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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ondath" data-source="post: 9133439" data-attributes="member: 7031770">As someone who played 3.5/PF briefly and then played 5E, I think there is some nuance to this. There are some core mechanics (attack/damage roll mechanic, ability score/modifier distinction - albeit with different conversion rates -, classes and their primary story functions etc.) that are very much the same in AD&D and WotC-era D&D. In another thread, there was a discussion about how many AD&D 2E monsters were ported almost straight to 3E, and later mathematically balanced for 3.5. But that connection was diluted more and more, and now WotC-era D&D is its own beast.I kinda liken the progression of D&D editions to Windows editions. The B/X-BECMI line are DOS-based home Windows editions, while AD&D is Windows NT. Then in the early 2000s, the company combined the branding of the two lines and rebuilt the game using the NT kernel (3E). That kernel has been improved ever since, it has some weird subsystems that date from 1989 for nostalgia/compatibility reasons, but it also changed drastically.I have a personal project I'm working on on the side, which is essentially trying to recreate 5E in the OSE kernel. That way, all traditions of D&D can genuinely be played using the same chassis (OSE Basic/OSE Advanced/OSE New School?), kinda fulfilling D&DNext's modularity promise that was never fulfilled. However even trying to align the fundamental math of the two editions is pretty difficult, and I'm a full-time research assistant who needs to finish his PhD fast, so I had to put the project on the backburner as soon as I started it. One day I will finish it though...</blockquote>

Verification