I like 5e, sort of.  The core is a great system.  In my view, the only thing that really holds it down is the overblown classes.  Stripped down, it functions like a well oiled clock.  Everything I don't like about modern D&D has to to with low effort supplements and shitty 5e community culture.  WOTC took gold and turned it into shit.

Quote from: Scooter on October 04, 2023, 11:06:53 AM

Quote from: Ghostmaker on October 04, 2023, 11:01:52 AM

Quote from: Scooter on October 04, 2023, 08:57:25 AM

Quote from: Naburimannu on October 04, 2023, 04:31:43 AM


I have no clue what Scooter is talking about

Read the rules then.  If your fighter has 20 hp at max you can take 40 hp damage and still live.Compare that to AD&D. Are you a total moron?

A hilarious oversimplification of the rules that clearly you haven't read either. Please, do us all a favor and throw yourself off a rooftop.

Yes, I have you fucking moron.  I stated the effect of the rule correctly.. PLUS resting for 8 hours to get back all HP lost as opposed to 1 hp/24 hours in AD&D.  Now run along dipshit.

Make sure you get your whole head in front of the shotgun.

Quote from: Thor's Nads on October 03, 2023, 04:55:25 PM
[Jeff Butler, Fred Fields, and Robh Ruppel were not good fits.

  I think Ruppel's Ravenloft covers were generally good at first, although his later work didn't impress, but Ravenloft sits a bit distant from mainstream D&D anyway.

  If memory serves, the most unified cover art may have been the Dragonlance: Fifth Age line--I think that was all Jeff Easley, or nearly so.

Quote from: Scooter on October 04, 2023, 08:57:25 AM
Read the rules then.  If your fighter has 20 hp at max you can take 40 hp damage and still live.

Technically he cannot.  If your 20 HP fighter takes 40 HP of damage, you are reduced to 0 and the remaining damage (the 40 damage-20 current hit points = 20 remaining damage) equals or exceeds your fighter's hit point maximum, you die. 

Ok, so, lets change the 40 to a 39.  Now the fighter is alive and at 0 hit points.  And certainly, that's more generous than AD&D 1e, where any damage above 29 will kill the fighter in one blow.  But 39 and 29 are not entirely dissimilar numbers.  And if the 5e character is hit for 21 points of damage and then bitten for 1 point of damage, he could easily die on the spot, whereas the AD&D 1e character in that situation will not be dead.

The method for recovering hit points is much longer (especially unaided by magic) in AD&D.  A single long rest in 5e famously recovers all hit points and pretty much all other resources, which is wildly unrealistic for any definition of hit points.  How does 5e handle this?  Well, there's an entire section on realistic healing and recovery in the DMG (basically long rests still give you hit dice, but don't offer any innate HP recovery).  This puts you back into the resource-management mode of older games, though it's still more healing per day than 1e through 3e offered.

I'll point out a few things though:
1- Every version made it easier to live than the prior one, except for the launch version of AD&D 2e, which made hovering on death's door an optional rule.  I never saw that rule NOT used personally, at many AD&D 2e tables.  Further AD&D splatbooks served to make it less deadly than before as well. 
2- The change to make characters take death more seriously while still being compatible with traditional and story type gaming is an ongoing one, and plenty of 5e DMs have houserules or use the DMG optional rules specifically because of this stuff.
3- Back in the day, house rules to get players back on their feet (aka not really dead at low levels) were not at all uncommon.
4- One of the reasons for the stupidly powerful long rest is to prevent players from having to track all their various infirmities as a resource when that only matters a small amount of the time.  Sometimes you are going from adventure to adventure as you trek across an icy landscape, trying to reach a safe spot before things get real cold, and there a persistent damage mechanic is very compelling- but many times the players who take one long rest really have a week of downtime and this just simplifies bookkeeping for them.

Anyway, you're definitely right that 5e is a lot less deadly than 1e, and if that's a reason you don't like it, well, you're correct to not like it.  The optional rules that you could use are going to be argued by many players to be overly punishing, while older games are built tough by default.  Even if tables that want easier rules outnumber tables that want harsher ones, it's much easier to loosen tough rules than it is to toughen loose rules, and that's an argument for tougher rules by default.

Quote from: Venka on October 04, 2023, 04:36:52 PM

Quote from: Scooter on October 04, 2023, 08:57:25 AM
Read the rules then.  If your fighter has 20 hp at max you can take 40 hp damage and still live.

