So 20 some odd years ago I played using the 2nd Edition. I lost all of my gaming things and recently bought the 5th Edition starter set as my 9 year old daughter asked how come she can’t play. So for Christmas we got the starter set and additional dice.
Reading through the rules has left me a little puzzled. For instance what happened to THAC0?
And looking at the modifiers for the various stats it looks as though a character with a very low score in a stat could get reduced hit points each level,, reduce some from the AC due to a low DEX score or do reduced damage. Is this how that works?
Another thing I see changed is that halflings no longer have a proficiency bonus with daggers or slings. Why was this dropped?
Another change I see is that EXP gets divided evenly. Seems a multiclasses character would get EXP based on skills used. For instance if my thief-warlock picks several locks and disarms several traps that they would only be rewarded on the thief side of things.
We are both really looking forward to finishing up these characters and getting started!
Quite a bit has changed from 2nd to 5th, mostly for the better.
Thaco went away in 3rd if I remember correctly.
Stats with low numbers do what you are thinking they do. An 8 in CON will give you a -1 to your HP rolls each level, an 8 in DEX will give you a -1 to AC, etc.
Daggers and slings are simple weapons, which every class is proficient in, so no need to include them in the halfling proficiency.
I think the intent is that EXP is just viewed as total character experience. No need to track and split up what point goes where. Eliminates the old "I killed that guy as a thief, and that other guy as a warlock." mentality where we had to assign points to each class so that we didn't break the 2 level difference cap. (Something like that...been a while, but I remember having a restriction about keeping levels close) Plus, there are a ton of 5e games that just use the milestone leveling option. No points to split anyway.
THAC0 is gone. AC is simple (is the attack roll higher than AC?).
Negative modifiers almost always have a work around (Low dex for AC? Heavy armor. Low str for weapon? Finesse weapons.)
Weapon proficiencies are also simplified. Most classes have proficiency with all simply weapons, and the few that don't at least have daggers, darts, slings, and staves.
Exp is tracked to the character, not any of their classes. When a character gains a level, they put that level into any class they have or a new class if they meet multicast requirements.
So 20 some odd years ago I played using the 2nd Edition. I lost all of my gaming things and recently bought the 5th Edition starter set as my 9 year old daughter asked how come she can’t play. So for Christmas we got the starter set and additional dice.
Reading through the rules has left me a little puzzled. For instance what happened to THAC0?
And looking at the modifiers for the various stats it looks as though a character with a very low score in a stat could get reduced hit points each level,, reduce some from the AC due to a low DEX score or do reduced damage. Is this how that works?
Another thing I see changed is that halflings no longer have a proficiency bonus with daggers or slings. Why was this dropped?
Another change I see is that EXP gets divided evenly. Seems a multiclasses character would get EXP based on skills used. For instance if my thief-warlock picks several locks and disarms several traps that they would only be rewarded on the thief side of things.
We are both really looking forward to finishing up these characters and getting started!
THAC0 - doesn't exist as a specific thing anymore, but attacking is still basically the same as it always has been. You roll a d20, add appropriate bonuses and penalties, and try to match or exceed the target's AC(can't remember which way it went before, I know it's flipped a couple of times, but high AC is better in this edition).
Besides the raw stat value, there's a corresponding stat modifier which applies to relevant attacks, saves, skill checks, etc. Most d20 rolls will end up being the die roll, plus your proficiency bonus if applicable, plus the ability modifier tied to the type of roll you're making. Various abilities, magic items, spells etc. can allow you to apply additional bonuses. You'll be using the ability modifiers WAY more often than the actual scores themselves.
There are only a few cases where a race or subrace's features include weapon/armor proficiency. That's mostly determined by class, occasionally subclass. For example, all Clerics have proficiency in Light Armor, Medium Armor, Shields and Simple Weapons. Some Cleric domains offer proficiency with Heavy Armor, and some offer proficiency with Martial Weapons.
I can't remember how multiclassing worked in previous editions, but it's pretty streamlined in this edition. It sounds like you're thinking of multiclassing as leveling up in multiple classes at once, dividing your earned XP between the classes, either evenly or based on what you did to earn experience. That's not how it works. You have a single value for the amount of XP you've earned, and there's a single table that shows what XP threshold you have to meet for each level. There's no "Thief XP vs Fighter XP", there's just "you get more awesome". When you level up, you can increase the level of the class you started as, or you can take a level in a different class. To do so, you must meet certain stat minimums for EACH class you have levels in. Basically you need at least a 13 in each stat important to the class. So if you're a Wizard who multiclasses into Cleric, you need at least a 13 in both Intelligence and Wisdom. Let's say I start as a Fighter. I reach 5th level, and decide I want to multiclass into Rogue. When I reach level 6, I take a Rogue level. I'm now a 5th-level Fighter and 1st-level Rogue. When I reach level 7, I can become Fighter6/Rogue1, Fighter5/Rogue2, or Fighter5/Rogue1/SomethingElse1 if I want. When you take that first level in a new class, you don't get everything you would if you started as that class. Chapter 6 of the PHB covers multiclassing and how it works.
Questions like this really drive home what a sea change there was from 2nd to 3rd edition. 3rd, 3.5, 4th, and 5th may have had very different rules and very different "feels", but the foundation of the way that stats give bonuses, the ways you apply those bonuses to rolls, how AC works, etc.... those have all remained relatively unchanged for about 18 years, but were very different before that!
Questions like this really drive home what a sea change there was from 2nd to 3rd edition. 3rd, 3.5, 4th, and 5th may have had very different rules and very different "feels", but the foundation of the way that stats give bonuses, the ways you apply those bonuses to rolls, how AC works, etc.... those have all remained relatively unchanged for about 18 years, but were very different before that!
Indeed! I first looked at buying all of the necessary books and dice to get back into it but saw extreme changes that I didn’t like. I walked out empty handed. It’s because of that that I decided to get the starter set.
By and large, the different editions don't really effect the type of stories that D&D sessions tell. The way you roll a dice to attack a kobold is different in 5th, 4th, 3rd, etc.... but either way you're still killing kobolds and collecting magic swords. To the extent that the modern rule systems have been designed with the intent of fixing things about older editions that made them inaccessible to new players or bogged down with unnecessary/unfun tables and rules, and that moving to 5e offers a lot of modern accessibility options that older editions don't have, I feel pretty safe recommending that "upgrading" to 5th edition is the right move to make.
