I've always had a general idea of which editions of D&D I like and don't like, but I recently decided to come up with an actual list of all the things I like and dislike about each edition of the game. I tried to stick with only the most eclectic things that I enjoy the most about each edition as well as the elements of the game that I feel the strongest about (positively or negatively).
I invite you to do the same and present your lists, too....but please keep it constructive and civil.
IMPORTANT: Please refrain from commenting on other people's lists unless it's positive and/or friendly feedback. I honestly want this thread to be a constructive list/poll of what people like and dislike about every edition of the game. I do not want it to be a battleground for people to argue about opinions.
Below is a list of things I really like about D&D and the improvements each edition brought to the table:
Original D&D • It popularized the concept of fantasy RPGs • "Core Four" Races (i.e., Dwarf, Elf, Halfling, and Human)
Classic D&D (Basic and Expert) • Simple, rules-light edition that's easy to learn • "Core Four" Classes (i.e., Cleric, Fighter, Thief, and Magic-User)
AD&D 1st Edition • Demihuman characters may be different classes • Alignment dynamic with Ethos and Morality: Lawful, Neutral, Chaotic and Good, Neutral, Evil • Hit Dice structure for the four main classes: Fighters d10, Clerics d8, Thieves d6, and Magic-Users d4 • AC starts at 10, instead of 9
AD&D 2nd Edition • Class Groups (i.e., Warrior, Wizard, Priest, or Rogue) • Overall clear and concise rules compared to AD&D 1st edition • Wizard/School Specialists • Bards are Rogues
D&D 3rd Edition • d20 vs DC resolution mechanic • Features a real skill system • Consolidated XP Table for level advancement • Feats (the concept, not necessarily how it was executed)
D&D 4th Edition • Rulebooks and supplements are graphically pleasing, well-designed, and easier to read than 3rd edition • At-Will spells for casters
Below is a list of things I really dislike about D&D and the changes each edition brought to the table:
Original D&D • It's basically a free-form RPG; with haphazard rules that closer resemble design notes, rather than actual rules. • The artwork and graphic design is pretty awful, even for the 70's. Classic D&D • Race and Class are the same thing (for demihumans) • Alignment is based on Law, Neutrality, and Chaos ONLY (instead of Good, Neutral, and Evil) • Level limits on demihumans
AD&D 1st Edition • Convoluted and long-winded rulebooks that are over-complicated • Level and class limits on Demihumans AD&D 2nd Edition • Level and class limits on Demihumans
D&D 3rd Edition • Dismantled the "Core Four" class structure • Class and race bloat started with this edition on an official capacity • Cluttered, "over-the-top" graphic design made rulebooks and supplements annoying to read • High-level play became unplayable (or at the very least, boring)
D&D 4th Edition • Mandatory use of miniatures and grid-based combat (I prefer the storytelling/roleplaying approach to playing D&D) • WAY too many drastic and arbitrary changes; i.e., Dragonborn and Tieflings as standard races, Warlord and Warlock as standard classes, AEDU powers and "power sources", etc. • Overall, not a bad edition, it was just too much of a jarring departure from previous editions (which in turn alienated many longtime players, myself included)
I firmly believe that there should be two editions of the game; the core rules released as a "Basic" set and a more complicated expanded rules edition released as an "Expert" set. These two editions would provide separate entry points to the game; one for new players or players that want a more classic D&D game and another entry point for experienced gamers that want more options and all the other things they have come to expect from previous editions.
Also, they must release several rules modules covering the main elements of the game (i.e., classes, races, combat, magic, monsters, etc.) upon launch to further expand the game for those that still need more complexity in a particular element of the game.
This boxed set contains a simple, "bare bones" edition of the game; the core rules. It's for those that want a rules-light edition of the game that is extremely modifiable or for new players that get intimidated easily by too many rules and/or options. The Basic Set contains everything needed to play with all the "classic" D&D races (i.e., Human, Dwarf, Elf, and Halfling) and classes (i.e., Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, Wizard) all the way up to maximum level (i.e., 20th Level).
The Basic boxed set contains:
Quick Start Rules A "choose your own way" adventure intended as an intro to RPGs and basic D&D terms. Player's Handbook (Softcover, 125 pages) Features rules for playing the classic D&D races and classes all the way up to 20th level. Dungeon Master's Guide (Softcover, 125 pages) Includes the basic rules for dungeon masters.
Monster Manual (Softcover, 100 pages) Includes all the classic iconic monsters from D&D.
Introductory Adventure (Keep on the Borderlands) An introductory adventure for beginning players and DMs.
Also includes:
Character Sheets Reference Sheets Set of Dice
ExpertSet
A set of hardbound rules that contains the core rules plus expanded races and classes, more spells and a large selection of optional rules modules — that is, pretty much everything that experienced players have come to expect. Each expert edition manual may be purchased separately, or in a boxed set. The Expert set includes:
Expert PHB (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes core rules plus 10 playable races, 10 character classes, expanded selection of spells and rules modules for players.) Expert DMG (Hardcover, 250 pages. $35 Includes core rules plus expanded rules modules for DMs.) Expert MM (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes an expanded list of monsters and creatures to challenge characters)
Expansions
These expansion rules modules can be used with both the Basic and Expert sets. Each expansion covers one specific aspect of the game, such as character creation, combat, spells, monsters, etc.)
