D&D 5E Is 5e really that different?

[dave2008]

I like 5E less and less as time goes by. But I still think it is a good game. And I very strongly agree with the sentiments that it is the greatest version of D&D ever.
Other versions are better for me personally. But 5E is head and shoulders above everything else in the mission of delivering the most fun to the most people.

I think that is a good way to put it and feels about right.

I will add that my favorite version of D&D is always my home version. We always homebrew and hack D&D and that is what I loved about it and in particular 5e. We have add the easiest time making 5e our game compared to previous editions.

 

[dave2008]

There were plenty of martial striker options. This seems hung up on making sure something called a "fighter" gets both options.

That is definitely true. I was hung up on that for a bit. But I am old school - I just want 4 classes really.

 

[DND_Reborn]

That is why we still play D&D

Don't you heavily house-rule it though?

I will add that my favorite version of D&D is always my home version. We always homebrew and hack D&D and that is what I loved about it and in particular 5e. We have add the easiest time making 5e our game compared to previous editions.

Asked and answered.

 

[BryonD]

It's more along the lines of "stealth 4e" at least mechanically. It is most definitely closer to 4e in mechanics than any other version of D&D. Granted, it shaved off lots of stuff from 4e as well. But, the basic chasis is most certainly there.

Really? Interesting.
I suppose we could go bullet by bullet and I'm sure we could find things that I would concede. But not much.

When you specifically use the term chassis, with regard to 4E, I certainly think of +level as a design fundamental. Bounded accuracy has its issues (IMO) but it is night and day different than +level.
Insta-healing was a major concern. That is still there by default. By 5E is, by design, built to be flexible and when I run 5E healing is much more old school and the system doesn't blink. That is, again, night and day different than the healing concerns that were baked in deal breakers for me.
I recall a lot of 4E praise for the realignment of player/DM authority. And I recall a lot of angst from 4E fans over how 5E went backwards on this front. I strongly agree that it went a very different direction than 4E.

I really think a lot of this comes down to two things:
1) There was a lot of complaint about 5E from 4E fans when it was being rolled out (normal for every edition change). But the perspective is different when the massive success of 5E must be accounted for.
2) Exceptions certainly exist, but a lot of 4E fans insisted that they WERE 3E fans until the major upgrades to 3E were released in 4E. I believe that in a very general since, 3E and 5E both share a common trait that differing table could play the game very different ways. And I believe that a 4E fan could play any of them and see similarities. (with 4E still being the pinnacle "by design"). But 4E was the LEAST adaptable to other play styles. So a 4E fans would see the relationships differently than someone who wanted something different. Eye of the beholder is key here. And respecting that different eyes may behold very differently is also key.

 

[dave2008]

Don't you heavily house-rule it though?

I don't know if heavily is the correct word, but we do house-rule / homebrew every edition. 5e currently has the least amount of changes. In 5e we have about a page of house-rules.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I don't know if heavily is the correct word, but we do house-rule / homebrew every edition. 5e currently has the least amount of changes. In 5e we have about a page of house-rules.

Well, if AD&D had the most changes, then I would respectfully suggest your feel from AD&D might be very different from others. I had only a few pages of house-rules in AD&D (due to the inclusion of 2E really), but have over 60 for 5E.

 

[Rikka66]

There were plenty of martial striker options. This seems hung up on making sure something called a "fighter" gets both options.

There were. My post isn't just about the fighter, that was just the example. I'm talking a fundamental rethink about how they approached builds and roles.

 

[dave2008]

Well, if AD&D had the most changes, then I would respectfully suggest your feel from AD&D might be very different from others. I had only a few pages of house-rules in AD&D (due to the inclusion of 2E really), but have over 60 for 5E.

I found my AD&D/BECMI house-rules a few years back and it was over 20 pages of rules. My 4e house-rules were 2-3 pages and our 5e house-rules are 1-2 pages.

A couple things to note:

1. I didn't have a lot of 1e books. We had the boxed sets (BECMI), the 1e PHB, DMG, MM, MM2, & Deities & Demigods.
2. My rule tolerance as changed a bit. Now we only change the rules that we need to change and just ignore many rules we don't need. If we had done that in 1e, the page count would have been less I imagine.
3. I can get away with a lot of DM improve that I wasn't able to do as a new DM 30+ years ago with 1e.

 

[Thunderfoot]

I find the house rules for me are less about changing rules, than altering the flavor of a certain race or class. (Making the Paladin a subset of Cleric instead of a fighter, Making Dwarves more Slavic, etc)

4e (for me) became unplayable because the house rules started to outweigh the regular rules. So we shelved it and went to BECMI clones until 5e launched.

 

[Hussar]

When you specifically use the term chassis, with regard to 4E, I certainly think of +level as a design fundamental. Bounded accuracy has its issues (IMO) but it is night and day different than +level.

I'm sorry, but, I don't see the difference.

+level means that by and large, success is floating around that 66% chance. Yes, there is variation, I know, but, the baseline is always that 66%. Be more focused and that percent goes up, be less focused and it goes down.

Bounded accuracy means the same thing. Success for the majority of tasks is around 66%. At least, that's the baseline presumption. Yup, you can increase or decrease from there, but, it always comes back to 66%.

That's what I mean by stealth 4e mechanics. In AD&D, you went from pretty much 0% chance of success at low level (1e thief I'm looking at you, but, also, the base Thac0 of 20). In 3e you went from about a 66% percent chance of success to either 100% or 0% depending on the focus of the character.

But 4e and 5e keep the same baseline throughout the levels. Strip out the level bonuses from 4e and the commensurate rise in DC's by level of 4e, and you get 5e bounded accuracy.