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

Again @overgeeked, you keep ignoring things.

Average party in Adnd was 6-8 pcs. Not four.

An Adnd pc could one shot an ogre in his own with a decent strength score. Never minding the two or three other fighter types in the group. Plus henchmen.

Those fighters by 3rd level, probably had zero AC or better. Mr ogre hits about 20% of the time for 5 points of damage. Your group of ogres is probably doing 10 points of damage per round.

Again I’m comparing to 3e where an ORC can do 48 points of damage.

That’s lethality in combat.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

The 4E designers listened to all the people who wanted rules only for combat because putting mechaical stuff into non combat stuff was unneeded...
Which is about my stance, but that stance sure as hell wouldn't have led me to design anything like 4e had I been at the helm. :)

For me, what sets 4e apart is that more than any other edition it leans into pure small-g gamism and isn't shy about saying so. End result is that those of us who want a bit more realism/simulation in our RPGs are going to - and did - bounce off it hard.
 

Which is about my stance, but that stance sure as hell wouldn't have led me to design anything like 4e had I been at the helm. :)

For me, what sets 4e apart is that more than any other edition it leans into pure small-g gamism and isn't shy about saying so. End result is that those of us who want a bit more realism/simulation in our RPGs are going to - and did - bounce off it hard.
Which is really weird for me because I bounce between those regularly. I enjoy the verisimilitude of going for simulation, but I also enjoy just getting on with it and playing the game.
 

Yes and no. The game says that an orc shouldn't be a threat to a 3rd level 3e party. It should be an incredibly easy encounter. Barely a speedbump.

But one lucky crit and that orc just dumped 48 points of damage into a 3rd level character, killing him instantly.

In no other edition can you do that. If you have 20 hp in 5e, it is impossible for a creature that deals less than 20 HP on a hit to kill you outright. It MUST attack you again after you're down.
In 4e or 5e, yes; but in 1e or 2e the downed character will, if left to its own devices, eventually bleed out and die. And 1e didn't have crits by RAW, so it would be uncommon that a character above about 2nd level would be one-shotted by anything short of a giant.

That said, if focus-fire is good tactics for the PCs it's just as good for their intelligent foes... :)
 

Again @overgeeked, you keep ignoring things.

Average party in Adnd was 6-8 pcs. Not four.
Doesn't change things much.
An Adnd pc could one shot an ogre in his own with a decent strength score. Never minding the two or three other fighter types in the group. Plus henchmen.
A bastard sword against a large target does 2d8 damage, 16 max. The strength modifiers don't hit +3 damage until you get into the 18%...in a system that rolled 3d6 in order. So...I think we're defining "decent" quite differently. So, while technically a possibility...it's not going to be a thing.
Those fighters by 3rd level, probably had zero AC or better. Mr ogre hits about 20% of the time for 5 points of damage. Your group of ogres is probably doing 10 points of damage per round.

Again I’m comparing to 3e where an ORC can do 48 points of damage.

That’s lethality in combat.
I wouldn't know. I skipped 2E and 3X.
 

LOL. Uh...we must have had wildly different experiences playing AD&D, then.

Partially true.

Sure, but those speedbumps added up over time. Remember, in AD&D you healed 1 hp per day. Unless the PCs are swimming in spell slots or magic items, they're not going to be gleefully charging into combat constantly.

Wow. Again, wildly different experiences, then. No resources? So zero spells cast. Zero hp lost. Zero consumables used? Not really, no. You certainly could avoid a combat by playing smart, but once the combat happened, "roll initiative" it was on.

But there's an interesting bit you left off. Number appearing. The assumption isn't that you'd face a single ogre. The no. appearing for ogres is 2d10. That's when they become a threat. Your party of 5-6 is now staring at a warband of ogres. Now they're a threat.

The MM1 ogre has 4d8+1 hit points...which averages 19 hp. Doesn't mean that's what they get. The ogre deals 1d10 damage or by weapon. So what do we learn about the monster from those stats? Facing off against one is a mild inconvenience for a 1st-level party of four. But fighting it could be anywhere from a cakewalk to a TPK depending on the dice. Facing off against the average or higher end of that 2-20? Yeah, run.

And remind me how quickly hp recovers in AD&D...1 hp per day of rest. So even one hit leaves a lasting impression. And how many hours of meditation, prayer, study does it take to recoup a used spell...from 15 min/level for magic-users to "a few hours" for clerics.

LOL. Really? An ogre is a threat? To whom? People with sensitive noses?

AC11. HP 59. CR2. Greatclub +6 to-hit, 5ft reach, 2d8+4 damage, or; Javelin +6 to-hit, 30/120 ft range, 2d6+4 damage.