Hall of Heroes (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes a vast selection of playable character races and classes, new and old all in one book) Combat and Tactics (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes dozens of new and old optional rules for combat all in one book) Creature Compendium (Hardcover, 350 pages.$35 Includes hundreds of monsters, new and old all in one book) The Grimoire (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes hundreds of new and old spells all in one book)
A Million Hit Points of Light: Shedding Light on DamageShow
A Million Hit Points of Light: Shedding Light on Damage and Hit Points
In my personal campaigns, I use the following system for damage and dying. It's a slight modification of the long-standing principles etsablished by the D&D game, only with a new definition of what 0 or less hit points means. I've been using it for years because it works really well. However, I've made some adjustments to take advantage of the D&D Next rules. I've decided to present the first part in a Q&A format for better clarity. So let's begin...
What are hit points? The premise is very simple, but often misunderstood; hit points are an abstraction that represent the character's ability to avoid serious damage, not necessarily their ability to take serious damage. This is a very important distinction. They represent a combination of skillful maneuvering, toughness, stamina and luck. Some targets have more hit points because they are physically tougher and are harder to injure...others have more because they are experienced combatants and have learned how to turn near fatal blows into mere scratches by skillful maneuvering...and then others are just plain lucky. Once a character runs out of hit points they become vulnerable to serious life-threatening injuries.
So what exactly does it mean to "hit" with a successful attack roll, then? It means that through your own skill and ability you may have wounded your target if the target lacks the hit points to avoid the full brunt of the attack. That's an important thing to keep in mind; a successful "hit" does not necessarily mean you physically damaged your target. It just means that your attack was well placed and forced the target to exert themselves in such a way as to leave them vulnerable to further attacks. For example, instead of severing the target's arm, the attack merely grazes them leaving a minor cut.
But the attack did 25 points of damage! Why did it only "graze" the target? Because the target has more than 25 hit points. Your attack forced them to exert a lot of energy to avoid the attack, but because of their combat skill, toughness, stamina and luck, they managed to avoid being seriously injured. However, because of this attack, they may not have the reserves to avoid your next attack. Perhaps you knocked them off balance or the attack left them so fatigued they lack the stamina to evade another attack. It's the DM's call on how they want to narrate the exact reason the blow didn't kill or wound the target.
Yeah, but what about "touch" attacks that rely on physical contact? Making physical contact with a target is a lot different than striking them, so these types of attacks are the exception. If a touch attack succeeds, the attacker manages to make contact with their target.
If hit points and weapon damage don't always represent actual damage to the target, then what does it represent? Think of the damage from an attack as more like a "threat level" rather than actual physical damage that transfers directly to the target's body. That is, the more damage an attack does, the harder it is to avoid serious injury. For example, an attack that causes 14 points of damage is more likely to wound the target than 3 points of damage (depending on how many hit points the target has left). The higher the damage, the greater the chance is that the target will become seriously injured. So, an attack that does 34 points of damage could be thought of as a "threat level of 34." If the target doesn't have the hit points to negate that threat, they become seriously injured.
Ok, but shouldn't armor reduce the amount of damage delivered from an attack? It does reduce damage; by making it harder for an attack to cause serious injury. A successful hit against an armored target suggests that the attack may have circumvented the target's armor by striking in a vulnerable area.
What about poison and other types of non-combat damage? Hit point loss from non-physical forms of damage represents the character spitting the poison out just in time before it takes full strength or perhaps the poison just wasn't strong enough to affect them drastically, but still weakens them. Again, it's the DMs call on how to narrate the reasons why the character avoids serious harm from the damage.
If hit points don't don't represent actual damage then how does that make sense with spells like Cure Serious Wounds and other forms of healing like healer kits with bandages? Hit points do represent some physical damage, just not serious physical damage. Healing magic and other forms of healing still affect these minor wounds just as well as more serious wounds. For example, bandaging up minor cuts and abrasions helps the character rejuvenate and relieve the pain and/or fatigue of hit point loss. The key thing to remember is that it's an abstraction that allows the DM freedom to interpret and narrate it as they see fit.
What if my attack reduces the target to 0 or less hit points? If a player is reduced to 0 or less hit points they are wounded. If a monster or NPC is reduce to 0 or less hit points they are killed.
Why are monsters killed immediately and not players? Because unless the monsters are crucial to the story, it makes combat resolution much faster. It is assumed that players immediately execute a coup de grace on wounded monsters as a finishing move.
What if a character is wounded by poison or other types of non-physical damage? If a character becomes wounded from non-combat damage they still receive the effects of being wounded, regardless if they show any physical signs of injury (i.e., internal injuries are still considered injuries).
Ok. I get it...but what happens once a character is wounded? See below.
Damage and Dying
Once a character is reduced to 0 or less hit points, they start taking real damage. In other words, their reserves have run out and they can no longer avoid taking serious damage.
Characters are fully operational as long as they have 1 hit point or more. They may have minor cuts, bruises, and superficial wounds, but they are are not impaired significantly.
