Alright folks lets settle it here, what is the best edition of Dungeons & Dragons...

The system that my group and I have ran for 20 years is a mashed-up homebrew of BFRP, 2nd ed, 3.5, and OD&D + Greyhawk + chainmail.

The best system is one that you piece together with your group with the intent of working toward your specific campaign.

Dungeon World hits the *feel* of D&D without getting into the crunch. Best for long term play? Probably not. But, it brings more ppl into the hobby, and if you can get them with that first hit you can shift them into an actual edition of D&D or whatever other ttrpg you want.

4TH EDITION

WARLORD IS THE BEST CLASS EVER

5TH EDITION BATTLE GUY CANNOT COMPARE

5e. Its bad, but it runs the cleanest and starts the fastest. If you judge a game by how many successful sessions are played in its lifetime, I have no doubt that by the time D&D releases a new edition 5e will be on top.

You are really just the saddest troll.
Here's a (you), just in case you were about to kill yourself from not getting any attention.

Good deed for today done.

"9th Edition".
Basically the hack the University of Waterloo English department threw together from 0e, Modavy Basic and 3.5 after Hasbro went tits up in the 2060s.

I mean, sure, AOL Time-Macy's got the rights to the entire franchise, but they've been sitting on it for 50 years. Every once in awhile they'll reprint an abridged version of Kellerman's 7e compendium--as if it was ever a workable ruleset--but that's it.

I mean... he's not wrong

5e is probably the most fun for me to play

5e is best e.

There is no best edition because of different foci. Only 3.5 and 5e are actively bad.

I like 4th the best. I like the old editions for being simple. I like 5th for replacing 3rd edition spinoffs.

True AD&D®, that than which there can be none greater. The gold and experience earned when all rules are implemented in harmony with all others are real. AD&D® will grant you spells if you provide it enough worshipers. This is canon. Spread the Good News of AD&D® and gain power. Tupac is alive in AD&D®. AD&D® has gold because of Tupac. AD&D® Tupac rap magic.

D&D "Tactics" 4e obviously.

D&D B/X is objectively the best edition of Dungeons & Dragons.

This is like asking me what flavor of tofu I like best.

Dungeon world
>inb4 it's the worst pbta game
>yes but it's the best dnd one

4e. How I miss it so...

DragonQuest

Nah, it's only better than 3.5 and 5e.

tomato/basil and olive tofu are the best

4e, with 5e a recognizable but distant second.

4th edition built on the mechanical improvements of 3rd.

It gave us races that were never underpowered - no more was wanting to be something other than a human an exercise in self-crippling.

It removed level adjustment, which had just been a clumsy way to deny non-traditional races a place in the party.

It dumped negative ability scores, which had never had any meaningful character implementation and just served to pigeonhole you into what WoTC/TSR thought was the only fitting race+class combos.

It created martials who had options that didn't boil down to "a single optimized trick" (grappling, pushing, tripping, etc) or just hitting things with their sword.

It made every spellcaster feel mechanically and thematically unique.

It gave us the Primal power source, which finally made druids more than just "overpowered nature clerics" and barbarians more than "angry, half-naked fighters".

It gave us the Swordmage, the finest gish we've had since AD&D gave us the multiclassed Fighter/Mage.

It dumped save or suck spells, allowing for a player to actually feel engaged in the struggle to avoid being dissolved to power or turned to stone.

It gave us a world built from the ground up to accept D&D for what it is, rather than trying to present a generic neo-medieval Europe world that "somehow" has real wizards and monsters in it.

It built epic rules right into the game's core, allowing you to go from a rookie adventurer to a universe creator, a god, a dragon, a plane shaper, a prince of hell, or Dr. Who.

I could sing so many praises, but 4th edition is my favorite, and that will suffice.

This is pretty good

2nd Edition because I've used it for over 20 years, every week, in the same game as DM
We did try 3rd and were very disappointed, same with 3.pf
4e was ok, just didn't feel the need to spend the money and change everything
5e just proved my decision to not switch to 4e was a spund one. The game isn't getting better, they're just getting your money

OSR/1e are the best because they capture what D&D is "supposed" to feel like while still being modular. Simple, elegant, refined.

3.5/Pathfinder are not objectively terrible games, after all it's easy to find players for. But I think it's overly bloated yet too simple at the same time. Imo you'd be better off playing something simpler like OSR or something a little crunchier like Runequest.

4e is basically just a tactical wargame. Fine if that's your thing, but there are better tactical wargames.

5e is pretty okay. Haven't played it much though.

