Roll vs. Role, 5e vs. Old-School
I've been playing 5th edition D&D (5e) in a face-to-face game for a
few months, which, for me, has really cemented the divide between
roll vs. role-playing and player vs. PC skill.
[My one-and-only exposure to 5e before this was at a convention
during the D&D Next playtest period][1], about six years ago. So
even though my memory is hazy, I don't recall thinking that we were
rolling skill checks all the time. Maybe it is the DM (and maybe
other 5e DMs can chime in here), but nearly everything we do in the
5e game is based on a roll, tied to some stat on our character
sheet. We roll **constantly**. "I search the sack... OK, roll an
investigation check" or, "I examine the fireplace, looking for
cracks or anything irregular about the stone floor and sides... OK,
roll an investigation check" or "We move down the hallway, trying to
be quiet... OK, roll a stealth check". So the [old-school primer][2]
is accurate in that regard, and I find it distracting during
play. We're constantly looking at our character sheets to see what
it is we can do in any given situation. It also seems that the
player is making most of the rolls - which is fine sometimes, but in
a lot of cases this encourages meta-gaming when the other players
see a poor roll and want to try the search or listening at the door
or whatever it is themselves.
I also notice the power creep. My 2nd-level Druid can already
shapeshift into animal form, and has three cantrips he can cast at
will, one of which is the well-known _Shillelagh_, which gives him a
magic staff with +5 to-hit and damage (his spell attack bonus) that
lasts for 10 combat rounds. Our 2nd-level Ranger can already cast
spells and has +6 to stealth checks. Our Warlock can telepathically
communicate with any creature within 30', regardless of what
language they speak, and has the _Poison Spray_ cantrip, which does
1d12 damage on a failed save (I mentioned the powerful cantrips in
my [convention report][1], so that at least did not change from the
playtest).
All that said, the combats are fun - 5e combat does not seem overly
complex or slow, although there is not the ever-present fear of
death that pervades old-school games. It is very easy to regain lost
hit points, and the multiple saves versus death mean PC death must
be pretty rare (it hasn't happened to us yet). And with the
aforementioned power creep, we're doing significant damage on each
attack round. Finally, with its reliance on character skill, 5e is
far more forgiving of bad play and tactical mistakes than the
old-school games I'm accustomed to.
For an old-school gamer, I think the key is playing 5e for what it
is and not worrying about how you might do it in your own games. It
is still fun and I'm enjoying playing over a gaming table for a
change (complete with battle mat and miniatures). But I don't think
I would enjoy running such a game. I would try to make it too much
like OD&D or whatever and in the end, I'd think to myself "Why not
just run OD&D?".
[1]:
https://smolderingwizard.com/2013/11/15/carnage-con-report/
[2]:
gopher://gopher.smolderingwizard.com/0/rpg/player_and_gm_resources/old_school_gaming_primer.txt
