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

[Vaalingrade]

Well reasoned.

What do you demand I say to the same old 'OMG, how DARE anime and video games 'influence' D&D by existing tangentially to it in the nerdspace' weird one-sided rivalry people keep trying to play as a trump card against things they don't like because they assume a shared antipathy will bypass reality?

 

[Fifth Element]

Just ignore that this is literally the escalation problem and likely exactly why we have the current issues with 5E. The designers just keep adding and adding and adding.

Very good post, but in the context of the post these "issues" with 5E can't be considered issues, because PC numbers only matter relative to monster numbers. As long a the designers add to both the PCs and the monsters, it's not an issue, as you explained.

 

[Minigiant]

The DM can react, but many DMs are tired of being vilified by their players if there's a playstyle mismatch. You need to hash this stuff out in an extensive session 0, particularly if the group has not gamed together before. If that means it's going to a long discussion, so be it.

That's another big change.

Playaers and DMS come from so many different fantasy backgrounds, preferences and experiencess than Session 0 is a major part of the game. Whereas it wasn't stressed as much in the beginning of D&D. Tone, flavor, and genre were not discussed as much, just what was off limits and what was expected.

 

[tetrasodium]

I have been digging though my books and I've come to a bit of a realization about this. It boils down to "add, don't subtract."

It's a losing proposition to mangle things in and cut things from the current edition to mimic the play of older editions. The players will rebel, the DM will be unhappy...and it will all collapse. It's a waste of time, really. But, instead, you embrace the thing for what it is. You as the DM can freely add material to the game and almost no one will complain, but if you try to remove things, that almost never goes over well. The book says the player gets that toy at that level for picking that thing. So let them have it. There's a few things that are just broken, that's not what I'm talking about. But the best solution seems to be: work around it. Add, don't subtract. Infinite dragons.

So instead of removing this or that, or mangling the adventuring day or destroying short/long rests to evoke a bygone age of D&D...you add to what's already there to get vaguely close to the same results. The numbers aren't absolutes. They don't mean anything in isolation. It's only by comparison to each other that they matter. That a 1st-level character has 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, or 75 hit points doesn't matter in isolation. It's only in relation to the monsters and their damage that PC hp matters. Through that context.

You want to make your 5E game more grimdark and scary...beef up the monsters to be nasty, dangerous, and challenging to baseline 5E PCs. Add, don't subtract. The players get to have the experience you're trying to give them while not having to deal with you taking their toys away. Just ignore that this is literally the escalation problem and likely exactly why we have the current issues with 5E. The designers just keep adding and adding and adding.

PCs blowing through your monsters? Add more. Beef their hit points. Drop some 4E monsters on their heads. PCs pulling a five-minute workday? Add more. The next encounter is beefed up because they waited an extra 8 hours before tackling the next thing.

That's all well & good, but changing an encounter so it can handle a 5mwd blasts into what winds up looking like aversarial GM'ing & killer GM territory so really all it accomplishes is instead of having players surly over being trolled by the world into skipping a long rest they are surly over the crazy encounters that led to an unprepared bob autopiloting his PC into a double tap/death by massive damage execution or whatever.

That's another bring change.

Playaers and DMS come from so many different fantasy backgrounds, preferences and experiencess than Session 0 is a major part of the game. Whereas it wasn't stressed as much in the beginning of D&D. Tone, flavor, and genre were not discussed as much, just what was off limits and what was expected.

Back in 3.xthe GM had more areas they could give during sessionzero & proto session zero analogues where they want this grittier/harsher thing or that default dangerous thing but are willing to start everyone with a +1 weapon a free feat or whatever. Now the players don't need those things & the system assumes they aren't in use so giving them requires the GM to claw back something elsewhere first just to make room for them to simply exist.

 

[overgeeked]

That's all well & good, but changing an encounter so it can handle a 5mwd blasts into what winds up looking like aversarial GM'ing & killer GM territory so really all it accomplishes is instead of having players surly over being trolled by the world into skipping a long rest they are surly over the crazy encounters that led to an unprepared bob autopiloting his PC into a double tap/death by massive damage execution or whatever.

So what's the alternative? Endless mindless easy mode? No thanks. I'm going to run challenging games. The players at my tables know that. If they're not onboard, they don't sit down. I can either nerf the PCs or buff the monsters. Players' choice. I haven't had a player yet tell me they'd rather I nerf their PC than buff the monsters. Maybe your players are different.

 

[tetrasodium]

So what's the alternative? Endless mindless easy mode? No thanks. I'm going to run challenging games. The players at my tables know that. If they're not onboard, they don't sit down. I can either nerf the PCs or buff the monsters. Players' choice. I haven't had a player yet tell me they'd rather I nerf their PC than buff the monsters. Maybe your players are different.

That's the problem. Too many dials are cranked to 11 & it's left to the GM to fix it with a system that in many ways is hostile to the GM doing that.

 

[Hussar]

About the width of a hand. Just like a typical Zweihander. Unless the mystical halo around you got you confused, the sword Elmore depicted is perfectly normal. The sword of "Zangetsu" is taller and got a wider blade than his head! And he can weild it one hand...

Well, at that time it made sense. Too skinny and too tigth around the hips and the lady might die in childbirth. A big belly in ancient times was a sign of health and wealth because it meant you could eat all your fill. And I would not say what you said in front of a Sumo. No sir!

Fair enough.

Can you find an example of D&D 5e art where this is true? The argument that's being made is that 5e art is full of giant weapons. I'm actually struggling to find an example.

 

[Hussar]

That's why I didn't match any written works and just stated the genres that were closest to it in genre.

The earliest editions of D&D didn't promote actual "heroic" play unless you played one of the "overpowered" classes that forced you to "fight on fair terms".


When it depends if you go by years or editions.

I would say Msytara, Faerun, and Krynn were created and pushed to contrast with the Darkness of Base 0e and 1e or Grimness of Greyhawk.

Then Ravenloft and Dark Sun were to bring it back.

This was always the really weird schizophrenia of 1e. Sure, if you look at the Greyhawk setting books - the old boxed sets or even earlier - the setting looked really grim. But then you played the modules. You were definitely the heroes here. Fighting slavers, flighting giants, fighting drow. You were never just plain old dirt farmers - that's Warhammer fantasy. By 5th or 6th level, you were walking around with a kingdom's worth of equipment, and probably had enough coin to buy a small country.

If anything, 3e drastically reduced PC wealth from the 1e and 2e days.

 

[Hussar]

Well reasoned.

Hang on though. The claim is that the art is all happy, happy, fun, fun. No darkness. Superheroes doing super heroic things with giant weapons.

And not a single example to be found.

 

[overgeeked]

That's the problem. Too many dials are cranked to 11 & it's left to the GM to fix it...

Yep. It's busted. But it is what it is. Either we get on with fixing it or we waste time complaining about it.

with a system that in many ways is hostile to the GM doing that.

The system isn't hostile to house rules or changes. It's infinitely more forgiving to house rules than 4E was. The system doesn't fight buffed monsters. It breaks nothing. It only makes the combats more challenging for the PCs. 5E is nowhere near as finely tuned as 4E. 5E is not a finely wound Swiss watch, you can monkey with the gears and springs without destroying it. Besides, however hostile the system itself might be...it's not...at all...but assuming it is...which it isn't...it's far less hostile than the players when faced with a nerf.