D&D General Why Editions Don't Matter

[doctorbadwolf]

I'm sure a lot of people mod the heck out of their games, but I probably run 98% according to the rules. Same for most people I've played with for the last couple of editions. That includes a couple of games with WOTC employees.

I think editions matter to most people when they are using rules to move the game forward. On the other hand, most social interaction and exploration (with the exception of 4E's skill challenges) have always been pretty much the same.

What the video seems to be saying is that a Model T is the same as a Tesla. I, and my brother in law who loves his Tesla (I'm not a fan), would disagree.

Yeah I’ve watched play videos of ODND, and it isn’t the same game as 2e ADND, much less any of the last few editions.

Everybody has a take, though.

 

[Argyle King]

I have to say, I pretty much agree, and always have, with what he has to say. I think we often (especially on forums) argue about the semantics. One thing of exceptional note is how D&D designers don't even play with the rules they are writing.

I've often suspected that the people writing the game aren't playing the game as-written.

That explains why I'm so often puzzled at how some "official fixes" have been drastically at odds with how things play out in home games. I'm curious how errata and fixes are accurately evaluated if they're playing a different version of the game.

 

[Mannahnin]

LOL Hardly! 5E is the first edition IMO which has HUGE "gaps" in the rules and feels like the designers simply expect groups to fill in those gaps themselves.

B/X and BECMI worked IMO without changing anything.
AD&D 1E was more of the "remove what doesn't work" edition.

Yeah, I can't let that go. Having played 1E and (since the pandemic) now a ton of OD&D, those two editions explicitly require a lot of patching and filling out. Much moreso than 5E.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I’ve yet to see any evidence of any kind that even a plurality of groups feel like they’re using an incomplete rules set. Not as detailed as you’d like is not incomplete.

Well, here is an example if you're curious:

Last night a PC in my game failed his save and is afflicted by Lycanthropy. Now, I know he has it due to the failed save, and I know a remove curse can get rid of it, but there is nothing in the rules about anything more. This is all there is:

How do they know they're afflicted? They need to know before they can choose to resist or embrace.
What about changing before the full moon? Can they resist it before then when the moon is full, or is it just the full moon? How many days is that?

Now, I can answer these questions easily myself, but for a newer DM I can see how they might feel a bit lost and wonder where are the rest of the rules on this? Is it in the DMG? Nope--nothing there I've ever seen.

So, while the rules for contracting and removing lycanthropy are there, the rest is missing and left up to the DM.

 

[ersatzphil]

I mean, I agree with the general point of the video: I'm currently running two games - one a 5e game where the players are running through the oneshots from Candlekeep Mysteries, and one Black Hack game where the players are running through N1: Against the Cult of the Reptile God. Those games are playing out very differently and feel very different to run, but both groups would be quick to describe what they're doing as "playing D&D".

 

[DND_Reborn]

Yeah, I can't let that go. Having played 1E and (since the pandemic) now a ton of OD&D, those two editions explicitly require a lot of patching and filling out. Much moreso than 5E.

Obviously YMMV, but for me I had less than two pages of house-rules for 1E or 2E despite playing them for 25 years, none at all for B/X or BECMI.

I have over 150 for the full 5E Mod house-rules I currently have.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Well, here is an example if you're curious:

Last night a PC in my game failed his save and is afflicted by Lycanthropy. Now, I know he has it due to the failed save, and I know a remove curse can get rid of it, but there is nothing in the rules about anything more. This is all there is:

View attachment 261891

How do they know they're afflicted? They need to know before they can choose to resist or embrace.
What about changing before the full moon? Can they resist it before then when the moon is full, or is it just the full moon? How many days is that?

Now, I can answer these questions easily myself, but for a newer DM I can see how they might feel a bit lost and wonder where are the rest of the rules on this? Is it in the DMG? Nope--nothing there I've ever seen.

So, while the rules for contracting and removing lycanthropy are there, the rest is missing and left up to the DM.

The “rest” isn’t missing, it’s not needed. It doesn’t need to be the same from campaign to campaign, much less table to table!

You seriously want tables and mechanics for all of that? That doesn’t sound obnoxious and tiresome at all?

Stuff like that is why I despised 3.5 so much I stopped playing altogether for several years.

Either way, it isn’t any kind of evidence regarding how common it is to feel like the rules are “incomplete”. You’ve just shown that it’s possible that you see anything less than a game that would make GURPS GMs feel overwhelmed with detailed rules as “incomplete”.

Let’s just say I find that notion untenable.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Either way, it isn’t any kind of evidence regarding how common it is to feel like the rules are “incomplete”.

Maybe because no one was saying this and demanding such is a rhetorical deflection?

 

[Charlaquin]

I have to say, I pretty much agree, and always have, with what he has to say. I think we often (especially on forums) argue about the semantics. One thing of exceptional note is how D&D designers don't even play with the rules they are writing.

I haven’t watched the video, but I find it amusing that the thumbnail doesn’t include a 4e cover (but does include a PF cover)

 

[Malmuria]

I took the point of the video to be that the stakes of a new edition of dnd, or in discussing the relative merits of any edition over others (i.e. edition warring) are very low. For instance, I see people all the time discussing which retroclone or OSR game will be the key that unlocks proper "old school" play, and I feel that it doesn't really matter. Or rather, if you are aligned with your table in terms of what kind of game you want, you'll end up making slight modifications to any game to match your style, and this is relatively easy to do.