There's one caveat to that though: 2nd edition has "archetypes" baked right into the rules. There are real mechanical systems designed to enforce playing a "dwarfy" dwarf, and outright obstacles on playing "weird" concepts like a dwarven mage, or a lizardman, or a half-angel thief/bard that specializes in grappling targets and punching them to death. If your enjoyment of D&D revolves around fighters being strong and clerics being devout and mages being old guys with beards, then the "everybody is special and everybody is weird" agnosticism of later editions can leave your head spinning.
But, while the rules allow that freedom, there's nothing to say that a DM has to permit those types of characters, or that a player has to choose them. I feel like 5th edition is still a solid foundation to build any new campaign on, even one that wants to be "old school."
THAC0 made more sense to me. An experienced fighter should be much more adept at using a weapon than a wizard. I’m at a loss for how a wizard (or any non fighter) could be as good, especially at a higher level.
I’m also a bit puzzled at the hit dice concerning one with a low CON. Let’s say we have a wizard with a score of 7 and upon gaining a level he rolls a 2. No additional hit points? In essence this character would only have a 67% chance of acquiring any and could get no more than 4. I guess I feel average (0 modifier) should have encompassed a larger portion of the middle.
And does a STR of 7 give a -2 to damage? Is that right?
Let me see if I get this. A thief-warlock gains 300 EXP and can otherwise attain 2nd level but the points aren’t divided between the two but is relegated to the class of choice? Any reason why it wouldn’t be split between the two?
Are there no EXP awarded for picking locks, disarming traps, etc.?
My daughter has chosen a barbarian. Reading up on starting weapons several javelins are listed. How would these be carried?
I’m also wondering on versatile weapons and shields. If anyone played the arcade D&D game they’d have seen the cleric could manage a special strike where he used both hands despite the shield. Is this a possibility? Curious whether or not her baraberian would potentially want a battle axe and shield vs a great axe. Also wondering if the unarmored advantage for the barbarian works with a shield.
I see the dart does the same damage a dagger does. I imagine these being something like twice the size of the darts we take to the bar. Seems the damage would be 1/2 that. Is there something more to darts? Maybe a barb or bladed head?
Lastly I’ve always been enamored with the ranger and ambidexterity. Initially I had thought two long swords was ideal for the damage, but I’m wondering about confined spaces. This never came up in any adventures back then, but realistically tight quarters would make longer weapons a bit hard to work with. In that light it seems a long sword, short sword, and dagger/second short sword would be more ideal. I haven’t read anything about fighting in confined spaces, but then these are the neutered rules...
By and large, the different editions don't really effect the type of stories that D&D sessions tell. The way you roll a dice to attack a kobold is different in 5th, 4th, 3rd, etc.... but either way you're still killing kobolds and collecting magic swords. To the extent that the modern rule systems have been designed with the intent of fixing things about older editions that made them inaccessible to new players or bogged down with unnecessary/unfun tables and rules, and that moving to 5e offers a lot of modern accessibility options that older editions don't have, I feel pretty safe recommending that "upgrading" to 5th edition is the right move to make.
There's one caveat to that though: 2nd edition has "archetypes" baked right into the rules. There are real mechanical systems designed to enforce playing a "dwarfy" dwarf, and outright obstacles on playing "weird" concepts like a dwarven mage, or a lizardman, or a half-angel thief/bard that specializes in grappling targets and punching them to death. If your enjoyment of D&D revolves around fighters being strong and clerics being devout and mages being old guys with beards, then the "everybody is special and everybody is weird" agnosticism of later editions can leave your head spinning.
But, while the rules allow that freedom, there's nothing to say that a DM has to permit those types of characters, or that a player has to choose them. I feel like 5th edition is still a solid foundation to build any new campaign on, even one that wants to be "old school."
Ah, yes! Killing kobolds and collecting magic swords is still fun, and precisely why I went ahead and got the game. I feel I may modify some things, but I first want to understand how it all works first.
I forgot to comment earlier about the halflings and their proficiency with daggers and slings. They initially had a +1 bonus with these just like elves with swords and bows. I see it rather fitting and don’t understand why it was removed. The notion of all characters being proficient doesn’t give them the +1 bonus they had. The elves still have their bonuses.
Wizards may have the same proficiency as a fighter at high levels, but they are nowhere near a fighter in what they can do with weapons. A wizard can attack once per round with a small list of weapons, while a fighter can attack multiple times per round with any weapon. Plus, the wizard isn't likely to have a high DEX or STR, while a fighter is, so they will hit more and will deal more damage.
You are correct on the hit dice. If you have a CON of 8 (-1) and roll a 1 for HP at a new level, you get zero HP. Or, you can take the average instead of rolling a dice to ensure you get some HP.
STR of 7 (or 6) gets -2 to damage, as well as -2 to STR saving throws and skills that rely on STR (like athletics).
At first level, you would either have a thief or a warlock. At 300xp when you gain a new level you pick your second class if you are going to multi-class.
Picking a lock or disarming a trap will give XP if you are playing in or running a game that uses XP. If you are using a module, it is usually listed. In the DMG, there is some guidance on "Noncombat challenges" in chapter 8. Basically, the DM decides what XP to give.
Javelins get carried in a pack by default. If you are asking if there is a specific piece of equipment in the 5e item listing that states it holds javelins like a quiver, there is not.
Versatile items are still a thing. If you look at the weapons the ones listed as versatile have two different damage amounts. The lesser is for one handed, the larger is for two handed.
Darts in D&D/fantasy settings are based on throwing spikes. (Google will show real life examples to give you a visual)
Ambidexterity is not a thing in 5e like it was in previous editions. Also, the confined fighting rules are mostly gone in 5e also.