Technically he cannot.  If your 20 HP fighter takes 40 HP of damage, you are reduced to 0 and the remaining damage (the 40 damage-20 current hit points = 20 remaining damage) equals or exceeds your fighter's hit point maximum, you die. 

Okay 39 fucking hit points.  In AD&D if brought to 0 HP (has taken 20 hp of damage) he is unconscious and dies automatically in 10 rounds unless healed. Also, Any character brought to 0 (or fewer) hit points and then revived will remain in a coma far 1-6 turns. Thereafter, he or she must rest for a full week, minimum. He or she will be incapable of any activity other than that necessary to move slowly to a place of rest and eat and sleep when there. The character cannot attack, defend, cast spells, use magic devices, carry burdens, run, study, research, or do anything else. This is true even if cure spells and/or healing potions are given to him or her, although if a heal spell is bestowed the prohibition no longer applies.  That and the 8 hours rest make if D&D Snowflake edition. 

Quote from: Scooter on October 04, 2023, 04:49:21 PM

Quote from: Venka on October 04, 2023, 04:36:52 PM

Quote from: Scooter on October 04, 2023, 08:57:25 AM
Read the rules then.  If your fighter has 20 hp at max you can take 40 hp damage and still live.

Technically he cannot.  If your 20 HP fighter takes 40 HP of damage, you are reduced to 0 and the remaining damage (the 40 damage-20 current hit points = 20 remaining damage) equals or exceeds your fighter's hit point maximum, you die. 

Okay 39 fucking hit points.  In AD&D if brought to 0 HP (has taken 20 hp of damage) he is unconscious and dies automatically in 10 rounds unless healed.   That and the 8 hours rest make if D&D Snowflake edition.

Also, that's only if they have 20 hit points. At level 1 a wizard could have 5 hp (though 7-8 is more likely) and a single 10 point hit would kill them instantly.

Further a default orc in AD&D has about 5 hp and does 1d8 damage. A default orc in 5e has 13 hp and deals 1d12+3 damage.

A fighter with a good Con score might have 12 hit points at level one and so even they could go down in one hit to an orc and be dead in three rounds if they rolled poorly on the death saves.

Basically, 20 hp in 5e means way less than it does in 1e... because how they calculate monster stats is different.

Quote from: Abraxus on October 02, 2023, 09:30:45 AM
Is Pundit so desperate for clicks and attention he is now rehashing and recycling topics he already spoke about. Nice ttry with changing the title it still sounds like a broken record.

Imo 2E was the heyday of D&D with better art. As for splat books definitely too many yet absolutely no one had a gun to their head forcing them to use them.

I've done a lot of videos, but I honestly don't remember doing a video about 2e on this subject.

Quote from: Rob Necronomicon on October 02, 2023, 07:20:16 PM
Well, lucky for us we have Condor DM who is able to explain Pundit's video. Enjoy, LOL

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpO4Pxid1C0

Someone seriously needs to figure out what medication that guy needs.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 03, 2023, 12:07:38 AM

Quote from: Rob Necronomicon on October 02, 2023, 07:20:16 PM
Well, lucky for us we have Condor DM who is able to explain Pundit's video. Enjoy, LOL

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpO4Pxid1C0

That bitch thinks Pundit wants to put the Game Designer on top?

Pundit has spoken several times against the trend to play raw, to follow the dictates of the designer, from where does he get his "facts"?

Also, Pundit isn't an experienced GM?

I know where Condor BitchWanker gets his "facts" from the deepest receses of his arse!

The guy is just ridiculous, confounding my point about how in the OSR as a design school focuses on game designers (which is pretty obvious) as me suggesting that game designers are the most important people at the table, which as you said I am strongly opposed to. But basically, he's following the same formula others have: talk about me to get more views to your underperforming channel.

Quote from: Rob Necronomicon on October 03, 2023, 06:19:12 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 03, 2023, 12:07:38 AM

Quote from: Rob Necronomicon on October 02, 2023, 07:20:16 PM
Well, lucky for us we have Condor DM who is able to explain Pundit's video. Enjoy, LOL

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpO4Pxid1C0

That bitch thinks Pundit wants to put the Game Designer on top?

Pundit has spoken several times against the trend to play raw, to follow the dictates of the designer, from where does he get his "facts"?

Also, Pundit isn't an experienced GM?

I know where Condor BitchWanker gets his "facts" from the deepest receses of his arse!

