Search results

It's interesting to note that the OD&D paladin wasn't able to cast spells or turn undead. Those abilites didn't show up until 1e. Even then, spellcasting was reserved for high-level (9+) paladins and was pretty limited. It was more of a nice little extra for high-level paladins rather than a...

1. Using attack bonuses and ascending AC instead of THAC0 or the charts. 2. Recategorizing saving throws as Fort/Ref/Will instead of the old five categories (but still keeping AD&D style static numbers to save against). Aside from those two things, I don't see much worth keeping.

Holger from Three Hearts and Three Lions is an example of a Gygaxian, appendix N paladin.

If they put the D&D name on it, then they should be trying to make the best version of D&D possible, with all the sacred cows intact. If they want to make the "best RPG possible", then by all means do so. Just call it something else and don't pretend it's D&D.

From BECMI to 1e to 2e, I played in a lot of groups and not one used a grid. Sometimes minis were used to help visualize position, but never was movement carefully measured out and so on. It wasn't until 3e came along that I ever saw a D&D group use a grid. IMO, defining combat in terms of a...

I'd definitely keep the entire original Appendix N and then add to it. There's a lot of great stuff in the original Appendix N and a lot of it is pretty easy to find used on the internet.

Original D&D. Variable weapon damage was introduced in Supplement I: Greyhawk. In OD&D, all attacks do 1d6 damage (except for some powerful creatures like giants). Hit dice are also stated in d6s. One hit die generally absorbs one hit of damage.

Be that as it may, the point still stands that the system worked just fine without them.

Up until 3e, there wasn't a skill system in D&D. It worked just fine. (Thieves technically had "skills", but they were essentially % based class abilities.)

I don't like this idea. Even if you have pre-gen builds, casual players still need to deal with a multitude of skills, feats, etc. How about if the DM doesn't want to deal with the micro-management of all the different skills, feats, etc.? Can the DM still run a simple game? I thought the...

Absolutely. In high-level 1e (level 15+) death is very common, so it's necessary for clerics to be able to raise their fallen comrades without too much difficulty. Of course, there is always the chance that a rez survival roll could fail and your character would be dead permanently. There are...

Disagree. I mean, how does the whole "Till death do us part" work? If one of the spouses is killed and then later raised from the dead, is the marriage still in effect? How about if the corpse is raised as a zombie or other undead? I think there are too many loopholes and exploits. This is...

I agree that we should get rid of proficiencies. While we're at it, let's get rid of skills too... and take a long, hard look at either axing feats or a large number of the specialized character classes.

I think if they decide to call 5e "D&D Next", then I think we need to reconsider how we refer to older editions so that we don't cause confusion. Revised Edition Names OD&D : D&D Begins Holmes Basic : D&D Begins for Beginners B/X D&D : D&D Began, Now for Both Beginners and Non-Beginners...

The whole "Next" label is just a marketing thing. There's nothing wrong with calling it "Fifth Edition"... except for the fact that there have been a lot more than five D&D editions. Maybe they should just use the year published, like "D&D 2013". At the rate new editions have been coming out...

Instead of killing off the fighter or any of the "big 4", why not kill off all of the specialized, niche character classes that have cropped up over the years?

Using different XP charts worked perfectly well for 20+ years. IMO, the unified experience chart is just "unnecessary symmetry". Some magic-users manage to figure the spell out, some don't. It's based on intelligence. Armor is heavy, restrictive, and fatiguing to wear. Magic-users don't...

Are you thinking that 7th level cleric spells be roughly equivalent to 7th level wizards spells in terms of power? Or are you saying that it should be more like classic D&D? Pre-3e, clerics topped out at 7th, but 7th level clerical spells were quite powerful, more powerful than 7th level...

I don't view this as a problem. D&D has been around for 30+ years and clerics have been there since OD&D, so the cleric archetype has been firmly established. Whether or not it exists outside of D&D is irrelevant at this point. It is firmly entrenched in D&D and D&D wouldn't be D&D without...

True, but remember that the 10 hit dice he gains as a bard are in addition to those he gained as a fighter and thief. This means he can have up to 19 total hit dice, each of which can receive a bonus from constitution.