Once they reach 0 or less hit points, they become Wounded (see below).That is, they have sustained a wound that impairs their ability to perform actions.
If they reach a negative amount of hit points equal or greater than their Constitution score, they are Incapacitated. This means they are in critical condition and could possibly die.
Characters will die if their hit points reach a negative amount greater than their Constitution score, plus their current level.
Unharmed: 1 hp or more Wounded: 0 hp or less Incapacitated: -(Constitution) to -(Constitution+Level) Dead: Less than -(Constitution +Level)
Wounded When the character reaches 0 or less hit points they become wounded. Wounded characters receive disadvantage on all attacks and saving throws until they heal back up to 1 hit point or more. This allows for a transitory stage between healthy and dying, without having to mess around with impairment rules while the character still has hit points left.
Incapacitated Characters begin dying when they reach a negative amount of hit points equal to their Constitution score. At which point, they must make a DC 10 Constitution saving throw on each of their following turns (the disadvantage from being wounded does not apply for these saving throws).
If successful, the character remains dying, but their condition does not worsen.
If the saving throw fails, another DC 10 Constitution saving throw must be made. If that one fails, the character succumbs to their wounds and dies. If successful, the character stabilizes and is no longer dying.
Finally, if a dying character receives first aid or healing at any point, they immediately stabilize.
Dead Characters will die if they reach a negative amount of hit points equal to their Constitution, plus their current level. Thus, if an 8th level character with a Constitution score of 12 is down to 4 hit points then takes 24 points of damage (reducing their hit points to -20) the attack kills them outright.
Nifty idea for a thread. I just want to pre-emptively step in and ask everyone to not argue over anyone's specific lists of likes and dislikes. These are opinions and preferences and therefore can't be "proven" right or wrong. Stick to listing your own likes and dislikes and we should have a good, constructive thread.
Thanks.
Quentin Small WotC Online Community Coordinator All around helpful simian
I've always had a general idea of which editions of D&D I like and don't like, but I recently decided to come up with an actual list of all the things I like and dislike about each edition of the game. I tried to stick with only the most eclectic things that I enjoy the most about each edition as well as the elements of the game that I feel the strongest about (positively or negatively).
I invite you to do the same and present your lists, too....but please keep it constructive and civil.
Below is a list of things I really like about D&D and the improvements each edition brought to the table:
Original D&D
• It popularized the concept of fantasy RPGs
• "Core Four" Races (i.e., Dwarf, Elf, Halfling, and Human)
Classic D&D (Basic and Expert)
• Simple, rules-light edition that's easy to learn
• "Core Four" Classes (i.e., Cleric, Fighter, Thief, and Magic-User)
AD&D 1st Edition
• Demihuman characters may be different classes
• Alignment dynamic with Ethos and Morality: Lawful, Neutral, Chaotic and Good, Neutral, Evil
• Hit Dice structure for the four main classes: Fighters d10, Clerics d8, Thieves d6, and Magic-Users d4
• AC starts at 10, instead of 9
AD&D 2nd Edition
• Class Groups (i.e., Warrior, Wizard, Priest, or Rogue)
• Overall clear and concise rules compared to AD&D 1st edition
• Wizard/School Specialists
• Bards are Rogues
D&D 3rd Edition
• d20 vs DC resolution mechanic
• Features a real skill system
• Consolidated XP Table for level advancement
• Feats (the concept, not necessarily how it was executed)
D&D 4th Edition
• Rulebooks and supplements are graphically pleasing, well-designed, and easier to read than 3rd edition
• At-Will spells for casters
Below is a list of things I really dislike about D&D and the changes each edition brought to the table:
Original D&D
• It's basically a free-form RPG; with haphazard rules that closer resemble design notes, rather than actual rules.
• The artwork and graphic design is pretty awful, even for the 70's.
Classic D&D
• Race and Class are the same thing (for demihumans)
• Alignment is based on Law, Neutrality, and Chaos ONLY (instead of Good, Neutral, and Evil)
• Level limits on demihumans
AD&D 1st Edition
• Convoluted and long-winded rulebooks that are over-complicated
• Level and class limits on Demihumans
AD&D 2nd Edition
• Level and class limits on Demihumans
D&D 3rd Edition
• Dismantled the "Core Four" class structure
• Class and race bloat started with this edition on an official capacity
• Cluttered, "over-the-top" graphic design made rulebooks and supplements annoying to read
• High-level play became unplayable (or at the very least, boring)
D&D 4th Edition
• Mandatory use of miniatures and grid-based combat (I prefer the storytelling/roleplaying approach to playing D&D)
• WAY too many drastic and arbitrary changes; i.e., Dragonborn and Tieflings as standard races, Warlord and Warlock as standard classes, AEDU powers and "power sources", etc.
• Overall, not a bad edition, it was just too much of a jarring departure from previous editions (which in turn alienated many longtime players, myself included)
I did not play much basic and expert but I think you hit the highs and lows from what I remember so I won't add anything there.
1st Edition Pretty well sums it up although on the Dislike side I will add
Psionics poorly done - just a mess.
Assassin class- a sneaky guy who kills people in underhanded ways. Should have let the thief kill him off and steal his stuff.
Most of Unearthed Arcana classes and races were not well thought out. While the underlying concepts may have been solid (a Barbarian, a cavalier, a drow character or a deepgnome- COOL) the execution was horrid.
I will aslo add one like - The 1st edition DMG - so many cool tables, rules for running domains, snapshots of the basic info for ALL mm1 monsters. Yeah the oganization was lacking but the sheer amount of cool stuff was great.
2nd edition agree with everything you said and would add some likes
Kits- wonderful wonderful kits. Not all were executed well but man the concept was great.
They let the thief kill the assassin and take his stuff. Assassin became a kit, as did some 1st edition classes like barbarian and cavalier. Loved this change.
3rd edition agree with most of your items would add for like that it gave more control over character creation to players and less to dice (point buy system) and a few dislikes
Multiclassing- much prefer the idea behind 1e/2e multiclassing if not the execution. I hate 3e multiclassing with a passion.
Caster supremacy appeared in this edition much earlier than in previous ones and was much worse imo due to some restrictions that had existed previously being removed and enormous expansion of the spell lists.
Magic item being assumed as part of character development. The magic item bazaar became more prevalent in this edition and easy/cheap item creation rules took the "magic" out of items.
4th edition I would add lots of likes that probably are dislikes for others for example
Surge mechanic- love it. Basing healing on the innate hardiness of the character was awesome.
Giving noncasters and partial casters more stuff to do- fighters and paladins (2 of my favorite character types) are awesome compared to previous editions.
Gave specific abilities to help classes do their roles (roles had existed before but now they were acknowledged and classes were given things to help them carry out their role)
Toned back the power of a lot of spells - no more easy teleports, easy divinations, overpowered summons etc
Got rid of save or die and replaced with escalating consequences for failed saves (made it so you didn't trash a character with 1 bad roll)
Got rid of or vastly changed the SCREW YOU monsters from earlier editions. In 1e/2e you could lose months or years of experience to 1 undead creature and don't get me started on how sucky rust monsters were
I'm sure ive missed a lot but thats the start
Now just so you don't think I think it is perfect I have a fair few DISLIKES about it as well.
Long fights - good lord they go on forever it seems at times.
The "economy"- obviously the designers said "This isn't important so lets make it so no monsters weapons and armor can ever be resold and make magic items an exponential curve price"
This somewhat goes with the last but magic items in general- they are now officially baked into the math of the system- ugh 5e's bounded accuracy has me hoping that thier system will be better.
Some of the changes to the wizard may have been a bit drastic and contributed to the backlash- I'd have made some adjustments there.
Rituals -love the idea hated the execution.
Skill challenges- ugh hate the way they are described.
Hate most of the PHB races and classes
Marketing and modules- seriously the wotc folks virtually guaranteed that Paizo would come out with pathfinder and thier modules are by far inferior to the folks that USED to do Dungeon Magazine.
I could probably go on but you probably get the idea. Many of the criticisms I have for 4e might be familar to the anti 4e crowd but I put up with them because on the whole it works better for my playstyle than 3e did.
Nifty idea for a thread. I just want to pre-emptively step in and ask everyone to not argue over anyone's specific lists of likes and dislikes. These are opinions and preferences and therefore can't be "proven" right or wrong. Stick to listing your own likes and dislikes and we should have a good, constructive thread.
Thanks.
You hear that soft, fading scream? That's the sound of your hopes for this thread falling down a very deep chasm of edition-wars and blatant snark. I wish this thread well, but since I already see 5 things on the OP's list that I vehemently disagree with at a very basic level, and to state them would be inviting the inevitable to happen even faster, I will leave it much as I found it...teetering on the edge of that chasm.
More or less agree with everything the first poster wrote about except I never played original D&D. Being a newb I'm only familiar with 1st and and Basic era D&D. Stoloc's list is also a good one.
I wanted 4th ed to at least resemnle 3.5 with the spellcasters being nerfed hard. Its like they removed all restrictions on them from 2nd ed and didn't compenste the other classes with good stuff or accelerated level progression. Whack a 2 level LA on casters in 3rd ed and they look alot less attractive. In my Pathfinder game you can only multiclass into the primary spellcasters (anything with level 7+ spells) at level 3. Makes a huge difference to class balance i noticed although there is a in game reason for it (think Sith killing them all a'la Jedi).
Reducing a character to a list of dice rolls and modifiers is not role playing*
I already see 5 things on the OP's list that I vehemently disagree with at a very basic level, and to state them would be inviting the inevitable to happen even faster
I posted my likes and dislikes of the various editions; and I invite people to do the same, without arguing about other peoples' opinions.
I want to get an idea of what people like and dislike about the various editions...the goal being only to list the absolute favorite elements and the absolute hated elements from each edition. There's no impetus to comment on other peoples' lists at all...and in fact, I hope no one will for the sake of civility.
I firmly believe that there should be two editions of the game; the core rules released as a "Basic" set and a more complicated expanded rules edition released as an "Expert" set. These two editions would provide separate entry points to the game; one for new players or players that want a more classic D&D game and another entry point for experienced gamers that want more options and all the other things they have come to expect from previous editions.
Also, they must release several rules modules covering the main elements of the game (i.e., classes, races, combat, magic, monsters, etc.) upon launch to further expand the game for those that still need more complexity in a particular element of the game.
