Whats your D&Dism?

[Rogue Agent]

3e was closer to 2e and probably closer to 4e then 4e is to 1e

It depends heavily on how you look at it.

OD&D to 1E: The big shift here was in the number of rules. The AD&D core rulebooks were very explicitly attempting to create an "official" ruleset; whereas OD&D was basically written to be unplayable unless DMs customized the rules.

1E to 2E: 2E brought back in the attitude of DMs customizing the rules, but very little actually shifted mechanically between these editions. But some people saw a big shift from OD&D/1E to 2E in terms of attitude; fantastical content; and the resources provided to DMs.

2E to 3E: In this shift, 3E mucked around with the core of the system (unifying resolution mechanics, getting all the math pointing in the same direction, etc.) but left everything else practically untouched (resulting in virtually identical gameplay).

3E to 4E: In this shift, 4E did the exact opposite. It mostly uses the same core resolution mechanics as 3E, but changes everything else (classes, spells, etc.), resulting in completely different gameplay.

So what metric are using to make your comparison?

Attitude? Then 2E is a lot like OD&D in its inclusion of optional rules; very different from AD&D in that respect. AD&D is very similar to 3E in terms of its support for dungeoncrawling. 4E is very similar to 2E in practically abandoning dungeoncrawling and focusing on railroaded stories.

Core mechanic? Then OD&D w/Chainmail is distinctly different from everything that followed. But OD&D w/o Chainmail, 1E, and 2E are all very similar. 3E is different than what came before, but very similar to 4E.

Functional gameplay? Everything pre-2008 is pretty similar; 4E is very different.

And, of course, the game has reliably added more options for customization with every new iteration. For some people, the game is suddenly considered "very different" as soon as the customization options for PCs exceeds whatever their personal level interest is. More than three classes and four races? Total munchkin-ville! Non-weapon proficiencies? Crutches for the imagination! Feats and skills? The min-maxer's wet dream! Powers allowing for selection of class features? Unnecessary meta-gamey nonsense!

 

[BobTheNob]

Clearly your butthurt over the death of 4e and have it on the brain. But you should really stop projecting that onto threads about the future.

Mental note to self. BoredGremlin responds to valid counter points and criticism by resorting to purile childish responses.

Seriously, gremlin, this is not how people get taken seriously on forums, and EnWorld generally has a higher standard than this.

I was going to respond to this thread, but after reading this post I decided not to, except to say that this was totally out of place.

 

[aco175]

I guess if comes down to figuring out what was right with each edition and building on that. I should caveat things with the fact that years ago I played a different way than I do now. For example, I would like to see magic items be better in a new edition. I love 2e items with all power and game changing, or 1e with random item roll. When I was 12 that was great, now I would want more ballance being older. The other thing I noticed is that each edition seems to be fine, in playing the game. whether it was better than the last is opinion.

Some cool things I like from each edition include;

2e magic items- Not sure how to add things that chop heads off or let you teleport at will and still have things be about ballanced

3e multi classing- I like that I can make a character any way I like, or can change partway through the campaign with another class. Do not really like 4e with paths that do not allow you to be an 11th level fighter- you have to be a 11th level something.

4e hit points and surges- Don't remember 1e, but 2e we houseruled dying at 0 and went with the -10. It does make fights last longer though, since monsters have more as well.

I like using minis and tiles/grids- I think it free the dm to focus on other things and players can see how far they can move and not relay on the dm to judge. It worked when you would ask if you could sneak around and backstab. The dm would say something like you can sneak, but cannot backstab. I find the minis means less arguing.

I'm not sure on magic spells- I like each class having certain powers you can use each encounter like in 4e and not having to remember things like how many encounters you could use Bull Strength before it wore off. Part of me wants to see more options like with cleric's Channel Divinity, wher you could cast This, That, or The Other Thing- but only one this fight. We never really use rituals and a lot of those could be useful as old school spells.

4e monsters- I like the way Orcs can be easy to fight ie. minions, or they can be 'standard' level3 brutes- or whatever, and they can have a number of other class types, but not have to spend the time making them with adding class levels to them as the Dm. It seems to spread out the useful life of each monster before you get to bigger ones.

Modules- I always liked 1e feel. Maybe because things were new and we were young, but they had a certain feeling to them. Before things like plot and character development got into modules. As the dm I can add these and could use more basic places and event encounters.

4e where you attack each defense- This lets players roll more even if they have a caster and lets them miss, but the dm could have just made a save instead. Although the saves feel weaker compared to 'save or die', or 'you turn into a newt'. That was another thread about fighter/wizard power at each level.

I guess there would be more like specific classes and abilities, but this is enough for now.