D&D General Lethality, AD&D, and 5e: Looking Back at the Deadliest Edition

[Hussar]

Also, I have found that 5e is much more focused on roleplaying than on combat (4e would be your most combat-oriented edition, IMO). This may be less about the rules than the culture, though, as the rise of actual play shows has effectively acculturated a mass audience towards heavy RP.

LOL. Here's where I always kinda giggle when people edition war. Where do you think those role-play focused elements in 5e came from? All those expanded rules for skills and whatnot. Extended skill challenges and group skill challenges. The notion of "say yes" that found throughout 5e. Backgrounds? BIFTS? All 4e concepts repurposed for 5e.

It astonishes me that people still argue this.

 

[Micah Sweet]

LOL. Here's where I always kinda giggle when people edition war. Where do you think those role-play focused elements in 5e came from? All those expanded rules for skills and whatnot. Extended skill challenges and group skill challenges. The notion of "say yes" that found throughout 5e. Backgrounds? BIFTS? All 4e concepts repurposed for 5e.

It astonishes me that people still argue this.

I don't disagree, but to be fair I also don't actually  like any of that stuff.

 

[Hussar]

I don't disagree, but to be fair I also don't actually  like any of that stuff.

Ahh, well, that's fair.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Person: "modern WotC D&D is just combat and dice rolls to resolve everything. They didn't actually role-play like we did back in the day."
Same person: "modern WotC D&D is all about story time hour where it's just a shared story, not like the deadly combat we had back in the day where the dice determined your fate!"

 

[Clint_L]

LOL. Here's where I always kinda giggle when people edition war. Where do you think those role-play focused elements in 5e came from? All those expanded rules for skills and whatnot. Extended skill challenges and group skill challenges. The notion of "say yes" that found throughout 5e. Backgrounds? BIFTS? All 4e concepts repurposed for 5e.

It astonishes me that people still argue this.

I’m not edition warring so please don’t make it that. I’m claiming that 4e was the most combat oriented edition (ie combat was particularly central to its design). I didn’t claim anything about it’s influence on RP in 5e.

 

[Hussar]

I’m not edition warring so please don’t make it that. I’m claiming that 4e was the most combat oriented edition (ie combat was particularly central to its design). I didn’t claim anything about it’s influence on RP in 5e.

I get what you're claiming. I'm just disagreeing with your interpretation. 4e was very much not the most combat oriented edition by a considerable margin. Most of the RP elements that you see in 5e are directly ported in from 4e.

Good grief, does everyone forget that a quarter of your powers in 4e were Utility powers? That every class got a pretty broad selection of utility abilities that were not combat oriented, at all?

 

[Oofta]

I get what you're claiming. I'm just disagreeing with your interpretation. 4e was very much not the most combat oriented edition by a considerable margin. Most of the RP elements that you see in 5e are directly ported in from 4e.

Good grief, does everyone forget that a quarter of your powers in 4e were Utility powers? That every class got a pretty broad selection of utility abilities that were not combat oriented, at all?

The RP elements in 4E were more structured and had more mechanical support than previous editions. Combat abilities were also more structured. Some aspects of 4E are used in 5E. Some aspects of most editions are.

That did not make 4E any less combat focused for a lot of people. It's not a criticism, just an observation.

 

[Mannahnin]

I get what you're claiming. I'm just disagreeing with your interpretation. 4e was very much not the most combat oriented edition by a considerable margin. Most of the RP elements that you see in 5e are directly ported in from 4e.

Good grief, does everyone forget that a quarter of your powers in 4e were Utility powers? That every class got a pretty broad selection of utility abilities that were not combat oriented, at all?

I wouldn't point at the Utility powers as my favorite piece of evidence, as to be fair, some of those were healing focused and useful in combat. But lots of them weren't, it's true. You're dead-on about the skill challenge system, of course, which was the most prominent example of D&D ever having an extended resolution system (more than a single check) for non-combat task resolution. The pursuit/chase rules are another example.

The RP elements in 4E were more structured and had more mechanical support than previous editions. Combat abilities were also more structured. Some aspects of 4E are used in 5E. Some aspects of most editions are.

That did not make 4E any less combat focused for a lot of people. It's not a criticism, just an observation.

TBF, the combat in 4E was pretty darn fun and tactical, and it was the closest to a functional balanced CR system the game has ever had. Between that and the monster roles, it was super easy and lazy to just build engaging tactical set piece fights (which was one reason I was able to take on running a full game with my former wargaming buddies). None of that made the game itself less roleplay-focused than other editions. As you and Hussar have pointed out, it mechanically supported stuff-other-than-combat more than just about any other edition. But a lot of folks did tend to focus on the tactical combat.

 

[Krachek]

Two simple questions

As a players, do you have ask for more lethality at the start of a campaign?

Would you like that the OneDnD PHB offer an official Variant to make the game much more lethal?

my answers: no and yes.

 

[Oofta]

I wouldn't point at the Utility powers as my favorite piece of evidence, as to be fair, some of those were healing focused and useful in combat. But lots of them weren't, it's true. You're dead-on about the skill challenge system, of course, which was the most prominent example of D&D ever having an extended resolution system (more than a single check) for non-combat task resolution. The pursuit/chase rules are another example.



TBF, the combat in 4E was pretty darn fun and tactical, and it was the closest to a functional balanced CR system the game has ever had. Between that and the monster roles, it was super easy and lazy to just build engaging tactical set piece fights (which was one reason I was able to take on running a full game with my former wargaming buddies). None of that made the game itself less roleplay-focused than other editions. As you and Hussar have pointed out, it mechanically supported stuff-other-than-combat more than just about any other edition. But a lot of folks did tend to focus on the tactical combat.

Whether the changes 4E made were positive or negative will always be a matter of opinion and preference. Just like whether it was more combat focused was also a matter of perspective.

But we can't really discuss this objectively, it always seems to lead to edition wars. Which is too bad, I think it could be an interesting subject about approaches to the game's structure and what people want. In any case maybe we should just move on?