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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6851782" data-attributes="member: 996">It's a 5e discussion board, I should hope we've  mostly gotten to play it. (I've run 5e a lot more than played it, myself.)I started with 1e, so any nostalgia needs 5e isn't meeting for me would be in reference to that edition, not 2e (which managed to loose my interest eventually), but, there were a lot of similarities...With EKs & ATs I don't much miss the MCing, also, starting at 3rd level can let you have traditional MC combos like Fighter/Cleric/Magic-user if you really want.  There were barbarians in 1e, though I didn't much care for the class, and it seems like even before there were barbarians, people wanted to pay fighters like they were Conan; Warlocks don't bother me, in part because, in 2e, I'd added a school of 'Sorcerery' that was based on making pacts with spirits, so the flavor was something I was looking for even back in the day (similarly, 2e had Wild Magic, which 5e presents in the form of a Sorcerer bloodline, so the Sorcerer isn't an issue, either).  Hps are about the same at low level, and I'd tried to boost 1st-level hps a little when I ran AD&D, anyway - in fact, I'd be happier with 5e if first-level hps were higher (again, starting at 3rd level helps, why AL won't go for that is beyond me).  3e/4e/5e Cyclical Initiative feels like a step up from 2e.  At-will Cantrips? amusingly enough, I added a 'Battle Magic' spell that let a wizard cast minor attack or defense effects for an extended duration, because the way Vancian clashed with genre had always bothered me, so 2e casters had access to 1/round magic that was comparable to basic weapon use, and a little flashier and more varied. In theory, I miss saving throws actually getting better as you leveled, instead of 2 keeping pace with DCs and the other 4 getting worse relative to rising DCs - in practice I just haven't done high levels yet.  I definitely miss the greater restrictions on spell casting.  Every time someone just casts a magic-missile right in a monster's face with no risk or consequence (even in 4e, they'd've suffered an OA) I just feel like something not right.  It's one thing to intentionally build a wizard or other casters who's tough, has a high concentration check or some close-blast spells or whatever (in 1e I had coveted magic items that 'focused' casting, reducing some restrictions), and can thus get away with casting in melee, it's something else for anyone to be able to do it casually.Bounded Accuracy I'm more ambivalent about.  It does mostly stick to the fairly good idea of putting everyone on the same scaling.  And making the scaling so limited (+4 over 20 levels) means things that don't scale (like the affore-mentions 4 out of 6 bad saves) don't get a lot worse by contrast.  So we no longer have the 3e problem of 5- and 10- point BAB gaps or skill gaps that outright overwhelm the d20 (though high stat+expertise comes very close).  But, you do loose a sense advancement that you had in AD&D. I also miss the 1e Fighter's 1-attack-per-level vs less-than-1-HD monsters.  3e's Great Cleave/WWA and 4e's Close attacks came close to that (better in some ways, since you could mow through tougher things than goblins that way).  In 5e it'd've been broken, with characters able to break up their moves between attacks, of course, but I still miss the fighter being able to take on really large groups of lesser foes (and Bounded Accuracy actually makes that both better than 2e, when such foes were no threat at all, and worse, since being outnumbered even by the even lamest enemies can be fatal).</blockquote>

Verification