I can see your point about neutered rules, but they have been designed to be more user-friendly for a reason. The "feel" of D&D is still there. If you want a more rule based edition than what you remember, you could also look at 3.5. Although not supported here, I know a lot of people that still play it. Be warned, though, there are rules for EVERYTHING in 3.5. It is one of the reasons 5th needed to be scaled back in my opinion. I was playing 3.5 up until a little over a year ago, then my group decided to move to 5th. It was a bit of a shock at first, not having a rule for everything, but it does flow and play better in my opinion than previous editions.
If you're going to argue that 2nd edition is a cleaner rule system than 5th, multiclassing is absolutely not the hill to pick that fight and die on :P
Your first point about fighters being "better" at using a weapon than a wizard is a good one... but 5th edition shows this in different ways. If your character has proficiency in a weapon, you're good at using it! Wizards don't normally have proficiency in longswords, but if yours does (by being an elf, for example), then you're good at it! Are fighters "better" at using longswords than wizards? Not directly in how well they hit with it, or how much damage they deal when they connect... but fighters get more attacks with their Extra Attack feature, get more feats than other classes (leading to them usually having more combat tricks), and their class features are more directly relevant to melee combat than the spells that a wizard will be getting. If you put a wizard and a fighter in a room and tell them to have a swordfight, the fighter will still be better at it.... but if you have an elven wizard that wields a Moonblade, you won't be penalized for playing a character that is a litter different from your average Gandalf!
Consitution is indeed the stat that controls "hardiness," both as the stat that provides bonuses/penalties to hit points, and also to saving throws or direct attribute checks. Your wizard with a score of 7 is a bit of a misleading example, because in 5th edition there's really no good reason to have a score lower than 8, since that's the rock bottom score you can start with using point buy (which is the "default" method of stat generation that the system is generally balanced around). But in the event that you're rolling for stats and get stuck with a 7 in constitution, things aren't quite as bad as you make them out to be. The minimum HP you can gain on level up is 1 HP, even if you have a terrible constitution modifier. A "normal" wizard with a 10 constitution that takes average HP on level up gets 3 HP per level, and one that rolls for it every level averages 2.5... so it's not like we're talking a huge spread here. 40 HP less at level 20 from having a -2 Con modifier every level could easily be closed by taking a single feat, Tough, or allocating some of your every-fourth-level stat increases to constitution to turn that ship around.
Expanding on your first point there, about "average" encompassing a larger portion of the "middle" range of stats... essentially that's what the point buy system is intended to accomplish, by making it very cheap to buy up to 13, but increasingly more expensive to buy stat points past that. Somebody that minmaxes their stats by buying 15-15-15-8-8-8 is essentially buying stats that add up to +3, while someone that buys 14-12-12-12-12-12 adds up to +7. Most players probably won't buy such a generalized stat spread... but a lot of classes don't really need max stats in three different attributes, and it's pretty common to see people spread things around a bit to have a couple good scores, a couple average ones, and a couple bad ones.
A poor strength would indeed give a -2 damage to melee weapon attacks for most classes... but if you're interested in playing a low strength character, there are plenty of classes and abilities available right from level 1 that allow you to do so without penalty. You can either use a Finesse weapon that allows you to make melee attacks with Dexterity, or play a class like Monk that lets you use Dexterity for your attack with monk weapons instead of Strength, or a class like Warlock (Hexblade) that lets you use Charisma for melee attacks, or a class that provides access to a melee spell attack cantrip like Shocking Grasp that uses your spellcasting attribute... The rule that "for normal people, being less strong causes one to deal less damage when one hits something" is a sensible baseline, especially when players are given so much freedom to play an exception to that rule if that's their concept.
Your thief-warlock exampleprobably comes from confusing it with the 2nd edition concept of multiclass where the various X/Y combos functioned as single classes you would select right from level 1... In 5th edition, "multiclassing" is much more similar to 2e "Dual Classing", but without any sort of limitations on going back and forth between classes for future levels. A level 1 character starts as a Rogue, or a Warlock, or whatever class they've chosen to start as. Upon attaining 300 xp they can take a second level in that same class... or a different class. This doesn't start them over as a level 1 character, they're a level 2 character with the 1st level features of both classes, and at future levels they are free to level up the first class, the second, add a third... whatever strikes their fancy. There's another thread going on right now already discussing this, which you can find here, because 5th edition is sort of uniquely forgiving to multiclass characters when compared to any other edition that has come before, it's one of the bigger changes one has to get used to.
As far as experience awards for picking locks and disarming traps... that's entirely up to the DM! Some tables run D&D where individual monsters are worth an individual xp amount, some where a combat encounter is based on the total of the individual monsters' CR combined with the overall difficulty of the encounter, some hand out xp for overcoming non-combat obstacles like traps or social and skill challenges, and some simply level up their players at points along the story where they feel they've "earned it," regardless of what they've fought or avoided up to that point. Nothing about 5th edition requires that a DM use any specific one of these systems, as long as they come up with some way to progress their players... it would be fairly straightforward to give players xp for traps/locks depending on the difficulty of the check required to overcome them.
Carrying javelins... a DM can again go as gritty (describe to me realistically how those are looped over your shoulder in a way that doesn't interfere with movement, and track their weight on your character sheet, and we're going to roll to see if they break each time you throw them!) or hand-wavey (you have 3 javelins "somewhere" about your body; just keep track of whether you have that in hand or your axe, and you can stow or retrieve whatever weapon you want as part of an attack) as they want. A 5th edition DM is no more or less compelled to pay attention to small "bookkeeping" rules like inventory weight and bag size than a 2nd edition DM was, you're always free to focus on the rules that your table enjoys and avoid those that just get in the way... but in general, reading through the 5th edition more overtly signals this than older editions that were obsessed with "simulation."
Versatile weapons are still a thing: certain weapons roll a different damage die when wielded two-handed versus one-handed. I'm not aware of any class features that let you specifically do a two handed smash while holding a shield. The shield AC bonus does stack with the Barbarian's Unarmored Defense AC calculation.
I kind of figure Darts are a catch all for "small sharp throwy thing", everything from shuriken to lawn darts to throwing knives. There's probably some overlap in the concept between that and a dagger, it does strike me as an unnecessary amount of granularity that both of those weapons exist in the rules, where things like distinguishing a thousand types of polearms from one another have largely been left in the past. Basically, a dart is a sharp thing you throw at people that fits in your pocket on a bandolier, while a dagger is a sharp thing you stab someone with, and can throw in a pinch.
