WotC to Reprint D&D 3.5

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Ahtman**

Article

Earlier this year, we announced the release of the 1st Edition core rulebook premium reprints. And now, we're further pleased to offer 3.5 Edition Core Rulebook premium reprints releasing this September!

On sale September 18, these 3.5 Edition premium reprints feature new covers and the latest errata -- so, be sure to pick yours up at your friendly local book or gaming store!

The Player’s Handbook has all the rules players need to create characters, select equipment, and engage in combat with a variety of supernatural and mythical foes.

The Dungeon Master’s Guide provides the DM with advice, guidelines, and everything he or she needs to create challenges, adventures, and full-fledged D&D campaigns, including sections on prestige classes, magic items, and character rewards.

The Monster Manual contains material that players and DMs alike will find useful. With hundreds of monsters to populate all levels of dungeons, this tome also includes monster creation rules, information on playing monsters as characters, details on monster tactics, and powered-up versions of standard creatures.

Together, these three volumes comprise the core rules for the 3.5 Edition of the Dungeons & Dragons game!

**SoloFalcon1138**

Further proof that 4th edition sucks.

**Hellfury**

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:Further proof that 4th edition sucks.

Close the thread. This is all that needs to be said. It is so full of truth it deserves to be quoted twice.

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:Further proof that 4th edition sucks.

There we go.

On a more serious note, it is not that 4th ed sucks, but is a completely different game. They should have branded it as such instead of dropping 3.5 and going this route.
Now that they are reprinting the core 3.5 books, it is rather scathing evidence of admitting 4th ed was not a stellar commercial success. If it was they would not bother doing this as there are plenty of used 3.5 books on the secondary market.

**Phototoxin**

Haters gonna hate...

**SoloFalcon1138**

Seriously, 4e was nothong more than WoW RPG, with crafting and character paths and powers, etc. WOTC has been trying to make D&D into Magic since the failure of the minis game. Now with the eeprints of 1st and 3.5, they are showing that they can't design an RPG.

**Ahtman**

Hellfury wrote:
SoloFalcon1138 wrote:Further proof that 4th edition sucks.

Close the thread. This is all that needs to be said. It is so full of truth it deserves to be quoted twice.

They are also reprinting 1st edition as well. Does that mean that 2nd, 3.5, and 4e all suck so much it deserved to be quoted 4 times?

**SoloFalcon1138**

I adressed that. Beside the fact that it is WOTC's contribution to the Gygax memorial fund, its another tribute to the fact that TSR knew how to make a role-play system that worked.

**Ahtman**

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:I adressed that. Beside the fact that it is WOTC's contribution to the Gygax memorial fund, its another tribute to the fact that TSR knew how to make a role-play system that worked.

So reprinting 1st is a tribute, but reprinting 3.5 is because of how much you didn't like another system? That seems like inconsistent reasoning. I would say they are doing a reprint because if Paizo is going to make money off 3.5 they see no reason they shouldn't either. With 5E a year or less away I think they are trying to make edition wars and nostalgia work for them as much as it has against them.

**grayshadow87**

*sigh* I really just can't see the logic in this reprint. Aside from people who are truly die-hard completionists who will buy the reprints for their libraries, I just can't imagine anyone shelling out whatever inflated price WotC will charge for books that (barring a bit of errata) are available on the cheap on the secondary market.

**SoloFalcon1138**

The significance of 3.5 is just that it was WOTC's first attempt at an RPG, and not one they actually conceived, just one they bought.

**Grot 6**

It's about WOTC crapping all over D and D as the preverbial cash cow that it became and losing thier hand on it.

They reprinted 1st edition stuff, yet peed in Gygax's face when he was alive.

The "reprint of the 3.5" is just that they opened up a can of haterade that they are trying to back out of a can of

that they will never back out of, and are trying to remove the stench of overstepping thier bounds with the garbage that is 4th.

Stay Classy, WOTC

**SoloFalcon1138**

Grot 6 wrote:It's about WOTC crapping all over D and D as the preverbial cash cow that it became and losing thier hand on it.

They reprinted 1st edition stuff, yet peed in Gygax's face when he was alive.

The "reprint of the 3.5" is just that they opened up a can of haterade that they are trying to back out of a can of that they will never back out of, and are trying to remove the stench of overstepping thier bounds with the garbage that is 4th.

Stay Classy, WOTC

Exactly...

**Manchu**

It's so lame how companies primarily see products as something they make money off of.

**SoloFalcon1138**

Manchu wrote:It's so lame how companies primarily see products as something they make money off of.

Ah... I see what you did there...

I'm not saying that it is unfair that they try and make money, but why not make mkney by producing a quality product, not by salvaging a failing brand by resurrecting old versions? If they had actually done a good job on 4e, they wouldn't already be looking to redo it again...

**pretre**

SoloFalcon1138 wrote: If they had actually done a good job on 4e, they wouldn't already be looking to redo it again...

