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

[Parmandur]

And now we have 5e where doesn't even put playable-species NPCs on the same chassis as PCs. Sigh.....

Oh, add that to my pile of Likes.

 

[Remathilis]

The idea of percentile strength - that exceptional individuals could have crazy-high strength scores - is IMO sound enough. But those percentile rolls then immediately need to be converted to integer scores.

We had to do this conversion-to-integers in about 1985 in order to make the Cavaliers' percentile-increment system (a brilliant innovation that should have been given to all classes!) work side-along with exceptional strength.

It annoyed me to no end that there was no percentile intelligence, wisdom or dexterity for other classes to access. I guess it was supposed to give warrior types a bonus over non warriors, but if so it was locked behind "naturally" rolling an 18 for your strength. I had completely patched it out prior to 3e, mostly adjusting the numbers a bit and nobody missed it.

 

[Lanefan]

It annoyed me to no end that there was no percentile intelligence, wisdom or dexterity for other classes to access.

Yeah, me too, for about five minutes bask in the day. Then I realized what they were going for, just blamed Conan, and stopped worrying about it.

I guess it was supposed to give warrior types a bonus over non warriors, but if so it was locked behind "naturally" rolling an 18 for your strength. I had completely patched it out prior to 3e, mostly adjusting the numbers a bit and nobody missed it.

The natural-18 strength requirement serves to nicely make exceptional strength the long tail on the bell curve that it's supposed to be.

This does, however, assume honest (or closely supervised) dice rolling.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Big 3 Likes:

• Actually thinking about game design. D&D was designed by vibes for a long time before anyone thought about the impact those mechanics would have in play. Starting at about 3e, the people at the helm started thinking more about how to actually use the rules at the table, and it's been a huge benefit. Bounded accuracy, advantage/disadvantage, class balance, unified XP tables, these are very good things.
• Imagination & Inclusivity. A more diverse game that is less closely wedded to specific historical or fantasy tropes is a game that can explore ideas and themes and kinds of fun that weren't in the original. D&D is fundamentally a game (a toy, some might say) about make-believe, and that is something that should be celebrated and encouraged.
• Simplicity-focused design. This is sort of a combo of the above points in that the threshold for playing D&D is already VERY high. We do not need it to be any higher than necessary. Character builds and feat tier lists and such are things that the game has been moving away from, and this is Good.

Big 3 Dislikes:

• Encounter focus over Dungeon/Narrative focus. Attrition, resource management, strategic thinking, these are good bits of game design that deserve to be leveraged over a whole session. Combats should be fast and tight, as part of an overall experience in the session, but they are in practice meandering and heavy with too many decision points, too much time dedicated to them, and with most of the fun buttons being things you get to do in a fight, it steals focus from the other areas of the game. This kind of crystalized for me after seeing what Draw Steel is, in that I am not looking for a monster fighting game for my TTRPG. Monster fighting is necessary in my TTRPG, but I do not want to play a game that is ABOUT monster fighting.
• Lack of innovation on the Social / Exploration side. There's been a little, but I think it's an area that TTRPG designers in general are challenged by. In a game of make-believe, it's easy enough to pretend to have a conversation or describe an exploration, but there's a lack of impactful options, tactics, or strategy here that can be addressed. There are ideas and mechanics out there, but they're foreign enough to D&D and often lack D&D's characteristic crunch. Some OSR games are doing interesting things with exploration that future D&D could back into (encumbrance, light, etc.). The social side is still very much in "Do whatever you can imagine!" territory, which doesn't help players who need a bit more. Ironically, the improvements in Alignment's rules have made this a bit worse as editions have marched on.
• B R A N D I N G. D&D as a brand to market rather than as a product to be sold. Aesthetics and tropes without much significance or meaning. "I understood that reference!" without understanding why things are that way or what power they have. Stop just looting cool stuff and think about why those cool things are the way they are, please and thank you.

 

[dave2008]

I'm sure it's probably not, but I can't think of any that aren't. Certainly nothing like this:

View attachment 427758

Oh, is that Jim Halloway art?! I also loved his stuff. He was the best add in the 1e MM2 art.

 

[dave2008]

OK @dave2008 those are fighting words! 2e PHB art is the best of D&D!

IDK, I just looked through it again and there are a few good works (most if not all the good ones are recycled art I think) but man the overall art and graphic design I find incredibly uninspiring.

 

[dave2008]

Yea, I think we’re just diametrically opposed on this. My first RPG book was the 2e PHB; when I read the 1e PHB a few years later I found the black-and-white sketches actively offputting.

Most of the art in the 2e PHB is black and white (or blue and white). Or are you taking about the later release with different art. I am talking about the original 2e PHB with stuff like this:

 

[Marc17]

Likes:

2E: Crits and non-Weapon Proficiencies - There were countless home brew rules for crits and skills, many of which we liked more, but those were good enough and pretty much standardized what was typically radically different between many games.

3E: Unified XP chart, ascending AC, large skill system, more intuitive saves, and crafting rules.

5E: That they posit Interaction and Exploration are also pillars of D&D. Lifestyles, downtime actions, and bastions.

 

[dave2008]

I know yours is a genuine question an inquiry so will try to answer. First things first: I think 5e (gulp) might be superior to 1e in some respects.

Secondly, if you see it “a lot” there is probably something there. And I think you are asking honestly so I will try to articulate.

Enter all disclaimers about D&D being anachronistic and ahistorical…I get it as a lover of history.

There is no evocation of a real history for me at any point. There is however an evocation of a fantasy archetype of a time and place that never existed except in fiction and pulling a little from history books…tangentially.

It is indeed about proportion. I looked at my brother’s 2024 PHB and just did not enjoy the art direction.

I have lots of 1e modules and of course the hardbacks. Yes, there were line art cartoons...trying to be funny. But if you take the PHB, dmg, and monster manual from 1e, count the scenes of smiling characters and domestic bliss. Now do the same with 2024 PHB alone.

I would say the tone in color choices, spectacle wearing, modern tattoos and sushi and taco eating probably also detract from the vibe for ME and what I am looking for.

I am not saying it is “wrong.” Just not the vibe I like and does not evoke fantasy tropes I like. Happy orc families —not my bag.

None of it is “wrong” and there are plenty of tattoos, colored hair and piercings on my family members and people I love most in my home, right now. But I don’t want to see “them” in the rpg. I am looking for something that is more out of line with the modern.

I hope that helps clarify what I meant and don’t mean a bit of offense to anyone that prefers the new aesthetic. I could even see myself playing an artificer one day…or in a game that has magic ship to ship combat in space.

Not at you Dave, but into the void:

(Bracing for the “you’re focused on only a few pictures,” the game is supposed to appeal to the kids and not 40-50 year old geezers like “you guys,” etc etc etc). I get it.

Somehow I missed your reply until now! Thank you for taking the time to respond. I don't agree with your desire, but I understand your frustration. For me, the art direction of most of 2e and into 3e bothered me enough that I mostly lost interest in the game. 1e and 5e are the height of D&D art for me (for often different reasons).

 

[TwoSix]

Most of the art in the 2e PHB is black and white (or blue and white). Or are you taking about the later release with different art. I am talking about the original 2e PHB with stuff like this:

View attachment 427791
View attachment 427792
View attachment 427793

I'm talking about the 1989 PHB, the one with the fighter charging with the orange-y background. I don't have it handy, but I remember it having like at least 8-10 different full page color art work. I think this one is the most famous.