D&D General How has D&D changed over the decades?

[Helldritch]

day 1:"lets take a long rest, bob will you ritually cast tiny hut?" four is less than 6-8
day 2"lets take a long rest, bob will you ritually cast tiny hut?" four is less than 6-8
half minute hero style doom clocks to fix the problem that thwarts a bonkers design doesn't really count & stringing a bunch of extra reinforcements into an encounter is still going to be pretty grindy. Tack on short rest classes & the gains of long/short rests leaves a situation where a death spiral from interruptedrests is basically impossible.

I beg to differ. At least in my experience, it can and does work. Sometimes the 8 will happen only in one day, remember that the 6 to 8 is about medium encounters. Harder encounters and those that bring special difficulties will lower that number. Remember that the exp budget is also a thing. I can quickly judge the number of encounters and build something that will work in a believable story that will feel almost if not completely organic and fluid. Not all encounters needs to lead to a fight. In fact, most encounters will be avoided with a good scout/ranger.

And for Tiny hut. It is good for rests but outside of resting, it does nothing. It does not even take place. That the players use it for night encounters will not help for day encounters and bad luck can be a bi***. As the spell ends, those pesky goals just happen to enter the clearing...
Ho well, a small sacrifice to Lady Luck could have helped.

And the fun of it... the players can not even claim that the spell is useless, it did protected them the whole night!!!!

Also, creature with a sense of smell highly developed might catch that something is amiss. They might circle the zone where the players are and if intelligent, they might even deduce that an invisible hut is there and plan anmbush accordingly. Tiny hut is not an all mighty spell that will save the characters at all times.

 

[tetrasodium]

I beg to differ. At least in my experience, it can and does work. Sometimes the 8 will happen only in one day, remember that the 6 to 8 is about medium encounters. Harder encounters and those that bring special difficulties will lower that number. Remember that the exp budget is also a thing. I can quickly judge the number of encounters and build something that will work in a believable story that will feel almost if not completely organic and fluid. Not all encounters needs to lead to a fight. In fact, most encounters will be avoided with a good scout/ranger.

And for Tiny hut. It is good for rests but outside of resting, it does nothing. It does not even take place. That the players use it for night encounters will not help for day encounters and bad luck can be a bi***. As the spell ends, those pesky goals just happen to enter the clearing...
Ho well, a small sacrifice to Lady Luck could have helped.

And the fun of it... the players can not even claim that the spell is useless, it did protected them the whole night!!!!

Also, creature with a sense of smell highly developed might catch that something is amiss. They might circle the zone where the players are and if intelligent, they might even deduce that an invisible hut is there and plan anmbush accordingly. Tiny hut is not an all mighty spell that will save the characters at all times.

the more you do trying to meet the bar the more things start pulling apart at the seams. I agree that there's lots of ways to "fix" the problem ranging from spree killer body counts to loldeadly monsters by tinkering around the margins like higher CR encounters & more monsters or playing with rest mechanics, but all of them create their own set of problems & some of those problems need their own tinkering to fix.


As to tiny hut, yes the GM can effectively troll the players with a weirdly high number of burrowing/incorporeal monsters that thwart tiny hut just as they can introduce an incredible gathered force waiting for it to end or continually somehow interrupt rests until they say fiiiiiine & give in. At the end of the day it's still a cascade of things that are the result of the badly set bar that initially started things & the risk of having a rest interrupted is basically "whatever lets take another rest".

 

[Older Beholder]

I haven’t noticed the change in magic items others have mentioned. I’ve seen campaigns with very limited magic items and others with lots in both the past and present.

It’s usually more to do with the level of magic in the setting, rather than any particular edition. At least in my experience.

 

[Hussar]

day 1:"lets take a long rest, bob will you ritually cast tiny hut?" four is less than 6-8
day 2"lets take a long rest, bob will you ritually cast tiny hut?" four is less than 6-8
half minute hero style doom clocks to fix the problem that thwarts a bonkers design doesn't really count & stringing a bunch of extra reinforcements into an encounter is still going to be pretty grindy. Tack on short rest classes & the gains of long/short rests leaves a situation where a death spiral from interruptedrests is basically impossible.

Nearly 10 years of playing and DMing 5e and I've yet to see a Tiny Hut spell being cast.

 

[Stefano Rinaldelli]

Please, let's not add an ageist angle to the "snowflake", 'afraid of challenge', and 'DM emasculation' denigrations.

Much of what is being debated here I would say has less to do with any edition change (nor even any societal change, but that'd be a different thread) and instead describes group dynamics and personalities that have been common throughout D&D's history. Furthermore I'd say that's the crux -- because it's about group dynamics and personalities and thus it isn't a thing the rules or the edition needs or can address. I don't subscribe to the idea that greater character flexibility and capability in the rules equals loss of DM control or player entitlement to being the star of the show.