You know that 4E is lasting longer than 3E and the same amount of time as 3.5 right? (5 years, since it will be out next year probably)

Publication date 1974 (original)
1977 (D&D Basic Set 1st revision)
1977–1979 (AD&D)
1981 (D&D Basic Set 2nd revision)
1983–1986 (D&D Basic Set 3rd revision)
1989 (AD&D 2nd Edition)
1991 (D&D Rules Cyclopedia)
2000 (D&D 3rd edition)
2003 (D&D v3.5)
2008 (D&D 4th edition)

Also, I'm glad that the Edition Warriors are out in force for a thread announcing a reprint.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
And before you come in and say '3E and 3.5 were the same, so that's 8 years', I'm gonna go ahead and say 'I had to buy a new PH, DMG and MM, so they weren't the same'.

**SoloFalcon1138**

Eh, same system, poor initial execution...

**pretre**

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:Eh, same system, poor initial execution...

So what you're saying is:

The Year 2003 wrote:
If they had actually done a good job on 3E, they wouldn't already be looking to redo it again...

The Year 2000 wrote:On a more serious note, it is not that 3rd ed sucks, but is a completely different game. They should have branded it as such instead of dropping AD&D and going this route.

The year 2000 wrote:Seriously, 3e was nothong more than Diablo RPG, with crafting and character paths and powers, etc.

Do me a favor SoloFalcon1138 take any of your arguments and drop them into a google with the date set for 1998-2003. Watch in amazement as you see they are recycled from the people who railed against 3E or even 2E.

Now travel into the future and watch as they are levelled against 6E.

**Noir**

Pathfinder... 3.5 from a company thats being working on the system and balancing it this whole time or WotC's new reprint of the system they left behind and done no work on to even fix the druid OPness. Wonder which is a better use of money.... hmmmm.

**Manchu**

The reprint will include existing errata. So there's that.

But if you want to play a tactical skirmish roleplaying game that's not 4E, yeah, Pathfinder is a better choice than this reprint.

**grayshadow87**

Pathfinder was where I ended up going after trying out several games of 4th edition. It put me in mind of 3.5 if it was on some form of steroids.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Pathfinder, that is, not 4e.

**daedalus**

Would be cool if they acquired the rights to reprint the 3.5 Ravenloft books. Never happening, but would be cool.

**Manchu**

They licensed out Ravenloft in that era.

http://www.amazon.com/Ravenloft-Campaign-Setting-Rulebook-Roleplaying/dp/1588460754

**pretre**

I think that's why he said it will never happen. Too bad. :(

**SoloFalcon1138**

Another Wizards failure. Sold Ravenloft for $250,000, and when they heard a popular call to return to it, SSI wanted $2.5 million. This prompted the Heroes of Horror expansion book and the Return to Castle Ravenloft module, about the only Ravenloft property WOTC could reprint.

**Manchu**

Just ... no. Ravenloft was never sold to SSI. SSI did a few licensed computer games way back when. Since then, there was even a third game that had nothing to do with SSI. What actually happened is that Wizard licensed the line out to Arthaus, which made supplements (like the one I linked) that were published through White Wolf's Sword & Sorcery line. In 2008, Wizards said Ravenloft would be a 4E setting (they even went so far as to print some weird novels) but it never came to fruition. Instead, Wizards decided to do a Ravenloft boardgame, which was very successful.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

pretre wrote:I think that's why he said it will never happen.

Nope. The rights reverted to Wizards a long time ago.

**pretre**

Oh neat. The more you know...

**SoloFalcon1138**

Sorry, I meant Sword & Sorcery...

**Manchu**

Even so, Arthaus's license ran out some time ago. They bought the rights for a limited period. Wizards did not have to pay anything for their rights to revert back to them. So Ravenloft may yet see major coverage as a campaign setting. I speculate that they pulled back during 4E because they didn't want to have the name associated with the edition wars. Unfortunately, that is what has befallen Dark Sun -- just as it befell Planescape at the end of AD&D 2E.

**Da Boss**

Ravenloft is my favourite setting, and I think Arthaus did a spectacular job with it. Those books are superb (apart from the bestiary, which is an obvious rush job). The Gazeteers are amazing resources for campaign running.

The 4th edition Darksun setting is pretty good too, and it's certainly the most interesting thing they've released. Just a shame they didn't come up with any setting that was specificially 4th, and not just a rehash of something older.

It was sad times when the rights to ravenloft reverted. If you compare the Swords and Sorcery books to the Expedition to Castle Ravenloft adventure, well, it speaks for itself. I like the maps and so on they've put in to Expedition, but that's as far as it goes.

**daedalus**

Oh man, you say the Bestiary was rushed, but I can't help but chortle with glee every time I read it. Nothing says Ravenloft like CR 2 monsters that could TPK level 4 characters even if they passed all their horror/madness saves.

Granted, terrible balance, but truly unforgiving and horrible encounters.

Don't look at me that way. I've not killed a PC yet.