D&D 2E [2e AD&D] what optional stuff did/do you use?

[Ancalagon]

I thought that Spells & Magic had some great stuff in it, and that Combat & