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

[nevin]

I like that player characters are more durable; I don't miss the one-hit-and-you're-dead style from the early editions, and the various save-or-die effects that were common in the early incarnations of the game. I like the shift toward inclusivity within the game and the hobby as a whole. I like the changes that help balance the classes better between each other and across levels; for example, allowing low-level thieves to actually do stuff rather than having 1d4 hit points and minuscule chances of passing a skill check, and that magic-users have more than a single spell before they're relegated to chucking darts (not even allowed a humble crossbow!).

mages had 1d4 hitpoints. Thieves had 1d6 unless you were playing Gygax's special greyhawk thieves. that for some unexplained reason only got 1d4. I always thought that was bit odd.

 

[nevin]

D&D has been changing since the first time it was played, let along published. Cross pollination with related media as well as other RPGs, not to mention the simple creativity of the people making the game over the years and editions, have caused many elements of D&D to evolve. Sometimes these evolutions are minor and the core remains strong. Others not so much. And since we all have our own preferences, experiences with the game, and relationships with the aforementioned adjacent media, we all likely prefer some evolutions and dislike others.

So what changes to core D&Disms (classes, mechanics, settings, meta-game, etc) that have occurred over time do you like? Which ones could you do without?

Note that this is a + thread. In this context, what I hope that means is that we can express our preferences and respond to others without it getting vitriolic.

For my part, I like the diversifying of "magic user" archetypes over the editions, all the way to the wizard, sorcerer, warlock and bard division today.

One thing I do NOT like is how the druid has transformed into... whatever it is now. I much prefer the more traditional 1E archetype over the were-berserker thing it has become.

I love that they made it easier for players to multiclass. I HATE HATE HATE the idea that paladins/clerics can take a class like warlock that is often the opposite of their diety or ethos. While alignment never did work well I would like to see stricter rules for classes that get powers from a divine source taking powers from other sources. It just causes a cognitive dissonance for me that distracts from the game.

I don't like the fact that they refuse to fix magic and make diverse and different spell lists for Arcane, Bards, Druids, etc. I'd love to see all caster classes have unique spell lists. I'd honestly love to see all divine classes go back towards 2nd edition spheres where each god has a function and enemies of that god simply won't get those types of divine magic.

I love the advantage/disadvantage mechanic. It's a wonderful easy way to things you dont' want to be just normal one way or ther other.

I'd like to see a few more abilities like 1st edition paladins Magic resistance circle when holy weapon was drawn to give players and DM's a bit more granualarity to deal with classes like mages and clerics that can get out of control with inexperienced DM's especially at high level.

Overall I think 5e is the best entry level easy version of Dnd todate. For new players and DM's it's probably the easiest to run and enjoy. This is good for the game. But I'm beginning to think it needs some variation rules supplements. Maybe "epic", "Ravenloft", "planes edition", etc. (or some other variation. just spitballing) Seems to me like they'd be better off having advanced rule sets that mesh on top of the basic 1 to 12 level game rules so that tables could go the direction they wanted at that point. Either start over or pick thier flavor of high level rules and keep going. Then they could leave the base rules mostly alone and have high level rulesets they could add splat books and new editions of. for tables to buy without jacking with the entire player base because they want to sell a new players handbook.

 

[DammitVictor]

For a change as radical as 4E was, telling folks their favorite things are only 9 months away might as well have been an eternity.

Honestly? "We're working on updating your favorite class, but it's taking awhile" is... completely fine by me. Page count and man-hours are limited resources, and it makes sense to do the most mainstream stuff first-- because the people who like the mainstream stuff are, by definition, more numerous than the people who like the niche stuff and we tend to forget that the people who like vanilla also get really sad when their flavor isn't on the menu.

My issue is developers' and fandoms' tendency to scrap something from the last edition and then tell the people who are disappointed that they're wrong-- not even wrong for liking it, but wrong about actually liking it in the first place, and complaining about its current, indefinite, and deliberate absence is "concern trolling"... from people whose Edition War agenda, apparently, doesn't actually have anything to do with enjoying the game.

Which may not be an evolution of the game itself-- though it very much is-- but it's an evolution I dislike intensely nonetheless.

