D&D General Lethality, AD&D, and 5e: Looking Back at the Deadliest Edition

[Necrofumbler]

You threw darts at your potential henches and hirelings?

Or is this just another glorious typo?

As a hyppo master myself, I agrree it is inn deed gloripous.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I liked darts. 3 attacks per round. Your wizard had a decent chance of actually hiring something at low levels.

MAGIC USER!

Seriously, though, this illustrates one of the things I loved about early D&D (TSR era D&D, in this case 1e). The regional, local, and table differences.

Where I played, Magic Users never, ever, ever used darts. It just wasn't done. While I remember that this was the case, I can't tell you the exact reason for absolute sure. But if I was reasoning backwards, I think it had to do with two things-

1. Lore. Obviously, darts were ... weird. While we can say today that they were modeled after Roman War Darts (Plumbata) ... we didn't know that then. To us, darts were things you played with in the rec room or at bars. They weren't combat weapons. Conceptually, the idea of a MU using darts seemed stupid to us, since it wasn't something that was ever within any fiction we had come across.

2. Combat. MUs were restricted to three weapon choices- dagger, staff, and dart. More importantly, MUs only had proficiency in one weapon to start with, and they didn't get a second proficiency until seventh level. Non-proficiency penalty was -5 (!!!), which for MUs was basically a HELL NO when you were attacking.

If you chose a dart, that meant that you couldn't get a dagger or staff until seventh level. And darts were ranged only. That meant that when a critter got to within melee range, you were toast if you chose a dart. And while darts were a better choice from range, there would always be something (something!) that happened ... Moreover, while there were plenty of magic daggers and the occasional magic staff, magic darts were ... well, close to non-existent. Players would always choose the staff (more damage, more iconic) or the dagger (ability to throw and use a ranged weapon).

So I never played in a 1e campaign where a MU chose a dart as the first weapon of choice. Again, though, different areas played differently.

 

[billd91]

1. Lore. Obviously, darts were ... weird. While we can say today that they were modeled after Roman War Darts (Plumbata) ... we didn't know that then. To us, darts were things you played with in the rec room or at bars. They weren't combat weapons. Conceptually, the idea of a MU using darts seemed stupid to us, since it wasn't something that was ever within any fiction we had come across.

He should have called them Jarts in the Players Handbook. Gen X kids would have immediately recognized the weaponized connection then.

 

[Mannahnin]

I just realized that (and I'm aware Snarf was speaking somewhat figuratively) that when looking at the title of this thread, everything that made AD&D particularly lethal was true in OD&D, and most of the classes had smaller hit dice to boot.

Yes, there's certainly a case for that. There was no optional rule for survival at zero or negative HP, either, though the rules were sketchy enough that some referees might interpret the vague "chance of survival" percentages in the Constitution table as applying to when you're knocked to 0 HP.

Of course, there also weren't all the trap/"gotcha" monsters from AD&D yet in OD&D. No earseekers or rot grubs, for example.

 

[Oofta]

Doubt it about the pendulum swing. If anything, the game is moving to an even greater level of "epic unkillable superheroes" play style.

My main beef with 5E is that there are way too many "story tropes" that get utterly broken by commonly available very low level spells. The game is HEAVILY geared towards a "Let's sweep all that Social and Exploration pillar stuff under the rug so that we can get to the next fight ASAP" type of playstyle.

Any "Gritty Survival" style campaign simply gets kicked in the balls, hard. Infinite Light Cantrips = No more light management required.

As opposed to the objects we had continual flame cast on in older editions?

Tiny Hut = no more finding a good campaign site required.

Also give enemies plenty of time to set up ambushes, doesn't have a floor, doesn't make you invisible. I do add a house rule that you can't attack anything outside the hut from inside because it's a bit OP. But with the limitation that the caster has to stay inside the hut

Create Food & Water = No more hunting forgaging or fishing required, and deserts stop being any threat.

Create water debuted in Men & Magic. Doesn't get much more old school than that.

Mending = no more dealing with broken gear required.

Mending can only repair small breaks. It is handy, but if your suit of armor is somehow destroyed you're still likely SOL.

Speak with dead = No more need to capture an enemy then interrogate him through good roleplaying, just kill him then "read its memories like an open book".

Another spell that has been around for a long time. It also doesn't have to answer if, for example, it recognizes you as an enemy. The person that just killed them? Likely considered an enemy.

Actually needing to Travel somewhere? Nah. Overland Flight the party, Summon a few Pegasi, or outright Teleport.

At a higher level, sure. The DM needs to adjust. As far as teleport, hope you don't roll bad. Also one that was added in the Expert Set, so not exactly new. Spells like Forbiddance and Inner Sanctum which can be made permanent stop teleportation.