He's obviously trying to capitalize and get a few clicks off the anti-punit crowd.
That wobble bottom is so utterly delusional. I mean, he claims that Pundit is attacking him because Pundit criticizes 2e (and therefore it was a no-named but direct attack on Walrus DM).
Then goes on to say, that Pundit isn't an experienced DM (yes, he actually said that). And that game designers are not credible compared to experienced GMs like him. Of course, talent, game design, and research mean nothing (apparently). LOL

So how experienced is Walrus GM? He's had over 10k public games (since he started in the 90s). Or so he claims. And I shit gold bars and unicorns or so I claim.

I've run multiple campaigns that have run for over 10 years of regular play. And in the case of Last Sun, I have the records to prove it.

Quote from: Chris24601 on October 03, 2023, 08:48:57 AM

Quote from: Scooter on October 03, 2023, 08:20:56 AM

Quote from: Thor's Nads on October 03, 2023, 06:34:00 AM

5e is only good insomuch as it rekindled some of the spirit of 1e, with a modern twist.

LOL!  Milk and coolie rest breaks, super tough hard to kill 1str level PCs, NO!  Not the spirit of 1st Edition at all.

It's funny how the OSR crowd here had nothing but praise for 5e ... until they took away Pundit's credit in the front of the book. Then suddenly 5e was always bad and wicked and a betrayal of everything D&D stood for (not became that... was that from the start).

Now it's on to the purity spiraling phase as earlier and earlier editions "don't count" (used to just be 4E, then became 4-5e, then all WotC editions, Pundit is saying 2e, and a few here are even saying "Dragonlance"). Pretty soon anyone who doesn't play using the original house rules for Chainmail won't be doing it right.

No, at least that's not what I'm saying. 2e definitely counted as D&D, it was just a more bowdlerized more sanitized D&D that was therefore more bland than what came before. 3e still counted, though it was flawed by an excessive focus on character optimization and special tricks (feats, skills etc). 5e counts, though all the later products for it have been mostly trashed.

The only edition that doesn't count as D&D is 4e.

Quote from: Abraxus on October 03, 2023, 01:35:13 PM
Saying Brom and  Caldwell are garbage burn the heretics. Sure some 2E art was imo terrible much of 1E was just as bad though the IoSR crowd views that through rose coloured glasses that they spray painted black.

Every edition imo had its good and bad art art. One edition because it's an favourite edition for some does not and should not be given an exception. I hated one artist I think his last name was Crapapple who drew for third edition . One bad artist does not mean an entire edition art is garbage.

There was some definitely bad art in pre-2e D&D books for sure. There was also some quite good art in 2e. However, the art in b/x and AD&D1e as a whole evoked a kind of "heavy metal" and "gritty fantasy" style overall, while the art in 2e had a much more generic "G-rated fantasy" Ren-faire style as a whole.

Quote from: RPGPundit on October 04, 2023, 05:52:40 PM


There was some definitely bad art in pre-2e D&D books for sure. There was also some quite good art in 2e. However, the art in b/x and AD&D1e as a whole evoked a kind of "heavy metal" and "gritty fantasy" style overall, while the art in 2e had a much more generic "G-rated fantasy" Ren-faire style as a whole.

Pretty much my impression. To this day every time I look at an Erol Otus piece, "Heavy Metal, Takin a Ride" starts playing in my head.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on October 04, 2023, 07:23:42 AM
I wasn't even really opposed to the idea. The fact that they put monsters on both sides of a sheet so you couldn't really alphabetize them drove me nuts.

I think that bugged alot of people really and put some off from buying later packs.

Quote from: Venka on October 04, 2023, 12:05:52 PM

As to whether people here didn't get mad until they started pretending Pundit didn't help with the new edition, I couldn't say.  Companies had this idea, possibly related to "ESG" investments, that they needed to "piss off the conservatards" or whatever, and many of them made small statements about equality or whatever, but these weren't targeted enough and I guess they wanted redder meat, so a lot of them started being overtly and deliberately offensive.  While this is less now than it was a couple years ago, it's still going on.  If this negatively impacted your view of certain companies, I mean, that's fine, it certainly did for me.  If your only reason for hating 5e is that they tried to rewrite history to fuck over Pundit, uh, sure, that's a fine reason.

But I'm not even saying that happened.  I'm saying if it did happen, good.

Zweihander got all the consultants removed from not just the later 5e prints but also the Basic rules and anywhere else. But there was displeasure with WotC very early on as Mearls loved to chirp some new buzzword at least once a week. WotC lives on lies and outrage marketing now.