So, who's sticking with 3.X?

[Zeta Kai]

So, who's sticking with D&D 3.X? I know I am. I may be a fool, but I'll stick with the devil I know, rather than the demon I don't (at least devils will make a deal with you).

[monty]

Count me in. I spent too much effort getting all of these books to make them obsolete.

[Emperor Tippy]

I am.

Although I think I'm going to make a 3.7 edition (or a "How I think 4e should be" edition).

[serok42]

I will give 4th a shot but my group just switched to 3.5 from 2nd.
It took that long to convince them

On the plus side Half Price Books will have tons of 3.5 books pretty soon.

[Renegade Paladin]

I am.

Although I think I'm going to make a 3.7 edition (or a "How I think 4e should be" edition).

I worked on that for awhile, but the team that came to the board and wiki I set up for the purpose couldn't agree on anything, so everyone lost interest.

[averagejoe]

I'll probably stick with 3.5. Don't get me wrong, 4e looks great, I'm just thrifty to the point of being cheap, so at the least I'll only be willing to buy the books used.

[Ionizer]

Me. Partly because I don't have $100 to buy the new set, but mostly because the new rules kinda look stupid. No versatility. "You do this, and I do that!" "But I wanted to try..." "NO! That's not how it works! That's the other dude's job!"

Stupid crap like that.

[Emperor Tippy]

I worked on that for awhile, but the team that came to the board and wiki I set up for the purpose couldn't agree on anything, so everyone lost interest.

Team? If Fax every stopped being incommunicado I would draft him to help. Otherwise I would grab Solo, Jack Manycoats, and maybe one or two others and mostly use them to bounce ideas off of and for balance opinions. Then I would get people I trust to play test. Then I would post the updates.

Frankly, I would take ToB and the Expanded Psionic Handbook and chuck most every other class concept rules wise. A lot of refluffing and then most of the rest would deal with spell and power balance issues. I would dump the Sorcerer and maybe the monk (moving some of its capabilities onto the rogue).

All full casters would be based off the Psion. All half casters would be based on either ToB or the Psiwarrior. All other classes would be based on ToB. The only real hard part would be the druid, and that would be mostly balancing class features.

[kamikasei]

I'm playing 3.5 in several PbP games and an RL group, so I'll certainly not be abruptly discontinuing it or avoiding it for new games. I won't be avoiding 4e, though. I'll look to play at least one game of it to see what it's like. I can't see myself deciding never to play it any more than I'd pledge never to try Exalted or WoD.

[bosssmiley]

Sticking with 3.T(ome). I've just about got the system working the way I want it now. Still might steal a few of the less bad ideas from 4th Ed though.

I think - when it finally comes down to it - that the very idea of a wizard with anything other than a d4 hit die is deeply offensive to me.

[Gorbash]

I do, as do all of the people I play with (10).

[ghost_warlock]

I still haven't received my PHB so I haven't read it to give it a fair review but, if what I've been hearing here and in the previews is accurate, I'll be sticking with 3.5.

3.7e Project: I'd, too, use the XPH and the ToB but I'd also keep the specialized spontaneous casters more-or-less intact (dread necro, beguiler, warmage, and my shadowmage). I've kind of got a soft-spot for Vancian spellcasting, so I don't know if I'd be comfortable re-working the wizard and cleric into Power Points system. I almost feel it'd be stealing some of the psionic "different" feel. Maybe swap the Animal Companion progressions for the druid and ranger...but I haven't honestly thought all that much about those classes.

[Jack Zander]

I'll be sticking with 3.x but I'm leading the design of a homebrew system with my gaming group that will cater to our simulationist style of play. Once that's done it'll be good-bye DnD forever. (At least until I get rich off of my homebrewed system then buy out the mess 5th edition will have become and then I'll make a good RPG with the name DnD and not a half-assed one.)

[D&DCapone]

Yeah im sticking with 3.5 all my screwed up house rules to boot

[SilverClawShift]

My group looked at 4.e, and have been entirely unimpressed. We're sticking with 3.5, and we're going to be using homebrew stuff (ours and others) when we feel the need to expand into new content.