Crafting stuff and needing to find, and roleplay with, a master NPC artisan? then waiting weeks and also payng him for his work? Nah that's stupid just Fabricate it in 1 round, for FREE. Basically making the wizzy the best uber artisan in the entire world, for all crafts, instantly.

You need to have expertise in order to create anything complicated, so no.

Why build a thick walled medieval castle for TONS of thousands of gold pieces when... Transmute Rock to Mud, Spider Climb, Fly, Passwall, etc. meanwhile poor mister Fighter will "break his sword". If you allow a magic user to do all those things, then allow my fighter to be just as badass and able to do just as legendary epic stuff, and slice that castle's high tower in HALF with a single sword strike. allow my rogue to pass easiily under doors and through tiny wall cracks using "mere shadows".

Transmute Rock is another one that has been around for a long time. It's also not a core spell, it was added in Elemental Evil Player's Companion so I didn't even know it was a 5E spell until I looked it up. Nobody has ever used it, if they did I would have banned it.

And so on, and on, and on, and on, and on.

I guess the question is - how old school are you going? Most of the broken spells (I always though transmute rock was stupidly overpowered) go way, way back.

Magic would be ok if the magic user was good at ONE type of magic, not a uber god for almost EVERY type of magic in existence. Or if magic actually "only" somewhat boosted something already there, by a small but reasonable factor, instead of being so many orders of magnitude better that it ends up completely stealing the show.

For example with Fabricate, it could make an artisan work better and faster, and for a lower cost. Even a mere "Artisan rolls with Advantage, working twice as fast for half the price", that would already be a HUGE effect.

What's the point of being a Rogue trying to climb a high wall with a dangerous hard Climb DC, for a bit of movement over several rounds, when the party Wizard can just cast Spider Climb or Fly and 100% safe run accross the distance in a dinslge round, no check needed or danger involved? Trying to open a very hard trapped locked chest, when the wizzy can just 100% no check required just Knock it open from a distance? Trying to Stealth when magic gives invisibility instead?

Knock makes a sound that can be heard up to 300 feet away. Invisibility just gives you advantage on stealth it doesn't make you undetectable. It's also another spell that has been around since Men & Magic. Not sure how much more old school you can get.

Magic should BOOST a prexisting cappacity by some amount. And not by "several orders of magnitude", but a reasonably low (but still noticeable) factor.

Just go to TV Tropes, find a few nice story tropes, and then see how many low levels spells utterly ruin it.

If you run a D&D campaign as a series of predetermined-story-driven battles, with the style of "PCs as greater than life superheroes", with next to no downtime in between the battles, then yeah, it works. But not other types.

My main beef is thhe casters totally nuking that "secondary random encounter o nthe way to the dungeon", making it 100% a trivial waste of time. Nah. Make that choice to "waste" spell slot there actually COUNT. Wizards should be likec in the Gauntlet video arcade game, casting spells one after another almost nbon-stop, but using their brains and using their precious spell slots only where they count most. But with only 1-2 enncountewrs per long rest, those sppell slots aren't "precious" nor actually require any brains at all as you can just spam them most of the time. Not at level 1, sure. But even by level 5, even casting spells as much as they could every round, PLUS using multiple spells per each non-combat encounter, our Dragon Heist casters were NEVER lacking for spell slots.

Now, if the game made sure the "per long rest" capabilities were recovered only once over 4-8 encounters occured, suddenly that changes a lot how the casters would behave.

Bbut that ain't gonna happen, if anything 1DnD iss addding even more power creep. "Player feedback" uses a "1 feedback, 1 vote" approach. But there are at least 5 times as many players as DMs, and DMS are way better placed to determine what is good for a campaign, and work way hardewr to make campaiggnbs more succesful, than players mainly just comin to play and tending to focusing a lot more on what feels good for their own character aka more even more powerful options, rather than on what is good for the campaign as a whole. Try it, ask your players what they want, then add it all, straight up. Lather rinse repeat. And watch your campaign inevitably and quickly crash & burn. Then the players blame the DM. PLAYERS JUST DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY REALLY WANT.

So IMHO actual DM feedback should count as about 20-30 times "more important" than normal players feedback.

But that ain't what's happening. Catering to PLAYERS always sold a lot more books DMs than catering to DMs.

If you're going to complain about how OP magic is, that's fine. I think there are plenty of ways to counter it, magic has always been part of the game since it's inception. But pretty much everything you complain about have always been part of the game. For every spell like tiny hut that is more powerful than it used to be, others have been weakened. In Men & Magic disintegrate just disintegrated anything that failed a save, now it does damage and only disintegrates if it kills you.