Two weapon fighting in 5th edition does address your concern about longswords. Ordinarily, anyone can attack with two weapons to get an extra attack using a bonus action... but 1) the weapon in their offhand has to have the "light" feature, and 2) they don't get to add their strength (or whatever attribute you're using to attack) bonus to the damage of this extra attack. Certain class features or feats may change or lift some of these restrictions, or provide additional bonuses: a ranger that takes the Two Weapon Fighting Style is now allowed to add their attribute bonus to the offhand attack as if it were a normal attack. The "Dual Wielder" feat allows you to hold a weapon that isn't Light in your offhand (allowing you to wield two longswords, for example), and gives you a small AC bonus when wielding two weapons. There's no specific rules about what qualifies as a "confined space" and how that might effect dual wielding longswords vs. shortswords or daggers... but again, the absence of a rule does not imply that a DM is not free to add one at the table! If you want to tell your players "you'll get a penalty with attacks using anything longer than a shortsword in this tight tunnel".... awesome, that sounds really immersive!
Wizards may have the same proficiency as a fighter at high levels, but they are nowhere near a fighter in what they can do with weapons. A wizard can attack once per round with a small list of weapons, while a fighter can attack multiple times per round with any weapon. Plus, the wizard isn't likely to have a high DEX or STR, while a fighter is, so they will hit more and will deal more damage.
You are correct on the hit dice. If you have a CON of 8 (-1) and roll a 1 for HP at a new level, you get zero HP. Or, you can take the average instead of rolling a dice to ensure you get some HP.
STR of 7 (or 6) gets -2 to damage, as well as -2 to STR saving throws and skills that rely on STR (like athletics).
At first level, you would either have a thief or a warlock. At 300xp when you gain a new level you pick your second class if you are going to multi-class.
Picking a lock or disarming a trap will give XP if you are playing in or running a game that uses XP. If you are using a module, it is usually listed. In the DMG, there is some guidance on "Noncombat challenges" in chapter 8. Basically, the DM decides what XP to give.
Javelins get carried in a pack by default. If you are asking if there is a specific piece of equipment in the 5e item listing that states it holds javelins like a quiver, there is not.
Versatile items are still a thing. If you look at the weapons the ones listed as versatile have two different damage amounts. The lesser is for one handed, the larger is for two handed.
Darts in D&D/fantasy settings are based on throwing spikes. (Google will show real life examples to give you a visual)
Ambidexterity is not a thing in 5e like it was in previous editions. Also, the confined fighting rules are mostly gone in 5e also.
I can see your point about neutered rules, but they have been designed to be more user-friendly for a reason. The "feel" of D&D is still there. If you want a more rule based edition than what you remember, you could also look at 3.5. Although not supported here, I know a lot of people that still play it. Be warned, though, there are rules for EVERYTHING in 3.5. It is one of the reasons 5th needed to be scaled back in my opinion. I was playing 3.5 up until a little over a year ago, then my group decided to move to 5th. It was a bit of a shock at first, not having a rule for everything, but it does flow and play better in my opinion than previous editions.
Sorry about the confusion. I meant the beginner set rules vs the actual book. What I have in front of me is neutered compared to what I can see online. The beginner set doesn’t show creating a character. You just pick from the pregenerated characters supplied. Who doesn’t want to roll their own dice and create a character?
Gotcha. Yes, the beginner set/rules are pretty light. When I moved to 5th I skipped those and went straight to the full books. I forget about them most of the time because of that.
Though I like to completely understand the rules I’m not exactly rigorous about everything. Though it may be more realistic it can dampen some of the fun. I figure I’d run things somewhere in the middle.
I’m sure I’ll be back with more questions after I reread it all again with the understanding given. Thanks for all the help!
THAC0 made more sense to me. An experienced fighter should be much more adept at using a weapon than a wizard. I’m at a loss for how a wizard (or any non fighter) could be as good, especially at a higher level.
I think maybe you are missing some finer points. Can we use a basic long sword as an example since we are talking fighter? It's a pretty simple and basic weapon a generic fighter might have. It is also considered a "martial" weapon. With those things in mind a wizard, that hasn't taken some feat or dual class, would never have "proficiency" with a long sword. Not at a low level or higher levels. So that gets to the first main point, the wizard would not include their "proficiency" stat (which is 2 for all starting players and goes up from there) in their attack modifier. Second, most players, depending on how you determine your ability scores, would make their highest stat, as a wizard, Int with Str being last. Most likely the wizard would have a -1 or 0 STR modifier. The fighter, on the other hand, would include their proficiency and they would have a higher STR modifier (At lvl 1 it could be on average +2 or +3 maybe). So if both players were swinging a sword the Wizard would potentially do it with a -1 whereas the Fighter would be doing it with a +3 or more. Those numbers would continue to be more disparate over time too.
That example doesn't hold as true with a dagger but would still be better in the hands of the Fighter. The full player guide does point out that the D20 system, in particular, the crit hit or crit miss system, exists because at any given time there is a chance that even an inexperienced character might be able to hit something no matter their skill. That said, on average, the fighter will always be better with a sword then a mage.
I was unaware that a proficiency added +2 (to hit only?). Maybe I’m wrong but elves gain a proficiency with short/long swords and bows. I thought it was a +1. The pregenerated elven wizard has a DEX of 15 giving him a +2 with the short sword he is armed with. The damage is shown as 1d6+2 but his attack bonus is shown as a +4. Is this why (proficiency adding +2 to attack)?
Also an unarmored character with a DEX of 10 (no bonus) has an AC of 10, right?
I still feel halflings should have the original proficiency with daggers and slings. It’s suits them much as swords and bows do elves. But then it seems dwarves would be no less proficient with axes...
proficiency adds the proficiency bonus, which increases with levels. at level 1, it's +2, so your observation is accurate.
re: AC: yes
as to halflings, the designers seemed not to share your ideas (and probably others) as to weapons being part to of their identity in the way elves and dwarves do
I was unaware that a proficiency added +2 (to hit only?). Maybe I’m wrong but elves gain a proficiency with short/long swords and bows. I thought it was a +1. The pregenerated elven wizard has a DEX of 15 giving him a +2 with the short sword he is armed with. The damage is shown as 1d6+2 but his attack bonus is shown as a +4. Is this why (proficiency adding +2 to attack)?
