The D&D Edition Complexity Thread- How do you order Edition Complexity?

[Mark Hope]

For me it's B/X - 2e - 5e - 1e - 4e/3e

I'm not ranking OD&D because it requires so many assumptions and understanding to play the game out of the box that I don't feel it can be meaningfully compared to the other editions - unless you use all the supplements, in which case it's more or less the same as 1e.

2e - at its core - is an exceedingly simple game. Most of the rules that add complexity are optional. Without them, it is fast and smooth and simple. Add in all the options, and you're up with 1e in terms of complexity. Over time, 5e becomes more complex, as the available options proliferate through play and level advancement. At higher levels, its up with 4e. 3e at its core is also quite simple, but with all its bells and whistles in play, is easily the most complex of the editions. B/X is clearly the most straightforward.

 

[Zardnaar]

I would rate them this thinking about it more.

Easiest-Most Complex
B/X
2E
BECMI
5E
1E
4E
3E

OD&D is really hard to judge. Not sure with that one but maybe after 2E.

With 2E I'm assuming RAW. Optional rules can get it up to 3E/4E levels.

 

[Weiley31]

One caveat...if I went back to play 3.5, I would use ONLY the later books, and exclude the core. The core was where 90% of the imbalance was. Games where your casters were beguilers and warmages were actually pretty fun.

Don't forget to swap out the Fighter/Paladin/Monk for Warblade/Crusader/Swordsage as they are the better versions of said classes.

 

[Zardnaar]

Don't forget to swap out the Fighter/Paladin/Monk for Warblade/Crusader/Swordsage as they are the better versions of said classes.

I used the UA Druid and banned the more abusable feats and PrCs.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

With 2E I'm assuming RAW. Optional rules can get it up to 3E/4E levels.

Out of curiosity....if you are ranking 2e by just the main 3 books why wouldn't you rate all the editions that same way?

 

[Zardnaar]

Out of curiosity....if you are ranking 2e by just the main 3 books why wouldn't you rate all the editions that same way?

I did. That's my ranking with the core material. And why I treated B/X and BECMI separately.

2E was designed as a toolbox D&D and it's hard to define 2E asva lot of people played it very differently. It's cleaned up 1E almost formatted like BECMI which had the rules cyclopedia land a couple of years later.

1989 2E is very streamlined though.

 

[JeffB]

I can't rate it on a simple easy to complex scale- So my ranking is for complexity at first to complexity over time for PC and DMs as well as amount of rules referencing over time (general inclusive, not split up)

Any TSR D&D- Complex at first because it's not intuitive and the sub systems differ roll D6, roll d20, Roll percentiles, Lower is better, Higher is better, blah blah). Easy over time- with B/X being easier still and 1E being most difficult. *Rules referencing- moderate at first, moderate over time for AD&D- Moderate/low for OD&D/Variants. Granted- Lots of rulings, not rules - feature, not a bug AFAIC.

3.0- Easy to learn the basics, moderately complex over time for players, complex over time for DMs. Rules referencing-moderate at first, high over time.

3.5- easy to learn the basics, most complex over time for players and DM. Rules referencing-moderately high at first, high over time.

4E- Moderately complex at first for players (Info overload on character sheet/at creation) . Moderately complex for DM at first. Easy over time for Players/DM. Rules referencing- moderately high at first, Low over time.

5E- Easy to learn basics- moderately complex over time for both PC/DM. Rules referencing-moderate at first moderate to high over time.

*I'm including at table things like spell lookups, PC abilities, monster manual for special attacks, conditions, etc.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

Odin's beard, that was a headache. Calculating damage sometimes was so arduous:

PC 1: I do 12 points of damage to the orc
DM: Okay, subtract 5 from the Wraith Lord's Aura of Fear
PC1: Okay, I do 7 points of damage
PC2: Don't forget my Yell of Pummeling, which gives +3 damage to any blunt weapon attacks until the end of my next term.
DM: Alright, I've got it, I'm subtracting 10 points of damage from the Wraith Lord's HP.
PC3: Oh, don't forget that +1 from my aura!

I had totally forgotten the not-joy of trying to remember the 5 conditions that lasted "until the end of this creatures next turn" that were always floating around during combat that kept getting overlooked.

 

[oknazevad]

That's exactly why I consider 4e to be on the rather complex end of the scale. The systematic elements are straightforward, but the devil is in the details within the actual game play, and the result is it often takes a while to resolve events like combat. In many ways it's elegant, but it's not simple. It's also easy to wind up with option paralysis, especially during chargen and leveling. The Essentials line was aimed at cutting down on that, but the underlying game is still the same.That said, it's supposedly easy to run (never did, only played it).

Spealing of option paralysis, 3.x is also rather complex because of the sheer magnitude of customization elements and their effects at the table. Even just in the core books there's dozens of feats and a laundry list of spells, and that's before every splat book used feats as an easy page filler. Keeping it all straight, let alone keeping track of which are worthwhile is a cottage industry itself. It's very complex. I'd almost say it's the most complex.

In the other hand both editions of AD&D are pretty complex as well for different reasons. Both share the classic issue of disparitive rules for different actions, but 1e has EGG's purple prose and poor organization, while 2e is easier to read, but brings in added elements (namely making NWP essentially standard; even if they were labeled optional in the PHB, they were almost universal in use and subsequent books assumed their use) and had a ton of options throughout its lifespan. Both are pretty complex, but less so than what 3.x turned into.

The Basic Set by itself (any of the five versions), is, well, pretty basic, although it does have the same issue of dis-unified mechanisms of other TSR versions. Even Expert (either one) is still straightforward, but as one goes up through the subsequent sets (or uses the Rules Cyclopedia), the game is really just as complex as AD&D, albeit in different places.

Meanwhile, 5e was designed with ease of use in mind (especially for new players). It manages the be less complex without losing depth.

So I'd say, least to most, 5e -> Basic -> 4e -> 1e = 2e -> 3.x.