Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Janx" data-source="post: 5461684" data-attributes="member: 8835">I'm pondering this, to identify some parameters of the "4e" disuputes.I'm curious to see a summarized list of the changes from each edition (presuming 1e's AD&D hard-cover books as the baseline, which I know isn't quite precise).In 2e:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">stripped out Armor vs. Weapon (made it an optional rule Armor vs. Weapon Type) converted the attack math to THAC0 (though to my eye, it resulted in the same thing) Added a "Skills" system Introduced Specialty Priests Introduced wizard school specialization (1e only had Illusionists) thief abilities are point-buy (players choice) 1 minute round (was 10 seconds or some such)</li> </ul>I'm too lazy to confirm this, but UnearthedAracana and Wilderness Survival Guide had some influence on what 2e brougt it.Also, it appears to be more of a re-write to remove Gary than a change of the rules.in 2.5e (Skills & Powers)<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">added sub-ability scores</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">added class feature customization</li> </ul>S&P made it easier to "power-game" which seems to be the big complaint.in 3e:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">overhauled the skills system</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">flipped the math formulas so that rolling high=good, otherwise %odds were the same (Peter Adkison even suggested this idea in a Dragon Mag editorial long before 3e was announced.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">monster stats were mostly formulaic, following  a comparable process to making NPCs (which followed the PC rules).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">buffs became prevalent</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">got rid of wizard school specialization mostly</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">replaced specialty priests with Domains concept</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Attacks of Opportunity</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">10 second round</li> </ul>Previously, monster stats were formulated, and were much shorter.  Heck, we used 1e's MM for quite a time in 2e.Added Feats, which extend the extra abilities the PC has, usually class relatedSpontaneous casting via Sorceror or healing for clericsin 3.5e<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">standardized monster sizes to be square, presumably</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">adjusted durations of some spells (buffs mostly) to make them only useful during 1 combat</li> </ul>in 4e:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">remade all classes to have equivalent effecitveness in combat.  Such that for the most part, they all could do the same amount of damage & a special effect</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">removed all classes that weren't combat focussed (bard)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">designed each class to have a specific role (defender, striker)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">concept of "Marking" an opponent for a bonus (akin to 3e's Dodge feat but expanded)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">changed magic usage dramatically (too wordy to explain, and I don't know all the details)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">re-simplified monster and NPC stats to NOT follow same rules and PCs</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Shortened up the skill list by consolidating things</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">made healing and HP refreshing more abundant</li> </ul>Without getting into quibbling details (which mgiht be a matter of my opinion), is there any other concepts I missed?Personally, I feel like 4e made more dramatic changes.  I started in 2e, but have 1e books.  I've never read 4e.  One could nitpick specific spell differences between 1e-3e, but that's quibbling.  For the most part, Fireball and Magic Missle work the same in all those editions.  And combat has mostly been the same (attack value modified by die roll vs. AC)Each of these changes may have felt dramatic to somebody used to the old system.Once I couldn't fathom why some guy I met was bemoaning that D&D3e had a skill system when his fondly remembered 1e didn't "need it"  To my eye, it was a matter of every other ruleset had a skill system and it made sense.  A recent post somewhere on enworld pointed out a good reason against.  It was expressed that in 1e, it was assumed you could ride the horse or light the campfire, and at worst, in a challenging moment, the GM might make you roll for it.  Once the skills came in, suddenly, if your sheet didn't say fire building, you couldn't do it, because that would invalidate that I spent my skill slot on fire building and you didn't.Perhaps this 4e argument is of the same bent.It's kick-the-ball vs. rock-paper-scissors.  2e's skill system is Rock-paper-scissors.  and back in the day, we could just kick the ball.  But now that you added this RPS thing, I can't just kick the ball. 4e added these class roles, a new form of RPS (Rock Paper Scissors Lizard Spock?).  It s a new mechanic, not wholly needed for the old way of playing, but introduces its own play and balance element.</blockquote>

Verification