When Do the 5E “Ride or Die” Folks Become Grogs Like The Rest of Us in “D&D Older Editions” And When Do We Get D&D 5E Flair for Posts?

[Micah Sweet]

This is true but there is no need for the species to support this pillar, nor for that matter should the background system. The classes and subclass can do it on their own.

If I had my way there would be no A.S.I's in the game at all. In my opinion they exist because when 5e was being created one essential marketing task for the game was to win back the audience that stayed with 3.x or went to Pathfinder.


I believe that species and background is one area that should support rp and areas of the game not directly supporting combat.
It is one area where Level Up does a much better job than 5e.

Completely agree. About ASIs as well. If I could get away from ASIs I would. This is why I don't use WotC's system.

 

[PHATsakk43]

What? I don't follow.

Every race in 2E had a minimum and maximum ability score which the ability scores had to fall within prior to racial ability score modification being applied. Table 7 in the 2E PHB has the core game racial ability requirements.

Before a race could be considered, this chart was supposed to be referred to, and then racial ability score modifications were applied, and then the modified scores were used to determine class availability. Oddly, dwarves and halflings were the most restrictive with minimums >9 and maximums <18.

As more races were added, these tables were updated as the game progressed.

 

[Mannahnin]

Every race in 2E had a minimum and maximum ability score which the ability scores had to fall within prior to racial ability score modification being applied. Table 7 in the 2E PHB has the core game racial ability requirements.

Before a race could be considered, this chart was supposed to be referred to, and then racial ability score modifications were applied, and then the modified scores were used to determine class availability. Oddly, dwarves and halflings were the most restrictive with minimums >9 and maximums <18.

As more races were added, these tables were updated as the game progressed.

Oh, sure. That concept was carried forward from 1E. Which had class-related minimums in the core ability score tables, and racial minimums and maximums in their own table on page 15 of the PH. And yeah, those were expanded in Unearthed Arcana with the new options.

 

[Mannahnin]

Completely agree. About ASIs as well. If I could get away from ASIs I would. This is why I don't use WotC's system.

I really like the ASI system in The Nightmares Underneath.

I think if you use ability checks (and roll-under in particular) as a core system in a given version of D&D, you've got to allow for abilities to increase with level. I can't stand how so much character competency is set and fixed at first level, based on your luck with ability score rolls, in versions which don't.

 

[PHATsakk43]

I really like the ASI system in The Nightmares Underneath.

I think if you use ability checks (and roll-under in particular) as a core system in a given version of D&D, you've got to allow for abilities to increase with level. I can't stand how so much character competency is set and fixed at first level, based on your luck with ability score rolls, in versions which don't.

At least in the edition I'm most familiar with this mechanic, 2E, you could continue to add NWP slots for a +1/slot as you level.

To me it made sense. It seems odd that you become better at some non-core ability solely because you increase level in your "profession" so-to-speak. The stuff that does increase is tied directly to the class. The additional NWPs are effectively just the PC's college electives in my opinion.

 

[Older Beholder]

You’ve said they eliminated race as a factor in builds…

To me, the elimination of race as a factor in character build is the biggest functional change to the game since AD&D ended the D&D "race as class" mechanic

Let’s say I wanted to build a fighter that can fly and uses a weapon with 10ft reach at level 3, how many other ways can you do that without using species?

Again, after 3rd level or so, the ability to fly occasionally shouldn’t be something that limits a party given the amount of stuff out there in the game that can provide that effect.

With the ability scores, getting a career +5% to a lot of rolls will actually make a difference. It may not be as flashy or as remembered when you hit your DC solely because of summed up bonuses, but it’s very important for the game outcome.

Just because there might be other ways to do something, doesn’t mean it’s not a factor in building a character.

 

[EthanSental]

Reading the magus class now, thanks for sharing the link.

 

[Mannahnin]

At least in the edition I'm most familiar with this mechanic, 2E, you could continue to add NWP slots for a +1/slot as you level.

To me it made sense. It seems odd that you become better at some non-core ability solely because you increase level in your "profession" so-to-speak. The stuff that does increase is tied directly to the class. The additional NWPs are effectively just the PC's college electives in my opinion.

Ok, but...

A) The lack of improvement with level applies equally to seemingly "core" abilities, like Religion for a Cleric or Spellcraft for a Magic-User.
B) Because the rate of getting new NWPs was so slow, and the increase only 5% per slot (so the BEST you could improve your skills was 5% to ONE skill every three levels, or FOUR levels for poor Rogues), that always seemed like a sucker's game.

 

[billd91]

Ok, but...

A) The lack of improvement with level applies equally to seemingly "core" abilities, like Religion for a Cleric or Spellcraft for a Magic-User.
B) Because the rate of getting new NWPs was so slow, and the increase only 5% per slot (so the BEST you could improve your skills was 5% to ONE skill every three levels, or FOUR levels for poor Rogues), that always seemed like a sucker's game.

Agreed. Trying to improve something you already had was ferociously expensive. This was why, with AD&D's non-weapon proficiencies, you almost always spent the newly gained proficiency slot on something new. Better to have a big jump forward on a new skill than a minuscule improvement on one you had.
I suspect this was also why 3e went with a more granular approach to skill investment and improvability.

 

[Mannahnin]

Agreed. Trying to improve something you already had was ferociously expensive. This was why, with AD&D's non-weapon proficiencies, you almost always spent the newly gained proficiency slot on something new. Better to have a big jump forward on a new skill than a minuscule improvement on one you had.
I suspect this was also why 3e went with a more granular approach to skill investment and improvability.

I don't think granular is quite the word. Both editions gave basically +5% per point (or two points, for cross class) you put into a skill.

3.x just gave you many times more points, and faster.