This boxed set contains a simple, "bare bones" edition of the game; the core rules. It's for those that want a rules-light edition of the game that is extremely modifiable or for new players that get intimidated easily by too many rules and/or options. The Basic Set contains everything needed to play with all the "classic" D&D races (i.e., Human, Dwarf, Elf, and Halfling) and classes (i.e., Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, Wizard) all the way up to maximum level (i.e., 20th Level).
The Basic boxed set contains:
Quick Start Rules A "choose your own way" adventure intended as an intro to RPGs and basic D&D terms. Player's Handbook (Softcover, 125 pages) Features rules for playing the classic D&D races and classes all the way up to 20th level. Dungeon Master's Guide (Softcover, 125 pages) Includes the basic rules for dungeon masters.
Monster Manual (Softcover, 100 pages) Includes all the classic iconic monsters from D&D.
Introductory Adventure (Keep on the Borderlands) An introductory adventure for beginning players and DMs.
Also includes:
Character Sheets Reference Sheets Set of Dice
ExpertSet
A set of hardbound rules that contains the core rules plus expanded races and classes, more spells and a large selection of optional rules modules — that is, pretty much everything that experienced players have come to expect. Each expert edition manual may be purchased separately, or in a boxed set. The Expert set includes:
Expert PHB (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes core rules plus 10 playable races, 10 character classes, expanded selection of spells and rules modules for players.) Expert DMG (Hardcover, 250 pages. $35 Includes core rules plus expanded rules modules for DMs.) Expert MM (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes an expanded list of monsters and creatures to challenge characters)
Expansions
These expansion rules modules can be used with both the Basic and Expert sets. Each expansion covers one specific aspect of the game, such as character creation, combat, spells, monsters, etc.)
Hall of Heroes (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes a vast selection of playable character races and classes, new and old all in one book) Combat and Tactics (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes dozens of new and old optional rules for combat all in one book) Creature Compendium (Hardcover, 350 pages.$35 Includes hundreds of monsters, new and old all in one book) The Grimoire (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes hundreds of new and old spells all in one book)
A Million Hit Points of Light: Shedding Light on DamageShow
A Million Hit Points of Light: Shedding Light on Damage and Hit Points
In my personal campaigns, I use the following system for damage and dying. It's a slight modification of the long-standing principles etsablished by the D&D game, only with a new definition of what 0 or less hit points means. I've been using it for years because it works really well. However, I've made some adjustments to take advantage of the D&D Next rules. I've decided to present the first part in a Q&A format for better clarity. So let's begin...
What are hit points? The premise is very simple, but often misunderstood; hit points are an abstraction that represent the character's ability to avoid serious damage, not necessarily their ability to take serious damage. This is a very important distinction. They represent a combination of skillful maneuvering, toughness, stamina and luck. Some targets have more hit points because they are physically tougher and are harder to injure...others have more because they are experienced combatants and have learned how to turn near fatal blows into mere scratches by skillful maneuvering...and then others are just plain lucky. Once a character runs out of hit points they become vulnerable to serious life-threatening injuries.
So what exactly does it mean to "hit" with a successful attack roll, then? It means that through your own skill and ability you may have wounded your target if the target lacks the hit points to avoid the full brunt of the attack. That's an important thing to keep in mind; a successful "hit" does not necessarily mean you physically damaged your target. It just means that your attack was well placed and forced the target to exert themselves in such a way as to leave them vulnerable to further attacks. For example, instead of severing the target's arm, the attack merely grazes them leaving a minor cut.
But the attack did 25 points of damage! Why did it only "graze" the target? Because the target has more than 25 hit points. Your attack forced them to exert a lot of energy to avoid the attack, but because of their combat skill, toughness, stamina and luck, they managed to avoid being seriously injured. However, because of this attack, they may not have the reserves to avoid your next attack. Perhaps you knocked them off balance or the attack left them so fatigued they lack the stamina to evade another attack. It's the DM's call on how they want to narrate the exact reason the blow didn't kill or wound the target.
Yeah, but what about "touch" attacks that rely on physical contact? Making physical contact with a target is a lot different than striking them, so these types of attacks are the exception. If a touch attack succeeds, the attacker manages to make contact with their target.
If hit points and weapon damage don't always represent actual damage to the target, then what does it represent? Think of the damage from an attack as more like a "threat level" rather than actual physical damage that transfers directly to the target's body. That is, the more damage an attack does, the harder it is to avoid serious injury. For example, an attack that causes 14 points of damage is more likely to wound the target than 3 points of damage (depending on how many hit points the target has left). The higher the damage, the greater the chance is that the target will become seriously injured. So, an attack that does 34 points of damage could be thought of as a "threat level of 34." If the target doesn't have the hit points to negate that threat, they become seriously injured.
Ok, but shouldn't armor reduce the amount of damage delivered from an attack? It does reduce damage; by making it harder for an attack to cause serious injury. A successful hit against an armored target suggests that the attack may have circumvented the target's armor by striking in a vulnerable area.