Also an unarmored character with a DEX of 10 (no bonus) has an AC of 10, right?
I still feel halflings should have the original proficiency with daggers and slings. It’s suits them much as swords and bows do elves. But then it seems dwarves would be no less proficient with axes...
Yes, proficiency is adding the +2 to hit at early levels. At later levels the bonus from proficiency increases.
Yes, a naked creature with Dex 10 or 11 will generally have an AC of 10 - although there are many ways that a creature could gain higher AC other than just Dex or Armor.
Halflings don't need dagger and sling proficiency because literally every class already possesses that proficiency. Proficiencies don't stack on top of eachother so it would be meaningless. Elves and dwarves get their proficiencies mentioned because they cover some martial weapons or more complex simple weapons that many of the caster classes lack the proficiency for - that's how your elf wizard can sword it up.
proficiency adds the proficiency bonus, which increases with levels. at level 1, it's +2, so your observation is accurate.
re: AC: yes
as to halflings, the designers seemed not to share your ideas (and probably others) as to weapons being part to of their identity in the way elves and dwarves do
Clearly I need the official books as the starter set is lacking.
Actually the designers of the game initially gave the halflings the bonus for daggers and slings but took them away at some point but left them solely with elves. It may make sense to some but it doesn’t to me. And dwarves never had a proficiency that I’m aware of but then I’m only familiar with 2nd Edition so maybe things changed somewhere between then and now. My thoughts were that elves have always been given that bonus, and when we think of elves we can understand that. Initially the designers gave halflings the proficiency with daggers and slings and that made sense too. Along those lines, though I’m not aware of it ever having been so, dwarves would then seem worthy of an axe proficiency as well.
I was unaware that a proficiency added +2 (to hit only?). Maybe I’m wrong but elves gain a proficiency with short/long swords and bows. I thought it was a +1. The pregenerated elven wizard has a DEX of 15 giving him a +2 with the short sword he is armed with. The damage is shown as 1d6+2 but his attack bonus is shown as a +4. Is this why (proficiency adding +2 to attack)?
Also an unarmored character with a DEX of 10 (no bonus) has an AC of 10, right?
I still feel halflings should have the original proficiency with daggers and slings. It’s suits them much as swords and bows do elves. But then it seems dwarves would be no less proficient with axes...
Yes, proficiency is adding the +2 to hit at early levels. At later levels the bonus from proficiency increases.
Yes, a naked creature with Dex 10 or 11 will generally have an AC of 10 - although there are many ways that a creature could gain higher AC other than just Dex or Armor.
Halflings don't need dagger and sling proficiency because literally every class already possesses that proficiency. Proficiencies don't stack on top of eachother so it would be meaningless. Elves and dwarves get their proficiencies mentioned because they cover some martial weapons or more complex simple weapons that many of the caster classes lack the proficiency for - that's how your elf wizard can sword it up.
I don’t see why the halflings would be considered any different than the elves in this regard. They were, at one time, given the proficiency just as elves, which in this version can wield swords despite being a wizard who would otherwise not be able to do so. It’s a special proficiency.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So 20 some odd years ago I played using the 2nd Edition. I lost all of my gaming things and recently bought the 5th Edition starter set as my 9 year old daughter asked how come she can’t play. So for Christmas we got the starter set and additional dice.
Reading through the rules has left me a little puzzled. For instance what happened to THAC0?
And looking at the modifiers for the various stats it looks as though a character with a very low score in a stat could get reduced hit points each level,, reduce some from the AC due to a low DEX score or do reduced damage. Is this how that works?
Another thing I see changed is that halflings no longer have a proficiency bonus with daggers or slings. Why was this dropped?
Another change I see is that EXP gets divided evenly. Seems a multiclasses character would get EXP based on skills used. For instance if my thief-warlock picks several locks and disarms several traps that they would only be rewarded on the thief side of things.
We are both really looking forward to finishing up these characters and getting started!
Quite a bit has changed from 2nd to 5th, mostly for the better.
Thaco went away in 3rd if I remember correctly.
Stats with low numbers do what you are thinking they do. An 8 in CON will give you a -1 to your HP rolls each level, an 8 in DEX will give you a -1 to AC, etc.
Daggers and slings are simple weapons, which every class is proficient in, so no need to include them in the halfling proficiency.
I think the intent is that EXP is just viewed as total character experience. No need to track and split up what point goes where. Eliminates the old "I killed that guy as a thief, and that other guy as a warlock." mentality where we had to assign points to each class so that we didn't break the 2 level difference cap. (Something like that...been a while, but I remember having a restriction about keeping levels close) Plus, there are a ton of 5e games that just use the milestone leveling option. No points to split anyway.
Good luck and have fun.
THAC0 is gone. AC is simple (is the attack roll higher than AC?).
Negative modifiers almost always have a work around (Low dex for AC? Heavy armor. Low str for weapon? Finesse weapons.)
Weapon proficiencies are also simplified. Most classes have proficiency with all simply weapons, and the few that don't at least have daggers, darts, slings, and staves.
Exp is tracked to the character, not any of their classes. When a character gains a level, they put that level into any class they have or a new class if they meet multicast requirements.
THAC0 - doesn't exist as a specific thing anymore, but attacking is still basically the same as it always has been. You roll a d20, add appropriate bonuses and penalties, and try to match or exceed the target's AC(can't remember which way it went before, I know it's flipped a couple of times, but high AC is better in this edition).
Besides the raw stat value, there's a corresponding stat modifier which applies to relevant attacks, saves, skill checks, etc. Most d20 rolls will end up being the die roll, plus your proficiency bonus if applicable, plus the ability modifier tied to the type of roll you're making. Various abilities, magic items, spells etc. can allow you to apply additional bonuses. You'll be using the ability modifiers WAY more often than the actual scores themselves.
