pathfinder 1e is incredibly cheap and easy to get, and you could publish modules and shit to hearts content if you wanted to.
>>96916390>3.5i was reading D&D 3.5 Monster Manual V and it had a Thoon Elder Brain CR 15, so i could use it. I had made a reverse advanced standard elder brain from cr 25 to cr 12 (psionics only, no mage spells) so it can be played and not just be just some text taking up space.and at page 122 they pretty much have a paragraph explaining in an apologetic manner "AN ELDER BRAIN AT CR 15? Both Lords of Madness and Underdark have statistics for a mind flayer elder brain. It’s a fine monster, but it’s CR 25, which limits how many campaigns can use it—it’s difficult to build an adventure in which both CR 8 mind flayers and their CR 25 leader pose appropriate challenges."this is how much this bloat and power creep and just inflation and adding numbers to creatures and making the unplayable became at 3.5 monster books. Their CR 25 elder brain did not even have proper psionics, it had sorcerer spells.The worse is the banshee at mm2, which is at CR 17 26 HD (can go to 52 HD) and boosted colossal, when at AD&D 2e and prior its a 7 HD creature usable on any party.
>>96932228>this is how much this bloat and power creep and just inflation and adding numbers to creatures and making the unplayable became at 3.5 monster books.It's not like you NEED to pile on mid-level monsters with the various advancement rules, as well demonstrated by the late Monster Manuals throwing piles of examples of exactly that. Also note that the official settings routinely revolve around the top of the scale, so for anything to be a long-running threat in them it has to make the Gigawizard accretion actually have a reason to hesitate instead of getting cleared out shortly after rearing its head in a lazy afternoon.>Their CR 25 elder brain did not even have proper psionics, it had sorcerer spells.For Underdark, it would be using 3.0 Psionics which were A Proper Mess, and it NEEDS to be contending with all the other Underdark bullshit that includes no few legacy well-past-20th characters. For Lords of the Underdark, there is a sidebar on page 65 explicitly stating that it uses Sorcerer casting for the sake of DMs not using Psionics in their campaign, with the necessary adjustments in another on the same page as the statblock.In both cases, Psionics rules are a different splatbook so to be useful to buyers without they'd need to either include conversion-to-core sidebars for EVERYTHING or duplicate large chunks of their respective Psionics Handbook. Given the standardization aspects of 3.X design, default-Vancian with Psionic conversion specified as desired was the direction taken.>The worse is the banshee at mm2, which is at CR 17 26 HD (can go to 52 HD) and boosted colossal, when at AD&D 2e and prior its a 7 HD creature usable on any party....And your estimation of the likelyhood that whoever was on that book would know off the top of their head there was a TSR-era statblock to convert?
>>96932228This isn't a 3.5 issue though.You seem bizarrely obsessed with hit dice, when they don't actually matter a whole lot when it comes to challenge rating. >the banshee is too high of challenge ratingWell it has a scream of death so I can understand it being that high. But yes, I agree that it should been a "greater" banshee at that level and the original should have been CR 7.Having two different elder brains is perfectly fine. People probably bitched and complained that they weren't patient enough to stay with a campaign to hit level 19 or 20 and be able to take down a CR 25 (though you can do it far earlier with the right builds).I just really don't understand how this is a 3.5 specific issue when 5e has the same issue almost in reverse (so many low-CR monsters that you run out of variety for stuff to fight by mid-levels).
3.5 was a sort of "Melting Pot" for the different groups:>Enough crunch and bookkeeping for the nerds and wargamers>Enough customization for the theatre kids>Lethal, but survivable enough for a story to play out. I have a lot of nostalgia for it, and it has some good ideas. But it's whole identity comes from being a janky, unbalanced mess that doesn't really excel at anything, and gave rise to the buildfag and the rules lawyer.You're better off going the OSR route, with >minimal player-facing rules>pretty excellent procedures>a ton of Referee-facing resources,or going with 5E, which, if nothing else, seems to be the most balanced, flexible, and immediately usable edition.
>>96932906>elder brains is perfectly fine.the 2 cr 25 (yuck arcane magic and not psionics in the psionic ruler.....) came first, that is the thing. some growth cycle stats like the dragons and their ages would be useful, 20 hd for the max and above for th epic 21 to 25 and beyond (even more useless inflation).
>>96916425>Thread expressing interest in thing that seems like it'd be fun. >Immediately must shit on said thing.Why is this place like this?>>96916613Honestly, this wouldn't be a bad thing. Writers now have even more freedom to do whatever they want.>>96917616Meh, just takes some writer and artist with a lot of time on their hands. I really like the settings converts OSR books. I'm pushing my friend to run an OSR campaign right now, cause I am a tad tired of DMing the random 80s ruleset faserip for him. >>96918562Make one.>>96919909What games? I collect this stuff, but I've never got into 3e stuff.
>>96929613>5e was literally designed to mollify 3.5 fans yet they won’t accept itWow no shit>see, it's like 3.5 except we removed all the bits you liked about it!3.5 was never perfect but it was detailed, something neither osrfags nor storyfags can stand because you're supposed to be rolling and shouting 1d6 damage for *insert your fluff text for desired generic weapon here*
>>96916846>>96917189>>96916430>>96917472>>96917468The whole "2E IS NOT OSR" narrative stems from 1-2 lolcows on /osrg/.Theyve consistently been shilling the narrative that OSR is only "the games first decade" which really just translates to their a bunch of 1e Purists, who want to exclude retroclones and anything not in their narrow BroSR bubble. Thry come out of the woodwork the SECOND you talk about 2e (the 2e and nsr threads were made as a tantrum by them) and try to cite old anon posts as evidence for their lolcow behavior. Best thing you can do is ignore and report them.
