When Do the 5E “Ride or Die” Folks Become Grogs Like The Rest of Us in “D&D Older Editions” And When Do We Get D&D 5E Flair for Posts?

[PHATsakk43]

Ok, but...

A) The lack of improvement with level applies equally to seemingly "core" abilities, like Religion for a Cleric or Spellcraft for a Magic-User.
B) Because the rate of getting new NWPs was so slow, and the increase only 5% per slot (so the BEST you could improve your skills was 5% to ONE skill every three levels, or FOUR levels for poor Rogues), that always seemed like a sucker's game.

Somewhat a fair point, however, while it seems significantly worse than say, 3E or especially 5E with the level based proficiency bonus, it’s not really truly equivalent because of the mechanics of the two systems.

The AD&D system is a fixed target roll against the character’s ability score. So, one major difference is that the DC doesn’t tend to scale with game level either. A religion or spellcraft check by a 1st level priest or mage is the same for them at 20th. So heavy progression wasn’t really as necessary as it is in D20 games where DCs tend to scale with party level.

Add in that most characters had ability scores that tended to average above the median 9-10 range and often for prime requisites in the 15-17 you effectively have a fixed DC of 3-7 for most NWPs which creates far more chances for success without having to bump up the numbers.

Again, as this is a discussion regarding 5E, one thing that it did do was to attempt to eliminate the ridiculous numbers seen in 3/3.5 in skill DCs with its “bounded accuracy” model. I’ll admit that it’s a fairly good solution given the limitation of a fixed, single mechanic game system. Fortunately, it seems that D&D.2024 has maintained that and also the simple (too simple in my opinion, but I understand why it works) skill system.

That said, I think it is one place where pre-D20 D&D was actually better, if by accident than by design. “Roll under” and having a floor for a chance works better in some situations.

 

[CreamCloud0]

while i don't think species has quite reached the bar to be qualified as a 'cosmetic choice' and there are certainly a few standouts who push back against that classification, i do think there is an overall progression towards species design that is 'equally available' for being used with any type of build and traits that are fundamentally low-impact on character playstyle,

• 120' Darkvision
• Advantage on STs to end the Charmed condition.
• Proficiency in Insight, Perception, and Survival.
• The freedom from having to sleep and the ability to finish a Long Rest in 4 hours.
• Ability to cast Dancing Lights 1/Long Rest at 1st level, Faerie Fire 1/Long Rest at 3rd level, and Darkness 1/Long Rest at 5th level.

like, look at these drow traits presented earlier, how much do these really incline a character towards any particular type of strength? darkvision which more species get than not, resistance and immunity to sleep and charm respectively are pretty neutral, the skills are skills and a couple of 1/LR spells, there's nothing earthshattering there that would really cause your drow to play all that fundamentally different from the next person's halfling or dragonborn

and i know this came about as a pushback from restrictive design and anti-optimisation typecasting but personally i'd rather my species had enough impact on my build that it does matter enough to be factored into someone's optimisation calculations than it be shallow enough that it can be written off.

 

[Parmandur]

while i don't think species has quite reached the bar to be qualified as a 'cosmetic choice' and there are certainly a few standouts who push back against that classification, i do think there is an overall progression towards species design that is 'equally available' for being used with any type of build and traits that are fundamentally low-impact on character playstyle,

like, look at these drow traits presented earlier, how much do these really incline a character towards any particular type of strength? darkvision which more species get than not, resistance and immunity to sleep and charm respectively are pretty neutral, the skills are skills and a couple of 1/LR spells, there's nothing earthshattering there that would really cause your drow to play all that fundamentally different from the next person's halfling or dragonborn

and i know this came about as a pushback from restrictive design and anti-optimisation typecasting but personally i'd rather my species had enough impact on my build that it does matter enough to be factored into someone's optimisation calculations than it be shallow enough that it can be written off.

Most people don't do "builds" at all.