What about poison and other types of non-combat damage? Hit point loss from non-physical forms of damage represents the character spitting the poison out just in time before it takes full strength or perhaps the poison just wasn't strong enough to affect them drastically, but still weakens them. Again, it's the DMs call on how to narrate the reasons why the character avoids serious harm from the damage.
If hit points don't don't represent actual damage then how does that make sense with spells like Cure Serious Wounds and other forms of healing like healer kits with bandages? Hit points do represent some physical damage, just not serious physical damage. Healing magic and other forms of healing still affect these minor wounds just as well as more serious wounds. For example, bandaging up minor cuts and abrasions helps the character rejuvenate and relieve the pain and/or fatigue of hit point loss. The key thing to remember is that it's an abstraction that allows the DM freedom to interpret and narrate it as they see fit.
What if my attack reduces the target to 0 or less hit points? If a player is reduced to 0 or less hit points they are wounded. If a monster or NPC is reduce to 0 or less hit points they are killed.
Why are monsters killed immediately and not players? Because unless the monsters are crucial to the story, it makes combat resolution much faster. It is assumed that players immediately execute a coup de grace on wounded monsters as a finishing move.
What if a character is wounded by poison or other types of non-physical damage? If a character becomes wounded from non-combat damage they still receive the effects of being wounded, regardless if they show any physical signs of injury (i.e., internal injuries are still considered injuries).
Ok. I get it...but what happens once a character is wounded? See below.
Damage and Dying
Once a character is reduced to 0 or less hit points, they start taking real damage. In other words, their reserves have run out and they can no longer avoid taking serious damage.
Characters are fully operational as long as they have 1 hit point or more. They may have minor cuts, bruises, and superficial wounds, but they are are not impaired significantly.
Once they reach 0 or less hit points, they become Wounded (see below).That is, they have sustained a wound that impairs their ability to perform actions.
If they reach a negative amount of hit points equal or greater than their Constitution score, they are Incapacitated. This means they are in critical condition and could possibly die.
Characters will die if their hit points reach a negative amount greater than their Constitution score, plus their current level.
Unharmed: 1 hp or more Wounded: 0 hp or less Incapacitated: -(Constitution) to -(Constitution+Level) Dead: Less than -(Constitution +Level)
Wounded When the character reaches 0 or less hit points they become wounded. Wounded characters receive disadvantage on all attacks and saving throws until they heal back up to 1 hit point or more. This allows for a transitory stage between healthy and dying, without having to mess around with impairment rules while the character still has hit points left.
Incapacitated Characters begin dying when they reach a negative amount of hit points equal to their Constitution score. At which point, they must make a DC 10 Constitution saving throw on each of their following turns (the disadvantage from being wounded does not apply for these saving throws).
If successful, the character remains dying, but their condition does not worsen.
If the saving throw fails, another DC 10 Constitution saving throw must be made. If that one fails, the character succumbs to their wounds and dies. If successful, the character stabilizes and is no longer dying.
Finally, if a dying character receives first aid or healing at any point, they immediately stabilize.
Dead Characters will die if they reach a negative amount of hit points equal to their Constitution, plus their current level. Thus, if an 8th level character with a Constitution score of 12 is down to 4 hit points then takes 24 points of damage (reducing their hit points to -20) the attack kills them outright.
Love the idea, and I think it's good that there are positives here as well. I believe I posted something similar in another thread, but I will try to remember my goods & bads
1st edition good stuff: -The incredible library of modules! -The planar design -Many supplemental books were ideas to expand the area of play for one's campaign, instead of character splat-books. -Erol Otus.
1st edition bad stuff: -The formatting and design of the PH & DMG was just painful to read. -Attack matrices; bleh.
2nd edition good stuff: -Kits! -All the awesome settings available -Refined the 1e rules, while staying quite compatible to all the 1e product, thereby giving 2e an even larger plethora of modules -The artists: Elmore! Easley! Parkinson! Caldwell! Brom! -The various compendiums (magic items, wizard spells, cleric spells) -Three words: RAL PARTHA'S MINIS.
2nd edition bad stuff: -The Player's Option series felt like it threw a monkey wrench into the rules. -The complete destruction of Dragonlance via 5th age and the SAGA rules. -The removal of demons, hell, and all other things that the religious right was whining about -The way THAC0 was explained in the PH (if it was explained better, I believe that there would have been less complaining.)
3rd edition/3.5 good stuff: -The d20 vs DC mechanic was quite simple. -Eberron. -The spirit of presige classes (the execution left a lot to be desired) -The skills system, at its core -The high quality of the physical product
3rd edition/3.5 bad stuff: -The OGL was written poorly, so that WotC didn't have any editorial approval. This left a lot of garbage product by 3rd party companies on the market. -The formatting made the books tough on the eyes. -With the exception of Wayne Reynolds and Todd Lockwood, the art was awful. -The decision to turn magic items into a tradable/salable commodity. (Worst thing to happen to D&D, IMO) -The power creep and splat-book glut. -The basic abandonment of many of the great settings. (I include pawning them off to other companies in this)
4th edition good stuff: -My wizard has something to do every turn (at-will for wizards) -The design and formatting is excellent -The focus on making the game easier to run for DMs -Better art than 3.5 -I happen to like the dragonborn & tiefling (and I have been playing since 1990)
4th edition bad stuff: -To me, AEDU powers made every class feel like a spellcaster; not good. -Promised a setting every year. WotC bailed on that after Dark Sun (sorry, but Neverwinter and Menzoberranzan don't count, they are part of the Realms, so there) -Magic items made even more horrid by making them almost needed to keep up with level advancement. -The "roles" forcing specific play-styles per class. -The race, class, and power bloat due to the PH2/3 and other shennanigans.
