D&D 5E How is 5E like 2E?

[Nefermandias]

I think the primary thing for me is that like BECMI and 2E, 5E puts trust back in the DM to be able to "handle it." After over a decade of 3.x I actually balked a little. "Where are the task DC charts?!?" But I have realized over time that the broad proficiencies and guideline DCs are a real boon to DMs. It is easy to run on the fly.

I will say that one place it also lines up with 2E that I don't like is how imbalanced it is on the player side. As a player I don't care, but as a DM I cringe when I watch one player make all the optimized choices and another make (relatively speaking) suboptimal choices. I have to challenge them both without being unfair! Ugh.

Not allowing feats and multiclass goes a long way preventing those broken builds to arise in your game. It also keeps the things simple so we can focus more on exploration, resource management and clever usage of the environment around the characters.

I also feel like 5e has brought back the "adventure" as the main unit of challenge instead of the per encounter basis we had with 3e and 4e. It's more important to plan ahead and preserve resources than making super optimal moves in your combat turn.

 

[Burnside]

Not allowing feats and multiclass goes a long way preventing those broken builds to arise in your game. It also keeps the things simple so we can focus more on exploration, resource management and clever usage of the environment around the characters.

Using point buy and/or standard array also helps - in fact, I'd say that if you do that, there is no need to ban feats and multi-classing.

However, there are some newer 5E subclasses - twilight cleric and echo knight come to mind - that are just inherently overpowered on their face as designed. But this is a recent development.

 

[TheSword]

Pretty sure it was Pathfinder 1e. But I'm going from memory, haven't played since 5e came out (and really before that).

Edit: so I'm looking online and can't find the limit anywhere now. Maybe it was a campaign house rule and I just internalized it?

Regardless, the point was that 3e buffing got pretty ridiculous and I'm very glad it was clamped down (4e and 5e)

Yeah. Pathfinder never has a limit and I totally agree that 3e and its variants was the king of pre-buffing, with so many opportunities to extend the length of spells to cover even more combats. It was also a problem that got exponentially harder at higher levels. I love the change 5e made with concentration.

 

[overgeeked]

Using point buy and/or standard array also helps - in fact, I'd say that if you do that, there is no need to ban feats and multi-classing.

Point buy helps, but some feats are just broken. Some multiclass combos are just broken. Using point buy doesn’t change that.

However, there are some newer 5E subclasses - twilight cleric and echo knight come to mind - that are just inherently overpowered on their face as designed. But this is a recent development.

Yes, they are. There’s a few in the PHB that are busted as well. They’ve just always been busted so we take them for granted.

 

[ad_hoc]

In 3e and 4e you use abilities and then roll to see if you succeed.

In 2e and 5e you describe what your character does. The DM then tells you if you succeed or fail or if the outcome is in doubt.

That is the biggest similarity. The philosophy of game design is entirely different than 3e and 4e and is more similar to earlier editions.

 

[Staffan]

Pathfinder clamped down on the bonuses by "only" allowing 3 buffs at any given time.

Is that a rule for Pathfinder 2e? Three buff max? I played Pathfinder 1st Ed for several years but could never justify moving to 2e when 5e was working for us.

There's no rule about three buffs max. However, Pathfinder 2 still has the 3e rule where you can only get one bonus and one penalty of each type at once, but reduced the number of types to three: item, status, and circumstantial. Item bonuses usually come from gear, magical or masterwork; circumstantial comes from mundane or mundane-ish circumstances, and status bonuses usually come from spells or other special abilities. There's a loophole for magic armor runes, which unlike other bonus items technically increase the armor's normal item bonus rather than adding an item bonus of their own. So you don't get the situation you had in 3e where bless gives a +1 morale bonus, prayer gives you a +1 luck bonus, bull's strength increases your Strength by 4 for an increased Strength bonus by +2, and offensive precognition gives you a +2 insight bonus.

So, for example, if I am hiding behind a corner and thus already have Greater Cover giving me a +4 circumstance bonus to AC, Raising my Shield for a +2 circumstance bonus to AC doesn't help (at least not AC-wise, it still allows me to use the Shield Block action should I get hit). And if my bard buddy is casting inspire courage giving me a +1 status bonus to attack rolls, using ki strike for a +1 status bonus to attack rolls doesn't help (but I still get the additional damage from ki strike).

 

[Weiley31]

there are some newer 5E subclasses - twilight cleric and echo knight come to mind

Despite that, these two Subclasses are pretty awesome.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Each edition is multifaceted, so it would be an oversimplification to say that it’s coming from one or two similar elements. Rather the overall combination makes it more reminiscent of 2e than any other edition.

For me, I’d say that overall it mechanically sits somewhere between 2e and 3e. Its cosmology is based on 2e Planescape, with some additions from other editions, a few subtractions, and some innovations. Playstyle leans towards 2e era also.

A lot of the individual elements that people bring up could easily apply to 1e too, but the general feel evokes 2e more strongly than 1e.

It‘s also important to remember that they didn‘t design it as a sequel to 4e, the way each previous edition had been a sequel to the prior one. Rather, as part of their design research process, they played every previous edition of the game. In effect (and IMO) 5e is the first edition designed to be a “sequel” to the entire body of the game before it taken as a whole, rather than to any particular edition. Every basic element that made it in to 5e is there because they chose it from the entire palette (or innovated something new like Advantage/Disadvantage) not because they started with a particular edition as the base and then made changes from that point.

 

[see]

I'll note in specific, 5e's Backgrounds fill the role of a whole pile of 2e kits (particularly ones in the early PHBR series like, say, "Peasant Wizard"), while subclasses have filled the role of other kits (particularly the style seen in, for example, the Complete Bard's Handbook).

 

[Laurefindel]

So, what aspects of 5E are reminiscent of 2E?

It’s similar to 2e AD&D in the sense that 2e was (a little bit) more fleshed out than 1st edition or OD&D, including skills non-weapon proficiencies and character customization options.

but mostly, because it takes a step back from things that made 3e stand out from AD&D.

AD&D had a modest numeral progression, 3e was nuts in that department.

in AD&D, magic items were nice to have. In 3e, the « big 6 » were necessary and expected as part of the character progression to follow the CR calculation. Magic items are back to « nice to have » status, kind of…

3e put everything in the players’ hands and for their own agency, including magical gear. 5e took more things back in the hands of DMs.

3e was (in relation to 2e) incredibly codified. 5e relaxed on that front and even rules intentionally vague (for the better or for the worse)

In 3e, system mastery was significant. You could make a OP character or a significantly subpar and deficient one. 5e, like 2e, has some system mastery but the gap between over-thought, optimal character builds and accidentally lame characters is much smaller.

3e brought the concept of feats into D&D and them obligatory and part of normal character (and monster) progression. In 5e, feats are there but take less space and are no longer an expected part of a character.

3e had perfect (or almost perfect) character/monster symmetry. 5e is back to an asymmetrical system.

In all fairness, 4e also did change from 3e but between 2e and 4e, 5e is closer to AD&D, particularly in language used (although there is a lot of 4e in 5e’s DNA)