Player's Handbook / DM Guide for 3.5 Ruleset

[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

[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)

[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.)