3.3 is still pretty good. As long as you meet the university-wide requirements, your portfolio will be the important piece.

Also, you had some crap happen and now you're bouncing back from it. That speaks volumes and shows tenacity and resiliency. 

You may want to check if your school allows you to do a grade replace.  My school had this.  Basically if you get a D or F in a class that's not toward your major, you can retake the class (only one time so make it count) and do better.  If you get at least a C, the previous failing grade doesn't get factored into your GPA.  The old grade still shows on your transcript but with a note that you retook the class for better.  The new passing grade does get factored in.  If you fail the class a second time, you now have 2 fails for the same class, so you have to hustle and make it count.  I had some friends do this and it helped them graduate.

As far as I know, a 3.3 is considered on the lower side for masters, but if you have a good GRE and portfolio, you should be fine.

All you really need on a resume is that you have a degree, so I wouldn’t sweat that.

Most schools are run like business. If you are not an awful client, they will take your money. 3.3 is just fine, the bad spots.... eh some schools will be fine with that I am sure, like josh said, the portfolio is more important.

Definitely look to see if your school does grade replacement. Based on your circumstances, there might even be a possibility of getting classes changed to a hardship withdrawal or an incomplete (admittedly more difficult after time has passed). But if you’re looking to practice, why bother with the Masters on top of the B.Arch?

I had my personal *bleep* to deal with in undergrad back then.
I did fall back two years in my program and one of those years, flunked my studio. Being the keener that I was, I did take a lot of extra architecture courses out of interest when i dropped some core courses and went out of  curriculum sequence. Unexpectedly, my GPA was 3.45 at graduation..leaving one of my professors flabbergasted. 

5 years years in the field and I currently work in a boutique firm and heading to another reputable firm. Still on the fence on licensure and the M.Arch, but leaning towards it.

Honestly I've seen and heard of students that got F's or bad marks and doing fine outside of school and smartened and/or strengthened up after the F or coming close to an F. Some have went on to grad school. 

NOTE: I'm not talking about the spoiled, party-hard slackers that actually do deserve an F.

The most important thing to do is to be transparent with the chair/director of the admissions committee. Be forthright and explain the circumstances that led to the failed courses to the greatest degree of transparency possible. Make it clear to them that you have moved on from those circumstances and are ready to excel as a grad. student. 

You goal is to make that person comfortable enough to think you are worthy of being championed through the process- by them. This is no guarantee, but it means the might pause to say “I’ve chatted with this person and...” This means emails, phone calls, visits  - conversations- even before you apply. Also get letters from people who are familiar with you then and now, and are in agreement with your ability to pursue an advanced degree.

Finally, despite the commonly held assumption that portfolios are everything, some institutions will not allow grad programs to accept anybody if their gpa is too low. So make a point to ask their grad school/ school of professional programs if there are any restrictions. That’s a more difficult group of people to convince.