A difficult question

[Sword of Spirit]

I know I may be asking the Tanar'ri and Baatezu if they would be interested in having a polite discussion of their philosophical differences here, but...

I'd really love to see a courteous discuss that goes through step by step the differences between the editions, where each side both offers, and eventually responds to, the individual points, as well as overall quantity, etc, of considerations as to why they consider 4E to be a greater departure from tradition than 3E, or why they consider 3E to be a greater departure from 2E.

I know this will be particularly difficult, because almost everyone who would be interested in discussing this has a strong opinion (myself included).

Is there any interest in attempting this exercise? Is it possible to do so without an edition war? Are there are "True Neutral" parties who would volunteer to moderate?

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Folks everybody knows that WOTC put D&D on the cover so I hope we are all clear what I mean by the above. I'm meaning that it was such a departure playstyle wise from previous editions that it no longer felt like the same game. Surely putting the name on something isn't all it takes? If they renamed Star Wars Saga - 5e and didnt' change anything else would it still be D&D to you? To me, and it was a quote from me, 4e did not look at all like D&D. It looked like a new game. It wasn't a version of an existing game. It was a new game.

It being a departure resulted in you(and others) disliking it, not ceasing to be D&D or being less D&D. Saying that 4E isn't D&D is simply inflammatory.

 

[stoloc]

I know I may be asking the Tanar'ri and Baatezu if they would be interested in having a polite discussion of their philosophical differences here, but...

I'd really love to see a courteous discuss that goes through step by step the differences between the editions, where each side both offers, and eventually responds to, the individual points, as well as overall quantity, etc, of considerations as to why they consider 4E to be a greater departure from tradition than 3E, or why they consider 3E to be a greater departure from 2E.

I know this will be particularly difficult, because almost everyone who would be interested in discussing this has a strong opinion (myself included).

Is there any interest in attempting this exercise? Is it possible to do so without an edition war? Are there are "True Neutral" parties who would volunteer to moderate?

I'd be willing to discuss what I see as the strengths of the various editions and I am willing to be courteous and polite so long as others refrain from making inaccurate claims and attacks themselves (such as claiming that something is the TRUE dnd or something else is not REALLY dnd).

However I have no interest in a discussion of whether this or that edition was more or less of a departure from previous editions as that would be pointless.

 

[jrowland]

I want a game that delivers what I want.
I want a game that delivers enough other people to play the game that it can flourish and grow.

If 5e delivers those two points, I'll support it.

If 5e fails to deliver those two points, I'll buy the PHB, DMG, and MM as my "sacrifice". I support D&D, even when r-tards are at the helm, but that is as far as I'll support it.

I own all the BECMI, 1e, and 2e books. I own most of the 3E books. I own about half of the 4e book. I own nothing of pathfinder. Pathfinder is an oddity, so maybe if I lumped it with 3E then I could say I own half of 3E/pathfinder. That feels more correct. My interest is waning...maybe its age.

I am by no means a grognard, but I think "back in the 1E days" I simply didn't know any better. Scry, teleport, nova wasn't an option...It didn't occur to us. With age and experience, the internet hivemind, and newer editions it is hard to recapture that...I can't go back.

We played the game wrong, and it worked. Ultimately, that is what I want: a game like the one I use to play incorrectly, before I learned how to maximize and break the game.

 

[Emerikol]

Maybe it will be easier to list the things that were common in earlier editions of D&D and ceased to exist in 4e at least at launch.

1. Base Attack Bonus that led into multiple attacks.
2. Hit points as the sole control for health.
3. Wizards had nine spell levels and a goodly number of spells per level.
4. Your defense against a spell was a saving throw. (Minor point for me but true)
5. Utility magic was part of the spell selection process and not a ritual.
6. Utility magic came at lower levels and was decent.
7. Named spells like Tensers floating disc.
8. The Great Wheel Cosmology
9. Nine Alignments.
10. Alignment mattered.
11. Only magic healed instantly.
12. Mundane healing was measured in days.
13. Spells could be disrupted. (Although by 3e this was all but dead I agree).
14. Magic items didn't require personal energy (surges) to use.
15. Spells outcomes were based upon both the text and the stat block.
16. Every class didn't have "powers" and was not AEDU.
17. The game was not heavily dependent on a grid. (even if houserulable 4e wasn't made for theatre of the mind play. 3e started down the path to grid though I agree.).
18. Magic Resistance/Spell Resistance existed.
19. Classes were not shoehorned into roles even if many players chose a role for their PC.
20. Level drain existed (although again in 3e they were already going the wrong way).