>>96916390Just play Pathfinder 2.
>>96916390Sorry op, anyone wanting a 3Erevival, is probably just going to play pathfinder 1e.They're probably setting conversions 3.5 to PF if you really like a particular world
>>96932906>You seem bizarrely obsessed with hit dice, when they don't actually matter a whole lot when it comes to challenge rating.Not that poster, but 3.X monster design is a bit messed up due to the way they are built on monster types. Monster types were effectively the class equivalent for monsters with the HD being the monsters "level." Both influenced hp, BAB and saves. Each monster type more or less had a role equivalent and funky things happened if you built against and even to type for several of them. The failure of monster types is why 4e opted to build monsters based on role and level rather than type and HD.
>>96916390we need some new 3e (3.5 is fine) scans as the pdfs that are going around are not very pleasant to read.
>>96932906>You seem bizarrely obsessed with hit dice>bansheethe 2e banshee that works, converted to 3.5 you get a fine creature (in 3.5 it would be like a specter + banshee powers)https://www.completecompendium.com/appendix/banshee/and the abomination that begs for apocalypse from 3.5 MM2, i paste some of its statshttps://www.realmshelps.net/monsters/block/BansheeBanshee (CR 17)Initiative: +7 (Dex); Senses: darkvision (60-foot range), Listen +33, and Spot +33Hit Dice: 26d12 (169 hp)Base Attack +13; Grapple -Attack: Incorporeal touch +16 meleeFull Attack: Incorporeal touch +16 meleeDamage: incorporeal touch 1d8/19-20 plus 1d4 Charisma drainSpecial Attacks/Actions: Charisma drain, horrific appearance, wailAbilities: Str -, Dex 17, Con -, Int 16, Wis 15, Cha 17Special Qualities: Detect living, incorporeal subtype, SR 28, stunt plants, undead traitsAdvancement: 27-52 HD (Medium-size)Climate/Terrain: Any land and undergroundOrganization: Solitary, pair, or brood (3-4)Charisma Drain (Su): Fortitude save (DC 26) or permanently lose 1d4 points of Charisma (or 2d4 points on a critical hit).Horrific Appearance (Su): Any living creature within 60 feet that views a banshee must make a successful Fortitude save (DC 26) or permanently lose 1d4 points of Strength, 1d4 points of Dexterity, and 1d4 points of Constitution.Wail (Su): During the night, a banshee can loose a deadly wail. This attack can slay up to eighteen living creatures within a 30-foot spread centered on the banshee, or within a 60-foot cone extending from the banshee, at the creature's option. A successful Fortitude save (DC 26) negates the effect. Once a banshee wails, it must wait 1d4 rounds before it can do so again, and it can wail no more than three times per day.Stunt Plants (Su): Once per day, a banshee can stunt all normal plants within a one-half mile radius. This ability otherwise functions like the stunt version of a diminish plants spell (caster level 18th).
>>96939251I don't feel like 2e is the core OSR experience, it already did the splats upon splats upon compendiums thing 3.5 was so reviled for
>>96919871>>96929613>Pathfinder 1e is 3.75 in all but name due to copyright issues>Pathfinder 1e IS the 3.5 revivalIt succeeded in leaching a good chunk of 3.5 crowd, but it failed at being 3.75. Because Paizo are a bunch of retards who failed at fucking 3rd grader math. Even cursory glance will allow you to see multiple problems - the whole CMB/CMD shit, splitting combat feats, incredibly dumb forced movement restrictions and so on, and so on.
>>96946754>it already did the splats upon splatsthe 2e extra books do not feel forced, they are very optional and the good ones are very useful in general for rpgs.the 3.5 extra books, the real bad ones, are like a cancer.
>>96946766>Pathfinderit took a rules heavy complex system and made it even more heavy and complex.
>>96946754That's fine for you to feel, but you have to remember that other people feel differently because their version of the "core OSR experience" is different than your own. >it already did the splats upon splats upon compendiums thing 3.5 was so reviled forAs did AD&D1e. And even OD&D. Every edition of D&D was an attempt to sell as many books as possible, and Basic D&D was even made because OD&D had somehow managed to get bloated up with so many rules, well beyond its original 3-booklet form. And, Basic D&D also got bloated up into Basic/Expert, and then Basic/Expert/Companion/Masters/Immortals.One of the big issues with AD&D 1e was that a lot of its rules were scattered around in various adventures, just tucked away in random places and with the only way to find them being to stumble upon them. Some of those 2e compendiums were just an attempt to address that and were compilations of all those scattered bits that DMs would otherwise have to sift through dozens of adventures to find.>>96946767This is a generalization, and not an wholly accurate one. Some 2e books were also not great. Then again, some 1e books were complete shit too.A lot of this "edition warring" business is really just people being unfair.
>>96946958you can find more foundational material in 2e books, in 3.5 you can find mostly a mechanics trove
>>96918704>Prepare yourselves for 5e nostalgia. Its going to be wild.Given how 5e is literally just 3e/d20 OGL with most of the content removed, that's likely only going to result in a resurgence of d20 OGL.
>>96917104>the hot take is that 5e was basically that; down to the reintroduction of level by level itemized multi classing and quadratic spell scaling.It's also just the straight-up wrong take. People played 3.5 for the customization and crunch, 5e took most of that out.Saying 5e is the 3rd edition renaissance is like saying megablocks is a good alternative to Lego. Even a 2yo would call you retarded for saying that.