There are only a few cases where a race or subrace's features include weapon/armor proficiency. That's mostly determined by class, occasionally subclass. For example, all Clerics have proficiency in Light Armor, Medium Armor, Shields and Simple Weapons. Some Cleric domains offer proficiency with Heavy Armor, and some offer proficiency with Martial Weapons.
I can't remember how multiclassing worked in previous editions, but it's pretty streamlined in this edition. It sounds like you're thinking of multiclassing as leveling up in multiple classes at once, dividing your earned XP between the classes, either evenly or based on what you did to earn experience. That's not how it works. You have a single value for the amount of XP you've earned, and there's a single table that shows what XP threshold you have to meet for each level. There's no "Thief XP vs Fighter XP", there's just "you get more awesome". When you level up, you can increase the level of the class you started as, or you can take a level in a different class. To do so, you must meet certain stat minimums for EACH class you have levels in. Basically you need at least a 13 in each stat important to the class. So if you're a Wizard who multiclasses into Cleric, you need at least a 13 in both Intelligence and Wisdom. Let's say I start as a Fighter. I reach 5th level, and decide I want to multiclass into Rogue. When I reach level 6, I take a Rogue level. I'm now a 5th-level Fighter and 1st-level Rogue. When I reach level 7, I can become Fighter6/Rogue1, Fighter5/Rogue2, or Fighter5/Rogue1/SomethingElse1 if I want. When you take that first level in a new class, you don't get everything you would if you started as that class. Chapter 6 of the PHB covers multiclassing and how it works.
Questions like this really drive home what a sea change there was from 2nd to 3rd edition. 3rd, 3.5, 4th, and 5th may have had very different rules and very different "feels", but the foundation of the way that stats give bonuses, the ways you apply those bonuses to rolls, how AC works, etc.... those have all remained relatively unchanged for about 18 years, but were very different before that!
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Indeed! I first looked at buying all of the necessary books and dice to get back into it but saw extreme changes that I didn’t like. I walked out empty handed. It’s because of that that I decided to get the starter set.
By and large, the different editions don't really effect the type of stories that D&D sessions tell. The way you roll a dice to attack a kobold is different in 5th, 4th, 3rd, etc.... but either way you're still killing kobolds and collecting magic swords. To the extent that the modern rule systems have been designed with the intent of fixing things about older editions that made them inaccessible to new players or bogged down with unnecessary/unfun tables and rules, and that moving to 5e offers a lot of modern accessibility options that older editions don't have, I feel pretty safe recommending that "upgrading" to 5th edition is the right move to make.
There's one caveat to that though: 2nd edition has "archetypes" baked right into the rules. There are real mechanical systems designed to enforce playing a "dwarfy" dwarf, and outright obstacles on playing "weird" concepts like a dwarven mage, or a lizardman, or a half-angel thief/bard that specializes in grappling targets and punching them to death. If your enjoyment of D&D revolves around fighters being strong and clerics being devout and mages being old guys with beards, then the "everybody is special and everybody is weird" agnosticism of later editions can leave your head spinning.
But, while the rules allow that freedom, there's nothing to say that a DM has to permit those types of characters, or that a player has to choose them. I feel like 5th edition is still a solid foundation to build any new campaign on, even one that wants to be "old school."
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
THAC0 made more sense to me. An experienced fighter should be much more adept at using a weapon than a wizard. I’m at a loss for how a wizard (or any non fighter) could be as good, especially at a higher level.
I’m also a bit puzzled at the hit dice concerning one with a low CON. Let’s say we have a wizard with a score of 7 and upon gaining a level he rolls a 2. No additional hit points? In essence this character would only have a 67% chance of acquiring any and could get no more than 4. I guess I feel average (0 modifier) should have encompassed a larger portion of the middle.
And does a STR of 7 give a -2 to damage? Is that right?
Let me see if I get this. A thief-warlock gains 300 EXP and can otherwise attain 2nd level but the points aren’t divided between the two but is relegated to the class of choice? Any reason why it wouldn’t be split between the two?
Are there no EXP awarded for picking locks, disarming traps, etc.?
My daughter has chosen a barbarian. Reading up on starting weapons several javelins are listed. How would these be carried?
I’m also wondering on versatile weapons and shields. If anyone played the arcade D&D game they’d have seen the cleric could manage a special strike where he used both hands despite the shield. Is this a possibility? Curious whether or not her baraberian would potentially want a battle axe and shield vs a great axe. Also wondering if the unarmored advantage for the barbarian works with a shield.
I see the dart does the same damage a dagger does. I imagine these being something like twice the size of the darts we take to the bar. Seems the damage would be 1/2 that. Is there something more to darts? Maybe a barb or bladed head?
Lastly I’ve always been enamored with the ranger and ambidexterity. Initially I had thought two long swords was ideal for the damage, but I’m wondering about confined spaces. This never came up in any adventures back then, but realistically tight quarters would make longer weapons a bit hard to work with. In that light it seems a long sword, short sword, and dagger/second short sword would be more ideal. I haven’t read anything about fighting in confined spaces, but then these are the neutered rules...
Ah, yes! Killing kobolds and collecting magic swords is still fun, and precisely why I went ahead and got the game. I feel I may modify some things, but I first want to understand how it all works first.
I forgot to comment earlier about the halflings and their proficiency with daggers and slings. They initially had a +1 bonus with these just like elves with swords and bows. I see it rather fitting and don’t understand why it was removed. The notion of all characters being proficient doesn’t give them the +1 bonus they had. The elves still have their bonuses.
Wizards may have the same proficiency as a fighter at high levels, but they are nowhere near a fighter in what they can do with weapons. A wizard can attack once per round with a small list of weapons, while a fighter can attack multiple times per round with any weapon. Plus, the wizard isn't likely to have a high DEX or STR, while a fighter is, so they will hit more and will deal more damage.
You are correct on the hit dice. If you have a CON of 8 (-1) and roll a 1 for HP at a new level, you get zero HP. Or, you can take the average instead of rolling a dice to ensure you get some HP.
STR of 7 (or 6) gets -2 to damage, as well as -2 to STR saving throws and skills that rely on STR (like athletics).
At first level, you would either have a thief or a warlock. At 300xp when you gain a new level you pick your second class if you are going to multi-class.