I'll stop at 20. There are more though.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Maybe it will be easier to list the things that were common in earlier editions of D&D and ceased to exist in 4e at least at launch.

1. Base Attack Bonus that led into multiple attacks.
2. Hit points as the sole control for health.
3. Wizards had nine spell levels and a goodly number of spells per level.
4. Your defense against a spell was a saving throw. (Minor point for me but true)
5. Utility magic was part of the spell selection process and not a ritual.
6. Utility magic came at lower levels and was decent.
7. Named spells like Tensers floating disc.
8. The Great Wheel Cosmology
9. Nine Alignments.
10. Alignment mattered.
11. Only magic healed instantly.
12. Mundane healing was measured in days.
13. Spells could be disrupted. (Although by 3e this was all but dead I agree).
14. Magic items didn't require personal energy (surges) to use.
15. Spells outcomes were based upon both the text and the stat block.
16. Every class didn't have "powers" and was not AEDU.
17. The game was not heavily dependent on a grid. (even if houserulable 4e wasn't made for theatre of the mind play. 3e started down the path to grid though I agree.).
18. Magic Resistance/Spell Resistance existed.
19. Classes were not shoehorned into roles even if many players chose a role for their PC.
20. Level drain existed (although again in 3e they were already going the wrong way).

I'll stop at 20. There are more though.

1. Attack bonus didn't lead into multiple attacks before 3E
2. 3E had ability score damage
4. Unless your touch AC was your defense against that spell
5-6. Rituals started at level 1 in 4E, cantrips at level 1, and non-combat utility spells started at level 2.
7. Tenser's Floating Disc and Mordenkainen's Faithful Hound, Bigby's Iron Grasp, and Evard's Black Tentacles are all 4E spells, among others.
8-10. Many would call these changes improvements.
12. Yuck
14. These items in 4E were exceedingly rare, and not indicative of 4E magic items as a whole.
15. This is only different in 4E combined with a lack of imagination. Scorching Burst lighting thatched roof cottages on fire and such.
16. Non-AEDU classes were first introduced in PHB3, and many varied kinds after Essentials.
18. How is SR different than simply having higher defenses?

For somebody who keeps talking about what is the "One True D&D", you don't seem to know much about it?

Mod Note: Please see my note below. ~Umbran

 

[stoloc]

1. Attack bonus didn't lead into multiple attacks before 3E
2. 3E had ability score damage
4. Unless your touch AC was your defense against that spell
5-6. Rituals started at level 1 in 4E, cantrips at level 1, and non-combat utility spells started at level 2.
7. Tenser's Floating Disc and Mordenkainen's Faithful Hound, Bigby's Iron Grasp, and Evard's Black Tentacles are all 4E spells, among others.
8-10. Many would call these changes improvements.
12. Yuck
14. These items in 4E were exceedingly rare, and not indicative of 4E magic items as a whole.
15. This is only different in 4E combined with a lack of imagination. Scorching Burst lighting thatched roof cottages on fire and such.
16. Non-AEDU classes were first introduced in PHB3, and many varied kinds after Essentials.
18. How is SR different than simply having higher defenses?

For somebody who keeps talking about what is the "One True D&D", you don't seem to know much about it?

1) Well there were a few classes that got multiple attacks based on level- to be honest I preferred the fact that multiple attacks could be done in 4e based on specific powers as your character levelled up.
2) Yeah hated ability score damage and it's ilk in pre 4e. Good riddance. If you need to have things that weaken characters I much prefer the weakened condition. Much less fiddly. Dont even get me started on the whole permanent draining things from previous editions.
3) Yes and now they have a goodly number of spells of various levels.
4) Yeah much prefer NAD's to AC, touch AC, saving throw, no save confusion of previous editions.
5-6)Rituals great idea poorly implemented. Utility abilities not taking the same design space as offensive abilities great idea.
7) Yeah I coulda sworn that our party wizard had Evards. whats the problem again? Oh it's not a 4th level spell that you get at 7th level? psh big deal.
8) Pure fluff I'm pretty sure you can use whatever cosmology that you want without breaking much. I'm also pretty sure I've seen alternative cosmologies used in previous editions.
9) Seen alignments dropped before by various groups pre 4e and no real detriment. Also don't see any problem with using the 9 from earlier in 4e.
10) Still does just as much as always.
11) Yes only magic healed instantly and the options for other things was an improvement.
12) Yeah and the improvement in healing rates was great for some folks- you didn't like it then reduce it. Much ado about nothing.
13) Yeah but there isn't really the need to interrupt them now any more than there is a need to interrupt the ranger from shooting you.
14) Yeah I dont have any magic that uses surges - maybe talking about potions.
15) Yeah I prefer mechanics to be pretty clear and straightforward and fluff to be divorced from the mechanics so it can be changed if you want.
16) Yup everyone gets cool stuff and ITS GREAT.
17) Meh I remember using a grid back in 1e but yeah 4e does assume it more than previous editions.
18) Meh once again prefer NAD's and the various resistances that 4w has - makes more sense to me.
19) Like meatshield, skillmonkey, healbot and utility? Yeah I remember those from 1e
20) See 2 above also throw in rust monsters and other SCREW YOU PC things from previous editions. Never liked the effects in previous editions.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

