D&D 3E/3.5 Play Board Games Review: "5e really feels like the best from 2e, 3e and 4e."

[Sacrosanct]

That statement by the writer is the same thing as those people who say, "5e doesn't have anything from my favorite edition X in it.", just on the opposite side of the spectrum. That is, there are only parts of each edition that he or she likes, and it just so happens that those are in 5e so he or she makes the statement that 5e includes the best of that edition, even if 5e doesn't include options from that edition that other people like. Just like if the parts of 4e that someone really likes that might not be in 5e exactly as they want, they say 5e doesn't have anything from 4e in it, despite there being elements of 4e there.

The bottom line is this. We've had the OSR crowd say that 5e is too much like 3e and 4e. We've had 4e fans say it's too much like AD&D and 3e. We've had 3e fans say there's too much 4e and AD&D in it. So obviously 5e has elements from every edition in it, and we as fans of particular editions tend to have blinders on, focusing on the stuff that "proves" our point while ignoring those parts that "disproves" our point. News at 11.

 

[Greg K]

Not the best from 2e, 3e, and 4e for me. Off the top of my head, the following stop it form being the best of those editions. Others' views my differ:



2e: It is missing

• the 2e Priests of Specific Mythoi/Specialty Priests and spheres of influence. 3e, 4e, and 5e in my opinion, have all been very poor in comparison. The current 5e cleric despite being bettter balanced than 3e clerics is my least favorite.
• Weapon Groups (2e Complete Fighters Handbook/PO: Combat and Tactics)

3e: Currently, missing

• the Repose Domain and 3e's more narrow domains,clerics having spells from all of deity's domains. Also missing
• the OA Shaman (which replaces the monk in my campaign)
• Cloistered Cleric variant (Unearthed Arcana)
• non-spell casting options for ranger and paladin (Complete Champion)
• Skill Points
• DR for Barbarians

4e: Missing

• Constitution Score replacement for con bonus per level
• Warlord

In addition to the above, I don't like 5e's Barbarian and Sorcerer.
The 5e Barbarian is too close to 4e and Pathfinder in conception and I dislike their takes. I want my Barbarian closer to 1e's which was a non-rager, outdoor specialist whose weapon proficiencies were based upon culture, but without both 1e's fear /distrust of magic and additional AC bonus for high dex (David Howery's Dragon article fixed the class). In 2e, I could do this in 2e with the Wilderness Warrior kit and 3e using the UA Variants crafty hunter, favored environment, weapon groups (Cultural)

The 5e Sorcerer is also to close to 4e and Pathfinder. Rather than Wild Magic or transforming intot a bloodline heritage, I want something closer to 3e's Sorcerer, but specializing in metamagic

Also not a fan of incorporating 4e's no strength penalties for halfling sized creatures. It doesn't need to be to hit and damage, but I wish there was something representing size hindering other aspects of strength like lifting.

 

[Sunseeker]

I too question what exactly it took from 4E.

I say this as being completely un-read on 2nd, but it reads like 3.5-lite. Not the worst outcome for me personally since I do enjoy 3.X and my biggest kvetch about it was the overcomplication that grew out of it. If there are elements from 4th, then they are likely systemic ones as 5th seems a lot smoother than raw, core 3.0, 3.5 or Pathfinder, less fiddly math you constantly have to check and recheck. Obviously we've drawn some popular elements from 4th out, such as Dragonborn, Tieflings and Drow (though arguably at least one of those existed in a popular form prior to 4th). Fighters feel more "Book of 9 Swords"-ish than they do 4th though, but they have certainly been improved over their 3.X predecessors in many necessary ways.

Healing and party composition seems to at least have been advised along 4E lines as it feels like a couple of the casting classes can cover the healing corner of the trinity instead of just the traditional Cleric. It seems that all classes are capable of some form of limited in-combat defense or self-healing ala Second Wind, which is nice.

On the whole though I really don't "feel" the 4th ed bits. It feels more like they've taken earlier components and fixed their problems with 4E bandages and when those came off, all we have are earlier concepts that are more functional. Which is precisely the vibe I was getting throughout development, it's the edition to bring back the oldschoolers, without bringing back the oldschooler problems.

 

[Fion]

I certainly see 4e a hell of a lot more in the PHB than I did during the play-tests, especially the early ones. A lot of class 'abilities' are AEDU and there are a number of great 4e classes melded into 5e ones. The Warlock is significantly more like the 4th edition one than the hackneyed 3rd ed Warlock. A number of class abilities and spells are nearly identical or at least inspired by 4e.

My one 4e innovation that should have been in 5e is the NAD system, non-ac-defense. As other's have mentioned the idea of opposed saves is out-dated and avoided by most modern RPGs today because there simply are better mechanics that do the same thing, NAD being one of them. I really hope that we get a NAD 'module' in the DMG because I'll certainly convert over to it.

