D&D General What Have You Liked Most About Each Edition (+)

TheAlkaizer

Game Designer
3rd edition: My best memories of 3E diving in a random supplement book and going over different options. There was so much material. Even though I would not want to go back to Prestige classes, there was something satisfying about seeing all the possible options ahead of you and being excited for them. I don't remember all the names, but most 3rd edition adventures that I played were very fun. Overall, no one can argue that it was in any way, but as I mentioned in another thread, I would not go back and play 3rd edition.

4th edition: I've got so many good things to say about 4th edition.

Mechanics-wise I loved the Bloodied condition, I loved the healing surges and their interactions with healing spells. I loved that there was very few dead levels, my players always had something to be excited about. I liked that it dived 100% into magic items and it was expected to give cool stuff to your players. I really liked having saving throws be tied to two ability scores. Like most people, I loved the Warlord class. I thought the power sources and roles, albeit a bit gimmicky, made it very simple to differentiate classes for newer players. I liked the Shadow power source.

Many people really disliked the martial classes having powers, but many now suggest to give the battlemaster's manoeuvers to all fighters. Fighters were as exciting and resourceful to play as wizards and casters. I think using a different wording and presenting them a bit differently might have helped people accept them as manoeuvers or martial techniques. I loved the use of keywords.

Overall, I think what I liked the most is that 4th edition knew very well what it wanted to achieve and went for it. There were no half-measures. It went into a different direction and it went hard. The experience it offered was different and refreshing. It really felt heroic, action-packed. The art really supported what the game wanted to be; like it or not, it was perfect for the product.

But the edition's biggest strength, in my opinion, was that it was so good to DMs. The encounter building rules are absolutely golden. It was easy, fun and it felt creative to put encounters together. There were some clear tables about what the normal progression should be, and that made it easy to gauge the difficulty. Oh, and minions is one of the edition's best feature; its so fitting with the heroic tone.

It had its issues, but overall the layout and editing was fantastic. Clear color-code, repeating motifs and layouts. It's always so easy for me to go back and dive in these books. The language used for powers and mechanical aspect was technical, short and to the point. You knew exactly what it did, what was the range. To me, 4th edition books are in many ways, the best presentation I've had for D&D books.

5th edition: I love how it managed to capture the essence and feel of D&D while also modernizing the game. It really just feels like a more streamlined, elegant and modern version of the game. I still think some aspects were streamlined a bit too much, but they landed pretty close to the sweet spot in my opinion.

I didn't like the content drought that we had before Tasha's when it came to player options, but I like the release frequency of 5E much more than 4E and 3E. There's less bloat in books, and every book with content feels impactful. It refreshes the game. But, more monsters please?

After 4E, it also felt good to have more spells and features be oriented towards social or exploration situations as opposed to strictly combat.

The advantage/disadvantage mechanic is absolutely a step in the right direction when it comes to the level of complexity/depth of core mechanics. It makes playing the game so much easier to understand, faster and just better. Playing Starfinder last year made me realize how much I don't miss stacking bonuses and minuses from different source.

I like that it leaned towards ambiguity and leaving the DM in control as opposed to having very detailed rules for the use of skills and other rules. More games should leave more in the hands of the DM in my opinion.

I like that they felt comfortable exploring a bit outside the archetypes when it comes to player options. We're getting some weird stuff like Clockwork Soul, Swarm Ranger, etc. They're not all great and some don't stick, but I prefer them being a bit bold and trying to bring cool stuff.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

My age will show...
OD&D/BECEMI: This is where I have started in 1980. We played this for a few years and boy was it fun. We used all boxes and got play immortals/gods. It gave us quite the insights as to why gods act like they do. We ended our immortal run in 1994. It became a secondary campaign in 1983(84?) When we started to play AD&D.

1ed: This has been one of the best edition. Nothing to hate, but a lot to argue ;). Fun worlds, fun adventures and so much to try.

2ed: I went into that wagon with a bit of disappointment. I was not rolling with money and sooooo much stuff to buy. The settings and complements were great. The Draconomicon comes to mind. Ravenloft, Spell Jammers and Planescape.

3.xed: For me these two are one and the same. I really liked that this was the first true logical edition. A "+" is a good thing. A "-" is a bad thing. No more awkward stats such has %strength.

4ed Attack cantrips, minions, bloodied condition and did I mentioned the minions? A true heroic edition.

5ed. So far it is the best edition that took everything that was great from the other editions. The simplicity of OD&D/BECMI, The base classes of 1ed and the lore it had started, the logic approach of 3.xed and the at will cantrips of 4ed so that very high level magic would be limited in favor of better/competitive martial classes.
 


ccs

41st lv DM
Really? Really?
Yes, really.

