D&D General Mechanics you DO want to see return

[R_J_K75]

I want to see more support for DMs in the Monster Manual.

I want Morale scores for monsters. Also bring back % in liar, and descriptions of a typical lair for each monster.

I also miss treasure types, I like thatdifferent monsters who’ll have different style hoards.

Stuff like this helps DMs when they have to improvise.

Yep I like to see this too, and go one step further and go with the who 2E version of monster write up with the ecology, habitats, etc entries

 

[Ratskinner]

Not having read the rest of the thread....

I'd like to see more "skillsy" things, saves, etc. wrapped back into classes, and away from the modern "ability scores are everything" framework. Nowadays, I'm feeling like even AD&D is too ability-score dependent. With choosing Background, Race, and Class (and subclass), There are plenty of opportunities to bake-in all that stuff, and maybe even drop ability scores entirely....

 

[jmucchiello]

Wouldn't mind Gestalt type multiclassing, but it's also something I could live without and could see very easily breaking the 5e system if not done just right.

The "simplest" way to do this is change the xp chart for multiclass characters. They need 600 xp to get to level 2/2 instead of 300 to get to level 2. It would have to be a choice made at character creation. (Figuring out how this works mathematically at higher levels is left as an exercise for the reader. For example, you might need to base proficiency bonus on the normal xp chart.)

 

[jmucchiello]

Oh, yeah, on topic. There's only one thing that sticks in my craw that is missing in 5E:

Skills.

Skills should have a chapter in the PHB. They should not just be descriptors for ability checks. Players generally treat the game as if skills exist but technically, they don't. They just allow you to add your proficiency bonus to an ability check.

 

[CubicsRube]

Those could be integrated well into 5E without redoing the whole system. Basically i like this.

Yeah, in the end so much stuff i would like just requires too much work and it wouldn't feel like d&d to me. These are the kind of things i can tack on with minimal work but takes this in the direction i like.

I've got a couple of others, but they are not prior d&d rules and so I haven't put them here.

 

[billd91]

So has anyone done a comparison of this to the mechanics you do not want to see return? Because it seems like there may be a decent amount of overlap.

Yes, there's a lot of overlap. In general, despite playing since earlier editions where these mechanics lived, this is definitely the "Oh, hell no," thread for me.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

the 'Bloodied' condition and all the stuff that key off it.

This. Especially as a monster thing, but even for players I really liked how things could change when you get bloodied.

I also miss the tactical powers of monsters, especially leaders and defenders, in 4e. I’m working on working them back into my encounter design, but it either takes a a lot of work or a lot of trust in my own improv skill.

 

[Samloyal23]

A skill and feat based psionics system with tangents and telepathic combat. Just update all of the 2E rules to fit the new skill system. Add a non-Athasian version of harbingers and constructs to make mental combat more complex and strategic. You can see something similar in the Star Wars d20 rules for using the Force.

Adapt the 3E psionic classes to fit the updated/retro system. Voila! A non-spell psionics system that feels different from magic and therefore has a reason for being...

 

[Undrave]

A skill and feat based psionics system with tangents and telepathic combat. Just update all of the 2E rules to fit the new skill system. Add a non-Athasian version of harbingers and constructs to make mental combat more complex and strategic. You can see something similar in the Star Wars d20 rules for using the Force.

Adapt the 3E psionic classes to fit the updated/retro system. Voila! A non-spell psionics system that feels different from magic and therefore has a reason for being...

Wouldn't that just mean that Psionic Combat is a whole different game in itself? Seems like a lot of load for ONE type of characters.

 

[Vael]

4e'isms that I miss:

• Bloodied
• Monster Design

I still use Bloodied as a descriptor, but I did like that some classes and races used it in 4e. And I miss 4e Monster statblocks, they made combat a breeze. And Minions were fun.

ETA: Another one that just popped to mind, multiple damage types. It wasn't common, but 4e had some spells/abilities that had multiple damage types. For example, a Storm blast that would deal both Thunder and Lightning Damage. In order to resist it, you needed resistance to both damage types.