Oh, thought of another one: I hope that 5e has only one core elf race that waffles between the forest hippie archetype and the mysterious arcane archetype.
And has a passive chance to notice secret doors, forcing the DM to remember to roll every time one is passed.
Per the 1st Ed DMG, elves got a chance to spot secret doors without actively searching but only if the player asked. That is, the DM didn't need to remember to roll every time; it was up to the player to do so.

Gimme some XP if you had an Elf character in your party that would ask every single frickin' room. We got to a point where we (as players) banned Elves from the game![]()
So what should we call the 4E equivalent of the Knights and Knaves Alehouse, where speaking well of any other edition earns one scorn, derision and nerdlitist snorts?
What don't you like about Paizo's monster choices? I've never seen one of their monster books.In my case, a hybrid of 1E tone and subsystems, Paizo preferences for monster choices, OSR playstyle advice and 3.5 magic, combat, monster design and system mastery will fill this niche quite nicely.![]()
My issue with pre-4e AC is that while attacks and saves are mostly level-based, AC for some reason is mostly "realism" based. I put that word is quotes because there's no real rhyme or reason that say, a stone golem's AC is a particular value. It's based purely on the writer's idea of what's realistic, and every writer has different ideas on realism.Here's a revolutionary thought: what if Armour Class was based on what kind of armour your character be wearing?
I agree, but D&D has never been that way. And I hope 5e maintains our traditional reliance on magical items, because otherwise 5e will have made a big improvement and my decision won't be so easy.PCs shouldn't need magic items. The game should be about the heroic characters, not he who has the best toys wins.
I'm referring specifically to ranks and proficiencies. I like 4e's "You're either good at it, or you're not" skill system.What game system are you playing that doesn't have skills?
It's not the circle; the circle is the veneer. It creates an illusion of planar symmetry that looks great, but breaks down once you start thinking about it.I don't follow. What's inconsistent about planes being arranged in a circle? I mean besides the fact that magic doesn't really exist.
Weird, I don't think of eladrin as 'extra elfy.' (If anything, I think the tree hugger archetype is more elfy.) What are the better explanations?Yes, please. I really disliked the 4e elf/eladrin split.
(Perhaps ironically, since the announcement of 5e I've read two explanations of it that are many times better than the PHB one. Even so, the eladrin should most certainly have been more than just "extra-elfy elves".)
Bitter? Nah, I just know what kind of system I don't want to DM anymore.
With that level of bitterness, I hope you hate it too, good buddy.
Nope. We never played 1st Ed, and 2nd Ed didn't have that fun little rule - the DM was expected to remember. It was a bit of a surprise to find it when I finally read the 1st Ed DMG last year.![]()

(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.