Player's Handbook / DM Guide for 3.5 Ruleset

[TXCBoy36]

Did Smiteworks create the ruleset for D&D 3.5 for FGC / FGU? Can't seem to find anything on the store. I know that they have produced 2e but can not find anything for 3.5e.

Any suggestions would be helpful.

Thanks!

[esmdev]

Did Smiteworks create the ruleset for D&D 3.5 for FGC / FGU? Can't seem to find anything on the store. I know that they have produced 2e but can not find anything for 3.5e.

Any suggestions would be helpful.

Thanks!

Sadly, because 3.5 was never licensed the only information that could be provided was what is in the SRD. It would be nice if they got the license, but doesn't seem like it's going to happen.

[bayne7400]

How do people play 3.5e? Do you have to build from the ground up?

[esmdev]

How do people play 3.5e? Do you have to build from the ground up?

You can load the SRD which gives you the basic stuff. But anything else you need to add manually.

From what I understand, as I don't play 3.5 in FG, many opt to use Pathfinder which is similar and has plenty of support.

[Kelrugem]

How do people play 3.5e? Do you have to build from the ground up?

Yup, I simply build the data stuff on my own :) (the automation can still be used of course, also related to this data)

[TXCBoy36]

Looks like I will have to dig out my old manuals so I can take a refresher on the data, etc..lol

[bayne7400]

If you build your hard copy of players handbook is it against the rules to share it with people?

[Kelrugem]

If you build your hard copy of players handbook is it against the rules to share it with people?

yes, sadly, except when they are part of the SRD :)

[TXCBoy36]

So, my understanding is that we can produce on our own, but we can not share it or distribute it.....

[Kelrugem]

So, my understanding is that we can produce on our own, but we can not share it or distribute it.....

Exactly, or convincing WotC to free the 3.5e license :D AD&D is already allowed here somehow on FG, so, why not 3.5e, too :D

[TXCBoy36]

Completely agree.....is there a way to reach out to them directly?

[Kelrugem]

Completely agree.....is there a way to reach out to them directly?

Probably, but I do not know how, and I also would not know how to convince them in such a way that they do not simply ignore me :D

[esmdev]

Hasbro/WotC is probably a multi-level maze of licensing bureaucracy that SmiteWorks has a map of, having thus far licensed 5E and 2E. The best way to approach WotC would probably be through them. It seems to me that 3.5 would be popular and definitely would benefit from the FG tabletop.

[Trenloe]

I may be off the mark here, but it seemed like 2E support came because there was a developer stepped forward and took over development of the ruleset and, more importantly, the initial development of the products (PHB, DMG, MM, etc.).

[esmdev]

That is true, Celestian was working on 2E for years before the license was approved.

[LordEntrails]

Also keep in mind. 2E was not marketed on FG as 2E. Rather it was marketed as "Classic" (and mostly incorporates 1E).
What would 3/3.5 be marketed as? "Intermediate"? Having a current and a Classic is clear, throwing in the confusion of all the various editions is not.

That said, I would love if a license for 3.5 was obtained because I play in a 3.5 campaign on FG and it would make things easier for us. But, I can see from WotC perspective how such would muddle the waters for the casual D&D player and might not be desirable. They apparently have a big desire to not fracture their market base.

[esmdev]

Probably something like:

D&D Prehistoric (Original, B/X, BECMI, Cyclopedia)
D&D Classic (1E/2E)
D&D D20/3.5 (3/3.5E)
D&D Orphan (4E)
D&D Next (5/5.5E)
D&D Next Next (6E)

Note, 5.5 is assuming they start playing around with stuff with Tasha's to a level of player's option books, 6E is not announced but going by prior updates seems like it shouldn't be more than a couple years until they start talking about it.

[Kelrugem]

Also keep in mind. 2E was not marketed on FG as 2E. Rather it was marketed as "Classic" (and mostly incorporates 1E).
What would 3/3.5 be marketed as? "Intermediate"? Having a current and a Classic is clear, throwing in the confusion of all the various editions is not.

That said, I would love if a license for 3.5 was obtained because I play in a 3.5 campaign on FG and it would make things easier for us. But, I can see from WotC perspective how such would muddle the waters for the casual D&D player and might not be desirable. They apparently have a big desire to not fracture their market base.

"not so classic" (as classic) :D

[esmdev]

Some basic numeric data on the number of recorded sessions from June 2019 to May 2020:

Classic (18,604)
3/3.5 (24,060)
4E (8,452)
5E (875,454)

Going by numbers, assuming SmiteWorks and WotC consider Classic successful, it seems there would be demand for 3.5 licensed products. It would probably just need a reliable developer. From what I recall, SmiteWorks requires developers to commit to at least one year support for licensed products.

[Kelrugem]

Some basic numeric data on the number of recorded sessions from June 2019 to May 2020:

Classic (18,604)
3/3.5 (24,060)
4E (8,452)
5E (875,454)

Going by numbers, assuming SmiteWorks and WotC consider Classic successful, it seems there would be demand for 3.5 licensed products. It would probably just need a reliable developer. From what I recall, SmiteWorks requires developers to commit to at least one year support for licensed products.

yeah, 3.5e is still played a lot, even more when you account the PF1 numbers due to the strong similarity of both rulesets (and there are surely interesting 3.5e modules for PF1 users, like battle of tome, draconomicon, Libris Mortis etc.) :)

[esmdev]

PF1 adds another 96,050 sessions on top of the 24,060.

[TXCBoy36]

Also keep in mind. 2E was not marketed on FG as 2E. Rather it was marketed as "Classic" (and mostly incorporates 1E).
What would 3/3.5 be marketed as? "Intermediate"? Having a current and a Classic is clear, throwing in the confusion of all the various editions is not.

That said, I would love if a license for 3.5 was obtained because I play in a 3.5 campaign on FG and it would make things easier for us. But, I can see from WotC perspective how such would muddle the waters for the casual D&D player and might not be desirable. They apparently have a big desire to not fracture their market base.

You mentioned that you play a 3.5 campaign on FG....did you develop the ruleset?? just curious

[Kelrugem]

You mentioned that you play a 3.5 campaign on FG....did you develop the ruleset?? just curious

No, Moon Wizard is, so, SmiteWorks itself :) LordEntrails is not a community ruleset developer as far as I know :) (but I remember some coding questions from him :D)

[LordEntrails]

You mentioned that you play a 3.5 campaign on FG....did you develop the ruleset?? just curious
Nope. I'm old, but I haven't been around here that long. And as Kel says, I'm not really a developer. I poke around with a few things (decals, character sheet mods, etc) but I would still be developing the 3.5 ruleset if I had started on it 5 years ago!

[Kelrugem]

Here, https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?62804-Poll-Would-you-be-interested-in-official-D-amp-D-3-5E-D-amp-D-4E-and-additional-1E-2E, is a poll about additional D&D content for FG (non 5e), 3.5e is listed there, too! :D