In the end I'm pretty happy with 5e so far. In early play-tests it seemed pretty obvious that Mearls intention was to 'make a spiritual successor to 3.5' so I'm very happy to see that isn't the case. I know this isn't an especially popular opinion but as a GM who's been playing since he got the red box for christmas in 1983, and who's group has 2 players who've been with me since 2nd ed, 3x was my least favorite D&D. It's overwhelming complexity and subsequent ease at exploitation put me and my group off of it. We did play it on occasion but that decade was spent more discovering other great RPGs like World of Darkness (we still play a lot of 2nd ed nWOD, Godmachine, etc), L5R and Deadlands.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I guess as sort of to illustrate how I'm just as guilty on my own point above, I see more 4e than AD&D in 5e, especially mechanically.

For example, there are AEDU abilities/powers, there are forced movement effects, the recharge mechanic for certain monster powers, being able to heal a significant amount without using anything magical, etc. There's very little mechanically there that emulates AD&D specifically. No attack matrix or THAC0, no descending AC, stronger starting PCs (like no 1-4hp wizards for example), no % strength, Saving Throws are completely different, no % skills, no XP for treasure as the primary driving XP force, no level limits, the list goes on. Mechanically, 5e is furthest away from AD&D than any other edition, IMO.

That all being said, 5e feels a bit more like AD&D playstyle wise than 3e or 4e to me. It's not all about numbers bloat and a skill for everything (3e) or tactical combat (4e). I think Mearls and co did a good job bringing D&D back to a fast resolution system with no implied or inferred preference over one of the pillars over another. And to me, that feels like AD&D more than any other edition.

 

[RSKennan]

That all being said, 5e feels a bit more like AD&D playstyle wise than 3e or 4e to me. It's not all about numbers bloat and a skill for everything (3e) or tactical combat (4e). I think Mearls and co did a good job bringing D&D back to a fast resolution system with no implied or inferred preference over one of the pillars over another. And to me, that feels like AD&D more than any other edition.

That's what I meant when I said 5th had the soul of 2nd edition (which was part of one line in a long thread). 1st edition is there too (they're practically the same), but this thread specified 2nd edition.

 

[Dausuul]

I too question what exactly it took from 4E.

• Death saves.
• Tightly controlled attack and defense values.
• At-will cantrips.
• Ritual spellcasting.
• Recharging monster abilities.
• Binary skills ("trained/untrained" rather than skill points).
• Dragonborn and "devil pact" tieflings.
• Full healing with a night's rest, and a nonmagical "self-healing" resource.
• Warlock pacts and a lot of the warlock spells.
• Passive skills.
• Legendary/solo monsters.
• Floating stat bonus for humans.
• The Feywild, the Shadowfell, and the Elemental Chaos.
• Dex bonus to damage on ranged and finesse weapons.
• Str bonus to hit on thrown weapons.
• Two types of rests (short and long).
• Option to knock creatures unconscious at 0 rather than killing.

I could probably find more if I kept looking. 5E takes its broad shape from 3E, there's certainly no question about that; but it adopted a slew of 4E's mechanical innovations.

 

[Raith5]

That all being said, 5e feels a bit more like AD&D playstyle wise than 3e or 4e to me. It's not all about numbers bloat and a skill for everything (3e) or tactical combat (4e). I think Mearls and co did a good job bringing D&D back to a fast resolution system with no implied or inferred preference over one of the pillars over another. And to me, that feels like AD&D more than any other edition.

Agree. I feel 1 e and 2e in 5e. It certainly feels like an interesting change of pace from 3e and 4e. I am not sure about the equality of the pillars in 5e (or any edition for that matter) combat still seems to rule. We will have to wait till WOTC bring out a social manual and exploration manual to go along with the monster manual!

 

[GameDoc]

However, one great element of 4e I do miss in 5e is the idea of static defences, I think the 4e approach is much more simple and elegant than a mixture of attack rolls and saves. Also, for some reason I miss +1 wands and rods etc - I dont even like playing wizards/sorcerers!

This.

I thought the static defenses were a very elegant concept. It's pretty easy to keep if you want. Replace any save made against another roll with a DC to 10 + stat modifier. But I do like the way 5e abandoned the three derived defenses in favor of one based on each of the six stats.

I hope we'll see +1 focus/implement items in the DMG along with their magical weapon counterparts.

 

[Jester David]

There's a fair amount of 4e in 5th edition.

It's balanced. Especially between fighters and wizards.
Encounter building is quick.
Most monsters are self-contained.
There are non-traditional fantasy races.
Martials have options.
You can rest mid-day and recover resources & heal.
Casters have at-will magic.