First, there was a great post by ... [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION], I think? ... in a recent thread wherein he laid out why he thought the 2E->3E change was bigger than the 3E->4E change (IIRC, focusing on the fact that someone who knows 3E can pick up a 4E character sheet and play pretty effectively, while someone who knows 2E will not understand most of the 3E sheet).

1. Base Attack Bonus that led into multiple attacks.

BAB is 3.XE only, and in editions prior to 3E multiple attacks came from being a Fighter and from Weapon Specialization points - not your THAC0.

2. Hit points as the sole control for health.

Except for poison damage pre-3E, which killed instantaneously. Also, in 3E, you can take Con damage which can kill you without reducing your HP to 0. (EDIT: Forgot level drain killing you, too. Thanks, [MENTION=87792]Neonchameleon[/MENTION]!)

3. Wizards had nine spell levels and a goodly number of spells per level.

I don't think Wizards had 9 spell levels in the Rules Cyclopedia, but I could be wrong. Also, conspicuosly absent from your list is how many spell levels Clerics and Druids had ...

4. Your defense against a spell was a saving throw. (Minor point for me but true)

Except for all those spells that required attack rolls.

5. Utility magic was part of the spell selection process and not a ritual.
6. Utility magic came at lower levels and was decent.

I'm not 100% sure how to parse this one.

7. Named spells like Tensers floating disc.

Exist in 4E.

8. The Great Wheel Cosmology

Doesn't exist in Dark Sun, or Eberron, or the Forgotten Realms, or Dragonlance, or Birthright, or ...

9. Nine Alignments.

Do not exist in Basic / Rules Cyclopedia, which just has 3 (Law, Neutral, Chaos).

10. Alignment mattered.

... Sometimes, I guess? I mean, this varied really, really heavily depending on the group. And, I guess there was the occasional magic item that required a given aligment, but this is not something that is universally true among pre-4E D&D (especially given the large number of DMs I've run into who just ignore the whole thing anyway).

11. Only magic healed instantly.

Sure. Still true in 4E, if you're talking about things like actual wounds or diseases. HP, since the Gygaxian days, is not purely wounds, so IMO, 4E's the first one to get this right.

12. Mundane healing was measured in days.

... Except when it was measured in weeks or months. Which, actually, almost never happened, because you nearly always had a cleric (either PC or NPC) with you, anyway, so mundane healing was almost completely replaced by magical healing, anyway.

13. Spells could be disrupted. (Although by 3e this was all but dead I agree).

You can disrupt spells in 4E, too, so ... ?

14. Magic items didn't require personal energy (surges) to use.

Except for the ones that took HP to use. And making magic items took personal energy / health in previous editions (Con drain in ... 2E?, XP in 3E).

15. Spells outcomes were based upon both the text and the stat block.

Still true, so ... ?

Also, did you never have anyone describe their spell in their own way before 4E?

16. Every class didn't have "powers" and was not AEDU.

Sure. But in 1E, not every class had "Skills" (just the thief), and in 3E, they did.

17. The game was not heavily dependent on a grid. (even if houserulable 4e wasn't made for theatre of the mind play. 3e started down the path to grid though I agree.).

But with everything measured in inches, it was (purportedly) dependent on being run on a tabletop. If you can ignore one, you can ignore the other.

Also, if 3E was heavily dependent on a grid (and I agree it was), then this doesn't belong in your list.

Also, 4E gives a good way to resolve minor combat encounters: run them as skill challenges! No grid at all!

18. Magic Resistance/Spell Resistance existed.

True enough.