Note, for the record, I play all of these editions, enjoy all these editions, and will continue to play them, even when 5e comes out (I will play that one too). I never understood how people can say they can't play multiple systems at the same time; never had a problem with it...
I prefer 2nd Edition AD&D. But I have played basic, 1E, 2E, 3.5, & 4E, and found all to be fun.
I already see 5 things on the OP's list that I vehemently disagree with at a very basic level, and to state them would be inviting the inevitable to happen even faster
I posted my likes and dislikes of the various editions; and I invite people to do the same, without arguing about other peoples' opinions.
I want to get an idea of what people like and dislike about the various editions...the goal being only to list the absolute favorite elements and the absolute hated elements from each edition. There's no impetus to comment on other peoples' lists at all...and in fact, I hope no one will for the sake of civility.
Hope you didn't mind I just said "me too" on most of your likes and dislikes- I was lazy and didn't want to type it all out again
Heck I don't mind disagreement with my personal likes and dislikes- so long as folks don't use heavy negatives like"xyz isn't DnD", "abc belongs in Diablo/WoW/computer rpg du jour", and one I was prone to using before but have since toned back "You just want to return to casters and caddies". If folks keep it civil discussion even disagreement is fine and productive imo.
I firmly believe that there should be two editions of the game; the core rules released as a "Basic" set and a more complicated expanded rules edition released as an "Expert" set. These two editions would provide separate entry points to the game; one for new players or players that want a more classic D&D game and another entry point for experienced gamers that want more options and all the other things they have come to expect from previous editions.
Also, they must release several rules modules covering the main elements of the game (i.e., classes, races, combat, magic, monsters, etc.) upon launch to further expand the game for those that still need more complexity in a particular element of the game.
This boxed set contains a simple, "bare bones" edition of the game; the core rules. It's for those that want a rules-light edition of the game that is extremely modifiable or for new players that get intimidated easily by too many rules and/or options. The Basic Set contains everything needed to play with all the "classic" D&D races (i.e., Human, Dwarf, Elf, and Halfling) and classes (i.e., Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, Wizard) all the way up to maximum level (i.e., 20th Level).
The Basic boxed set contains:
Quick Start Rules A "choose your own way" adventure intended as an intro to RPGs and basic D&D terms. Player's Handbook (Softcover, 125 pages) Features rules for playing the classic D&D races and classes all the way up to 20th level. Dungeon Master's Guide (Softcover, 125 pages) Includes the basic rules for dungeon masters.
Monster Manual (Softcover, 100 pages) Includes all the classic iconic monsters from D&D.
Introductory Adventure (Keep on the Borderlands) An introductory adventure for beginning players and DMs.
Also includes:
Character Sheets Reference Sheets Set of Dice
ExpertSet
A set of hardbound rules that contains the core rules plus expanded races and classes, more spells and a large selection of optional rules modules — that is, pretty much everything that experienced players have come to expect. Each expert edition manual may be purchased separately, or in a boxed set. The Expert set includes:
Expert PHB (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes core rules plus 10 playable races, 10 character classes, expanded selection of spells and rules modules for players.) Expert DMG (Hardcover, 250 pages. $35 Includes core rules plus expanded rules modules for DMs.) Expert MM (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes an expanded list of monsters and creatures to challenge characters)
Expansions
These expansion rules modules can be used with both the Basic and Expert sets. Each expansion covers one specific aspect of the game, such as character creation, combat, spells, monsters, etc.)
Hall of Heroes (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes a vast selection of playable character races and classes, new and old all in one book) Combat and Tactics (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes dozens of new and old optional rules for combat all in one book) Creature Compendium (Hardcover, 350 pages.$35 Includes hundreds of monsters, new and old all in one book) The Grimoire (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes hundreds of new and old spells all in one book)
A Million Hit Points of Light: Shedding Light on DamageShow
A Million Hit Points of Light: Shedding Light on Damage and Hit Points
In my personal campaigns, I use the following system for damage and dying. It's a slight modification of the long-standing principles etsablished by the D&D game, only with a new definition of what 0 or less hit points means. I've been using it for years because it works really well. However, I've made some adjustments to take advantage of the D&D Next rules. I've decided to present the first part in a Q&A format for better clarity. So let's begin...
What are hit points? The premise is very simple, but often misunderstood; hit points are an abstraction that represent the character's ability to avoid serious damage, not necessarily their ability to take serious damage. This is a very important distinction. They represent a combination of skillful maneuvering, toughness, stamina and luck. Some targets have more hit points because they are physically tougher and are harder to injure...others have more because they are experienced combatants and have learned how to turn near fatal blows into mere scratches by skillful maneuvering...and then others are just plain lucky. Once a character runs out of hit points they become vulnerable to serious life-threatening injuries.
