Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Yaarel" data-source="post: 8593479" data-attributes="member: 58172">Thank goodness the mechanics have evolved since 1e!These three items seem a fair description of 1e mechanical principles. ... Heh, tho I hate each of these three principles.Niche protection: defacto, but seems unintentional to me. The 1e Thief can do things that the 1e Magic-User cant. But this seems to have to do with each class being a brand new subsystem created ad hoc with no real relationships to other classes and possibly conflicting and imbalancing with the other classes and their subsystems. 4e is the exact opposite, all classes use the same system. 5e is a synthesis but allows mix-matching class subsystems. I dislike niche protection because I feel character customization is more important.Balance over time. This is definitely in play all the way into 3e. I call it "hazing". Suffer in this one level, and one gets to become broken in this other level. 1e famously did this with the Magic-User, fragile at 1, but vastly powerful at 17. But also the human race was less powerful early, but unlimited at higher level. This kind of hazing is present in 3e prestige classes whose prereqs required things that sucked but then granted overpowered features, whence its convoluted system mastery. 4e and 5e achieve (or at least value) balance between classes at the same levels.Gatekeeping via rarity. Yep, still survives in 5e, unfortunately, when rolling ability scores randomly. The straight natural 18s are totally broken, if someone else gets straight natural 3s. Similarly rolling magic treasure randomly. I dont go near this kind of design concept. At least in 5e I dont have to, such as pointbuy scores and DM controlling treasure.3e is so important for beginning to systematize the disparate ad hoc subsystems of 1e. 4e is so important for understanding how mechanical balance works. 5e really is a synthesis from all of the previous editions.</blockquote>

Verification