Differences Between Dungeons and Dragons Editions.?

Question

I've been trying to get into Dungeons And Dragons. I figured a good place to start would be getting the Manuals (DM guide, Players Handbook, Monster Manual) But I cant figure out which version I should get! I've seen everything from the 1980's guides to the new 4th editions. Is there much of a difference between the different versions? If so what are they? And which do you suggest for a new player?

Answer 1

Basic/Expert/Master/et al. was a loose system, gamers were expected to fill in the gaps with their own house rules. There were 7 options for players- (Human) Fighter, (Human) Cleric, (Human) Thief, (Human) Magic User, Elf (Fighter/Magic User), Dwarf, & Halfling. So the generic classes were all human and the 3 other races were their own class. Other options became available later on.



Advanced D&D, First Edition, was written with the idea of standardizing rules for tournament play. So that everyone playing AD&D used the same rules and knew what to expect at tournament conventions.



AD&D had a broader range of options than Basic. Races available to PC's were Dwarf, Elf, Gnome, Halfling, Half Elf, Half Orc, & Human. Available classes were Cleric, Druid, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, Magic User, Illusioinist, Thief, Assassin, Monk, & Bard. Humans could be any one class. Non-humans could have more than one class at the same time, but some classes were off limits to them.



First Edition AD&D mechanics were driven by game balance. Each character had a few skills he was good at. But he couldn't do it all. So you had to get help from friends and have them play characters who were good at other things. The more a character could do- the more experience points it took for that character to level up.



Full Disclosure: I prefer 1e AD&D to other rules.



Second Edition AD&D took all the naughty stuff out, such as Assassins, Half Orcs, Demons & Devils. It crippled Bards to make them more 'fair'. Monks dissappeared. Gary Gygax's name was chiseled off all monuments and royalty checks in Lake Geneva.



To replace all that, 2e gave us 8 flavors of Magic User, called school specialists. And primitive rifles. Oh and kits. 2e introduced kits for people who couldn't figure out how to give their characters flavor or personality on their own.



WoTC bought the game from bankrupt TSR. WoTC wanted to sell new books & knew they couldn't sell fans recycled AD&D rules, the fans already had them. So they sold a paper version of Diablo. When that actually worked, they put out D&D 3.5 to see how many would fall for that.



3e lets players be any race they want, and any class they want. When its time to level up, you can pick a different class and add a level of that class to your pc. And a PC can learn any skill or feat they want. So none of the classes are special or unique, cause they all have varying amounts of access to the same talent pool.



Honestly I've only glanced at 4th edition D&D. Dragonkin...has it come to this? Fire breathing lizardmen? Where is the challenge if you play something this powerful? And they thought 1e Bards were bad.

I also can't figure out the reason to have Eladrin when they are just the same as elves. Maybe they taste different to monsters. It seems like filler or a waste of space to put in elves... then something that is just like elves but we'll call it something else.



What do I suggest? Buy previous editions. They're cheaper than the new books and you won't feel like a sucker when they come out with version 4.5 next year. Better yet google OSRIC. Because those rules are completely FREE.

Answer 2

Every edition has had it's pros can cons (as well as edition wars between those who embrace a newer edition vs. those convinced it's totally ruined the game.) The short answer to "What version should I play?" is "Whichever one the other people playing use." Unless you're starting a whole new group from scratch, you gotta play what the others are.



If the latter happens to be the case, I'd suggest 3.5 (or better still, Pathfinder which plugs a number of annoying holes in the rules) if you have some previous RPG experience or are money-tight (since it's not the current edition, a lot of 3.5 stuff is available in game store secondhand bins or on eBay...additionally, an electronic version of the combined Players and GM's guide for Pathfinder is only $10.) If you're a complete newcomer to RPGs or want to play the most current edition, go 4E. It's somewhat streamlined (some say too much...YMMV) so it's a bit easier to get the hang of things faster. I personally also feel WotC did a nice job in equalizing class power, especially after a couple of years of tinkering (the results of which are the new Essentials line of rulebooks.)

Answer 3

Key differences are: -- complete shift in rules, virtually no compatability between 3.5 and 4th edition -- 4th edition is HIGHLY combat-oriented. It boils character classes to combat roles such as striker or leader. Abilities are simplified for combats. For example, instead of a wizard having a spellbook, a wizard casts a spell at will or others 1x per encounter or 1x per day. -- 4th edition reduces skills and now has "skill challenges" where a variety of successful skill checks can overcome an encounter. Involves a ton of dice rolls and can make you feel less like you're "role" playing and more like you're "roll" playing. -- 4th edition combats can take a LOT longer and require battle mats and miniatures. If you've played miniatures, you'll notice monster stats and sheets are on "cards". It is nice to have smaller stat sheets. -- 4th edition resembles a lot of Warcraft video game skills (like Paladin auras, Ranger (Hunter) "marking" target. It's marketed to a younger audience. -- 4th edition has caused a rift with some of the talent. Not all writers and designers went with the transition. As such, you may notice a change in quality of stories. -- 4th edition added some new base races for player characters Won't argue one is better than the other, though I have a personal preference for Pathfinder (D&D 3.75 in some respects). Recommend sitting in on games before ever investing the large amount of $$$ either edition can cost.

Answer 4

I had this same problem when I started playing. I ended up going with 3.5e, but I now have the 4e books as well. Basically each version is an update with a different rules system, but in reality they're all fairly similar. If you're going to start a group with newbies, then it doesn't really matter what system you get. If you have a group you'd like to join, find out what they play with. If you don't have the whole group thing situated yet, I'd suggest 4e because it's the most current edition, and I'd say you're more likely to find a public group playing with it. A good way to get started with Dnd is through your flgs (friendly local gaming store), with weekly encounters and such, and they'll probably use 4e for that.

Now if you are thinking about buying the books second hand, one of the earlier editions might be better, like 3.5e, because there are generally more of the reference books available once you get through the core rulebooks, and they're cheaper on like eBay and that sort of thing.

One thing about the older editions is that the publisher, Wizards of the Coast, supports 4e almost exclusively with their website and all the promotional and player stuff they do, so if you want to be more involved in the Dnd community, I'd go 4e. If you're looking to get more involved beyond Dungeons & Dragons, 3e or 3.5e might be good, because they're based on the d20 system, and there are a ton of other roleplaying games based on it in different genres, like science fiction, futuristic, spies, steampunk, really anything you can imagine.

Finally 4e I've found to be more new player friendly. If you've got the time to devote to learning all the rules and stuff, and you're good with math, 3.5e is alright, but 4e seems more intuitive to me, and Wizards of the Coast even has a quick start guide on their website (wizardsofthecoast.com/dnd) that will get you playing pretty quickly. In fact, it'd be a good idea to check that out, to see if you like the 4e style of play.

Basically I'd really recommend either 4e or 3.5e, but again find out what your intended group is playing, and look into each. Check the internet for reviews and stuff.

Answer 5

D&D4e is more of a balanced game, while 3.5/Pathfinder is more of a fantasy simulation of reality to play with. Play what you think sounds like more fun. You can also check the edition wars threads at the forum at EN World for a more in-depth view of the differences between the editions.



In addition to what the Mad Professor said, I'd like to add that the complete Pathfinder core rules are online for free at d20pfsrd.com.