Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bedrockgames" data-source="post: 8862608" data-attributes="member: 85555">I agree elements like this were present in AD&amp;D. It is primarily a matter of degree and prevalence. For example by the mid 90s if you used the skills and powers books, that would feel a lot more like some of the things you had in 3E. And a wide variety of optional rules appeared throughout supplements, dragon, etc. and you even had the complete books in the 90s (though very different flavor to crunch ratio and different mechanical benefits from the 3E complete books. I think a big difference was optional really meant optional abd more often than not, at least in my experience, options were not widely used. In my campaigns we did use NWPs as presented in the 89 PHB, but no table I played at allowed skills and powers.I can’t speak to cantrips as I don’t play 5E and don’t know the specific concern people have expressed about them in that edition. I do think shifting the call to the roll to the GM side impacts feel. In my own games I include social skills and skills like detect (because in my experience most people expect them now). But the GM calls on a player to make a command roll after the player speaks and if the GM is unclear what the outcome should be or feels the characters talent in command is way above or way below what the player actually said or did. Same for Detect. A player might say “I examine the wall” but the GM calls for detect (and detect would be made secretly anyways). That approach gets things closer to the feel I like (though I should say not as perfectly close as just eliminating detection and social skills would).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Bedrockgames, post: 8862608, member: 85555"] I agree elements like this were present in AD&D. It is primarily a matter of degree and prevalence. For example by the mid 90s if you used the skills and powers books, that would feel a lot more like some of the things you had in 3E. And a wide variety of optional rules appeared throughout supplements, dragon, etc. and you even had the complete books in the 90s (though very different flavor to crunch ratio and different mechanical benefits from the 3E complete books. I think a big difference was optional really meant optional abd more often than not, at least in my experience, options were not widely used. In my campaigns we did use NWPs as presented in the 89 PHB, but no table I played at allowed skills and powers. I can’t speak to cantrips as I don’t play 5E and don’t know the specific concern people have expressed about them in that edition. I do think shifting the call to the roll to the GM side impacts feel. In my own games I include social skills and skills like detect (because in my experience most people expect them now). But the GM calls on a player to make a command roll after the player speaks and if the GM is unclear what the outcome should be or feels the characters talent in command is way above or way below what the player actually said or did. Same for Detect. A player might say “I examine the wall” but the GM calls for detect (and detect would be made secretly anyways). That approach gets things closer to the feel I like (though I should say not as perfectly close as just eliminating detection and social skills would). [/QUOTE]

Verification