Mixed-Edition D&D

[Meijin]

I'm curious Make me a party, 4-6 characters, no two characters from the same edition of D&D mechanically. Feel free to use different edition's mechanics to optimize, or to create a group that does something interesting with the mechanical differences. Then, how would you run combats? What sorts of monsters would you want to pull, from what editions? What would you expect to see in a game like this?

[ATHATH]

That would... that would be an utter nightmare to try to run as an actual game. How would initiative and AD&D casting times work, for example?

[Kane0]

Sounds fun, i'd sign up for it.

You'd need a good DM though, especially to consolidate differences on the fly.

[Zombimode]

There are many aspects that work the same across all Editions of D&D like attack rolls (yes, they do!). Problems will arrise when things are fundamentally different like initiative. AD&D is not even really turn-based. It it quasi-real-time with discrete time ticks AND a turn structure overlay.

Initiative is probably the biggest issue. You would probably have to declare one Version as the universal Standard and convert everything to this Standard.

Similar conversions would have to be made for saving throws (or you could go like OotS: if you don't HAVE a save vs. wands you automitically fail against an effect that calls for a save vs. wands ) and skill checks.

[Jay R]

From original D&D: a Bard (The Strategic Review, #5)

From AD&D 1e: an Illusionist.

From AD&D 2e:

If we’re starting at 1st level, a Fighter/Wizard/Thief.
If we already have over 58,000 xps, a 5th level Fighter who dual-classed to Wizard.

From D&D 3.5e: some weird Prestige Class

And since this is surreal anyway,
From TOON: Ragnar Rabbit, the Hanna-Barbarian. (High Chutzpah, low Smarts. Accomplishes most things with Fast Talking, or trying the impossible and failing his Smarts roll)

[Hugh Mann]

3.0- a wizard, with haste. Then tack on a prestige class.

3.5 - a Druid, focus on summoning and enhanced wild shape

4- I don't know a lot about 4 builds. Maybe a cleric or bard for buffs.

5- Barbarian, because we could use an extra tank. Give it bear totem.

And if we really want to do some weird stuff:
AD&D (I don't know which edition)- Spellfire Channeler. I have no idea how turns would work in AD&D but being able to just stand there and absorb magic is probably worth something passively.

The concept of the group lies with the Druid and the Wizard. The Druid can summon a swarm of creatures and the Wizard with haste can give extra actions using 3e's haste. Wizard then polymorphs the Barbarian into a 3e monster offering a whole slew of attack options not designed for 5e. On top of this the barbarian takes half damage from almost every source and gains AC from con, so if you factor in the extra stats given by polymorph then it should be a lot harder to kill. I don't know where 4e fits in on this, I just needed to use it for the similarity in mechanics.
As for the spellfire guy. That is mechanically different that the barbarian might as well just use it as an Antimagic shield.

Most of the combat from 3e to 5e is fairly similar. The biggest issues I can see are the saving throws and what kind of monsters they have to fight. 4e and 5e don't have Fortitude, Will, or Reflex, and 3e/3.5 characters would have difficulty passing saves for most of their stats. (Don't ask me about AD&D). Combat is fine up until the moment that a monster does anything besides attack their AC. 5e saves are too low to deal with most 4e or 3e/3.5 effects beyond early levels, meaning that they have to get buffed constantly to make up for the deficit.

Any monster that has mind controlling or instant death powers is a nightmare because the saves are all over the place. The players need to be very paranoid to survive encounters, but the cheese potential is very high.

[Meijin]

4E saves are compatible with 3.5, basically, although the basic numbers tend to go up higher (as with most things version 4). There's no mechanical difference reay between having w fortitude defense and rolling a fortitude save. It's the same concept as an attack roll against a passive armor class vs an armor roll against a passive attack.

I'd be interested if anyone could try a simple summary of AD&D initiative. I don't know much about it but everyone seems to think it's a big sticking point.

[Lord Torath]

4E saves are compatible with 3.5, basically, although the basic numbers tend to go up higher (as with most things version 4). There's no mechanical difference reay between having w fortitude defense and rolling a fortitude save. It's the same concept as an attack roll against a passive armor class vs an armor roll against a passive attack.

I'd be interested if anyone could try a simple summary of AD&D initiative. I don't know much about it but everyone seems to think it's a big sticking point.

Here's a summary, courtesy of D+1: How 1E AD&D Initiative Actually Works

And here's a pdf (courtesy of Dragonsfoot) of ADDICT

[Florian]

I'd be interested if anyone could try a simple summary of AD&D initiative. I don't know much about it but everyone seems to think it's a big sticking point.

It worked more or less simultaneously. You had one "turn", each participants rolled initiative to see when to can start an action. Now weapons and spells came with a speed factor, so you had to track that a, say, wizard casting a Fireball spell started at ini 10 and ended at ini 16, making it possible to interrupt the Wizard in this time. So, to make it work, actions had to be declared from slowest to quickest and then the whole "turn" had to be resolved (ie. the "slow" Wizard had to declare the Fireball, giving the "quick" Fighter the chance to choice and interrupt it, and so on.)
Then there was the thing how certain things with martial classes worked, like having 3 attacks over 2 "turns".