So a PC with +0 to-hit has a 50% chance to connect...and most 1st-level PCs are rocking +5-6 to-hit, so they have a 75-80% to-hit.

A 1st-level party of four can pump out 60 damage in what...a round...a round-and-a-half. Let's see fighter with +3 damage rolling 2d6 for that greatsword...averages 10 damage per hit. The rogue is rocking +3 damage and rolling 1d6 or 1d8...plus 1d6 with sneak attack...averages 10-11 damage per hit. The cleric is launching Sacred Flame or Toll the Dead...an infinite number of times...save DC13 vs DEX or WIS...of an ogre...so -1 or -2...so it's taking 1d8 or 1d12...averages about 5.5 per hit. Who's left? The wizard is rocking the same baseline +3 to main stat as everyone else...and launching a Fire Bolt for 1d10...averages 5.5 per hit. So assuming no crits...in one round that basic party puts out an average of 31 damage. So exactly two rounds. And all with 75-80% chance to hit. Let's say with some misses that's two-and-a-half rounds.

How much damage can the ogre put out in that time? Depends on initiative. It's not likely to go first, so it will get at least one attack off before it dies. Maybe two if it's lucky. Let's say two attacks. It lands smack in the middle of initiative. So first round, if it hits, does an average of 11 damage. Wow. That's so much. And on round two, if it hits, does an average of 11 damage. So 22 damage...then it dies. Now what effect does 22 damage, likely to two targets do? Knocks them to 0 hp and makes them roll death saves. There's a cleric in the party. Healing Word as a bonus action so not miss out on killing the ogre, or spare the dying if the ogre's already dead on round two, or someone with a healer's kit (plus or minus the Healer feat).

So what are the short term problems the PCs have to deal with? Down maybe a Hit Dice, one spell slot, and 1-2 healer's kit uses...at worst. And all that comes back tomorrow. Except the healer's kit uses...which cost 5gp for 10 uses. So nothing, basically. No consequences. No bad stuff. Certainly not anything that lasts. And unless the players are intentionally letting someone die, no one will die. Even if the DM targets one PC...the ogre gets two attacks before it dies. Unless the PC is incredibly unlucky, they live.

You're missing my point. It's not about wanting to whack a PC. It's about playing a game that's not so wildly balanced in favor of the PCs. It's not interesting because everything is a foregone conclusion. There's no chance. No randomness. No luck. No skill. The PCs simply win, unless the DM becomes adversarial and stacks the deck against them. I think that's bad.
You keep bringing up the 1HP/day number for ADnD as if that was the method parties used to recover HP. As if parties retired from a day of dungeoneering and took three weeks off in town before they headed back in for a second try.

That's not how anyone (except that ONE guy) played in the history of 1e.

They would retire to somewhere safe and take X days to heal where X was a function of how many healing spells the party had to crank out in a day.

Even Pool of Radiance on the Commodore 64 had a "Rest Until Healed" button that automatically did for you what everyone did at their tables.

One of my last three kills as a GM in 5e was a PC failing to save vs Hold Person and falling into water long enough they drowned. A second kill was a PC failing to save versus a Dominate spell and standing around while their brain was eaten.

Ive seen 5e characters die as a player by being KOed while flying, turning to stone permanently and crumbled, unsaved poison, drowning in sand, drowning in a water elemental, being set to 0 MAX HP by a vampire, and finally being dominated and turned by that same vampire.

5e has plenty of ways to be dangerous to characters, but standing around trading HP by beating on each other with the bad guys isn't the most likely way it can happen.
 

You keep bringing up the 1HP/day number for ADnD as if that was the method parties used to recover HP. As if parties retired from a day of dungeoneering and took three weeks off in town before they headed back in for a second try.
Not at all. Healing was slow, that’s the only point being made.
That's not how anyone (except that ONE guy) played in the history of 1e.
Neither of us have the omniscience required to make a statement that sweeping.
They would retire to somewhere safe…
There you go. Where’s safe? Not the dungeon. Wandering monster checks every turn or few turns. Not the wilds. Wandering monster checks every few turns, hours, etc. So safety is…back in town. Or you risked resting out in the wilds.
and take X days to heal where X was a function of how many healing spells the party had to crank out in a day.
Sure. But that depended on how much rest you got. Again, wandering monsters.
Even Pool of Radiance on the Commodore 64 had a "Rest Until Healed" button that automatically did for you what everyone did at their tables.
Not everyone. I suggested using that at our table after playing that game. It didn't go well.
One of my last three kills as a GM in 5e was a PC failing to save vs Hold Person and falling into water long enough they drowned. A second kill was a PC failing to save versus a Dominate spell and standing around while their brain was eaten.

