I'll just second that the DMG is full of neat and fun optional rules to personalize and flavour the game. I think it is one of the strongest DMGs, especially for new DMs. I also like how they've dialed back on magic items frequency while also giving good guidelines for creating flavourful magic swords and items.

On modularity: depends on your definition. I think its modular enough to allow for a variety of play-styles. No or little magic? Yep. Classes with different "feels"? Yep. Dont want feats or skills? Remove them. Want a lot of fiddily bits like maneuvers and bells and whistles? Got it covered. Less dependant on having ALL sorts of renewable powers? It can be.

To me, sounds like you could run a gambit of different campaigns with little fuss on changing things. Its Also modular to the point of the individual player. Fighter #1 wants a warrior thst bashes things and doesnt want to track a lot of things but Fighter #2 wants to have different stuff round-by-round. Both can work at the same table quite easily.

Though maybe Im biased. I think 4e is pretty similiar in terms of adaptability, from running no-magic campaigns to horror games to high magic. 0-level adventures are there, monster races are balanced, and you can adjust how much healing is done by house-ruling classes healing surges. I could Pretty much run anything with 4e.

1: Modular? Thers no rules to in the sense some of us think of. Not like 2e. But... There are some tips in the DMG. Otherwise the game isnt any more modular than any other edition. Meaning it isnt in the normal sense. But... You can drop some elements and not impact the game at all or with only small paperwork. You can drop whole classes and be perfectly fine. Just like in most older editions. Feats are optional as is and can be dropped. Races can be dropped or renamed/reskinned. Spells can be pruned and/or moved only to discovery as treasure, and so on.

2: I've really enjoyed 5e so far aside from come complaints I've voiced during playtest (and got changed) and after (which got an option in the DMG). It  plays smoothly and is somewhere between BX and 2e in overall feel.

3: You cant do that. The systems are too different.

4: Yes. Basic can be stripped of backgrounds as long as you remember to give the classes 2 more profession skills. Feats are optional allready and each class just has one path that often works like its AD&D counterpart in some small way. But you could drop the paths for some classes and not miss much. Others kinda need the path data. You'll have to sort that out.

5: In a funny way 5e is modular in that you could play with just the PHB. Facing only human threats and maybee some animals and an occasional skeleton or such. Monsters, treasure, and so on. Use or not. Like with past editions. Its up to the DM what to use or not.

6: Theres been UA articles introducing new paths, new races, new feats.

7: Yes and no. Mostly NO to the making new classes. You can tweak, rename and reskin. But so far there is nothing for making a new class from scratch. There is advice on making new spells, races, etc and other pointers in the DMG. And as noted, pruning the lists is no different than older editions. Make a choice and stick to it.

Example: Say someone wants to do a Conan setting like they did for AD&D. No clerics or certain other classes. Wizards and such may be NPCs but may not be PCs. No non-human PC races. Magic items are so rare as to be nearly non-existent. And so on.

Or in my own 5e Karameikos campaign Gnomes are not a PC race. Raise Dead is harder to come by. and some other tweaks.

For me. 5e seems less complex than AD&D 1st Edition. And less complex in some areas than BECMI.

I was a huge supporter of AD&D 2nd Edition. But toward the end, things got too complicated for me. The introduction of the Player's Option books is really where I was alienated. I just didn't think they added anything positive to the game.

D&D 3rd Edition and D&D 3.5 I had a lot of fun with. But the growing complexity of options started to get wearing.

D&D 4th Edition I spent way too much money on. But never actually played it. It's emulated computer game approach at tabletop RPGs just didn't work for me.

I'm eager to try converting some old AD&D 1st Edition adventures I still have to 5e. Should be a lot easier with 5e than my attempts to convert them to other editions.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;961221For me. 5e seems less complex than AD&D 1st Edition. And less complex in some areas than BECMI.

I was a huge supporter of AD&D 2nd Edition. But toward the end, things got too complicated for me. The introduction of the Player's Option books is really where I was alienated. I just didn't think they added anything positive to the game.

The best of those books, in MY opinion, is the Combat one.  It added stuff without breaking the system, unlike the races and powers one.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;961221D&D 3rd Edition and D&D 3.5 I had a lot of fun with. But the growing complexity of options started to get wearing.

I got burnt out on it, especially when it started emulating an MMO.  It had all the earmarks of Everquest in the basic four classes.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;961221D&D 4th Edition I spent way too much money on. But never actually played it. It's emulated computer game approach at tabletop RPGs just didn't work for me.

