D&D General What D&D Thing Has Changed The Most

[payn]

Paladins. As I said in that other similar thread from a while back, they used to have hard-to-legitimately-hit ability score requirements and a whole slew of RP commandments that were ostensibly to model the medieval European chivalric code but were really just an excuse for the DM to take away your PC's powers.

Nowadays, paladins have no entry requirements and can be of any alignment. Each 5e paladin subclass has a code, but they're more guidelines and roleplaying suggestions than "do this or your DM will take away your powers" commandments. There are also no requirements to tithe 10% of your earnings or doff your helmet at a passing lady or any such thing.

My first long-term 5e PC was an Oath of the Ancients paladin who was big on sharing the love thanks to their immunity to diseases.

I think they really let the cat out of the bag on pallys when they became a full blown class. I would have liked to see the Paladin become a prestige class that a character must work and buy into. Thats never going to happen though, so now Paladin just means knight that believes something strongly. Probably for the best.

 

[Lanefan]

I'll second the "challenge" point made upthread.

D&D used to in many ways resemble a rogue-like computer game: you'd make your character, put it in play, and let's see how long it lasts and-or how well it does. The game world/setting is out to kill said character and said death could come at any moment from any source; so when said character dies, lather-rinse-repeat until one sticks. Survival was job one and priority alpha; and therein lay the challenge. Luck played a very big role and bad luck was a challenge few if any could overcome.

Now the baseline expectation is that you'll finish the campaign playing the same character you started it with. Survival isn't a priority except in unusual circumstances. The challenge is both reduced and morphed; now largely being based on finding the best builds (bleah!), tactics, or story results to suit the in-game situation. Luck's role has also been greatly reduced, and bad luck can in many ways be mitigated or papered over.

The one element that hasn't changed at all (despite some who might say it has) is the act and art of roleplaying a character, giving it some personality, and making it both memorable and entertaining; in part because doing these things does not rely on mechanics.

 

[Krachek]

Aside the kobold the first level wizard fit well to have receive a lot of upgrade!

 

[payn]

I'll second the "challenge" point made upthread.

D&D used to in many ways resemble a rogue-like computer game: you'd make your character, put it in play, and let's see how long it lasts and-or how well it does. The game world/setting is out to kill said character and said death could come at any moment from any source; so when said character dies, lather-rinse-repeat until one sticks. Survival was job one and priority alpha; and therein lay the challenge. Luck played a very big role and bad luck was a challenge few if any could overcome.

Now the baseline expectation is that you'll finish the campaign playing the same character you started it with. Survival isn't a priority except in unusual circumstances. The challenge is both reduced and morphed; now largely being based on finding the best builds (bleah!), tactics, or story results to suit the in-game situation. Luck's role has also been greatly reduced, and bad luck can in many ways be mitigated or papered over.

The one element that hasn't changed at all (despite some who might say it has) is the act and art of roleplaying a character, giving it some personality, and making it both memorable and entertaining; in part because doing these things does not rely on mechanics.

I do enjoy an old fashioned skill play round once in awhile. However, I do think that modern D&D has improved the RP landscape so to speak. Its easier to get into a character and bring them to life when you know they will be around to do so.

 

[Bill Zebub]

The core audience has changed. It used to be white male nerds. Now it’s LGTBQ and PoC’s. Similar motivation/appeal in both cases, but I suspect much of the tension in the community is the collision between the two cultures, combined with a sort of possessiveness/gatekeeping.

That’s my theory anyway. No proof.

 

[James Gasik]

Thieves and Bards.

 

[MostlyHarmless42]

That I'm forced to hear about Magic the Gathering or popular d&d streams like Critical Role / celebrity DMs, or forced to use electronics/online material to play the game, whether I want to or not.

...a less cynical take: the game is a hell of a lot simpler and easier to learn for new players, and people are far less likely to say things like "You mean that Devil's game?" (Seriously, the Satanic Panic was no joke in the American South.). The biggest shift is that now most people have at least heard of the game through the cultural zeitgeist, if not having tried play it.

 

[Parmandur]

In my experience? Skill resolution. Having started with 3E, moved to 4E, rhen tried 2E, and then 5E happening...I've seen 4 very different approaches to that basic element of the game, and I know there were more changes prior.

 

[soviet]

It's the mechanisation and abridgement of non-combat play in the form of skill rolls coming to replace player description of what their character does, looks at, and says.

 

[Parmandur]

It's the mechanisation and abridgement of non-combat play in the form of skill rolls coming to replace player description of what their character does, looks at, and says.

Yes, and how it's done has changed drastically and repeatedly.