 

[TwoSix]

and i know this came about as a pushback from restrictive design and anti-optimisation typecasting but personally i'd rather my species had enough impact on my build that it does matter enough to be factored into someone's optimisation calculations than it be shallow enough that it can be written off.

There are games where I like this, but for D&D specifically, I'd rather see race/species as an aesthetic flavor choice.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Honestly, it's too soon to tell.

I'm old enough to remember the "I'll never switch to 3.5" crowd all quietly ... switching to 3.5, except for one or two posters who still bought 3.5 books to swipe from anyway.

On the other hand, the people who predicted the same would happen with 4E were clearly proven wrong.

But right now, before the Monster Manual is out, not to mention the rest of the 2025 books, which are clearly intended to on-ramp everyone into the new edition, no one can truly say for sure what's going to happen.

My fairly confident prediction is that it will be somewhere in the middle. 3.0e to 3.5e were mainly just mechanical changes which were almost universally considered improvements. The exceptions to that are fairly rare. 5.0e to 5.5e involves a more philosophical shift, and more of the changes feel (to me) like different ways of doing things rather than clearly better ways.

I imagine a lot more people will use a hybridized 5e taking the parts they prefer from 2014 and 2024, than ever did such a thing with 3e/3.5e.

 

[Corinnguard]

I imagine a lot more people will use a hybridized 5e taking the parts they prefer from 2014 and 2024, than ever did such a thing with 3e/3.5e.

People were hybridizing 5e well before 5.5e by coming up and sharing their own homebrewed material with the rest of the community. And some of these homebrews are much better than the official WoTC material.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Most people don't do "builds" at all.

they do enough in the manner i'm referring to, as in 'a DEX build' or 'a WIS build', but which might've been better expressed as simply your class/character strengths, what core stats your class runs off of.

you don't nearly have half as many traits in the game anymore which undermine your attempt to play a certain type of character because of the species you chose, (personally it still gets under my skin the Small size trait kneecaps attempts to play a STR martial cause all the best weapons are Heavy)

 

[CreamCloud0]

There are games where I like this, but for D&D specifically, I'd rather see race/species as an aesthetic flavor choice.

what would you say causes your difference in opinion in DnD from those other games? cause, if i pick to play a species i want to feel like i'm actually playing that species, i can RP til the cows come home but if my species isn't actually sending signals that it's affecting how my character does/can do/is affected by things it starts to feel a little hollow.

 

[Parmandur]

they do enough in the manner i'm referring to, as in 'a DEX build' or 'a WIS build', but which might've been better expressed as simply your class/character strengths, what core stats your class runs off of.

you don't nearly have half as many traits in the game anymore which undermine your attempt to play a certain type of character because of the species you chose, (personally it still gets under my skin the Small size trait kneecaps attempts to play a STR martial cause all the best weapons are Heavy)

Not based on the info from Beyond over the past many years: moat people are not doing that level of "character build" at all.

 

[TwoSix]

what would you say causes your difference in opinion in DnD from those other games? cause, if i pick to play a species i want to feel like i'm actually playing that species, i can RP til the cows come home but if my species isn't actually sending signals that it's affecting how my character does/can do/is affected by things it starts to feel a little hollow.

I don't mind it making an impact. I just don't want it be on a level of "my orc wizard is actively worse at wizarding than an elf wizard because the orc has a -2 Int and the elf has a +2 Int."

But I absolutely want transformative stuff like fairy/pixie flight, or a warforged constitution, or eladrin fey step, or tortle shell, or changeling disguise.

I can't draw a fine line, because it's a fairly squishy definition. But as an optimizer, at a gut level, I know there's a place where a racial feature can cross from "nice-to-have" to "makes other choices not worth considering".

The 3e bonus feat for humans (and strongheart halflings) was like this. Paragon Surge was briefly like this for Pathfinder. Racial stat adjustments (unless implemented well like PF2) are also like this.