Well, heres the thing, tg

Some of the splatbook classes can be a lot of fun if you aren't just looking for the most broken character possible. EG Binder and Warlock.

That doesn't even make any sense.

Ban core classes, allow tome of battle and psionics. This ends up with fun as hell fighters and a straightforward magic system without miles of bullshit.

I think this user is trying to troll you into the most miserable experience to turn you off of 3.5, and possibly D&D in general.

Is OP even still here? It's been two fucking hours.

>acting like there are "better" systems

There are different systems, not better. Quit being a system war troll and offering misguided advice just to play game politics.

This, systems are just different, not better or worse.

Now excuse me, I have to prepare for my next game of FATAL, and I have not yet rolled all of the anus circumferences for my NPCs yet.

Your fine runing 3.x these are nothing but trolls. Yes 3.x has imbalances but like this user said give items out as needed.

Stick with the core if you are new. 3.x is the most advanced D&D and has so many splats it can get overwelming for a new DM.

Watch casters as they become powerful quick. Talk to your players if you feel lile some thing is game breaking.

Use CR as guild lines not rules. Some monster can be a cake walk wile others are tpk ta the same cr.

Dont spend to much time looking up rules. Its better just to make a judge ment then look it up during a break or after the game.

Feel free to chop 3.x up. People here have this idea that the game needs to be played 100% but the book. Thats never true for any system.

3.x is the most fun D&d if done right.

Look, don't listen to the trolls.
Core is the very worst part of 3.5. If you want something resembling an enjoyable game with 3.5, ban absolutely everything (that includes the PHB, setting books, Dragon articles, internet sources, etc.) except for Tome of Battle, Expanded Psionics Handbook and Magic of Incarnum.

This isn't necessary

Just pick two adjacent tiers and only allow classes from those two tiers

No, there are some systems that are worse, but it's essentially impossible to effectively prove any game is better than 3.5.

You can argue forever, make as many claims as you want and demand people to value your opinions above all others, but all you can really do is say other games are different, but not better.

3.5 exists in the tier of games where what's better or worse is extremely subjective and a matter of taste and preference. I understand you hate this fact and it eats away at you so much that you need to be a system war troll, but you might as well give up already.

But, of course, you're just going to redouble your efforts. You wouldn't be a troll in the first place if you had any tact.

Nah it's really not.
At least not for noobs who won't understand how to do shit.
What OP should be most worried about, is his group being special snowflakes and wanting to pick 9 different races from 10 different books, and similar with classes.
Then you get a party with literally nothing in common, some of which come from other planes.
Fuck that.
5e is a good-ish system but it's bland. 5e has better rules than 3.5 in some categories (action economy, attacks/saves rolled into one bonus, size-based hit dice, and the way conditions and damage types are handled, with resistances / immunities and such). But overall it's a blander game. I got bored of it after one campaign. Whereas I will never be able to use all the 3.5 content.

>learn three books with entirely divergent sets of mechanics
>running a ToB martial as a new player
>do all this houserule crap to make the game "balanced" so that my fee-fees are protected on the internet
Just decide what tiers you guys want to play in, then play a party of those. Restricted class choices are better for new players anyway because they get option paralysis otherwise.

>unironically comparing 3.5 to FATAL
This is how I know you are arguing in bad faith.

I have to ask, is this a real card? I kinda want it to be a real card.

>At least not for noobs who won't understand how to do shit.
Funny, my group was like that and one half of our group inadvertently invalidated the other.
Also, you'll find that OP's group is not noobs, if you pay a minimum of attention.

>Then you get a party with literally nothing in common
That's what we had with core.

Don't listen to this idiot, he doesn't have ANY idea what he's talking about.

He's not comparing FATAL to anything, idiot. He's just pointing out that there are, in fact, some system that are better than others.

It is a real card. And no, you can't have it. Like a handful of them were handed out by Hasbro to key members of the D&D team.

It is: twitter.com/mikemearls/status/910270471391764481?lang=en

If you're absolutely set on running 3.5 I highly suggest you don't run the campaign past 9th level, 12 at the very most. The system just completely breaks down after that point.

Also, keep in mind that unless you're very, very smart about the magic items you give, the suggested CR's are total bullshit.

But for real though. Play 5e. It takes like an afternoon to learn.

be careful of frost damage. i hear theres lots of ways to abuse it.

No, there are some movies that are worse, but it's essentially impossible to effectively prove any movie is better than Avatar.

You can argue forever, make as many claims as you want and demand people to value your opinions above all others, but all you can really do is say other movies are different, but not better.

Avatar exists in the tier of movies where what's better or worse is extremely subjective and a matter of taste and preference. I understand you hate this fact and it eats away at you so much that you need to be a cinema war troll, but you might as well give up already.

But, of course, you're just going to redouble your efforts. You wouldn't be a troll in the first place if you had any tact.

Ignore this post, all of his advice but mixed encounters is wrong.

Session 0, determine the tone and themes that your whole group (you are playing too!) want. If you're DMing, you can veto what splats are ok. I would recommend greenhorn DMs start their first campaign with the core books. For ease of learning, maybe use a pre-made adventure, or at lease setting. If you feel comfortable expanding, and the players almost certainly will want to, then maybe add in some splat stuff.

>TLDR;
First time DM learning the ropes? Use baseline books, pre-made settings/campaigns.

>i'm not even trying to pretend I'm not a troll

Avatar made money, but wasn't really well-received by critics, while 3.5 was.

>But, of course, you're just going to redouble your efforts. You wouldn't be a troll in the first place if you had any tact.

How ironic.

This makes me both happy and super sad. That feels rollercoaster from a single post.

Thank you. I shall I check that out and try not to cry now that I've heard the bad news.

Set a precedent for how much you care about the rules. Usually, I'll make an on-the-fly ruling for checks I don't know the DC of, but if the PCs don't like it, or it's something important to the plot, we'll take 1 minute to try to look the actual rule up. After the minute is up, it's DM's call. I try to do that because I like my players to have the ability to come up with off-the-wall plans if they feel like looking up the rules for how to do everything.

In any instance I'm bothered by not knowing a rule, I'll write it down in my notes for the session and look it up before next time.

You can say that conciseness, ease of play, and balance are all super important factors to use a system for new players.

3.PF objectively sucks at all of that compared to other editions/games.