Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dausuul" data-source="post: 6275703" data-attributes="member: 58197">Of course it's not the same game as 1E. If it were the same game, why would anyone pay top dollar for a 5E Player's Handbook when they could just download OSRIC or grab a used 1E PHB off eBay? And why would 2E, 3E, 4E, or BD&D fans have any interest in it?I admit there aren't a lot of distinctly AD&D elements in 5E. That's because most of the best stuff from AD&D was kept on into 3E, so it's not unique to AD&D. The biggest thing 5E draws from old-school gaming is lack of rules--stripping out a lot of cruft from later editions. For example, wizards no longer have a zillion bonus spells from specialization and ability scores, so with the exception of cantrips, their supply of magic has been reduced to AD&D levels. Indeed, high-level 5E wizards have even fewer spells than their AD&D counterparts at the same level.So, what will I miss from AD&D? Not a lot, but a few things:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Saving throws with bonuses that scale by level, but fixed DCs*. This was a really clever idea. It undergirds the whole notion of "save-or-X" spells where X gets nastier as the spell level increases. At low levels, your "save-or-X" spells have a high chance of success (because the low-level target has crappy saves), but the effect is limited (because it's a low-level spell). At high levels, your "save-or-X" spells have potent effects, but the target is much more likely to make its saving throw. As a side benefit, it makes saving throws simpler to resolve.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Spells resolving after all other actions for the round are complete, so that an enemy can use its action to disrupt or evade the spell. This gives the "concentrate on casting" requirement real teeth. In 3E it was a joke, in 4E it didn't even exist, and as far as I can tell it's still gone in 5E.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The notion of armor type mattering beyond simple AC. I'm not advocating the return of "weapon types versus armor class," but I do like the idea that (for example) chain mail offers good protection from a scimitar, but very little from a mace. If that could be implemented in a clean, simple way, it'd be nice to have another dimension to armor.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Gygaxian prose... wait, no, I'm not going to miss that at all. While I enjoy big obscure words as much as the next geek, Gygax was an awful writer. *ducks*</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The ability to create and command armies of undead, not just small gangs. I recognize that there are major balance issues around being able to bring a legion of skeletons to a dungeon, but I hope there will be a "dominions and mass combat" module where being a necromancer-overlord is an option.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A scattering of random quirky tables... wait, no, I'm not going to miss these either, because it looks like 5E will have them. There's a Potion Miscibility table in the most recent playtest doc.</li> </ul>[size=-2]*Translating into 5E terms, of course. In actual AD&D, your saves were written out as target numbers you had to beat on a straight d20 roll.[/size]</blockquote>

Verification