That's the common Internet bashing, still repeated to this day.  And it's still wrong.  It emulated a board game.  It still is a fun war game if you have the miniatures to go with it.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;961221I'm eager to try converting some old AD&D 1st Edition adventures I still have to 5e. Should be a lot easier with 5e than my attempts to convert them to other editions.

To be honest, it's rather easy to slide in stuff into 5e.  I was using Undermountain as written for the most part.  Even the magical items.  One of my players took the coin that made no noise and was using that as a lure for a bit.

umm, thanks for the further replies, but this thread is 2 years old. I was asking about modularity at the time, cos that's what the designers had talked up before launch. Not so much an issue now. I'd prolly run it as is these days. That said I've had 5e for awhile now; still not played it yet. I am re-reading it though. I still think I'd rather go B/X or retro-clone for my D&D hit though.

Quote from: Batman;961129No or little magic? Yep. Classes with different "feels"? Yep.

Adventures in Middle Earth, more than illustrates this.

Quote from: estar;961445Adventures in Middle Earth, more than illustrates this.

When I picked that up it made me quite tempted to use the classes from AIME in the Realms or Greyhawk or Mystara. The latter would be awesome if you wanted to focus on a campaign in Thyatis where there aren't a lot of spellcasters to begin with. Making an NPC like Elminster into a Sage would certainly remove his Deus Ex Machina button.

Quote from: estar;961445Adventures in Middle Earth, more than illustrates this.

I've seen it, but haven't read it yet. I hear good things though. My biggest complaint with running a Lord of the Rings / Middle Earth game is mostly what characters NOT on the quest to destroy the one ring are honestly doing? It took the One Ring to bring a motley crew of mostly distrusting races (Elves, Dwarves, Hobbits and Men) to band together to finish this one task. So when people make their characters as a Wizard, human Knight of Gondor, hobbit rogue, dwarven fighter, and an elven Ranger the backstory or reason for this collection is going to be a bit far fetched (In my opinion). It's not like there's a big city of races like Waterdeep or Baldur's Gate for Faerûn in the Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk of Oerth or maybe there is in Middle Earth?

Quote from: Batman;961473I've seen it, but haven't read it yet. I hear good things though. My biggest complaint with running a Lord of the Rings / Middle Earth game is mostly what characters NOT on the quest to destroy the one ring are honestly doing? It took the One Ring to bring a motley crew of mostly distrusting races (Elves, Dwarves, Hobbits and Men) to band together to finish this one task. So when people make their characters as a Wizard, human Knight of Gondor, hobbit rogue, dwarven fighter, and an elven Ranger the backstory or reason for this collection is going to be a bit far fetched (In my opinion). It's not like there's a big city of races like Waterdeep or Baldur's Gate for Faerûn in the Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk of Oerth or maybe there is in Middle Earth?

I don't even like Tolkien's writing and I picked it up at my FLGS based solely on the amounts of positive reviews I read. The thing is, use it's Middle Earth Specific but the character classes and some of the other content are quite suitable for a low fantasy setting.

Quote from: Batman;961473I've seen it, but haven't read it yet. I hear good things though. My biggest complaint with running a Lord of the Rings / Middle Earth game is mostly what characters NOT on the quest to destroy the one ring are honestly doing?

Cublicle subverts by setting it five years after the Battle of the Five Armies and focusing on Wilderland. Cooperation is still fresh on everybody's mind. How a few years later the Darkening of Mirkwood occurs. Finally we know from the Tale of Year appendix Wilderland rallies under King Dain and King Brand of Dale, Bard's grandson to defeat Sauron forces sent to take Erebor.

Quote from: Krimson;961475I don't even like Tolkien's writing and I picked it up at my FLGS based solely on the amounts of positive reviews I read. The thing is, use it's Middle Earth Specific but the character classes and some of the other content are quite suitable for a low fantasy setting.

Just remember bows for everybody.

Quote from: estar;961515Cublicle subverts by setting it five years after the Battle of the Five Armies and focusing on Wilderland. Cooperation is still fresh on everybody's mind. How a few years later the Darkening of Mirkwood occurs. Finally we know from the Tale of Year appendix Wilderland rallies under King Dain and King Brand of Dale, Bard's grandson to defeat Sauron forces sent to take Erebor.

Ok then! Well that makes a lot more sense now. I'll have to pick this gem up it seems.

Quote from: estar;961516Just remember bows for everybody.

I'll make sure to tie some pretty one's for those dwarven beards.

5e was designed to be extremely modular.