D&D General How has D&D changed over the decades?

[jasper]

I started DMing 5E Adventure League in September 2016. 2 TPKs. A near one two sessions ago, I had to remind the table surrenders would be accepted. 338 Sessions 107 kills. So yes 5E can be deadly. In fact I discovered last night I have more kills than the local KILLER DM. KD got their reputation by starting most encounters in the hard to deadly and badly back off the power level.

1E You have a question? Look in the book, make it up, or send SASE to Gary for the answer. 5E Don't send a SASE to Gary but also check Wotc, this forum, that forum, the FAQ, Saga Advice, or wise old fart Jasper.
1E Few dozen modules from a few companies. 5E 300 official modules in DM's Guild.

 

[Thomas Shey]

That's where I'm at - I make a character that feels like what I'm aiming at and might leave some bonuses out by putting a few points in here or there.

In the ASI threads a lot of folks on here either care a lot or have a lot of players who do. I was really surprised the first time in I read one.

Well, again, as I note elsewhere, note which people will be attracted to those discussions. You'll note you never will have seen me in one of those.

 

[Hussar]

How the heck does the game math of 5e make any character feel constantly incompetent?

I'm with you on this one, but, having seen it first hand, such players really do exist.

 

[Hussar]

I think it might be a shifting baseline thing. Back in the day a +1 modifier to a stat was a big deal because it was rare. Now a character is considered incompetent if they have anything less than a +4 modifier to a stat, and the proper bonus is +5 in the stat, trained for the prof bonus, plus expertise.

That's certainly one shift in D&D over the years. Players have gone from a "sure, let's see what happens" mentality, to a "don't even try unless your bonuses are maxed out" mentality. You see this a lot when people complain about a non-socially optimized character even trying to talk to an NPC.

You are generalizing based on your players.

Please stop.

Not everyone plays like this. And, I strongly doubt even a majority of players play like this.

 

[Hussar]

I wonder if there is a Venn diagram overlap between DM's who's approach to skills is basically Roll High vs DM's who actually use the system. For the Roll High DM, every single plus is absolutely necessary because it takes the variability out of the skill checks. So long as that final number is high, you succeed. For those who actually use the 5e skill system, most checks succeed on a 6+ if you have proficiency (give or take - most DC's should be in the 10-15 range, 20+ should only appear probably once a session at the absolute outside or as part of opposed checks), so, those that max out and feel that they need expertise suddenly realize that they're just gilding the lily and wasting resources because the guy with a 12 stat and proficiency is succeeding most of the time anyway.

I've certainly found that actually using the skill system as presented has ended most of that whole "I must have a 20 stat" thing. My current group of 8th level PC's has about one 20 between the 5 PC's. And a couple have a high stat of 16.

 

[tetrasodium]

You are generalizing based on your players.

Please stop.

Not everyone plays like this. And, I strongly doubt even a majority of players play like this.

Ironically I think that the 3.x/pf first point =+3(or whatever) & manual allocation of points that left an uneven set of scores did more to thwart the mindset of it being ok to not be shooting for rainman's math skills in a particular skill than the modernuntrained+stat/prof bonus+stat tunnel vision imposes. When bob has +12 here & a bunch of other skills at +8 +6 +5 +5 +4 +4 etc or whatever. More skills to choose from & some partial proficiency choices or at level x in y class you can add +1 to one of these skills type things might have mitigated it a bit

 

[Helldritch]

I started DMing 5E Adventure League in September 2016. 2 TPKs. A near one two sessions ago, I had to remind the table surrenders would be accepted. 338 Sessions 107 kills. So yes 5E can be deadly. In fact I discovered last night I have more kills than the local KILLER DM. KD got their reputation by starting most encounters in the hard to deadly and badly back off the power level.

1E You have a question? Look in the book, make it up, or send SASE to Gary for the answer. 5E Don't send a SASE to Gary but also check Wotc, this forum, that forum, the FAQ, Saga Advice, or wise old fart Jasper.
1E Few dozen modules from a few companies. 5E 300 official modules in DM's Guild.

Exactly my own experience. Players assume easy mode because most DMs do not follow the 6-8 encounters per day. They forget to manage their ressources and end up in TPK.

I have no whack a mole in my games because as soon as a character spring back on its feet, intelligent foes attack downed PC to decapitate or strike the heart. Monstrous foes, on the other might try to flee with the body if not in lair. When the DM plays fair but follows the logic and guide lines, 5ed can actually be hard.

And still, most if the tools to control PCs power curve have been removed.

 

[tetrasodium]

Exactly my own experience. Players assume easy mode because most DMs do not follow the 6-8 encounters per day. They forget to manage their ressources and end up in TPK.

I have no whack a mole in my games because as soon as a character spring back on its feet, intelligent foes attack downed PC to decapitate or strike the heart. Monstrous foes, on the other might try to flee with the body if not in lair. When the DM plays fair but follows the logic and guide lines, 5ed can actually be hard.

And still, most if the tools to control PCs power curve have been removed.

to be fair, the 6-8 encounter standard is unhinged from any reasonable expectation for a gm to cram in to all but the grindiest of grindfests with any regularity

 

[Helldritch]

to be fair, the 6-8 encounter standard is unhinged from any reasonable expectation for a gm to cram in to all but the grindiest of grindfests with any regularity

Not really, there are ways to make them logical and easy to narrate. Reinforcements can come unexpectedly, two easy/medium encounters can happen back to back, during a short rest, a random encounter (that is not random at all if you understand me) can all be cramped onto a logical and believable scenario that the players will buy in without questions.

Also, travel encounters can be reunited. 20 days leads to 8 encounters in 6 days? Fusion these into two days of 4 encounters each. Make these encounters a bit harder and here you go. And it will be easy to make them fit the narrative nicely.

I have been doing it for a long time now and there are no problems to do it. And the players really like it.

 

[tetrasodium]

Not really, there are ways to make them logical and easy to narrate. Reinforcements can come unexpectedly, two easy/medium encounters can happen back to back, during a short rest, a random encounter (that is not random at all if you understand me) can all be cramped onto a logical and believable scenario that the players will buy in without questions.

Also, travel encounters can be reunited. 20 days leads to 8 encounters in 6 days? Fusion these into two days of 4 encounters each. Make these encounters a bit harder and here you go. And it will be easy to make them fit the narrative nicely.

I have been doing it for a long time now and there are no problems to do it. And the players really like it.

day 1:"lets take a long rest, bob will you ritually cast tiny hut?" four is less than 6-8
day 2"lets take a long rest, bob will you ritually cast tiny hut?" four is less than 6-8
half minute hero style doom clocks to fix the problem that thwarts a bonkers design doesn't really count & stringing a bunch of extra reinforcements into an encounter is still going to be pretty grindy. Tack on short rest classes & the gains of long/short rests leaves a situation where a death spiral from interruptedrests is basically impossible.