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

[pemerton]

Taking each rule in AD&D on their own, I think they're well thought out and mathematically sound. The issue is trying to put them all into play at once, especially if you don't have a solid grasp on them.

I have a completely solid grasp of the monk surprise table. That doesn't tell me how it interacts with a ranger's increased ability to surprise; or how many segments a monk is surprised for on various rolls. I can extrapolate in both cases, but I have to extrapolate.

Why is a ranger's stealth expressed as a level-independent adjustment to the chance to surprise, while a thief's is expressed as a level-dependent chance to move silently, which is not then linked to the surprise rules? There's no good reason.

How likely a thief is to surprise some goblins if the thief approaches them while moving silently? I don't know. Should it be the same as a ranger? Better? The rules don't say.

As I said, it's a shambles.

 

[Jahydin]

I have a completely solid grasp of the monk surprise table. That doesn't tell me how it interacts with a ranger's increased ability to surprise; or how many segments a monk is surprised for on various rolls. I can extrapolate in both cases, but I have to extrapolate.

Why is a ranger's stealth expressed as a level-independent adjustment to the chance to surprise, while a thief's is expressed as a level-dependent chance to move silently, which is not then linked to the surprise rules? There's no good reason.

How likely a thief is to surprise some goblins if the thief approaches them while moving silently? I don't know. Should it be the same as a ranger? Better? The rules don't say.

As I said, it's a shambles.

Understandable, but I guess that's where our enjoyment differs. I think it's pretty fun to extrapolate. I also get a kick out of seeing how every DM would do it differently.

As for the inconstancies, I think it adds a mysterious, esoteric vibe to the game that I find interesting. As a player it keeps you guessing and intrigued every time a new situation comes up and the DM has to make a ruling on the fly. For instance, in your thief example, the thief player would be a little more on edge and interested as the DM decides how to handle things, especially if the ruling was a one time, only unique to that particular situation alone kind of ruling.

Compared to just another D20 + Attribute + Prof bonus you've already made a million times that night, I find the wildly varied and inconsistent ways of doing things refreshing.

Btw, just the thought of making my own Monk Surprise Table in Excel, converting the percentages into a "X in 12" like progression sounds like a fun time to me, haha.

 

[overgeeked]

I do have to say though, as a kid I was pretty blown away by all the neat ways you could use math to simulate real world situations. Spent a lot of time looking over the bell-curve graphs in the DMG and trying to work out what dice to use to get a 3-12 range. Thanks to AD&D alone, I was performing two class grades higher than my peers, lol.

Same. Also managed to learn vocab that my English teachers didn’t know and had to look up. Thanks Old High Gygaxian.

 

[Fifth Element]

Same. Also managed to learn vocab that my English teachers didn’t know and had to look up. Thanks Old High Gygaxian.

I mean, if the person you're talking to has to look up a word you just used, the word is failing at what it's meant for - communicating.

 

[Jahydin]

I mean, if the person you're talking to has to look up a word you just used, the word is failing at what it's meant for - communicating.

That's how we expand our vocabulary though?

 

[overgeeked]

I mean, if the person you're talking to has to look up a word you just used, the word is failing at what it's meant for - communicating.

There's so much more to language, and its use, than mere communication.

 

[Fifth Element]

That's how we expand our vocabulary though?

Vocabulary for the sake of vocabulary isn't a worthwhile goal. One should not strive to be sesquipedalian.

 

[Fifth Element]

There's so much more to language, and its use, than mere communication.

"Mere" communication, lol.

 

[Ovinomancer]

There's so much more to language, and its use, than mere communication.

Um, no, language is only about communication. It's not just about passing facts, but also communicating emotion and the like, but it's all communication.

 

[Jahydin]

Vocabulary for the sake of vocabulary isn't a worthwhile goal. One should not strive to be sesquipedalian.

I don't know what sesquipedalian means. Is it your fault, the word's fault, or my fault communication failed ?