 

[Minigiant]

I agree with these as well, though I did solve the Christmas Tree issue buy just handing out fewer magic items

Magic item attunement slots. That was a brilliant way to solve the "Christmas Tree" issue I was having in earlier editions

I kinda hope D&D goes further with attunement.

I wish for a formula which includes both Constitution and Charisma? To determine a character's attunement slots. This would also give people a reason to care about these 2 abilities scores even more.

Quite frankly, I think that 5E originally came with a mistake of making itself magic item indifferent. I think that DND is kind of based on the process of adventurers collecting magic items. Just maybe not requiring tying their physical bonuses to the combat system..

 

[Minigiant]

I've acknowledged the inconsistency on my part, but for me it's the difference between magical and non-magical. Magic can do it, but it doesn't feel right to me as a mundane ability

I mostly just wish DOAM of weapons to be bludgeoning damage.

I always mentally see it as the shockwave of the weapon crashing with armor or shield or the hard dodge of jumping out the way and hitting a wall or the floor.

I think D&D suffers because the primary audience and designers arent the type of people who get into fights or practice martial arts so the fluidity and movement of combat is HEAVILY DOWNPLAYED.

A 3-7 foot humaniod is not being attack by a dragon or giant the size of a bear or elephant and standing straight in a 5 foot square or hex. They are jumping and dodging all over the place.. or dead.

 

[nevin]

I kinda hope D&D goes further with attunement.

Actually I just ignore attunement. I think it was just a solution in search of a problem.

 

[Minigiant]

Actually I just ignore attunement. I think it was just a solution in search of a problem.

There was a problem.

Magic item dispensary was DM based but thr game and/or the players were dependent on it.

But a third of DMs dont read the DM book and a third dont like being told what to do. So the handing out often caused a problem.

This is why the more DM suggestions become core player rules.

 

[Remathilis]

I wish for a formula which includes both Constitution and Charisma? To determine a character's attunement slots. This would also give people a reason to care about these 2 abilities scores even more.

Ugh. No. I want ability scores to matter less, not more. As it stands, 5e actively makes you want to max your primary ability score to 20 ASAP for maximum effectiveness. While making attunement tied to con and or cha sounds like you are forcing hard choices, all you are doing is rewarding classes who already are going to max those scores (sorcerer and paladin) while punishing everyone else who is more concerned with their primary scores that aren't Charisma. (Con is already important due to HP).

I was upset that 5e was angling away from "get to 20 ASAP" for classes and then doubled down on it in 5.24.

 

[nevin]

There was a problem.

Magic item dispensary was DM based but thr game and/or the players were dependent on it.

But a third of DMs dont read the DM book and a third dont like being told what to do. So the handing out often caused a problem.

This is why the more DM suggestions become core player rules.

no magic items were the slider of whether you wanted a gritty crawl through the desert or a high powered game or anything in between. If as a DM you wanted the players to take on high level things than thier levels might suggest you could buff the players with magic items. Magic Items also could be used to remove the power level disparities between high level character's like say warriors and mages. Magic Items also filled in missing classes like healers or other casters if needed for the story. They are also stealable, run out of charges and are consumable etc. So they can come and go as needed unlike player powers. They add an incredible flexibility to the game if used correctly.

Trying to fix DMin'g by controlling magic items in the rules was just stupid. Bad DM's will still do bad things and good DM's won't . There is no rule you can ever write that will fix that. The irony is that anyone thinks the 1/3 that don't like being told what to do were ever going to listen because a rule was written is rich. Your 1/3rd that don't read the book never got the memo so really you just tried to handcuff the 1/3rd that read and follow the rules.

So as I said a solution in search of a problem hoping everyone would play one way instead of the way they actually play.

 

[Parmandur]

Ugh. No. I want ability scores to matter less, not more. As it stands, 5e actively makes you want to max your primary ability score to 20 ASAP for maximum effectiveness. While making attunement tied to con and or cha sounds like you are forcing hard choices, all you are doing is rewarding classes who already are going to max those scores (sorcerer and paladin) while punishing everyone else who is more concerned with their primary scores that aren't Charisma. (Con is already important due to HP).

I was upset that 5e was angling away from "get to 20 ASAP" for classes and then doubled down on it in 5.24.

It really doesn't matter in 5E. Some people may feel that it does, but the game math does not bear that out.