D&D 5E My biggest gripe with 5e design

[DND_Reborn]

No idea how you calculated that.

But I’d point out that while I was wrong about rangers specifically the point does remain. Everyone wanted that +10% xp bonus which often resulted in wis or int at 16 or higher.

But yeah we used the unearthed arcana rolling method so that would really skew the numbers.

LOL through the magic of excel spreadsheets!

But, yeah, if you used the UA 1E system and were rolling as many as 9d6 for Int, Wis, or Cha, you would improve the odds, maybe as high as 2% of all human characters. If I have time later tonight or in the morning maybe I'll run the numbers

 

[Maxperson]

Claiming 90% of the game was played the same is complete spurious. You have no more idea than I do. You can complain about my math all day long but that doesn’t make yours any less fictional.

Somehow I think pretty much everyone played with hit points, AC, armor, weapons, races, classes, etc. I'm pretty confident in my number.

 

[Maxperson]

@Maxperson :

FWIW, using 4d6-L, the probability of a human character (or dwarf/halfing if allowed) having psionics in 1E is (roughly) 0.0049709131184350 or 1 in 201.2 characters, less than 1/2 of 1%.

So, given I would say maybe 8-10 characters out of all the ones I played with (myself and other gamers) in over 20 years, yeah, that is about right.

I only played it for 6 years and saw maybe 2-3 characters end up with it. So right in line with your numbers.

 

[Hussar]

Umm, how many campaigns did you play in that time? For us that would probably be about 5 campaingns, meaning something on the order of 50 to 80 pc’s between multiple pcs, swapping characters and other stuff.

Sure classes and races. Which classes? Which races? Did you use Dragon magazine? Home brew? Judges Guild? ICE material? Star Frontiers? Material from other games? Alien invasions and laser guns?

So on and so forth. I’m not so arrogant to believe that the way I played was the way the game was played anywhere else.

If you have any actual evidence let’s see it. Otherwise my anecdotes trump yours because I say so. Or yours trump mine. Because you say so.

Or we accept that we can only talk about our own experiences without trying to “prove” who is right.

 

[Maxperson]

Umm, how many campaigns did you play in that time? For us that would probably be about 5 campaingns, meaning something on the order of 50 to 80 pc’s between multiple pcs, swapping characters and other stuff.

Sure classes and races. Which classes? Which races? Did you use Dragon magazine? Home brew? Judges Guild? ICE material? Star Frontiers? Material from other games? Alien invasions and laser guns?

So on and so forth. I’m not so arrogant to believe that the way I played was the way the game was played anywhere else.

If you have any actual evidence let’s see it. Otherwise my anecdotes trump yours because I say so. Or yours trump mine. Because you say so.

Or we accept that we can only talk about our own experiences without trying to “prove” who is right.

Like I said. The game is huge. 10% variation makes each game play very differently. You're arguing against someone who is agreeing with you. Strange.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Somehow I think pretty much everyone played with hit points, AC, armor, weapons, races, classes, etc. I'm pretty confident in my number.

There were quite a lot of rules about thise things changed or ignored though. Race & class, sure racial class & level limits, maybe not. Armor & weapons, sure, weapon vs armor type adjustments, pretty oft-ignored.

 

[Hussar]

Like I said. The game is huge. 10% variation makes each game play very differently. You're arguing against someone who is agreeing with you. Strange.

Blurg?

So, you agree that because there is so much variation from table to table that claims of "the way the game was played" are largely pointless? Because, I was under the understanding that you disagreed with that.

 

[Maxperson]

Blurg?

So, you agree that because there is so much variation from table to table that claims of "the way the game was played" are largely pointless? Because, I was under the understanding that you disagreed with that.

Think of it this way. we share 98% of our DNA with chimps, 70% with slugs and 50% with a banana. The differences, while relatively few, are profound. D&D is the same way. The tables played most of the same rules, but the ones they changed made the games at each table feel different.

 

[Hussar]

Sorry, but, I'm a bit dense.

Do you agree with this statement:

Individual AD&D tables were/are different to a significant enough degree that making broad, general statements about "the way the game is/was played" become very, very difficult.

 

[Lanefan]

FWIW, using 4d6-L, the probability of a human character (or dwarf/halfing if allowed) having psionics in 1E is (roughly) 0.0049709131184350 or 1 in 201.2 characters, less than 1/2 of 1%.

Is that assuming no rearrangement of the rolled stats?

We use a vaguely similar system - 14+ in Int or Wis or Cha gives you a roll, with each point of Int-Wis-Cha over 14 adding 1.5, 1.0, and 0.5 respectively. The roll is locked in but the bonus varies as your stats change, thus if your roll adds to 99 and you somehow gain a point of Int during your career, that'll trigger your psyonics.

Then, if you come up psyonic, there's another roll to determine how powerful you are, on a steep J-curve.

Out of about 1000 characters there's been maybe 50 psyonic ones*, of which maybe 6 were game-breakingly powerful** and another 10 or so were significant but not too excessive. For the rest, the psyonics pretty much represent a minor augmentation to what they can do otherwise.

* - by roll; there's been occasional devices which bestowed psyonics but that's a different thing.
** - I've DMed 5 of those 6, all in one campaign - crazy-stupid psyonics seemed to be the dice-roll-du-jour, even when the rolls were done right out in the open.