D&D 5E Finding 5th edition too "safe".

[FormerlyHemlock]

Well, a "warrior"-type naturally reaches a THAC0 of 1 at level 20, not counting any benefits from magic weapons, weapon proficiency/specialization (which I guess was optional?), or stats. And a THAC0 of 1 is where the problems start--it doesn't even need to be negative, because you cannot roll less than 1 on a die. Even if we assume a modest magic weapon (+2) and a 17 Str (not that unlikely), Warrior types can easily achieve that several levels before cap--and every other bonus ticks it down further (such as the Kensai Fighter kit). Get an exceptional Str, which was hardly exceptional in 2e's heyday as I understand it, and it gets pushed down even further--with sufficient gear and options, it can happen even before the "domain management" phase is supposed to kick in.

If you're fretting about a problem that happens only after you gain millions of XP over the course of a decade or more of play... you might be worrying about a non-issue.

 

[Libramarian]

Yes, but now you have the bizarre result that only middle values are bad: you always want to roll high OR low, which means you have even less consistency with how rolling works. Some things you want to roll just low numbers (e.g. "below your Str score") some things you want to roll high (e.g. damage dice, or healing dice from Cure X Wounds), and other things you want to roll "not middle."

No you want to roll high so you meet or beat your THAC0. If you do that, you know you hit for sure (assuming ACs equal or greater than zero). If you don't, you might still hit anyway depending on the monster's AC. In practice it feels more immediate than roll, add, announce and wait for confirmation every time.

Talking about this makes me want to use it again I might try it in 5e with the monsters -- if the d20 result is equal or less than the attack bonus, it's a hit. If not, ask if it beats the player's AC.

(I know debating the best attack roll algorithm seems academic, but it really does make a difference considering it's the most common roll in the game.)

But "the middle" can become excluded! Both ends of that can become muddled and difficult to work with--it is possible for the two conditions to be mutually exclusive, e.g. a defender with AC 0 against an attacker with THAC0 1: according to the rules, every attack is simultaneously a hit (all rolls are greater than or equal to THAC0) and a miss (no rolls are less than or equal to 0), and because AC is 0 it can't be a modifier in either direction.

I feel like you're being nitpicky? It seems obvious that if you have a To-Hit-Armor-Class-0 of 1, then against an AC of 0 every roll results in a hit.

This method breaks with numbers that exceed the range of the die being used, but the system shouldn't do that anyways. It was always a mistake to introduce negative ACs. If a wider range of values were needed, they should have made unarmored AC 12 or 14 instead, and/or moved to a d30.

I honestly think that if the 5e designers were willing to replace static circumstantial mods with the roll-again advantage/disadvantage mechanic, I could have convinced them to use this method for the basic check.

 

[Corpsetaker]

I want to come back in and say a few things.

Lethality is not just about hit points and HD. There are many other things that exist in 2nd edition but not always in 5th.

1. Magic Resistance.
2. Magic Immunities.
3. Loads of Save or Die effects.
4. Age penalties.
5. Death from massive damage.
6. Aging effects from Ghosts and other undead.
7. Elves being restricted to Resurrection only.
8. Racial level limits.
9. Weapon Speeds.
10. Resting.
11. Item saving throws.
12. etc... etc....

Now these things could possibly be added to 5th edition but why would I do that when there is a system that already has them? Not to mention the fact that because of the limited amount of material for 5th edition, we are already using loads of 1st and 2nd edition material anyway. There are only two things that 5th edition gives us that we would hate to miss and those are feats and adv/disadv. Those are not enough to make us want to keep our main game in 5th edition. Now we will most likely go back at some point because 5th edition does give it's own uniqueness, but right now we feel like 2nd edition is more in line with what we are looking for.

 

[Celtavian]

Remember when rolling a saving throw was an intense experience? I still do. One missed save and you were dead. That level of deadliness hasn't existed in the game for a long time.

 

[Psikerlord#]

I want to come back in and say a few things.

Lethality is not just about hit points and HD. There are many other things that exist in 2nd edition but not always in 5th.

1. Magic Resistance.
2. Magic Immunities.
3. Loads of Save or Die effects.
4. Age penalties.
5. Death from massive damage.
6. Aging effects from Ghosts and other undead.
7. Elves being restricted to Resurrection only.
8. Racial level limits.
9. Weapon Speeds.
10. Resting.
11. Item saving throws.
12. etc... etc....

Now these things could possibly be added to 5th edition but why would I do that when there is a system that already has them? Not to mention the fact that because of the limited amount of material for 5th edition, we are already using loads of 1st and 2nd edition material anyway. There are only two things that 5th edition gives us that we would hate to miss and those are feats and adv/disadv. Those are not enough to make us want to keep our main game in 5th edition. Now we will most likely go back at some point because 5th edition does give it's own uniqueness, but right now we feel like 2nd edition is more in line with what we are looking for.

