D&D 5E How Old-School is 5th Edition? Can it even do Old-School?

[S'mon]

I think a sensible goal is not to turn 5th edition into an oldschool game, but to use oldschool methods and techniques to improve 5th edition.

Yes!!

 

[DND_Reborn]

I think a sensible goal is not to turn 5th edition into an oldschool game, but to use oldschool methods and techniques to improve 5th edition.

(bold added)

Such as?

 

[Voadam]

(bold added)

Such as?

That would depend on the aspects of OSR that you like.

For me it would be to use in-depth descriptions from both the DM and player to increase character immersion. Handle interactions more free-form and less with dice rolling mechanics. Focus more on player decisions than mechanics. Go with the player presented concept of their character more than the stats written on their sheet.

For others it might be sandboxing and random encounters, higher lethality in tone, more of a gold acquisition orientation, resource management importance, or mega-dungeoneering.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Ok, given the concepts you include below, how would you (anyone, not just @Voadam) use them to "improve 5th edition"?
How would you implement them?

I know how I might, but I am curious what others would do.

That would depend on the aspects of OSR that you like.

For me it would be to...

• Use in-depth descriptions from both the DM and player to increase character immersion.
• Handle interactions more free-form and less with dice rolling mechanics.
• Focus more on player decisions than mechanics.
• Go with the player presented concept of their character more than the stats written on their sheet.

For others it might be...

• sandboxing and random encounters
• higher lethality in tone
• more of a gold acquisition orientation
• resource management importance
• mega-dungeoneering

I think given all the ideas/ suggestions, it would be interesting to create a document with ways to incorporate ideas for giving 5E and old school feel, offering dozens of variants (like those in the DMG for a grittier feel) which would bring these concepts into the game.

 

[R_J_K75]

Handle interactions more free-form and less with dice rolling mechanics.

It's been a while since I read the 5E PHB or DMG, other than for reference. I don't recall what it says regarding rolling ability and skill checks. Is it implied throughout that ability and skill checks should be the primary resolution system outside of combat? To get the full picture is it safe to say I'd have to re-read both books cover to cover to put it all together?

 

[Yora]

I think XP for treasure would be a big one. Though if putting treasure hunting into the center is an improvement is subjective.
But I think it's the key to make a campaign actually play like the hypothetical ideal of Dungeons & Dragons. A game of exploring dungeons and facing off against dragons.

Once you have XP for treasure in place, you can bring back wandering monsters. Because when fighting wandering monsters offers no meaningful reward for the danger they pose, they become something that players want to avoid. And that fundamentally changes what a dungeon is and how it works as a game structure.
You also have an incentive to be stealthy and smart. Not simply to get a combat advantage whe you find a monster, but to bypass it entirely if practical. This opens up a big world of creative approaches to obstacles other than rolling initiative.

Using reaction rolls to randomize the initial disposition of encountered creatures is another great element. It creates uncertainy for the players if they should suprise attack creatures they sneaked up on, and it also generates a great range of unexpected interactions with monsters, that have a good chance to be memorable. And again, with XP coming from treasure, there is more incentive to negotiate for nonviolent outcomes of encounters.

In such a campaign, encumbrance starts serving a purpose, as retreats become a viable option without getting The Story stuck in a dead end. Exploring a dungeon swiftly and being able to make a fast retreat become a priority, which conflicts with being prepared with the tools and supplies for a wide range of situations.
If you can't do multiple short rests in a day, you have further incentives to explore smarter, and not harder. I think people's complaints about exploration not being well developed comes from the complete absence of such a structure for movement through a dungeons with constraints and conflicting priorities.

Though if you want to play the game to follow an elaborate story with cool action scenes, that probably won't add anything to the experience.

 

[jmartkdr2]

My own personal takes:

Ok, given the concepts you include below, how would you (anyone, not just @Voadam) use them to "improve 5th edition"?
How would you implement them?

I know how I might, but I am curious what others would do.

• Use in-depth descriptions from both the DM and player to increase character immersion.

Talk more, be more descriptive. Dm's need to fill spaces with stuff - empty rooms are not good for creative play.

• Handle interactions more free-form and less with dice rolling mechanics.

This is on the dm: be stingy with rolls. If it's likely to work because the plan is good - it just works.

• Focus more on player decisions than mechanics.

This follows from the above point: if the players are rewarded for engaging with the fiction more deeply, they will do so. Good plans (and I know 'good' is doing a lot of work here) should allow players to skip the rolls. Using a class feature directly should be a fallback option.

• Go with the player presented concept of their character more than the stats written on their sheet.

Here's a tougher one. I would say limit mechanical options (no feats) but let features they do have be used more broadly. Inspiring Leader should be the sort of thing anyone can do if they can give a decent speech.

I'd also lean into "you have proficiency, so you can do it" as much as possible.

• sandboxing and random encounters

This is totally doable with the game as written. I might add an option for fleeing: if all the players agree to flee, initiative ends and the pc's try to run away via chase mechanics (or not, if the enemy lets them leave.)

• higher lethality in tone

Nix boring resurrection spells. Maybe reduce or eliminate death saves.

• more of a gold acquisition orientation

XP for gold is a quick answer here.

• resource management importance

Track everything. Don't allow too many rests.

• mega-dungeoneering

No rules changes needed, just make megadungeons. If anything I'd say 5e works better in those kinds of settings, especially if they're built to require a lot of small encounters between rests.

I think given all the ideas/ suggestions, it would be interesting to create a document with ways to incorporate ideas for giving 5E and old school feel, offering dozens of variants (like those in the DMG for a grittier feel) which would bring these concepts into the game.

 

[Reynard]

No rules changes needed, just make megadungeons. If anything I'd say 5e works better in those kinds of settings, especially if they're built to require a lot of small encounters between rests.

I would say that a megadungeon requires an overhaul of the XP chart. 5E PCs blast through levels, and if you want them to explore they need to spend some time on each level of the megadungeon. If they gain levels too quickly they'll just head "downstairs" at the first opportunity.

 

[S'mon]

I would say that a megadungeon requires an overhaul of the XP chart. 5E PCs blast through levels, and if you want them to explore they need to spend some time on each level of the megadungeon. If they gain levels too quickly they'll just head "downstairs" at the first opportunity.

Definitely not my experience running megadungeons in 5e. In fact IME the PCs if anything tend to stall out on upper levels, being afraid of going too deep. 5e PCs in the level 4-10 range in a megadungeon or other sandbox environment generally do not advance quickly IME. If anything the game feels a bit slow & grindy due to combat taking longer than in 0e-2e.

 

[S'mon]

Once you have XP for treasure in place, you can bring back wandering monsters. Because when fighting wandering monsters offers no meaningful reward for the danger they pose, they become something that players want to avoid. And that fundamentally changes what a dungeon is and how it works as a game structure.
You also have an incentive to be stealthy and smart. Not simply to get a combat advantage whe you find a monster, but to bypass it entirely if practical. This opens up a big world of creative approaches to obstacles other than rolling initiative.

I don't strictly use GP = XP, but I definitely find that the PCs seek to avoid unnecessary combat. The biggest factor is that I use 1 week long rests, so there tends to be a 'mission' focus on getting the job done before LR resources run out.

I definitely agree with variable monster reactions, not necessarily always by a reaction roll, but many creatures should not auto-attack.