Picking a lock or disarming a trap will give XP if you are playing in or running a game that uses XP. If you are using a module, it is usually listed. In the DMG, there is some guidance on "Noncombat challenges" in chapter 8. Basically, the DM decides what XP to give.
Javelins get carried in a pack by default. If you are asking if there is a specific piece of equipment in the 5e item listing that states it holds javelins like a quiver, there is not.
Versatile items are still a thing. If you look at the weapons the ones listed as versatile have two different damage amounts. The lesser is for one handed, the larger is for two handed.
Darts in D&D/fantasy settings are based on throwing spikes. (Google will show real life examples to give you a visual)
Ambidexterity is not a thing in 5e like it was in previous editions. Also, the confined fighting rules are mostly gone in 5e also.
I can see your point about neutered rules, but they have been designed to be more user-friendly for a reason. The "feel" of D&D is still there. If you want a more rule based edition than what you remember, you could also look at 3.5. Although not supported here, I know a lot of people that still play it. Be warned, though, there are rules for EVERYTHING in 3.5. It is one of the reasons 5th needed to be scaled back in my opinion. I was playing 3.5 up until a little over a year ago, then my group decided to move to 5th. It was a bit of a shock at first, not having a rule for everything, but it does flow and play better in my opinion than previous editions.
If you're going to argue that 2nd edition is a cleaner rule system than 5th, multiclassing is absolutely not the hill to pick that fight and die on :P
Your first point about fighters being "better" at using a weapon than a wizard is a good one... but 5th edition shows this in different ways. If your character has proficiency in a weapon, you're good at using it! Wizards don't normally have proficiency in longswords, but if yours does (by being an elf, for example), then you're good at it! Are fighters "better" at using longswords than wizards? Not directly in how well they hit with it, or how much damage they deal when they connect... but fighters get more attacks with their Extra Attack feature, get more feats than other classes (leading to them usually having more combat tricks), and their class features are more directly relevant to melee combat than the spells that a wizard will be getting. If you put a wizard and a fighter in a room and tell them to have a swordfight, the fighter will still be better at it.... but if you have an elven wizard that wields a Moonblade, you won't be penalized for playing a character that is a litter different from your average Gandalf!
Consitution is indeed the stat that controls "hardiness," both as the stat that provides bonuses/penalties to hit points, and also to saving throws or direct attribute checks. Your wizard with a score of 7 is a bit of a misleading example, because in 5th edition there's really no good reason to have a score lower than 8, since that's the rock bottom score you can start with using point buy (which is the "default" method of stat generation that the system is generally balanced around). But in the event that you're rolling for stats and get stuck with a 7 in constitution, things aren't quite as bad as you make them out to be. The minimum HP you can gain on level up is 1 HP, even if you have a terrible constitution modifier. A "normal" wizard with a 10 constitution that takes average HP on level up gets 3 HP per level, and one that rolls for it every level averages 2.5... so it's not like we're talking a huge spread here. 40 HP less at level 20 from having a -2 Con modifier every level could easily be closed by taking a single feat, Tough, or allocating some of your every-fourth-level stat increases to constitution to turn that ship around.
Expanding on your first point there, about "average" encompassing a larger portion of the "middle" range of stats... essentially that's what the point buy system is intended to accomplish, by making it very cheap to buy up to 13, but increasingly more expensive to buy stat points past that. Somebody that minmaxes their stats by buying 15-15-15-8-8-8 is essentially buying stats that add up to +3, while someone that buys 14-12-12-12-12-12 adds up to +7. Most players probably won't buy such a generalized stat spread... but a lot of classes don't really need max stats in three different attributes, and it's pretty common to see people spread things around a bit to have a couple good scores, a couple average ones, and a couple bad ones.
A poor strength would indeed give a -2 damage to melee weapon attacks for most classes... but if you're interested in playing a low strength character, there are plenty of classes and abilities available right from level 1 that allow you to do so without penalty. You can either use a Finesse weapon that allows you to make melee attacks with Dexterity, or play a class like Monk that lets you use Dexterity for your attack with monk weapons instead of Strength, or a class like Warlock (Hexblade) that lets you use Charisma for melee attacks, or a class that provides access to a melee spell attack cantrip like Shocking Grasp that uses your spellcasting attribute... The rule that "for normal people, being less strong causes one to deal less damage when one hits something" is a sensible baseline, especially when players are given so much freedom to play an exception to that rule if that's their concept.
Your thief-warlock exampleprobably comes from confusing it with the 2nd edition concept of multiclass where the various X/Y combos functioned as single classes you would select right from level 1... In 5th edition, "multiclassing" is much more similar to 2e "Dual Classing", but without any sort of limitations on going back and forth between classes for future levels. A level 1 character starts as a Rogue, or a Warlock, or whatever class they've chosen to start as. Upon attaining 300 xp they can take a second level in that same class... or a different class. This doesn't start them over as a level 1 character, they're a level 2 character with the 1st level features of both classes, and at future levels they are free to level up the first class, the second, add a third... whatever strikes their fancy. There's another thread going on right now already discussing this, which you can find here, because 5th edition is sort of uniquely forgiving to multiclass characters when compared to any other edition that has come before, it's one of the bigger changes one has to get used to.
As far as experience awards for picking locks and disarming traps... that's entirely up to the DM! Some tables run D&D where individual monsters are worth an individual xp amount, some where a combat encounter is based on the total of the individual monsters' CR combined with the overall difficulty of the encounter, some hand out xp for overcoming non-combat obstacles like traps or social and skill challenges, and some simply level up their players at points along the story where they feel they've "earned it," regardless of what they've fought or avoided up to that point. Nothing about 5th edition requires that a DM use any specific one of these systems, as long as they come up with some way to progress their players... it would be fairly straightforward to give players xp for traps/locks depending on the difficulty of the check required to overcome them.
Carrying javelins... a DM can again go as gritty (describe to me realistically how those are looped over your shoulder in a way that doesn't interfere with movement, and track their weight on your character sheet, and we're going to roll to see if they break each time you throw them!) or hand-wavey (you have 3 javelins "somewhere" about your body; just keep track of whether you have that in hand or your axe, and you can stow or retrieve whatever weapon you want as part of an attack) as they want. A 5th edition DM is no more or less compelled to pay attention to small "bookkeeping" rules like inventory weight and bag size than a 2nd edition DM was, you're always free to focus on the rules that your table enjoys and avoid those that just get in the way... but in general, reading through the 5th edition more overtly signals this than older editions that were obsessed with "simulation."
