Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FormerlyHemlock" data-source="post: 6865139" data-attributes="member: 6787650">I understand where you're coming from on this. I spent a while playing GURPS: Dungeon Fantasy, trying to convert AD&amp;D or D&amp;D content to GURPS. It never really worked out, but it did prime the pump so that when 5E came out I was open to playing it.Adapting stuff across game systems can sometimes distort the material beyond recognition and give an unsatisfying experience. Personally, I'm currently reasonably happy with 5E (one big factor: even though I hate how combat-oriented 5E MM stat blocks are now, I at least appreciate having Str/Dex/Con/Wis/Cha stats for everything instead of strictly just Int) and my players know the system; but it wouldn't shock me if I at some point returned to AD&amp;D instead. AD&amp;D does have a superior magic system, especially for priestly magic. (Simultaneously more powerful and much more fragile: no casting while moving, for example.) The main downside of playing AD&amp;D would be: 5E combat is more tactically intricate. AD&amp;D has some cool stuff you can do with called shots and Complete Fighter's Handbook-type stuff, plus some specialized weapons; but 5E fighters have grappling/pushing which is generally more effective due to the way disadvantage works. If I were to play AD&amp;D I'd feel somewhat compelled to extend martial combat to include some 5E stuff like the effects of being prone, behind partial cover, or out of visual range. In short, bell curves are more interesting than linear d20s, and 5E has better bell curves, as well as a more interesting action economy.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FormerlyHemlock, post: 6865139, member: 6787650"] I understand where you're coming from on this. I spent a while playing GURPS: Dungeon Fantasy, trying to convert AD&D or D&D content to GURPS. It never really worked out, but it did prime the pump so that when 5E came out I was open to playing it. Adapting stuff across game systems can sometimes distort the material beyond recognition and give an unsatisfying experience. Personally, I'm currently reasonably happy with 5E (one big factor: even though I hate how combat-oriented 5E MM stat blocks are now, I at least appreciate having Str/Dex/Con/Wis/Cha stats for everything instead of strictly just Int) and my players know the system; but it wouldn't shock me if I at some point returned to AD&D instead. AD&D does have a superior magic system, especially for priestly magic. (Simultaneously more powerful and much more fragile: no casting while moving, for example.) The main downside of playing AD&D would be: 5E combat is more tactically intricate. AD&D has some cool stuff you can do with called shots and Complete Fighter's Handbook-type stuff, plus some specialized weapons; but 5E fighters have grappling/pushing which is generally more effective due to the way disadvantage works. If I were to play AD&D I'd feel somewhat compelled to extend martial combat to include some 5E stuff like the effects of being prone, behind partial cover, or out of visual range. In short, bell curves are more interesting than linear d20s, and 5E has better bell curves, as well as a more interesting action economy. [/QUOTE]

Verification