D&D 5E If EVERY edition of D&D has had some form of it, shouldn't 5e also?

[Aberzanzorax]

I'm talking about keeping:
Raise Dead
Vancian Casting
Classes
Races
Hit Points
Multiple die shapes (d4 through d20)
Elves, Dwarves, Halflings, Humans as playable races


Conversely, might it be a good guide to, if only one edition had something (unless a really great idea or very mundane), it might be worth tossing, like:
minimal restrictions on divine caster spell choice (3e)
at will/encounter/dailies (4e)
race = class (OD&D)


I DO think there is an excellent area of discussion regarding what might be appropriate for 5e D&D. But if this is the edition to unite gamers, I hardly think "let's toss vancian magic and those silly 'levels' and make a REAL roleplaying game" is going to do it.



Working within that framework, what can you name that every single edition of D&D has had? (Or what can you name that only one edition has had?)

 

[ferratus]

I think everyone who is arguing against Vancian magic is arguing for the sake of arguing, or to point out that people want another option. Everyone knows that Vancian magic is coming back in 5e, because Vance is as hard to kill as his anagram Vecna.

As for what exists common to all editions...

4 core races (halflings, humans, elves, dwarves)
4 core classes (cleric, thief, wizard, fighter)
6 ability scores from 3-18
Polyhedral Dice
Armor Class
Hit Points
Encumberance (but never paid attention to)
Vancian Magic (yes 4e has it too)
Mithril
Light Source and Vision rules that are incomprehensible
+x magical arms and armour
artifacts and relics

 

[Flatus Maximus]

5e will have to have crappy grapple rules.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

5e will have to have crappy grapple rules.

Nah, Every edition didn't have crappy grapple rules. Grapple rules only appeared in 1e. Basic and Original D&d got the grapple rules right. They didn't exist. Real heroes don't go around hugging things in dungeons. They save that for later at the tavern.

 

[foolish_mortals]

I have to agree that there needs to be consistency. Otherwise the game just becomes something new and unfamiliar with a clever Marketing ploy. I don't know where 4th sits on this spectrum. 3rd seems closer to keeping the goodies in place.

foolish_mortals

 

[DonTadow]

I'm talking about keeping:
Raise Dead

Yes, as a ritual, difficult and as usual optional. Raise Dead is very common in a lot of of fantasy, but is always quite difficult to do.

Vancian Casting

NO, this is not present in any modern day movies or media. If DnD wants to update to the times its time to update a 40 year old magic system to what everyone else is using these days. Magic is in DnD, it doesnt matter how its used.

Classes

Yes, but dnd needs to return to its roots. 4 classes and let chosen abilities dictatae how those are broken down by subtypes. The more options you have the more chance you have of angering people.

Races

Yes, but again traditional, nothing fanboish. No tieflings or half-dragons. Drizz't has ruined more gaming sessions than any other fictional character. ::gruff batman voice:: r "i'm a loner, i know i'm a party of adventures trying to do good, but i have a bad boy streak and like to work by myself"

Hit Points

Yeah but fewer and more meaningful. I'd love a system where no creature has hit points gerater than 100 with 100 being "level 20. A cool way to help indicate power without CR.

Multiple die shapes (d4 through d20)

yup

Elves, Dwarves, Halflings, Humans as playable races

see above

I DO think there is an excellent area of discussion regarding what might be appropriate for 5e D&D. But if this is the edition to unite gamers, I hardly think "let's toss vancian magic and those silly 'levels' and make a REAL roleplaying game" is going to do it.

The goal is not to unite. Minimize the rule system, nothing crazy, make dming easy. Those are the true goals. Hasbro's goal is to grow the game and reclaim marketshare. The game won't grow if only we play it.

At no pont will there be a mash of systems. A game designed for parties of 10 players just can't be compatible with a game designed for a party of 4 and wit ha game designed for a party of 3.

When they say unite, they are referring to how poorly 4e divided everyone. How cumbersome 3.5 was. I believe they are taking the early editions and modernizing them.

 

[Mark CMG]

If EVERY edition of D&D has had some form of it, shouldn't 5e also?

That's an interesting litmus test for how to look at what goes in and what goes out. As to-

race = class

Doesn't (O)D&D count separately from BD&D?