Versatile weapons are still a thing: certain weapons roll a different damage die when wielded two-handed versus one-handed. I'm not aware of any class features that let you specifically do a two handed smash while holding a shield. The shield AC bonus does stack with the Barbarian's Unarmored Defense AC calculation.
I kind of figure Darts are a catch all for "small sharp throwy thing", everything from shuriken to lawn darts to throwing knives. There's probably some overlap in the concept between that and a dagger, it does strike me as an unnecessary amount of granularity that both of those weapons exist in the rules, where things like distinguishing a thousand types of polearms from one another have largely been left in the past. Basically, a dart is a sharp thing you throw at people that fits in your pocket on a bandolier, while a dagger is a sharp thing you stab someone with, and can throw in a pinch.
Two weapon fighting in 5th edition does address your concern about longswords. Ordinarily, anyone can attack with two weapons to get an extra attack using a bonus action... but 1) the weapon in their offhand has to have the "light" feature, and 2) they don't get to add their strength (or whatever attribute you're using to attack) bonus to the damage of this extra attack. Certain class features or feats may change or lift some of these restrictions, or provide additional bonuses: a ranger that takes the Two Weapon Fighting Style is now allowed to add their attribute bonus to the offhand attack as if it were a normal attack. The "Dual Wielder" feat allows you to hold a weapon that isn't Light in your offhand (allowing you to wield two longswords, for example), and gives you a small AC bonus when wielding two weapons. There's no specific rules about what qualifies as a "confined space" and how that might effect dual wielding longswords vs. shortswords or daggers... but again, the absence of a rule does not imply that a DM is not free to add one at the table! If you want to tell your players "you'll get a penalty with attacks using anything longer than a shortsword in this tight tunnel".... awesome, that sounds really immersive!
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Sorry about the confusion. I meant the beginner set rules vs the actual book. What I have in front of me is neutered compared to what I can see online. The beginner set doesn’t show creating a character. You just pick from the pregenerated characters supplied. Who doesn’t want to roll their own dice and create a character?
Gotcha. Yes, the beginner set/rules are pretty light. When I moved to 5th I skipped those and went straight to the full books. I forget about them most of the time because of that.
Though I like to completely understand the rules I’m not exactly rigorous about everything. Though it may be more realistic it can dampen some of the fun. I figure I’d run things somewhere in the middle.
I’m sure I’ll be back with more questions after I reread it all again with the understanding given. Thanks for all the help!
I think maybe you are missing some finer points. Can we use a basic long sword as an example since we are talking fighter? It's a pretty simple and basic weapon a generic fighter might have. It is also considered a "martial" weapon. With those things in mind a wizard, that hasn't taken some feat or dual class, would never have "proficiency" with a long sword. Not at a low level or higher levels. So that gets to the first main point, the wizard would not include their "proficiency" stat (which is 2 for all starting players and goes up from there) in their attack modifier. Second, most players, depending on how you determine your ability scores, would make their highest stat, as a wizard, Int with Str being last. Most likely the wizard would have a -1 or 0 STR modifier. The fighter, on the other hand, would include their proficiency and they would have a higher STR modifier (At lvl 1 it could be on average +2 or +3 maybe). So if both players were swinging a sword the Wizard would potentially do it with a -1 whereas the Fighter would be doing it with a +3 or more. Those numbers would continue to be more disparate over time too.
That example doesn't hold as true with a dagger but would still be better in the hands of the Fighter. The full player guide does point out that the D20 system, in particular, the crit hit or crit miss system, exists because at any given time there is a chance that even an inexperienced character might be able to hit something no matter their skill. That said, on average, the fighter will always be better with a sword then a mage.
It does make sense.
I was unaware that a proficiency added +2 (to hit only?). Maybe I’m wrong but elves gain a proficiency with short/long swords and bows. I thought it was a +1. The pregenerated elven wizard has a DEX of 15 giving him a +2 with the short sword he is armed with. The damage is shown as 1d6+2 but his attack bonus is shown as a +4. Is this why (proficiency adding +2 to attack)?
Also an unarmored character with a DEX of 10 (no bonus) has an AC of 10, right?
I still feel halflings should have the original proficiency with daggers and slings. It’s suits them much as swords and bows do elves. But then it seems dwarves would be no less proficient with axes...
proficiency adds the proficiency bonus, which increases with levels. at level 1, it's +2, so your observation is accurate.
re: AC: yes
as to halflings, the designers seemed not to share your ideas (and probably others) as to weapons being part to of their identity in the way elves and dwarves do
Yes, proficiency is adding the +2 to hit at early levels. At later levels the bonus from proficiency increases.
Yes, a naked creature with Dex 10 or 11 will generally have an AC of 10 - although there are many ways that a creature could gain higher AC other than just Dex or Armor.
Halflings don't need dagger and sling proficiency because literally every class already possesses that proficiency. Proficiencies don't stack on top of eachother so it would be meaningless. Elves and dwarves get their proficiencies mentioned because they cover some martial weapons or more complex simple weapons that many of the caster classes lack the proficiency for - that's how your elf wizard can sword it up.
Clearly I need the official books as the starter set is lacking.
Actually the designers of the game initially gave the halflings the bonus for daggers and slings but took them away at some point but left them solely with elves. It may make sense to some but it doesn’t to me. And dwarves never had a proficiency that I’m aware of but then I’m only familiar with 2nd Edition so maybe things changed somewhere between then and now. My thoughts were that elves have always been given that bonus, and when we think of elves we can understand that. Initially the designers gave halflings the proficiency with daggers and slings and that made sense too. Along those lines, though I’m not aware of it ever having been so, dwarves would then seem worthy of an axe proficiency as well.
I don’t see why the halflings would be considered any different than the elves in this regard. They were, at one time, given the proficiency just as elves, which in this version can wield swords despite being a wizard who would otherwise not be able to do so. It’s a special proficiency.