D&D 5E So 5E is the Successor to AD&D 2nd Edition? How and How Not?

[R_J_K75]

All 8 specialties are given a full subclass with unique abilities in original 5e.

I haven't read or played either specialty wizards or clerics in 5E 2024. I have read the 2014 specialty cleric, and wizard class but they didn't feel the same, seem underpowered and pretty bland. Admittedly I may have misjudged because I never played any PCs or NPCs I built except one, Tango Ray Leonard, cleric of Thor. I think the wording of those sections don't really capture the wizard schools, or "Cleric of" features. It's a weird thing; I think the wording took me out of my suspension of disbelief causing my failure to properly visualize the character

 

[R_J_K75]

- The bizarre categorical restrictions. Dwarves can't cast Arcane magic, some races can't advance or even take certain classes. It's very arbitrary.

I liked that Dwarves couldn't cast arcane magic in 2E AD&D. I yelled at clouds for days after 3E reversed that.

 

[Minigiant]

What? I would argue the opposite. The game works better without magic items, even more so now with the 2024 MM.

5e works better with magic items when you adjust them to any difference between your game and the base assumption. 2024 is just not as bad.

Most tables don't run the base assumption. So they need house rules or skewed magic items.

 

[MattfromTinder]

I liked that Dwarves couldn't cast arcane magic in 2E AD&D. I yelled at clouds for days after 3E reversed that.

I always appreciated that as well about the older editions, all the races seemed very different from base human, and had restrictions to help reinforce that. I understand that it limited customization for players, and I do understand why it was reversed over time, but I can't help but miss it.

 

[dave2008]

5e works better with magic items when you adjust them to any difference between your game and the base assumption. 2024 is just not as bad.

Most tables don't run the base assumption. So they need house rules or skewed magic items.

The game, 5e14 or 5e24, works better, IMO, if played RAW with no magic items. No need for house rules or skewed magic items. I am not sure what you mean by "base assumptions" nor do I know how "most tables" play the game. And, my statement holds true for me regardless of how you define those terms (as it is not relevant to what I was saying IMO).

 

[Minigiant]

The game, 5e14 or 5e24, works better, IMO, if played RAW with no magic items. No need for house rules or skewed magic items. I am not sure what you mean by "base assumptions" nor do I know how "most tables" play the game. And, my statement holds true for me regardless of how you define those terms (as it is not relevant to what I was saying IMO).

IMO 5e14 and 5e24 both work better with magic items if you don't run the base assumptions of moderately optimized PCs, 6-8 resources draining encounters per long rest, 1-3 short rests per long rest, and various monsters and obstacles across the adventure and campaign.

This is before you get to the issues of motivation, repetition, surprises, and money sinks.

 

[dave2008]

IMO 5e14 and 5e24 both work better with magic items if you don't run the base assumptions of moderately optimized PCs, 6-8 resources draining encounters per long rest, 1-3 short rests per long rest, and various monsters and obstacles across the adventure and campaign.

This is before you get to the issues of motivation, repetition, surprises, and money sinks.

I still disagree with that statement. 5e14 & 5e24 work better without magic items because the math works better. The encounters are more challenging and the tension / excitement are higher without magic items. Everything else works just fine, IME.

 

[Gorg]

@Reynard one of the things I've noticed on this forum, and in other places, is how...dedicated 5e players are to this particular iteration of the game. People get crazy defensive, even hostile, if you critique 5e or suggest that it's not all that. If you like 2e, play 2e, or try an OSR game (I am currently loving Castles&Crusades, for example). I, too, felt the jarring reality of 5e when I tried to play it with a 2e point of view. They are completely different games.

And I would like to add, the vast majority of people I've interacted with on ENWorld are wonderful, curious, funny, and helpful. This is a good place to discuss things, but the edition wars are real.

Always have been. Since I owned a computer and had internet access (late adopter, lol) D&D forums have been chock full of edition wars... They got worse, every time a new edition comes out. Like people took it as a personal insult if you didn't like their preferred version as much as they did, and attempted to spread the word with a zeal that would make Jack Chick be taken aback...

Playstyle wars accompanied that, too. With all the requisite name calling and flaming.

Just as annoying then as it is now. My ignore list was always well populated in an attempt to filter out the wheat from the chaff. (and make the forum readable, without ruining my attitude, lol)

Also, I too have invested in C&C, and am really eager to give it a try. Also Dragon Bane.

 

[Shardstone]

IME game works way better WITH magic items. Magic items let me make more intense encounters and let me put more stuff in between long rests. The game runs fine without them, but with them, I can get away with some truly epic things at ALL levels.

 

[Starfox]

I feel 5E is a descendent of 1E because that was my first role-playing game. It scratches much of the nostalgia. Then again there were many things about 1E I didn't like and I feel 5E generally does a better job at those.