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

[Thomas Shey]

I've dug up my copy of Men & Magic. Of course the editing is impeccable, so spell research is found on p 34 (after the spell descriptions) but making magic items is in the MU class description (p 7).

The list is: spell scrolls, potion of healing, potion of giant strength, 20 magical arrows, +1 armour, a wand of cold, and a ring of X-ray vision.

Of course it's not the same as Expert. Here are the comparisons (OD&D vs Expert vs AD&D):

Scroll of spells (100 gp & 1 week per level / --- / no gp cost given but 1 day per level)​

​

Potion of Healing (250 gp & 1 week / --- / 200 gp & 2 days)​

​

Potion of Giant Strength (1,000 gp & 4 weeks / --- / 500 to 750 gp & 5 to 8 days)​

​

20 arrows +1 (1,000 gp & 4 weeks / 10,000 gp & 1 month / ---)​

​

Armour +1 (2,000 gp & 2 months / 10,000 gp & 6 months / - - -)​

​

Ring of X-Ray Vision (50,000 gp & 1 year / 100,000 gp & 1 year / ---)​

​

Wand of Cold (10,000 gp & 6 months / ---/ ---)​

​

Ring of Spell Storing (--- / 10,000 gp & 1 month per spell level / 5,000 gp + a scroll of the spells + a Wish and possibly a Permanency spell + Enchant an Item)​

​

Crystal Ball (--- / 30,000 gp & 6 months / ---)​

I think it would be generous to call this a system. It's barely even a framework.

I see my guess about the time restraints was correct at least up through AD&D; you could maybe manage scrolls and potions, but anything beyond that was going to eat your lunch, time wise (as I recall magic arrows were effectively consumeables too).

 

[pemerton]

Ergo why experiences aren't all that universal. I know in hindsight we weren't exactly playing AD&D as Gygax intended, but even in our closest-to-RAW days, Thieves were quickly found to be a role best served by a multi-class or an NPC. Solo-scouting a dungeon was a suicide run; the best you got was a few rooms or hallways down (just far enough you could pull, er... retreat, to your allies if spotted).

Playing AD&D in the mid through late 80s the thieves were multi-class (either fighter for combat ability, or magic-using for spell support). Being multi-class also entailed being non-human, which permitted seeing in the dark which tends to be necessary for successful dungeon scouting.

When I started playing predominantly RM in 1990, functions that AD&D would treat as thief ones were picked up by a variety of PCs, normally combined either with an ability to fight or with access to supporting magic similar to a MU/thief or illusionist/thief.

In our 4e D&D game, the "skill monkey" role was filled by the invoker/wizard and complemented by access to rituals.

I really don't think the AD&D thief turned out to be a very successful design. The unreliable utility abilities don't compensate for the lack of staying power (MUs similarly lack staying power, but they have pretty reliable utility abilities!).

 

[Thomas Shey]

I really don't think the AD&D thief turned out to be a very successful design. The unreliable utility abilities don't compensate for the lack of staying power (MUs similarly lack staying power, but they have pretty reliable utility abilities!).

Well, it really didn't help that so many of their skill functions could be duplicated by spells over time.

 

[Remathilis]

Well, it really didn't help that so many of their skill functions could be duplicated by spells over time.

A lot of the problem with AD&D thieves was that D&D wasn't built with a skill system in mind, so that thief class had a weird proprietary skill set that didn't connect with other areas of the game well. You had to do a lot of reading between the lines to see what advantage an elf thief wearing a cloak of elvenkind got on surprising a foe! So magic usually didn't take into account the thieves abilities (unless it was magic designed for a thief) and thus just overshadowed natural talent.

(It probably didn't help that advice on running thief skills was unhelpful and implied rolls needed to be made constantly for stealth or climbing, with a failed roll equalling detection or a fall. Thus, it was almost always better to use magic with a high chance of success over your natural abilities which started so low as to guarantee failure.)

 

[Thomas Shey]

Yeah, the OD&D thief was very clearly bolted on, and I suspect it took more than a couple editions for that to get reconciled with the rest of the system.

 

[Storyteller Hero]

When Thac0 became 0cahT, it was a much needed turning point for the game.

 

[pemerton]

You had to do a lot of reading between the lines to see what advantage an elf thief wearing a cloak of elvenkind got on surprising a foe!

Don't get me started on the surprise rules! And whole PhDs could be written on the interaction, or lack thereof, between the ranger's class features that are related to surprise, the monk's ability to reduce the surprise chance (but in percentile amounts) and the thief's percentage chances to sneak around and to notice things.

It's an utter shambles.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Don't get me started on the surprise rules! And whole PhDs could be written on the interaction, or lack thereof, between the ranger's class features that are related to surprise, the monk's ability to reduce the surprise chance (but in percentile amounts) and the thief's percentage chances to sneak around and to notice things.

It's an utter shambles.

Exception based design at its finest.

 

[Fifth Element]

Exception based design at its finest.

Even that is very charitable, suggesting there was some kind of basis for the design.

 

[Lanefan]

Even that is very charitable, suggesting there was some kind of basis for the design.

It's like a toolbox full of tools - if you've frequently got just the right tool on hand for a particular job that isn't much use for any other job, you still keep it in the box and pull it out when needed.

Better that than limiting yourself to just a few tools that sort-of get the job done but nowhere near as well as the bespoke-to-task ones.