So what exactly does it mean to "hit" with a successful attack roll, then? It means that through your own skill and ability you may have wounded your target if the target lacks the hit points to avoid the full brunt of the attack. That's an important thing to keep in mind; a successful "hit" does not necessarily mean you physically damaged your target. It just means that your attack was well placed and forced the target to exert themselves in such a way as to leave them vulnerable to further attacks. For example, instead of severing the target's arm, the attack merely grazes them leaving a minor cut.
But the attack did 25 points of damage! Why did it only "graze" the target? Because the target has more than 25 hit points. Your attack forced them to exert a lot of energy to avoid the attack, but because of their combat skill, toughness, stamina and luck, they managed to avoid being seriously injured. However, because of this attack, they may not have the reserves to avoid your next attack. Perhaps you knocked them off balance or the attack left them so fatigued they lack the stamina to evade another attack. It's the DM's call on how they want to narrate the exact reason the blow didn't kill or wound the target.
Yeah, but what about "touch" attacks that rely on physical contact? Making physical contact with a target is a lot different than striking them, so these types of attacks are the exception. If a touch attack succeeds, the attacker manages to make contact with their target.
If hit points and weapon damage don't always represent actual damage to the target, then what does it represent? Think of the damage from an attack as more like a "threat level" rather than actual physical damage that transfers directly to the target's body. That is, the more damage an attack does, the harder it is to avoid serious injury. For example, an attack that causes 14 points of damage is more likely to wound the target than 3 points of damage (depending on how many hit points the target has left). The higher the damage, the greater the chance is that the target will become seriously injured. So, an attack that does 34 points of damage could be thought of as a "threat level of 34." If the target doesn't have the hit points to negate that threat, they become seriously injured.
Ok, but shouldn't armor reduce the amount of damage delivered from an attack? It does reduce damage; by making it harder for an attack to cause serious injury. A successful hit against an armored target suggests that the attack may have circumvented the target's armor by striking in a vulnerable area.
What about poison and other types of non-combat damage? Hit point loss from non-physical forms of damage represents the character spitting the poison out just in time before it takes full strength or perhaps the poison just wasn't strong enough to affect them drastically, but still weakens them. Again, it's the DMs call on how to narrate the reasons why the character avoids serious harm from the damage.
If hit points don't don't represent actual damage then how does that make sense with spells like Cure Serious Wounds and other forms of healing like healer kits with bandages? Hit points do represent some physical damage, just not serious physical damage. Healing magic and other forms of healing still affect these minor wounds just as well as more serious wounds. For example, bandaging up minor cuts and abrasions helps the character rejuvenate and relieve the pain and/or fatigue of hit point loss. The key thing to remember is that it's an abstraction that allows the DM freedom to interpret and narrate it as they see fit.
What if my attack reduces the target to 0 or less hit points? If a player is reduced to 0 or less hit points they are wounded. If a monster or NPC is reduce to 0 or less hit points they are killed.
Why are monsters killed immediately and not players? Because unless the monsters are crucial to the story, it makes combat resolution much faster. It is assumed that players immediately execute a coup de grace on wounded monsters as a finishing move.
What if a character is wounded by poison or other types of non-physical damage? If a character becomes wounded from non-combat damage they still receive the effects of being wounded, regardless if they show any physical signs of injury (i.e., internal injuries are still considered injuries).
Ok. I get it...but what happens once a character is wounded? See below.
Damage and Dying
Once a character is reduced to 0 or less hit points, they start taking real damage. In other words, their reserves have run out and they can no longer avoid taking serious damage.
Characters are fully operational as long as they have 1 hit point or more. They may have minor cuts, bruises, and superficial wounds, but they are are not impaired significantly.
Once they reach 0 or less hit points, they become Wounded (see below).That is, they have sustained a wound that impairs their ability to perform actions.
If they reach a negative amount of hit points equal or greater than their Constitution score, they are Incapacitated. This means they are in critical condition and could possibly die.
Characters will die if their hit points reach a negative amount greater than their Constitution score, plus their current level.
Unharmed: 1 hp or more Wounded: 0 hp or less Incapacitated: -(Constitution) to -(Constitution+Level) Dead: Less than -(Constitution +Level)
Wounded When the character reaches 0 or less hit points they become wounded. Wounded characters receive disadvantage on all attacks and saving throws until they heal back up to 1 hit point or more. This allows for a transitory stage between healthy and dying, without having to mess around with impairment rules while the character still has hit points left.
Incapacitated Characters begin dying when they reach a negative amount of hit points equal to their Constitution score. At which point, they must make a DC 10 Constitution saving throw on each of their following turns (the disadvantage from being wounded does not apply for these saving throws).
If successful, the character remains dying, but their condition does not worsen.
If the saving throw fails, another DC 10 Constitution saving throw must be made. If that one fails, the character succumbs to their wounds and dies. If successful, the character stabilizes and is no longer dying.
Finally, if a dying character receives first aid or healing at any point, they immediately stabilize.
Dead Characters will die if they reach a negative amount of hit points equal to their Constitution, plus their current level. Thus, if an 8th level character with a Constitution score of 12 is down to 4 hit points then takes 24 points of damage (reducing their hit points to -20) the attack kills them outright.