Amen brother. Take you fav edition, add feats and adv/disad, and play on.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Remember when rolling a saving throw was an intense experience? I still do. One missed save and you were dead. That level of deadliness hasn't existed in the game for a long time.

That is because the powers that be who are in charge of the game decided that every PC was a "hero" that needed to stay alive against all odds. Back in the day your character was merely an adventurer who risked life and limb for the chance, perhaps one day, to attain the status of hero. Some people enjoy playing heroes more and some still enjoy the struggle of surviving as adventurers. There are flavors of D&D to satisfy both of these desires.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Remember when rolling a saving throw was an intense experience? I still do. One missed save and you were dead. That level of deadliness hasn't existed in the game for a long time.

One missed save against Plane Shift (to the plane of Elemental Fire or Water) is still an intense experience, though not one that has (quite) come up in play. I had a Rakshasa who had that planned, but due to good play by the players he never had the chance to use it.

I've seen intense initiative rolls, such as the Death Slaad who came this close to Plane Shifting away, taking the wizard's captured Robe of the Archmagi with him.

I've seen intense Dexterity checks to resist falling 100' after failing an Athletics contest in Out of the Abyss.

Failing a saving throw against Magic Jar is still a very bad thing in 5E.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

That is because the powers that be who are in charge of the game decided that every PC was a "hero" that needed to stay alive against all odds. Back in the day your character was merely an adventurer who risked life and limb for the chance, perhaps one day, to attain the status of hero. Some people enjoy playing heroes more and some still enjoy the struggle of surviving as adventurers. There are flavors of D&D to satisfy both of these desires.

Indeed: and it is entirely possible to construct a single system that can meet both needs, and not necessarily with all that much heavy lifting. But it often requires one side or the other to accept a compromise about something, such as what "first level" means, or the presence of certain spells or monster abilities that need to be "flagged" so the DM can know they require extra care to produce the intended/desired feel.

Sadly, 5e opted not to do either of those things, despite them being elementary applications of the "modularity" concept as presented during the playtest.

 

[JeffB]

I want to come back in and say a few things.

Lethality is not just about hit points and HD. There are many other things that exist in 2nd edition but not always in 5th.

1. Magic Resistance.
2. Magic Immunities.
3. Loads of Save or Die effects.
4. Age penalties.
5. Death from massive damage.
6. Aging effects from Ghosts and other undead.
7. Elves being restricted to Resurrection only.
8. Racial level limits.
9. Weapon Speeds.
10. Resting.
11. Item saving throws.
12. etc... etc....

Now these things could possibly be added to 5th edition but why would I do that when there is a system that already has them? Not to mention the fact that because of the limited amount of material for 5th edition, we are already using loads of 1st and 2nd edition material anyway. There are only two things that 5th edition gives us that we would hate to miss and those are feats and adv/disadv. Those are not enough to make us want to keep our main game in 5th edition. Now we will most likely go back at some point because 5th edition does give it's own uniqueness, but right now we feel like 2nd edition is more in line with what we are looking for.

I get it. I esssentially hit the same wall. I was converting everything , and at a certain point said "why bother?". I love 5th, but I dont use the AP/long, save the world yet again stories WOTC is putting out for it, so Its just easier to take adventure X and run it under whatever system it was designed for.

On the subject of a/d- I transported the idea into Castles and Crusades back during the 5e playtest. Castles and Crusades' "prime" system has always bugged me, but I love how easy it is to houserule the system (I prefer to add to, rather than subtract when it comes to rules) and convert products from 0e through 3rd on the fly in about 2 seconds (flip AC, figure out whether monster saves should be better with physical or mental abilities-all the other math is fine-as is) So I simply dropped the 12/18 challenge base, and set all challenge bases (think DC, which then gets modded by the level/HD of threat) to 15, and characters who had that ability as prime got "advantage" on the roll. Works awesome. The PCs are a tad more heroic than with the original systemwithout a big power increase AND they do slightly better on nonnprime checks (where as written, non prime checks have a very low chance of success- something that many C&Cers think is a bit too rough). So yeah, fiigure out how you want to incorporate it into 1/2e. Its totally worth stealing!

 

[Libramarian]

[MENTION=463]S'mon[/MENTION] Thanks for the reply upthread. Hakeem sounds very Conan-esque

I know 5e, with how complex the characters are, is not really suited for a meatgrinder game. I love the high risk / high reward feel of AD&D though, where losing a character is like busting in poker or knocking down the Jenga tower. It's hard to get that on the inidividual player level without a pretty significant chance of character death. I will cogitate upon other ways to achieve this... I don't think gimping characters with penalties is the answer.