As I've stated before, I gave 4e a fair shot.
I DM'd it for a year. I then played it from the PC side of the screen for a 2nd year. In those 2 years I thoroughly determined that I disliked the edition.
 

Aldarc

Legend
Yes, really.

As I've stated before, I gave 4e a fair shot.
I DM'd it for a year. I then played it from the PC side of the screen for a 2nd year. In those 2 years I thoroughly determined that I disliked the edition.
I think the issue, particularly for a +Thread, is the adage "If you have nothing nice to say, it's better not to say anything at all."
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
Yes, really.

As I've stated before, I gave 4e a fair shot.
I DM'd it for a year. I then played it from the PC side of the screen for a 2nd year. In those 2 years I thoroughly determined that I disliked the edition.
Hell, I don't like it either but I'll still give credit where it's due: there's a few quite decent ideas bobbing around in there that can (and IMO should, in some cases) easily be ported to other editions or versions of the game. Examples:

The bloodied mechanic. If nothing else it's a baby step toward a wound-vitality or body-fatigue hit points system, which the game really needs.
Big set-piece combats. (IMO the 4e adventure modules do these - and present them - better than any other edition, and it's not even close)
Points-of-light style setting(s) in which, other than a very few safe bases, the world really is out to kill you.
 


Emerikol

Hero
Red Box - I guess here it was the sense of wonder. The newness of everything. The Keep on the Borderlands was the module being played. I played this only briefly before I went on to 1e AD&D

1e AD&D - Everything I said about Red Box was true here too. I loved the way things were written. Almost as if the knowledge was revealed as a secret that really existed in some long forgotten world. Gygax had a style that was for me at the time mesmerizing. But most of all I loved the modules. No edition since has so given us such great modules. I remember pouring over the D1-D2 modules in wonder at the black and white art about secret places deep under the earth. For some strange reason I missed the village of Homlett and the Temple of Elemental Evil. Magic items of legend. Artifacts etc...

2e AD&D - Campaign settings. Forgotten Realms. To this day I buy campaign settings knowing I will never use them in a campaign. I just love reading about new strange worlds. I liked the slightly improved math.

3e D&D - The Unity of the System Mechanics in every nuance of the game. The idea of building a character via feats and skills.

4e D&D - Monsters. I liked the recharge mechanic a lot and I liked that everything you needed to play a monster was available in one stat block. I liked that they tried a new cosmology. I loved the great wheel but I felt something different was nice for a change of pace. I definitely love the Feywild conceptually as an overlapping reality to the prime material. I tend to keep that in most of my campaigns.

5e D&D - didn't play it. Though I probably would like the return to simplicity that was their goal. I started playing OSR games instead. I definitely don't think 5e is the worst edition by any means. It just so happens I am at a place where I pay closer attention to a new system before using it.
 

Nice posi thread, @BookTenTiger! This has been a nice stroll down memory lane, reminding me of when every edition was exciting.

For my part:

BECMI: Race-as-class. I love the simplicity of the system as a whole. This is where I began, and it's hard to separate my feelings about it from the brand-newness of it to me.

1e: The arcane weirdness of it all. It's the most KVLT of all D&D editions. There's something dark and fearsome about it. Just look at the Fiend Folio, for examples of both. The Death Knight and Necrophidius rub shoulders with the Tirapheg and Grell.

2e: The settings, as others have mentioned, but also the kits. I've cooled on them since, but at the time they were an explosion of variety. I adore the focus on lore that really took off here, too. You can come across a Dragon magazine article by Ed Greenwood that's still being referenced in the game today.

3e: The breaking of so many of D&D's sacred cows. Any race as any class opened so many character ideas up. I loved the magic item design system, especially for magic weapons. And the OGL remains a game-changer for the RPG industry to this day.

4e: Minions were a lot of fun for creating massive epic battles. The skill challenges made for much more dramatic events than just an immediate pass/fail.

5e: The inclusivity of the new edition really makes it feel like a game for everyone. And the deep dives they do on lore are pretty awesome. The streamlined skill system is easily my favorite iteration of a skill system in D&D.
 

BECMI: my first DnD, I still like the simplicity of it - how easy it is to start, how the loose rules make it easy to learn, etc.

1e: Best edition I've played for true survival-based dungeon crawls.

3e: brought me back in with clear, understandible, streamlined rules. Great customization. Late 3.5 had some of the best (or at least most inspiring) splatbooks I've seen in DnD.

4e: Still the best tactical fantasy rpg. Great for high-magic settings. Very easy to customize.

5e: Resonates with a lot of people, which means I never have trouble finding people to play with. Simpler than the last two editions, easy to houseule, forgiving for players and dms alike.
 

Remove ads

Top