We might be leeching ideas and mechanisms out of 4.e though. "down-converting" new monsters or classes and such.

And for anyone interested, that means the Dustlands will remain entirely 3.5 compatible.

[Frosty]

I am currently running a 3.5 campaign and will run it to its completion. Then, I will homebrew version 3.75. Basically, using ToB as a template and throwing in ideas from 4e, I will try to to do a re-balanced system using most of the 3.5 backbone and flavor, but doing it with at-will powers, encounter powers, per day powers, etc.

And then, I'll throw that into a Final Fantasy campaign setting

[potatocubed]

I haven't studied 4e much, but nothing I have seen makes me want to play it. I'll probably stick to 3.5 for my D&D and try to persuade everyone I know to play Exalted or Burning Wheel instead.

[McClintock]

My group will be staying 3.5 (6 of us), we all feel very abandoned by the whole change.

[obvious pun]

I'm sticking with 3.x, mostly because learning a new system will take too long, but also because 3.x books are now cheaper than before.

[valadil]

I'm gonna play whatever my groups want to play. I won't be buying 4e books unless we like the system and I won't be selling off my 3.5 books unless we really like 4e and see no reason to go back.

As much as I enjoyed 3.x, it is a flawed system and it was time for something new. Whether or not 4e is an adequate replacement remains to be seen. As much as I want to rail on it for making casters less interesting, all I really know is that 4e casters are less interesting than 3.x casters. 4e casters compared to other 4e classes (which is the only comparison we should be making) may still prove to be fun and interesting.

[Pronounceable]

Not me. But I suspect that doesn't count since I haven't been using 3E anyway. But there's some stuff that I'll be piching from 4E, just as I pinched much of 3E for my own twisted experiments...

[Glyphic]

Has anyone heard if the SRD is staying online? It's going hurt my group alot if it goes down..

And we haven't decided. I have yet to look at it, and my friend who actually played it don't have a freaking opinion.

[wadledo]

4e looks less than adequate, so I'll be sticking with 3.5 until proven wrong.

[Bender]

I've still got plenty of stuff to try in 3.5, and its flaws haven't bothered me yet (I only read about them on internet fora). So there's no reason to spend the time and money to switch.
Maybe after our campaign finishes, or a while after that, because 4e looks ok, but at our playing rate, by then we might have 5th edition on the way...

[Edea]

I'm not sure. I know I'll keep -using- 3rd Edition. As for actually playing 4E, I'm about to play it for the first time tonight, so I'll see if I like how it runs or not.

[Emperor Tippy]

I'm not sure. I know I'll keep -using- 3rd Edition. As for actually playing 4E, I'm about to play it for the first time tonight, so I'll see if I like how it runs or not.

It runs fine and it is fun, just don't expect what you would generally consider D&D. Go into it treating 4e as an entirely different game from a different publisher and with no connection to the D&D franchise.

[SamTheCleric]

It runs fine and it is fun, just don't expect what you would generally consider D&D. Go into it treating 4e as an entirely different game from a different publisher and with no connection to the D&D franchise.

Not true. It feels like D&D to all 3 groups I've played/run with.

[lin_fusan]

I'm sticking to 3.5 for the following reasons:

1) I'm cheap.
2) SRD was free (except for cost of paper and ink).
3) In the middle of paizo's Savage Tide Adventure Path and conversion will take time I don't have.
4) A couple players are new to DnD and a massive rules change will only confuse them more.
5) I'm old to DnD and a massive rules change will only confuse me more.

Maybe in a couple of years after the hubbub dies down, and the errata comes out, will I check out 4th.

[Draz74]

I'll probably play a casual one-shot or so of 4e sometime, but I'm mostly going to be sticking with 3.5.

Until (and if) I finish my own 3.7e, that is. It's making excellent progress in some areas, struggling in others.

[Reel On, Love]

I'll occasionally play 3.5, for obscene rules mastery implementation, wacky games consisting entirely of, e.g., a con artist group of Beguilers, Unseen Seers, &etc.

I'll mostly switch to 4E for my D&D needs. And, of course, there's all those other games that are actually really good to play...