You do not need to have a separate line for each sentence. Stop. Also 4e sucked, the "world" is built was shitty, tieflings and dragonborns sucked ass, eladrin were redundant with elves, power sources were autistic as hell, powers in general were autistic as hell, fighters were resource based shit, all the classes were almost identical mechanically, you started with 27x the hit points of an average orc warrior.

Also:
>level adjustment is raycissss wahhh
You sound like a liberfag dumbass. Level adjustment was a way of balancing the game. Yeah, if that means you dont' get to be a fucking rakshasa from level 1, that's okay, because you can just play a fucking normal race you stupid motherfucker. Oh wait with Savage Species you *could* play a rakshasa from level 1 and it worked fine if you weren't a brainlet.

5e is a lot better than either 3.5 or 4e. In fact, the crap from 4e is 90% of what drags down 5th edition.

>you started with 27x the hit points of an average orc warrior.

That's severely misrepresenting minions. I mean, the orc warrior is a level 9 minion. It's designed for when fighting 'Basic orcs' has stopped being a threat 1v1. Orcs have creatures all through early heroic that are not minions. Orcs will kick the ever loving shit out of a level 1 party.

>eladrin were redundant with elves

They really, really were not. Elves as a race had some serious cultural divide issues. Where they were both the 'High Elves' civilised and masters of magic but they were also 'Wood Elves' in tune with nature, and druidic. They ended up in a few places at once. Eladrin and Elves just gave names to 'High Elf' and 'Wood Elf' that wasn't just shoving a description in front of Elf. It's not even the first edition to do that, FR has always had it's Gold Elves and Moon Elves and such.

4e myself. Gave fun tactical options for all the classes without letting any one class dominate. Out of combat is also a lot smoother now with the heavier focus on skills, rather than abilities bypassing the need for skills. Nephir Vale was also a very nice setting, fuzzy enough for a GM to include most things but with a tone of it's own that set it apart from the other D&D settings. I'm so sad we didn't get the compiled setting book for it that was planned.

Not perfect (Would have loved a 4.5/5e based on 4e) but they were not afraid to kill some sacred cows and it worked well. Can't say the same for the Marketing/Having to fight the death throes of the OGL.

I think with an overhaul 4e would be bloody awesome. But 5e is my jam.

4e is, in fact, the best version of D&D.

Mechanically dense where it needs to be, hands off where rules aren't needed.

I'm a 4e fan myself and I'd honestly agree about the overhaul (Though possibly not in the same way). A lot of it's ideas were bloody fantastic but the numbers didn't quite line up with what they needed at the start.

Like Rituals. Giving them a GP cost was a terrible holdover from 3.5's expensive spell components. They HAD a good resource for 'Doing stuff at cost' in Healing Surges. With them as the cost for rituals (And a few more things like how bards got 1 ritual a day for free) you could have them be much more usable without them being spammed as using them tires you. As it was, no one wanted to use the non-permanent rituals as they were spending permanent progression (Gold) on a temporary boost (The ritual). I'd have also removed ritual caster as a feat and just made it part of 'Being trained in the linked skill(With a wider range of skills)' to widen up who can do rituals. You need a disguise ritual? The rogue likely knows a lot more about what makes a disguise work than the wizard, so he'll be better at working out the fine details due to his training in stealth.

That post is so horrendous that it compelled me to offer a constructive criticism of pathfinder.

Most features are implemented for the sake of having more options rather than having ease of play in mind.

For example
>allow racial traits
>human has a racial trait called something like hillfolk that allows the char to not roll acrobatics to chrage down hill
>DM:What the fuck? You have to roll acrobatics to charge downhill?

You didnt make your character better, you just effectively forced everyone except you to apply a new rule.

>Also 4e sucked
4e was an underappreciated treasure.
>the "world" is built was shitty
Points of Light was a fantastic setting that had an identity.
>tieflings and dragonborns sucked ass
Both were fantastic additions that let people play something a bit more interesting. Even if they did tend to attract edgelords.
>eladrin were redundant with elves
They were mechanically and thematically different so what are you on about?
>power sources were autistic as hell
They were a shorthand for "how are you doing your stuff."
>powers in general were autistic as hell
Ah yes, having things to do is the pinnacle of autism. Whatever you say buddy.
>fighters were resource based shit
And why is this bad? Why is it bad that fighters get resources?
>all the classes were almost identical mechanically
This is literally the most wrong thing you could possibly say. They all used the AEDU system and that's basically it. Because of how their abilities and powers worked, classes felt distinct.

>you started with 27x the hit points of an average orc warrior.
And why is this a bad thing?