If you want a game where magic isn't powerful, D&D isn't for you. Meanwhile there are many ways to counter the issues you perceive if you want to do so.

 

[Maxperson]

MAGIC USER!

Seriously, though, this illustrates one of the things I loved about early D&D (TSR era D&D, in this case 1e). The regional, local, and table differences.

Where I played, Magic Users never, ever, ever used darts. It just wasn't done. While I remember that this was the case, I can't tell you the exact reason for absolute sure. But if I was reasoning backwards, I think it had to do with two things-

1. Lore. Obviously, darts were ... weird. While we can say today that they were modeled after Roman War Darts (Plumbata) ... we didn't know that then. To us, darts were things you played with in the rec room or at bars. They weren't combat weapons. Conceptually, the idea of a MU using darts seemed stupid to us, since it wasn't something that was ever within any fiction we had come across.

2. Combat. MUs were restricted to three weapon choices- dagger, staff, and dart. More importantly, MUs only had proficiency in one weapon to start with, and they didn't get a second proficiency until seventh level. Non-proficiency penalty was -5 (!!!), which for MUs was basically a HELL NO when you were attacking.

If you chose a dart, that meant that you couldn't get a dagger or staff until seventh level. And darts were ranged only. That meant that when a critter got to within melee range, you were toast if you chose a dart. And while darts were a better choice from range, there would always be something (something!) that happened ... Moreover, while there were plenty of magic daggers and the occasional magic staff, magic darts were ... well, close to non-existent. Players would always choose the staff (more damage, more iconic) or the dagger (ability to throw and use a ranged weapon).

So I never played in a 1e campaign where a MU chose a dart as the first weapon of choice. Again, though, different areas played differently.

My experience was almost the same. We did occasionally pick darts just to switch things up a bit, but 19 times out of 20 it was staff or dagger.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Yes, there's certainly a case for that. There was no optional rule for survival at zero or negative HP, either, though the rules were sketchy enough that some referees might interpret the vague "chance of survival" percentages in the Constitution table as applying to when you're knocked to 0 HP.

Of course, there also weren't all the trap/"gotcha" monsters from AD&D yet in OD&D. No earseekers or rot grubs, for example.

Yeah, but that wasn't the routine cause of death anyway; it was simple damage or save-or-die effects of one stripe or another. Gotcha monsters were more things like rust monsters or level drainers (and the latter were even worse than I remembered, because somehow all the local groups got it in their head they had a saving throw).

 

[Thomas Shey]

I guess the question is - how old school are you going? Most of the broken spells (I always though transmute rock was stupidly overpowered) go way, way back.

Yeah. Some were less accessible (because of the steep level curve) but most of the big plot breakers were present in OD&D, at least by the time of the Greyhawk supplement.

 

[Lanefan]

Seriously, though, this illustrates one of the things I loved about early D&D (TSR era D&D, in this case 1e). The regional, local, and table differences.

Where I played, Magic Users never, ever, ever used darts. It just wasn't done.

Same here. I've seen a whole bunch - as in, many dozens - of MUs (and their subclasses) played and I'm not sure if I've ever seen one take dart as its first weapon...or even its second, come to that.

Invariably it's one of dagger or staff to start with, and the other of those is picked up at 7th. We've yet to have a mage reach 13th in our games; if and when one ever does then maybe - maybe! - we'll see our first dart-chuckin' caster.

1. Lore. Obviously, darts were ... weird. While we can say today that they were modeled after Roman War Darts (Plumbata) ... we didn't know that then. To us, darts were things you played with in the rec room or at bars. They weren't combat weapons. Conceptually, the idea of a MU using darts seemed stupid to us, since it wasn't something that was ever within any fiction we had come across.

Same here - when I hear "darts" I think of weaponized pub darts.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Same here. I've seen a whole bunch - as in, many dozens - of MUs (and their subclasses) played and I'm not sure if I've ever seen one take dart as its first weapon...or even its second, come to that.

Invariably it's one of dagger or staff to start with, and the other of those is picked up at 7th. We've yet to have a mage reach 13th in our games; if and when one ever does then maybe - maybe! - we'll see our first dart-chuckin' caster.

Same here - when I hear "darts" I think of weaponized pub darts.

All this said, while my experience is the same (and the same as @Maxperson ), I totally believe @Hussar as well.

One of the things I always found fascinating about those days is when you would travel somewhere else and play a game, and see just how differently other people might be playing it! Rules that you took for granted might not be used, or they might be using rules that were "buried in the DMG" that you weren't aware of.

They might be playing a more narrative style, or a meatgrinder dungeon. The lack of the internet made it so that there was a LOT of variation- not just table-to-table, but within localities and regions.