D&D (2024) A strange OD&D Hypothesis

[Yaarel]

I keep reading thread titles like this as if they are referencing Old D&D, and get very confused for a moment.

That is why I use the abbreviation "ODD".

Also more convenient to not need to key in the ampersand.

 

[JEB]

I'll take "1D&D" over "OD&D", simply because "OD&D" has been used to mean Original D&D for quite a while. (Though a better name altogether would be nice.)

 

[Thomas Shey]

I'll take "1D&D" over "OD&D", simply because "OD&D" has been used to mean Original D&D for quite a while. (Though a better name altogether would be nice.)

Yeah, I opened this thread thinking someone was talking about the original game read the first paragraph and was briefly puzzled as can be.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I dont think they will, but I find it quite elegant. Its really not a bad idea.

It would save a little time at the table, which is always a plus.

Would it be possible to do the same with rogue's sneak attack? (I dont do math)

Sneak attack scaling is way harder. It goes from 3.5 to 35. Eyeballing it, you could try and do a +double your level, but that might scale too fast and it tops at 43.5 which is a significant boost.

 

[Charlaquin]

Would it be possible to do the same with rogue's sneak attack? (I dont do math)

Sneak Attack adds 1d6 every other level, and the average of 1d6 is 3.5. So, +3.5 every other level works out to +1.75 per level. I guess you could round that up to 2x level damage, but that would outpace regular sneak attack pretty quickly.

 

[Shiroiken]

I keep reading thread titles like this as if they are referencing Old D&D, and get very confused for a moment.

Yeah, I've also gone with 1D&D instead of ODD or OD&D

 

[Marandahir]

5e was built on the altar of Mo Dice.

I wouldn’t be surprise is oD&D scales some of that back.

I actually think this is really important. Fiddly math modifiers are annoying to remember. Roll a second d10? that's easy and visual. I grab two of my dice, rather than just one to attack now. I don't have to do any math, just see what the results are.

I get that it's more swingy, but it's also more fun.

 

[occam]

Sneak attack scaling is way harder. It goes from 3.5 to 35. Eyeballing it, you could try and do a +double your level, but that might scale too fast and it tops at 43.5 which is a significant boost.

True, but it's a little less of a boost when you consider that crit damage for sneak attack would be removed.

 

[MarkB]

Sneak attack scaling is way harder. It goes from 3.5 to 35. Eyeballing it, you could try and do a +double your level, but that might scale too fast and it tops at 43.5 which is a significant boost.

You could do it as just "base damage + (Level x2)" and drop that initial d6 - that way it tops out at 40 rather than 43.5. Does mean it starts lower, though.

 

[TwoSix]

So, in the flurry of videos, redditt posts, interviews and discussions about OD&D, someone asked a question that I thought was very interesting. Because my first thought was "no, they wouldn't" but then... maybe?

They were looking at the Dragonborn Breath Weapon's damage, 1d10 + level. Notably, this scales almost identically to the multi-dice scaling they had

1d10+5 = 2d10
1d10+11 = 3d10
1d10+17 = 4d10

And they asked "Is this how One D&D will handle cantrips?" And the more I think about it, the scaling of 2dX at 5th, 3dX at 11th, 4dX at 17th isn't difficult... but I've still seen people forget it, and the +level is consistent throughout, which also saves page space when printing cantrips.

So... what if they did this? Would it work? The obvious exception seems to be Eldritch Blast, since it scales through multiple attacks, but that is the only thing I can think of.

Man, whoever said that must be pretty smart (and probably really handsome, too); I would definitely listen to them.

I like the use of "1dX+level" as a damage expression for Dragonborn breath weapon. It's roughly the same damage curve as "1dX, +1dX at levels 5, 11, 17" but is significantly less bumpy. I'm kind of wondering if cantrips will be changed to the same model in later packets.