Ive seen 5e characters die as a player by being KOed while flying, turning to stone permanently and crumbled, unsaved poison, drowning in sand, drowning in a water elemental, being set to 0 MAX HP by a vampire, and finally being dominated and turned by that same vampire.

5e has plenty of ways to be dangerous to characters, but standing around trading HP by beating on each other with the bad guys isn't the most likely way it can happen.
You gotta pump those numbers up. Those are rookie numbers.

(Sorry. Couldn’t resist the joke.)

You realize those are mostly edge cases, right? Drowning. In 5E. How long does that take?

“A creature can hold its breath for a number of minutes equal to 1 + its Constitution modifier (minimum of 30 seconds).”

After that, you’re choking for Con mod rounds.

After that, you hit 0 hp and are dying.

CON 12, 2 minutes, 2 rounds, +2-3 rounds.

CON 14, 3 minutes, 3 rounds, +2-3 rounds.

Etc.
 

Doesn't change things much.

A bastard sword against a large target does 2d8 damage, 16 max. The strength modifiers don't hit +3 damage until you get into the 18%...in a system that rolled 3d6 in order. So...I think we're defining "decent" quite differently. So, while technically a possibility...it's not going to be a thing.

I wouldn't know. I skipped 2E and 3X.
Yeah, I'm done with this. 3d6 in order wasn't the way characters were generated in 1e. If you did it that way, more power to you but that certainly wasn't presumed. Hell, my fighter got 9d6 to generate his strength. Never minding my +3 to hit and damage and multiple attacks at 1st level. Oh, right, we're not allowed to talk about Unearthed Arcana...

Note that any 18 percentile strength starts at +3 to damage and only goes up from there.

Again, the odds of someone playing a fighter type that didn't have percentile strength was something that rarely happened. You had six tries to get an 18, and most characters, as in almost all of them, managed it every time surprisingly enough.

The point being, a 1e party could easily be dropping two, three ogres per round, even by very low levels.

But, yeah, I've been around this argument too many times to bother with it again. It's so pointless because everyone's table was so incredibly different back then that virtually no generalizations could be made. Heck, the fact that you're pointing to 3d6 in order, a rolling method that wasn't the main rolling method in the edition, as somehow "proof" of your point means that this is largely pointless.
 

My responses are to your claims. The reason they were specific is because they were addressing your specific claims. If you wanted to make a general claim, okay, generally 5e is not generic. It's not more generic than prior editions, for sure. The main claim of being generic is always that you can ignore or replace the rules provided, which is a silly thing to credit to the rules you've replaced or ignored.

5e does D&D. There are a few ways to do D&D, sure, but they're are fairly tightly clustered within how the GM exercises their near universal authority over game processes. That's not generic, it's just spinning some dials on a rather small set of scales. I mean the arguments between sandbox and railroad are degrees on how the GM uses their authority. Get out and find some games that really change the authority landscape before claiming D&D is generic. It's not, it's its own thing.
D&D is generic. It does fantasy and can do a lot of other genre. Just check the various settings. Heck, some games are copying what D&D does and apply it to other genre. Such as Cthulhu, Star Wars and such. Strangely a lot other systems are unable to do the same without very much tweaking. Think of Paranoia, the Old Cthulhu from Chaosium, Warhammer, Battletech, Star Treck, Vampire and quite a few more. These games were stuck with their system build for their setting. Not so with D&D. And I guess it never was.

All the games I previously mentioned have pretty much build around their setting. 5ed wasn't build that way. D&D, since in inception had to be generic because so many genre were incorporated into it. Heck, one of the quasi-hero of Greyhawk has six shooters... But what makes 5ed even more generic, is exactly what makes is so easy to run. A rule light environment. Yep, the lighter the rules, the more generic you can become. The learning bar for D&D 5ed is relatively low and tweaking isn't that hard at all. Just check the DM's guild. 5ed is setting agnostic, simply because the amount of rules (and their interactions thereof) is so low that tweaking it requires minimal amount of work and the system will be recognize by those familiar with it nonetheless.
 

Which is about my stance, but that stance sure as hell wouldn't have led me to design anything like 4e had I been at the helm. :)

For me, what sets 4e apart is that more than any other edition it leans into pure small-g gamism and isn't shy about saying so. End result is that those of us who want a bit more realism/simulation in our RPGs are going to - and did - bounce off it hard.

Really??

 

Remove ads

Top