OD&D Stuff You'd Like from OD&D, AD&D, Holmes, B/X, BECMI, RC?

[steeldragons]

BTW, does it matter that I cheated by putting down in post 2 all of the stats I require players to track on their player logs in my game? Not that these things change all that fast, but it feels like cheating to suggest they be included in 5e.

Annnnd...in what way is it "cheating"? "Cheating" implies there was a correct/right way to answer your query and you were circumventing it. I don't see how your post makes that happen.

You were asking for what we wanted from the older editions in the newer/next one? I don't see how listing what you have/want is "cheating".

Have a nice cognac. Rest a spell. You'll be fine.
--SD

 

[ferratus]

Everything to do with gaining followers, strongholds and titles out of the Rules Cyclopedia.

 

[Celebrim]

I do miss some things. Mind you, I don't necessarily want to see them come back, because they would add complexity to a system that at present can't handle any more or they have other drawbacks, but I do miss them.

1) Random stat generation.
2) Casting times.
3) Weapon vs. AC modifiers
4) Facing
5) Separate declaration, movement, and attack phases.
6) Simultaneous resolution.
7) When it was sufficient to stat an NPC by simply going 'F8'.
8) Formal morale system
9) Followers, strongholds, ability to collect taxes, etc. once you hit the 'paragon tier', and similar stuff that caused the informal tiers to feel more different than formal tiers do now.
10) Gygax's wierd editting that made everything impossible to find, but filled the books with esoteric knowledge and secrets to discover - made all that much better by his wit, verve, and rich archaic language. Modern books are so clinical and dull by comparison.
11) 0th level characters
12) Psionics as a magic system that's not dependent (largely) on character level, rather than simply another profession.
13) Hit dice caps.
14) Saving throw DC's that decrease as you level, rather than increase.
15) The 'do it yourself' artifact tables that empowered your campaign to be different than anyone elses.
16) % in lair, number appearing, individual and group treasure types, wandering monsters, treasure tables, true random treasure generation, random dungeon generators and the rest of the built in sandbox peraphenalia of AD&D.
17) Gestalt multiclassing for demihumans.
18) Exponentially increasing XP/level rather than linear.

There are of course things I liked about the old systems that have stuck around, but every once in a while I want to bring some old concept back because I miss some of the depth it brought to certain situations or the ease it brought to others. But then I realize I'd have to throw some more modern complexity out and I sigh. There are times when I think that the future really is in digital table tops, the way games like Risk are simply better on a computer.

 

[Stormonu]

There were plenty of game elements before 3.x and 4e. I suspect those two will get the lions share of a 5e merger game, but what elements would you like to include, even if simply optional, from some of the earlier versions of D&D?

I want Jeff Dee and Elmore.

 

[Li Shenron]

Followers! Followers followers followers. Strongholds. Apprentices. All the cool stuff that used to open up when you hit Name level. They took that away in 3E and I want it back.

Interesting suggestion... I think followers and strongholds don't generally suit the average D&D game, which is about a small group of heroes exploring and fighting monsters, but it would be nice to have some good guidelines to support these ideas at mid-high levels. Not sure if I'd want them in the core tho, and certainly not in the PHB (players will demand to have them, and then try to exploit them in combat). Anyway, I prefer guidelines rather than rules for this topic.

 

[rogueattorney]

1. Exploration based gaming as a supported mode of play, where the players have to weigh diminishing resources (spells, hit points, torches, food, ammunition, etc.) and increased risks (the farther you go from home base, the badder the monsters are) against increased rewards (more treasure the farther you are from home base) as they proceed in the adventure.

2. A true 1e style Vancian magic option. By this I mean, the low-level one-shot cannon, not the 4 shot pop gun of 3e. An increased emphasis on magic with long-term effects from early levels (Charm Person in OD&D and 1e could last months or longer, for example), especially non-combat effects, rather than flash-bang type of magic.

3. Quickly resolved, grid-less combat option.

4. Some sort of objective xp award system option that isn't killing monsters. It doesn't have to be gp=xp (although, I still think that's the best way to go), but something that is neither "kill every monster you meet" nor "jump through the DM's story hoops" while still being relatively easy to track.

5. Goes hand-in-hand with #1... Monster stat blocks have to be reasonable enough to allow for quickly generated wandering monster encounters and very large dungeons and wilderness areas to explore.

6. Already mentioned by others... bring the npc back into the party. I want rules for henchmen, hirelings, cronies, followers, specialists, and other various hangers-on. This is what charisma was for originally. (Look it up. The attribute the gets easily the most ink in OD&D is charisma and it was for this reason.) The logical conclusion of the "building your support staff" mini-game should be that the pc ends up with some political power of some sort, and there should be some DM guidance (minimal as in 1e or incredibly detailed as in the C portion of BECM) in this regard.

7. Related to my #6 and also mentioned by other posters... There needs to be a morale mechanic for npcs and monsters. B/X D&D did it the best. Assign npcs/monsters a morale score between 2 and 12, roll 2d12 under certain situations, roll the number or under morale holds, roll over and morale breaks. Simple, elegant, works great.

 

[Dausuul]

Interesting suggestion... I think followers and strongholds don't generally suit the average D&D game, which is about a small group of heroes exploring and fighting monsters, but it would be nice to have some good guidelines to support these ideas at mid-high levels. Not sure if I'd want them in the core tho, and certainly not in the PHB (players will demand to have them, and then try to exploit them in combat). Anyway, I prefer guidelines rather than rules for this topic.

I'll be honest: I never actually had a character with followers. The only character who ever got to a high enough level to qualify was a 2E mage, and by the time I got my tower the campaign was more or less over. But the idea of followers and strongholds was a huge draw for me; that my character would not be forever a rootless adventurer, and could one day, if she survived, carve out a realm of her own.

One might then ask why we need rules for this. People at Wizards have mentioned their market research indicates most campaigns never get beyond the low- to mid-levels; what's the point of adding a whole new subsystem for followers and strongholds which most people won't ever use? Why not just imagine that my character will one day become "queen by her own hand?"

But it makes a difference to have rules for it. Without rules for dominions, it takes an extraordinary and committed DM to step outside the dungeon-crawling idiom of the low levels and create essentially a whole new game to encompass this larger realm. So I can imagine what I like, but I know deep down that if the campaign ever actually does reach those levels, it'll just be more of the same. Conversely, if there are rules for followers and strongholds, I can look forward to using them even if I never reach that point.

And, y'know, "most campaigns" is not "all campaigns."