D&D General D&D Evolutions You Like and Dislike [+]

Things I liked:
Thief skill progressions removed % based skills, which were awful until you hit higher levels.
Advantage mechanic
Spell schools

Things I didn't like:
Removal of niche protection. To me, D&D has always been a team game, like a sport. We don't see the QB making tackles on the D line. Everyone has their moment.
Move away from black and white inked interior art.

Reynard said:

This. I require proficiency all the time to make certain checks.

Click to expand...

Oh, yeah, Proficiency gating is important for maintaining the difference between characters and makes the flat math work.

Reynard said:

I don't think that is true. i remember the ability score charts going up to 25.

Click to expand...

In 2E, after things went pear shaped when I was 4 years old.

Alzrius said:

AD&D 2E was very clear that ability scores went up to 25, which was their absolute maximum, and the tables in the PHB reflected that.

View attachment 427742

Click to expand...

Right, this proves my point: notice the difference between t
18/00 and 29 even delineated by the coloring of the chart. Layer in this post I'll put into eh stuff from 1E, B/X and OD&D.

Remathilis said:

Correct. The 2e PHB had them all go to 25, and I don't remember if 1e had it in the PHB or UA.

Click to expand...

Not the PHan, nor in OD&D and B/X:



Nearest I can tell, the big numbers 2E used were in Deities & Demigods. Like 2E and BECMI, Deities & Demigods was broadly a mistake.

This a fun topic! I have these discussions with myself…

As it turns out I really enjoy 5e but also miss AD&D! At the outset let me say I love 5e (2014) so my criticisms are preferences only, not deal breakers.

Dislikes:

1. The tone. The art is good but the move toward happy shiny people is not evocative. Same goes for less of a medieval “theme.” And while it’s not a rules evolution, it seems all encompassing.

2. Too. Many. Spells. For. Everyone.

3. Bonus actions. “See you get these actions if you have something that fits the category. You will learn about that later…if it applies, maybe.”

4. Stealth rules…then again, were they “good” before?

Likes:

1. Options…feats skills etc. that let you play ‘X’ within urmulticlassing.

2. bounded accuracy!!! Huge plus

3. Warlocks. My favorite! So thematic and customizable and playable! If single classed…

4. Freedom from racial restrictions for classes

5. Open Multiclassing

6. Clearer surprise rules in spite of stealth confusion

mamba said:

then don’t have the barbarian even be able to attempt the check unless they are trained in arcana.

It’s not like I have a chance at deciphering Chinese when I never bothered studying it either.

Click to expand...

Had not thought of this. Stolen.

Yaarel said:

How would a Strength score 20 work? Or Giants with a Strength score 28? At a glance, to roll d20 under the score seems like less design space for gameplay?

Click to expand...

Giants didnt have STR scores.



On the other hand....



ahhhh! the good old days....

Like: D&D has continually evolved towards delivering its desired form: a game about empowering players to build detailed, specific fantasy heroes and then demonstrate their competence in planned story arcs.

Dislike: The game has continually changed how it wishes to frame encounters and challenges into a cohesive gameplay loop, thereby never creating one. The desires of a disparate, changing player base has meant each edition (and sometimes intra-edition changes) "reinvents the wheel" rather than refining and strengthening designs.

SkidAce said:

Giants didnt have STR scores.

View attachment 427754

On the other hand....

View attachment 427755

ahhhh! the good old days....

Click to expand...

I knew it existed before 2E, I just could not remember where.

Parmandur said:

The number only went to 18 before 3E, and the Gauntlets brought it to 18 with a few boni.

Click to expand...

Parmandur said:

Right, this proves my point: notice the difference between t
18/00 and 29 even delineated by the coloring of the chart. Layer in this post I'll put into eh stuff from 1E, B/X and OD&D.
Not the PHan, nor in OD&D and B/X:

View attachment 427748View attachment 427749View attachment 427750

Nearest I can tell, the big numbers 2E used were in Deities & Demigods. Like 2E and BECMI, Deities & Demigods was broadly a mistake.

Click to expand...

Your point made at the time others commented was that before 3e, the max was 18. This is clearly not the case. If it was correct except for things that you define as mistakes, we can accept it as a no-true-Scotsman style statement. But why not just say, 'Sorry, I misspoke. What I meant was initially capped at 18, and without clear intent that you regularly and routinely rise above that number (as is the case in 3e and beyond).'? That's certainly an accurate position.

Alzrius said:

Fun fact, Set 5: Immortals (1986) let characters who had become immortals (i.e. gods) have increase their ability scores up to a maximum of 100:
<charts>
Wrath of the Immortals (1992) kept that rule, albeit with some tweaking about how the bonuses were applied (the full rules for which are too long to reproduce below):
<charts>

Click to expand...

There was also at least one book (I think one of the Creature Crucibles or Gazetteers) where you could get a temporary stat of 19 (+4 bonus) in pre-Immortal levels.

The Immortal rules were distinct enough to almost count as a separate game (it certainly played differently than other levels, although I guess you could say the same thing about post-name-level). Although I have to admit that I don't think we ever got to that level playing the game by-the-book, much less played it btb (mostly going theater of the mind, at that point).

Yaarel said:

How would a Strength score 20 work? Or Giants with a Strength score 28? At a glance, to roll d20 under the score seems like less design space for gameplay?

Click to expand...

Not to distract from the thread, but the easiest way to do this is simply decouple the idea of the stats representing a unified system of measuring capacity between individuals of vastly different species.

Basically, a Str 14 human and a Str 14 giant wouldn't be equally strong. They simply have the same probability of overcoming a Strength based challenge relevant to what would be the appropriate challenge for the individual. For a human, that might be pushing a 200lb boulder. For a giant, that might be pushing a 2 ton boulder.

The skill set for the GM would shift to being able to determine what an appropriate type of challenge would be based on the concept of the character in question.

I know a lot of people have a strong attachment to the idea of a unified stat progression, but I don't think the above idea is any worse than a Str 8 halfling being able to move a rock a Str 18 half-orc can't a solid fraction of the time.