D&D General D&D Editions: Anybody Else Feel Like They Don't Fit In?

[TiQuinn]

OSE and Shadowdark has given me life.

I say this have finally learned to not hate 5E for what I consider flaws and just roll with its power level.

This.

Let 5e be its thing. There’s good stuff out there that does simpler fantasy gaming and has a totally different vibe.

 

[Aldarc]

OSE and Shadowdark has given me life.

I say this have finally learned to not hate 5E for what I consider flaws and just roll with its power level.

This.

Let 5e be its thing. There’s good stuff out there that does simpler fantasy gaming and has a totally different vibe.

This is why I say that people would likely be happier if they stopped trying to make games into something they're not but found games that better satisfied their itches. Not saying you can't hack or modify these games. Instead, lean into the strengths of various games that exist out there and enjoy these games for what they are rather than what you are trying to force them to be.

 

[TiQuinn]

This is why I say that people would likely be happier if they stopped trying to make games into something they're not but found games that better satisfied their itches. Not saying you can't hack or modify these games. Instead, lean into the strengths of various games that exist out there and enjoy these games for what they are rather than what you are trying to force them to be.

Going back to the OP, they had a progression of house rules and expanding complexity starting with B/X. To me, Shadowdark represents that return to a simpler ruleset with lots of opportunity to bring in house rules as you need it.

 

[Edgar Ironpelt]

3.5 is the only D&D edition I'll run any more. (I will run other, non-class&level games, however) It does have annoyances, but later editions have kept the parts I find annoying while dropping the parts I really like. In particular, I like 3.5e for having a skill system that was actually halfway decent, if often over-fussy.

My Brotherhood of Rangers game is 3.5e with gestalt rangers as PCs (fighter-ranger gestalt, rogue-ranger gestalt, wizard-ranger gestalt etc), started at 6th level with slow advancement and the various 'travel' spells combed out to give what I believe is a more 'rangerly' feel.

If I start another 3.5e campaign, it will most likely be what I've dubbed "2e6" - like e6 but with character levels up to 12th but class levels limited to 6th. Thus multiclassing will be required (at least after 6th level) and spells will be limited to 3rd level and less. (And a blanket ban on 'prestige' classes.)

There are some things from Pathfinder 1e that I like - and sometimes have independently worked out & adopted as 3.5e house rules. But I didn't and don't like it overall, thus my sticking with 3.5e D&D

 

[Thomas Shey]

This is why I say that people would likely be happier if they stopped trying to make games into something they're not but found games that better satisfied their itches. Not saying you can't hack or modify these games. Instead, lean into the strengths of various games that exist out there and enjoy these games for what they are rather than what you are trying to force them to be.

Its the usual thing; they want games that work the way they want them to, but have the popularity (and other benefits that go with it) of ones they don't. In some ways that's understandable, but those pieces of rope don't meet in the middle.

 

[SkidAce]

Going back to the OP, they had a progression of house rules and expanding complexity starting with B/X. To me, Shadowdark represents that return to a simpler ruleset with lots of opportunity to bring in house rules as you need it.

Oddly, I feel this way about 5e.

Simpler framework than 3e (non-disparaging comment, I played it) but easier to add custom things I liked for my camapigns.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yup. If the problem was really "the rules have changed" you could just dust off your old Basic D&D boxed set and play with that (or download it (or something very like) from the internet if you've lost it).

The issue is we have changed. And that's only a problem if you make it so.

Having players who want to play the game you want to play is also a factor.

 

[TiQuinn]

Oddly, I feel this way about 5e.

Simpler framework than 3e (non-disparaging comment, I played it) but easier to add custom things I liked for my camapigns.

Oh I totally get that. For me though, 5e is if I want a more heroic, story based game. Shadowdark is the more site-based, dungeon crawling game, with a focus on resources, traps and puzzles. I just look at the two games as different kinds of tools.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Having players who want to play the game you want to play is also a factor.

An example of my point above.

But in the end, they're either looking for the experience you want or they aren't. If they aren't, they aren't.

 

[Aldarc]

Having players who want to play the game you want to play is also a factor.

It is but there is a reason why the market is increasingly emphasizing VTTs and digital tools. We may both prefer playing games in person but there is no easier time than now to find people online to play with who want to play the games you want to play.