D&D General Things That Please You

[Reynard]

As a companion to THIS thread, what are some of the little things about D&D -- any edition -- that you really like. I know it might be difficult to parse out just a small thing from a larger system, but here's an example:

In BECMI, the transition from Adventurer to Leader is really nicely done. It really embraces the "name level" break point and with the Companion Set supports that transition with elegant, fun mechanics (the Doman Management and War Machine subsystems) in a way I don't think any other edition has managed to do.

Also, while there are certainly some issues with 3.X bloat, one thing I really like about the 3.5 life cycle was the deep dive books that came out for specific elements of play, whether it was The Draconomicon or Stormwrack. As a GM I love having far more information than I will ever need. Give me some of those books for 5E please!

 

[TheSword]

I like that concentration prevents massive overlapping buffs and decreases the likelihood of the 5 min adventuring day; black ops style scry and fry; and quadratic wizards.

I’d go so far as to say that Concentration is the single best addition to magic in the game since Metamagic (something I also love).

 

[DEFCON 1]

I loved the 4E electronic Monster Builder. Being able to take any monster and then level it up or down to where I wanted it and then the program would re-calculate all the baseline numbers of the monster for me automatically was so glorious. Saved so much time. Then once all the drudgery of standard number manipulation was done, I could go in and do the fun part, which was start searching for all the special abilities and attacks I wanted to use to make each monster their own. And then most importantly, PRINT that monster statblock out so it was all nice, neat, and in a readable and tidy format.

D&D Beyond does an okay amount of all that with all the custom monsters you can make and search the database for... but you have to calculate all the numbers for abilities, attacks, saves, damage, hit points etc. yourself when you change things, it doesn't do it for you (which is a shame in my opinion.) It's an okay stopgap, but doesn't really compare with the 4E one.

 

[aco175]

I liked 3e multiclassing. I could have a PC be the flavor I wanted and still be about as powerful as the single-class PCs. Even if it led to min-max dipping.

Feats were great in 3e when they came out. There did become soo many of them after a while, so picking a handful was hard, but you had some cool powers. I liked how 4e/5e made some of them class abilities and carried them on. 5e feats are a good option with their increased power, but that balances with the +2 to stats.

4e saves worked for me with having the PCs roll to hit reflex or fortitude instead of the DM rolling a save. Allowed the wizard player to roll more dice at the table. 5e attack spells are a good offshoot.

 

[billd91]

After suffering through problems with unlimited growing stats that started with 3e, I'm happy that stats for PCs are capped and modifiers don't bloat out of control.

I like having some class abilities refresh on a short rest rather than a long rest.

I like that all character classes advance on the same XP track.

I like that D&D combat can benefit from teamwork but isn't dependent on everyone working perfectly together like a well-oiled watch.

I like D&D races with distinct benefits to play to or incorporate in my playing - whether or not they synergize well with the class I've chosen.

I like class abilities that are reasonably reliable - it's terrible being able to smite once a day, having to declare it first and then missing the attack by rolling a 1. So I like when powers like that are declared after the attack roll or last multiple turns (like the PF1 Paladin's smite).

 

[Musing Mage]

Ohhh, where to start! One doesn't stick with a game for 35 years because there are only a handful of things...

All editions have the same basic draw for me - the potential for surprise and organic storytelling. No two games are the same, even if using the same pre-written adventure.

BECMI: The simplicity, and ease of learning that allowed 13 year old me to wrap my head around the game. Specific thing I like - Learning that I wasn't alone in my teenage trauma over the Death of Aleena at Bargle's hands!

AD&D 1st ed: The level of nuance and detail that 48 year old me craves. Bordering on simulation territory. Specific thing that I like - The heavier restrictions on PCs, level limits and such, gives meaningful parameters.

AD&D 2nd ed: Some of the refinements to 1st ed that improved the game, new ideas and ways of doing things that were retroactively applicable, as well as maintaining compatibility with the previous editions. Specific: Combat and Tactics option book. Love that thing.

3rd ed:... uhhh...

5th ed: The modular ruleset, easily learned and new player friendly but with enough variety and spice. The fact that this edition brought the hobby to its current worldwide glory! Specific: Enjoy the Advantage/Disadvantage mechanic for its simple elegance.

 

[el-remmen]

1E: Rangers, infravision

2E: All the fluff, Kits.

3E: Initiative system, multi-classing, prestige classes

4E: Um. . . Second wind was cool.

5E: Advantage/Disadvantage

BECMI: Elf, dwarf, etc as classes, prestige classes (effectively)

 

[kenada]

I like the way skills and saving throws work in old-school D&D. This is the other side of the balance treadmill coin that I mentioned in my dislikes post. It speeds up adjudication (player has all the info they need), and I can focus on creating new content rather than having to devise and balance DCs and stuff like that.

I like the tendency towards combat as war in old-school D&D as well because I don’t particularly like story-driven murderhobo adventures. Relatedly, I like ways of getting XP that don’t involve killing monsters. That includes XP for gold, but it also includes accomplishment XP in Pathfinder 2e. I also like XP (but not milestone advancement).

I like separate race from class because it makes it easier to adapt the game to my setting. I’m running OSE, but I’m using the separate race rules from the advanced fantasy genre rules because almost none of the default assumptions are true about my setting.

 

[jmartkdr2]

I really liked a lot of the late-cycle 3e books. They started getting genuinely creative and pushing new ideas and new directions. 5e's to concerned with updating old ideas that's I've played before - I want shadowcasters and incarnum and illumens (even if those are a type of monk and not a race). I don't need need a third full caster with a holy archetype.

 

[prabe]

Coming to 5E from late PF1, I was pleased to find I didn't need to use a computer to manage my character. I can play--or run--5E pencil-on-paper, using actual books.