>level adjustment is raycissss wahhh
No, it was a bad mechanic. It was a way of telling a player "wanting to play something other than the standard player races is badwrongfun."
>Level adjustment was a way of balancing the game.
A bad one, yeah. Level adjustments were inconsistent, and generally never worth the price of admission.
>Yeah, if that means you dont' get to be a fucking rakshasa from level 1, that's okay, because you can just play a fucking normal race you stupid motherfucker.
"Don't play something interesting. Only play the bog standards. Anything else is bad wrong fun."
>Oh wait with Savage Species you *could* play a rakshasa from level 1 and it worked fine if you weren't a brainlet.
Or I could just play a system that lets me play what the fuck I want from the get-go.
>5e is a lot better than either 3.5 or 4e
"I LITERALLY CAN'T STOP SUCKING WOTC'S DICK"

Why do you bother? You're not going to change his mind and you'll only make your own fanbase look shittier with your incessant but futile refutations.

4e lost. Whatever the game actually is does not matter. Nobody who doesn't already like it will change their mind and misinformation will continue to prevail over truth. Just stop trying.

You know, this actually makes me think... whilst the "4e martials are wizards!" meme and all who spout it need to die screaming in agony, what if Martials HAD actually played with the powers formula some?

I mean, who else remembers Psionics? They were unique, with their "Dailies and At-Wills only, but you have a pseudo-mana system you can use to bump up At-Wills into Encounter equivalents" system.

Perhaps Martials could have tapped into Healing Surges in a way? For example, At-Wills and Encounters only, but all Martial powers can be buffed up at the cost of a Healing Surge? Or at least you can burn Healing Surges to restore expended powers?

I like 5e.

Not either of those guys but the "4e is bad kill your self" memes are just getting cringy at this point

If you have geuinly never looked at a 4e rulebook take all of 45 minutes out of your day learn the system a bit if you like what you see congrats, you have a new system and some new ideas to steal, if you hate it well you wasted 45 minutes what a travesty

As for my favorite system i run 5e the most but i really have to thank 3.5 and its associated books for actually filling in the lore gaps that 5e leaves

Meant that second line as more of a PSA

I think burning healing surges would have been too hefty a cost for it, attacks that use healing surges as an additional cost are generally very above the curve as a result. Mind you I think the Psionics system could have worked for a Martial System. So you don't have encounter powers, you have At-Wills and 'Endurance' you use to upgrade it to encounter level.

However, it would still require some tinkering imo. As the psionics system sorta led to 'I do this one trick forever as it's my favourite trick'. Something to incentivise changing up which power you are using. Maybe something like:

>Threatening Momentum(Fighter): Whenever you attack a target with a power you did not use in the last round, mark them.
>Keep Off Balance(Rogue): Whenever you attack with a power you have not yet used this encounter, you gain combat advantage for this attack.

Entertainingly, that idea DID come from an MMO. City of Heroes had Titan Weapons as a power set, where your attacks were much slower unless you were flowing nicely between attacks to take advantage of the momentum of your weapon

I think the main reason Martials didn't change stuff up is 'You can't release D&D without martial characters and a second system in the corebook would have been a clusterfuck'.

I liked the idea of stance switching they played around with in Essentials, where you'd have several at-will minor actions that would augment how your basic actions functioned. I also liked how they had at-wills that interacted with aura effects like what skald had.

Really I think Post-Essentials material had a lot of neat ideas that clearly weren't fully thought out or playtested past level 1.

Also, I still think vampire with it's surge theft and regen could've made an amazing defender class if they weren't so fixated on making everything a striker.

Vampire feels like it could have been an amazing controller or defender. I mean, the vampire fluff is basically custom built for being a controller with hypnotic gazes, terror and just throwing a guy about with inhuman strength. Dominate IS basically the exclusive realm of Controllers and very iconic for vampires.

I think Essentials-stuff really needed to work more with 'Is it your turn' to prevent some of the issues it had. At it made 'Hand me the free attack' a bit too easy a choice when all it's at-will boosting worked even out of turn.

I endorse this message.

Should've been base defender with hunter build being striker secondary and beguiler build being controller secondary. It's bizarre that most of either's distinguishing features were locked behind a PP.

That would have worked well.

Base: Stealing life and keeping people in melee with you.
>Beguiler: Yanking them into melee from ALL the way over there.
>Hunter: Ravaging them while they are in melee (I feel like a focus on Ongoing Damage would be nice for the Hunter. Making you bleed out/waste away)

I don't really see a point in playing D&D if it isn't OD&D, Basic, 1E or 2E desu.
They're the ones providing the unique experience, and mechanics, that make up all of what D&D is.
The later stuff that WotC pushed out can be found in a lot of other games.