19. Classes were not shoehorned into roles even if many players chose a role for their PC.

Classes were expected to fill those roles, however - if you were playing a Fighter, it was expected that you would be holding the line and protecting the wizard from the badguys (or the wizard died and the player was unhappy with you). I mean, Fighters were called "tanks" long before WoW showed up. Similarly, if you were playing a Cleric, you were going to be doing some healing.

All 4E did was take the roles that had been assigned to those classes since time immemorial, make it explicit. It was, in no way, "shoehorning."

20. Level drain existed (although again in 3e they were already going the wrong way).

So, again, not something that existed and was unchanged pre-4E.

Also, I have always, always, always, always hated level drain. It's fine when you're playing with throw-away characters, but as part of a long-term campaign it's one of the stupidest rules I can think of.

 

[Umbran]

For somebody who keeps talking about what is the "One True D&D", you don't seem to know much about it?

Don't make it personal. Address the logic of the post, not the person of the poster.

This is an old song, and everyone should have it memorized. But, if someone does have a question about it, please take it to e-mail or PM with the moderator of your choice. Thanks, all.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Maybe it will be easier to list the things that were common in earlier editions of D&D and ceased to exist in 4e at least at launch.

1. Base Attack Bonus that led into multiple attacks.

False. This was a 3e only thing. Fighters gained extra attacks in 2e at high level - but that was a fighter class feature.

2. Hit points as the sole control for health.

False. Ability score damage and level drain.

3. Wizards had nine spell levels and a goodly number of spells per level.

False. oD&D (Brown and White Box) had 6.

4. Your defense against a spell was a saving throw. (Minor point for me but true)

Some spells. Not all. Some it still is.

5. Utility magic was part of the spell selection process and not a ritual.

Is in 4e as well. What do you think the U in AEDU stands for?

6. Utility magic came at lower levels and was decent.

Is low level in 4th. See wizard cantrips for details.

7. Named spells like Tensers floating disc.

False. 4e has Bigby's Gesticulating Fist et. al.

8. The Great Wheel Cosmology

False. Postdates nine alignments.

9. Nine Alignments.

False. oD&D had three. Law/Neutral/Chaos.

10. Alignment mattered.

You mean for spells?

11. Only magic healed instantly.

Still does. Mundane healing costs surges which means the damage is still there - just mitigated.

12. Mundane healing was measured in days.

This I'll grant. It was also irrelevant as of 3.0 thanks to the Wands of Cure Light Wounds.

13. Spells could be disrupted. (Although by 3e this was all but dead I agree).

Theoretically as of 3.0. And you can disrupt rituals in 4e.

14. Magic items didn't require personal energy (surges) to use.

IIRC some did. Most didn't. As in 4e. And seriously? Your problem here is that 4e has more flavoursome magic items?

15. Spells outcomes were based upon both the text and the stat block.

Fire Ball: A missile which springs from the finger of the Magic-User. It explodes with a burst radius of 2". In a confined space the Fire Ball will generally conform to the shape of the space (elongate or whatever). The damage caused by the missile will be in proportion to the level of its user. A 6th level Magic-User throws a 6-die missile, a 7th a 7-die missile, and so on. (Note that Fire Balls from Scrolls (see Volume II) and Wand [sic] are 6-die missiles and those from Staves are 8-die missiles. Duration: 1 turn. Range: 24" [OD&D Vol-1, p. 25]
​

Nope, I'm not seeing it. All I'm seeing is text that ought to be a statblock from oD&D.

16. Every class didn't have "powers" and was not AEDU.

Granted

17. The game was not heavily dependent on a grid. (even if houserulable 4e wasn't made for theatre of the mind play. 3e started down the path to grid though I agree.).

Instead game measurements were in inches. You stared out with a hacked tabletop wargame.

18. Magic Resistance/Spell Resistance existed.

Point.

19. Classes were not shoehorned into roles even if many players chose a role for their PC.

They aren't in 4e either. They have indicated roles and roles they are expected to be good at. But I've designed striker-wizards, controller just about anything, and even offbeat defenders. (The joke about my PCs is that whatever class they are they always end up as controllers).

20. Level drain existed (although again in 3e they were already going the wrong way).

And was screamed ant and ranted at and driven out.

OK, so cross-checking your list. You arguably have saving throws. You have alignment spells. You have spell disruption and healing times matching their practical 3.0 equivalents. You have AEDU. You have magic resistance. And you have level drain. Of those, spell disruption, healing times, and level drain grew directly out of 3e. Leaving "who rolls saving throws?", alignment spells, AEDU, and magic resistance. Not a lot there holds water.

Not a very high success rate there.