Yes, you have experiences, including some extreme cases on either end of the spectrum, whether it be players or DMs who are the ones who are being demanding or unyielding or what have you. My own experiences are the opposite. The groups I'm in today, some with newer players and some with veteran players and some mixed, do not remarkedly feel different to me as compared to the groups I've been in over the years. I've detected no shift in that variety of personalities, playstyles, or campaign styles (and, as I noted above, even amongst the same group and same players, shifting from campaign to campaign).

All through the years when there's been a clash of expectations is when the conversations began to either come to a point of alignment (including inviting people to try something new) or to part ways.

Nothing ageist (oh my god it seems that there's an ISM in everything one say). I'm simply telling you that the previous edition of the game where normally focused to a range of age (obvious since it is a product with a main target), with the rest of out of main target people more or less compatible. Now, expecially looking to books like strixhaven, it is embarassing for an adult to buy it looking at the illustration. Maybe this is subjective (as all written in this forum is) but I feel that now d&d is more focused to a specific age focus and less compatible to the tastes of people of 30+ years.
My feeling of alienation has grown stronger book by book, starting from 0 in the first manual and now running wild to not buying books anymore. I've forced myself to buy Witchlight. Passed Strixhaven, and recently passed Netherdeep simply because I'm literally unable to stand the art anymore. Maybe it is myself, but I'm quite as I was 10 years ago, nothing significant has changed in my life, tastes are the same. And also I have a big driver to buy from my children.
It seems to me that the gaussian curve is narrowing, focusing to a specific target age (or maybe this is the effect of some different editorial approach but it's impossible to talk about it here).
When I look back at TSR product or even 3rd edition I don't feel this bothersome effect from art. It was rarely good art, but I never feel embarassed looking at old manuals.
When I see art from Fria Ligan products it seems to me as passing from my neighboor singing under the shower to freddy mercury. And it has to be a real symptom of a precise age targeting, both for Frial Ligan and Wotc.

 

[Azzy]

Nothing ageist (oh my god it seems that there's an ISM in everything one say). I'm simply telling you that the previous edition of the game where normally focused to a range of age (obvious since it is a product with a main target), with the rest of out of main target people more or less compatible. Now, expecially looking to books like strixhaven, it is embarassing for an adult to buy it looking at the illustration. Maybe this is subjective (as all written in this forum is) but I feel that now d&d is more focused to a specific age focus and less compatible to the tastes of people of 30+ years.
My feeling of alienation has grown stronger book by book, starting from 0 in the first manual and now running wild to not buying books anymore. I've forced myself to buy Witchlight. Passed Strixhaven, and recently passed Netherdeep simply because I'm literally unable to stand the art anymore. Maybe it is myself, but I'm quite as I was 10 years ago, nothing significant has changed in my life, tastes are the same. And also I have a big driver to buy from my children.
It seems to me that the gaussian curve is narrowing, focusing to a specific target age (or maybe this is the effect of some different editorial approach but it's impossible to talk about it here).
When I look back at TSR product or even 3rd edition I don't feel this bothersome effect from art. It was rarely good art, but I never feel embarassed looking at old manuals.
When I see art from Fria Ligan products it seems to me as passing from my neighboor singing under the shower to freddy mercury. And it has to be a real symptom of a precise age targeting, both for Frial Ligan and Wotc.

OH, it seems sunjective as I have no similar hang-up as you in regards to current D&D products or art.

 

[Hussar]

Sorry, but, what's a "Fria Ligan"?

 

[Gnosistika]

Sorry, but, what's a "Fria Ligan"?

I believe they are referring to the gaming company.

 

[S'mon]

OH, it seems sunjective as I have no similar hang-up as you in regards to current D&D products or art.

Some people do, some don't. I do, but I appreciate it's mostly not an age thing. a Critter in my group is only a few years younger than me, was brought in by Critical Role, and that's his main point of reference. It's only partially a grognard thing, too - plenty of grognards here like the new direction & aesthetic. I don't like being told my liking for 70s-80s swords & sorcery is bad and wrong; I don't think I should be telling people who like stuff I don't that they're "liking it wrong", either.

 

[Fifth Element]

Now, expecially looking to books like strixhaven, it is embarassing for an adult to buy it looking at the illustration. Maybe this is subjective (as all written in this forum is) but I feel that now d&d is more focused to a specific age focus and less compatible to the tastes of people of 30+ years.

Yes, this is absolutely subjective, without question. I don't like the 5E art style either, but that's a completely subjective judgment, and has nothing to do with age. My teenage son recently started playing 5E, and he doesn't like the art either. But that doesn't affect the ability to enjoy the game itself.