L
lowkey13
Guest
*Deleted by user*
The D&D Edition Complexity Thread- How do you order Edition Complexity?
OD&D with the supplements is nearly as complex and detailed as AD&D.
Also OD&D, by the books, suffer from poor editing and external dependencies that aren't intuitive. I think you even need Chainmail to play it properly.
My ranking closely matches lowkey13's, although I never played Holmes or 2e.
Also OD&D, by the books, suffer from poor editing and external dependencies that aren't intuitive. I think you even need Chainmail to play it properly.
My ranking closely matches lowkey13's, although I never played Holmes or 2e.
ccs
41st lv DM
Have you read OD&D?
It starts just trying to actually read the badly written thing. And then you discover its incomplete - omits stuff & assumes your referencing Chain Mail or something.
Ralif Redhammer
Legend
For me:
Least<BECMI--OD&D--1e--2e--5e--4e--3e>Most
I would argue that OD&D (First three books only) may be inscrutable, but it's not overly complicated.
In some ways 2e is simpler than 1e, but it also adds a whole new sub-system, Kits, and makes the skill system a core part of the game. 1e's biggest foe is its own organization of information.
5e is easy to understand, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's not without complexity. But it also enables a player to modulate their complexity, and I think that's one of the things that makes it so great. I can play a Champion Fighter that just hits things or a Life Cleric that heals and heals and heals, or I can play a sorcerer/paladin and go wild with metamagic and divine smiting (not that I would ever play such a thing). I can go for Feats or Ability Score Increases.
I picked 3e as the most complicated for any number of reasons. Giant skill list. Giant feat list. Equivalent Character Level charts. A million and one modifiers and triggers for attacks of opportunity. Prestige classes. The list goes on.
I think, for me, one of the prime indicators of how complex a system is how easy it is to take something out. If I remove X, what are the effects? In 1e, removing weapon vs. armor adjustments works just fine. In 3e, removing attacks of opportunity creates all sorts of issues.
Least<BECMI--OD&D--1e--2e--5e--4e--3e>Most
I would argue that OD&D (First three books only) may be inscrutable, but it's not overly complicated.
In some ways 2e is simpler than 1e, but it also adds a whole new sub-system, Kits, and makes the skill system a core part of the game. 1e's biggest foe is its own organization of information.
5e is easy to understand, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's not without complexity. But it also enables a player to modulate their complexity, and I think that's one of the things that makes it so great. I can play a Champion Fighter that just hits things or a Life Cleric that heals and heals and heals, or I can play a sorcerer/paladin and go wild with metamagic and divine smiting (not that I would ever play such a thing). I can go for Feats or Ability Score Increases.
I picked 3e as the most complicated for any number of reasons. Giant skill list. Giant feat list. Equivalent Character Level charts. A million and one modifiers and triggers for attacks of opportunity. Prestige classes. The list goes on.
I think, for me, one of the prime indicators of how complex a system is how easy it is to take something out. If I remove X, what are the effects? In 1e, removing weapon vs. armor adjustments works just fine. In 3e, removing attacks of opportunity creates all sorts of issues.
GreyLord
Legend
The problems I see with this is that each version has so many supplemental books or booklets that you can go for the entirety of the edition with everything tossed in (in which case 2e and 3.5 get extremely complex) or you can go for just some or just the core of the system.
I would go more for just the core books of the system in which case it drastically changes things. In addition, you have complexity for the DM vs. Complexity for the Player.
For example, while I'd say 3.5e was incredibly complex for the DM, but somewhat less complex (but still complex) for the player, even with the core books, 4e core was incredibly simple for the DM, but still complex for the player.
Most players and even DMs don't get every rulebook and don't use close to half of an editions total library...with that, I'd go with which is more complex with their corebooks rather than otherwise.
In that light BECMI would probably have the BASIC rules as the core...though I might say you could toss in the Expert rules as well. RC would be separate in that it is a core rulebook which incorporates everything, but came at a later date (similar to the RC or rules compendium for 3.5 and 4e). This makes BECMI considerably simpler. AD&D 1e can still be complex unless someone actually realizes Gygax and TSR said those were optional rules, still it could be reasonably said it was still rather complex with the DMG.
With that, the only versions I've ever played with all the sourcebooks available would be OD&D (and even then I didn't use all the stuff from the magazines), 1e, and 5e.
To put them on a more level landing between each other where you could consider the Core books and perhaps one supplement (for example, Greyhawk and OD&D, or 5e's idea of the core +1) I'd probably rank complexity more like
Holmes -> B/X -> BECMI -> OD&D + Greyhawk -> AD&D 2e core -> 5e (as long as it is for the DM, AD&D 1e was STILL simpler for players) -> 4e -> AD&D 1e -> 3e -> 3.5
I would go more for just the core books of the system in which case it drastically changes things. In addition, you have complexity for the DM vs. Complexity for the Player.
For example, while I'd say 3.5e was incredibly complex for the DM, but somewhat less complex (but still complex) for the player, even with the core books, 4e core was incredibly simple for the DM, but still complex for the player.
Most players and even DMs don't get every rulebook and don't use close to half of an editions total library...with that, I'd go with which is more complex with their corebooks rather than otherwise.
In that light BECMI would probably have the BASIC rules as the core...though I might say you could toss in the Expert rules as well. RC would be separate in that it is a core rulebook which incorporates everything, but came at a later date (similar to the RC or rules compendium for 3.5 and 4e). This makes BECMI considerably simpler. AD&D 1e can still be complex unless someone actually realizes Gygax and TSR said those were optional rules, still it could be reasonably said it was still rather complex with the DMG.
With that, the only versions I've ever played with all the sourcebooks available would be OD&D (and even then I didn't use all the stuff from the magazines), 1e, and 5e.
To put them on a more level landing between each other where you could consider the Core books and perhaps one supplement (for example, Greyhawk and OD&D, or 5e's idea of the core +1) I'd probably rank complexity more like
Holmes -> B/X -> BECMI -> OD&D + Greyhawk -> AD&D 2e core -> 5e (as long as it is for the DM, AD&D 1e was STILL simpler for players) -> 4e -> AD&D 1e -> 3e -> 3.5
Zardnaar
Legend
I would probably agree with this list. In actual play.
Organization (1E, OD&D looking at you) leaves a bit to be desired.
ccs
41st lv DM
Being poorly written (and incomplete) does add to the complexity. It was true then & more so today.
I can spend time deciphering, reconstructing, & then teaching the arcane mess to others - or I can just pick up 5e.....
Lanefan
Victoria Rules
There's two rather big questions that probably should have been addressed in the OP so we're comparing apples to apples:
1. Are we ranking the editions as originally released or as their fully-bloated end results? E.g. 2e was pretty simple on original release but very complex once all the splats and extras got tossed on.
2. Are we ranking DM-side complexity or player-side complexity? 1e, for example, was-is complex as hell from the DM side but really pretty simple for the players.
1. Are we ranking the editions as originally released or as their fully-bloated end results? E.g. 2e was pretty simple on original release but very complex once all the splats and extras got tossed on.
2. Are we ranking DM-side complexity or player-side complexity? 1e, for example, was-is complex as hell from the DM side but really pretty simple for the players.
