D&D 5E What I Miss From 1st Ed

[Plaguescarred]

I miss magic items with charges depleting and forever gone once used (rather than coming back the next morning). And the ability to recharge some items possibly.

 

[TwoSix]

I suspect it is to get powers back into the game under a neo vancian disguise.

I don't particularly think there's a conspiracy at work here. (And really, this suggests to me a metaphor where 4e powers are the medicine, 5e spells are the peanut butter, and we're the dogs.)

I think it's just a general trend where people like playing spellcasters. I mean, look at Pathfinder. Wizard, cleric, druid, sorcerer, oracle, witch are 6 full casters out of 19 released classes. And they love the bard style caster progression in Pathfinder. Bard, summoner, inquisitor, magus, alchemist all cast up to 6th level spells. And in their newest book of 10 new classes, there are 2 more full casters, and 4 more bard style casters. (Hunter, investigator, skald, warpriest).

i really think if you want a game where casters aren't the norm, you need to look to the OSR. Check out something like Fantastic Heroes and Witchery, where even Clerics don't cast spells (they have a prayer ability instead).

 

[ExploderWizard]

The role structure has always existed in D&D. 4e was just the first time it actually listed it.

Yes. There has always been two roles in D&D since day one, the role of referee and the role of player. Anything beyond that is all newfangled gibberish made up by you kids these days.

What am I missing from 1E? Not a thing. I'm playing in 1E game right now and have 100% of it. I'm also playing in a 4E game with none of it. The games play very differently and are both fun.

 

[EnglishLanguage]

Yes. There has always been two roles in D&D since day one, the role of referee and the role of player. Anything beyond that is all newfangled gibberish made up by you kids these days.

What am I missing from 1E? Not a thing. I'm playing in 1E game right now and have 100% of it. I'm also playing in a 4E game with none of it. The games play very differently and are both fun.

I mean the "gamey" sort of roles, they've always been around, just never outright labeled.

The Fighter, being the guy with heavy armor and all the hit points, was always meant to be the party tank, and D&D is where a lot of modern video games got the whole "tank" idea in the first place.

Trouble is, Fighter's always been kinda crap at actually being tanky so it's never been a good thing to attempt until 4e(unless 90% of your fights took place in small hallways)

 

[ExploderWizard]

I mean the "gamey" sort of roles, they've always been around, just never outright labeled.

The Fighter, being the guy with heavy armor and all the hit points, was always meant to be the party tank, and D&D is where a lot of modern video games got the whole "tank" idea in the first place.

Trouble is, Fighter's always been kinda crap at actually being tanky so it's never been a good thing to attempt until 4e(unless 90% of your fights took place in small hallways)

I dunno. An OD&D fighting man has 1d6+1 hp. A magic user has 1d6-1 hp. All weapons do 1d6 damage. No offense but if you try and explain to the fighting man that his job is to take damage the response may be less than cordial.

 

[NewJeffCT]

I mean the "gamey" sort of roles, they've always been around, just never outright labeled.

The Fighter, being the guy with heavy armor and all the hit points, was always meant to be the party tank, and D&D is where a lot of modern video games got the whole "tank" idea in the first place.

Trouble is, Fighter's always been kinda crap at actually being tanky so it's never been a good thing to attempt until 4e(unless 90% of your fights took place in small hallways)

Never found the fighter to be lousy at being a tank in any edition, and I've been playing D&D since the late 70s. And, when I say "tank", it's the old "big bag o' hit points" that takes a lot of damage and keeps on going and going, even when your 1e level 2 wizard has used up his two spells for the day and is cowering behind a bush.

But, having a balanced party has always been a goal in D&D - cleric for healing, wizard for offensive spells, thief for sneaking/traps, and fighter for sucking up damage and also dishing it out regularly.

 

[Uller]

Random prostitute tables.

 

[EnglishLanguage]

Never found the fighter to be lousy at being a tank in any edition, and I've been playing D&D since the late 70s. And, when I say "tank", it's the old "big bag o' hit points" that takes a lot of damage and keeps on going and going, even when your 1e level 2 wizard has used up his two spells for the day and is cowering behind a bush.

But, having a balanced party has always been a goal in D&D - cleric for healing, wizard for offensive spells, thief for sneaking/traps, and fighter for sucking up damage and also dishing it out regularly.

Up until 3.x anyways, where you're basically shooting yourself in the kneecaps if you're playing a non-caster class.

 

[jodyjohnson]

Bob, Byron, Eric, Scott, and Chad.

And when they weren't available, the random dungeon generator.

A few years later that was replaced by Rogue/Moria.

 

[The Human Target]

I dunno. An OD&D fighting man has 1d6+1 hp. A magic user has 1d6-1 hp. All weapons do 1d6 damage. No offense but if you try and explain to the fighting man that his job is to take damage the response may be less than cordial.

Heh true, but in OD&D it seems like AC was more the contributing factor to the Fighter being the tank.

It is telling one of the first rules expansions they did fave the fighter a whole lot more HP.