Old animate objects.

[Kelb_Panthera]

For something I'm contemplating, I need to know what all changed about animated objects between 3.0 and 3.5.

The 3.0 SRD I found doesn't seem to include them in the monster section.

Can anybody be so kind as to explain how the rules differed back then?

[mattie_p]

Going off the tiny:

Hit dice: Same
Initiative: Same
Speed: Same
AC: 3.5 lists touch and flat-footed, 3.0 does not
Base Attack/Grapple: 3.0 omits
Attacks: Same
Space/Reach: Same

Special Attacks- Blind: Same; Constrict: Essentially Same; Hardness: Same; Improved Speed: Same; Trample: Same

Special Qualities: Essentially the same

Saves: Same
Abilities: Same

3.0 Construct traits neglect to mention immune to fatigue and exhaustion.

Some additional items:

Constructs did not receive Bonus Hit Points due to Size.
Space/Reach overall changed (Colossal used to be 40x80 for long with 15' reach, 40x40 for tall with 25' reach)

That seems to be it. Source: Compared 3.0 MM and 3.5 MM side-by-side, both monster entry and construct glossary entry.

[Kelb_Panthera]

So mostly nothing changed then? :smallconfused:

It didn't handle hardness or hp's any differently, excepting the lack of bonus hp, for example?

[mattie_p]

So mostly nothing changed then? :smallconfused:

It didn't handle hardness or hp's any differently, excepting the lack of bonus hp, for example?

The hardness entry is word for word identical, except that the pages and table numbers are different between the editions. And the only HP difference is due to the bonus HP constructs get in 3.5

[Kelb_Panthera]

Huh. I expected more. Oh well :smallbiggrin:

[mattie_p]

Huh. I expected more. Oh well :smallbiggrin:

Oh, there was more. $29.95 (MSRP) more to buy the 3.5 MM if you already had the 3.0 version. :smallbiggrin:

[Kelb_Panthera]

I got started in 3.5. So that wasn't anything that bothered me. :smalltongue:

Besides, isn't the 3.5 MM all-around better balanced? What about the conversion guides WotC put out?

I understand that many felt the 3.0-3.5 change wasn't entirely necessary but wasn't it at least a bit of an improvement?

[Tvtyrant]

I got started in 3.5. So that wasn't anything that bothered me. :smalltongue:

Besides, isn't the 3.5 MM all-around better balanced? What about the conversion guides WotC put out?

I understand that many felt the 3.0-3.5 change wasn't entirely necessary but wasn't it at least a bit of an improvement?

For melee? Yes. For casters it was an pointless entirely needed nerf. Like what happened to Haste.

It also made monsters a lot less complicated. Facing and long vs. tall creatures sucked.

[mattie_p]

There were only so many sticky notes I could put in my 3.0 books snipped from the conversion book before I caved. The breadth of 3.5 material made my decision to ultimately buy the core books easy.

I would say that for having like - what, 100 3.5 rule books? each with 100-300 pages? - that they did an awesome job of making a consistent product. Yes there are flaws, but I like it in spite of them.

[Chronos]

The rules for monster skills and feats were greatly simplified in 3.5, and made consistent with the rules for character races. The 3.5 monster manual also incorporated LA, which was absent from the 3.0 monster manual (I think that was introduced partway through 3.0).

[drack]

3.5 had plenty of little changes, like making druids not treat animals like undeads, or making it so that you couldn't throw three returning enchanted shurikins/attack action to triple damage. :smalltongue:

[Chronos]

3.5 had plenty of little changes, like making druids not treat animals like undeads,...
Wait, what?

[drack]

3.0 had a command animal type animal companion where, like undeads, you're encouraged to abandon your lifetime friend for something bigger and more combat worthy. It also had a weapon called shuriken, which deals one damage, and has "special: ..." which (paraphrasing) says you can throw 3/attack action. Only that then you enchant them to each do as much damage as a normal weapon. To name two of the small changes.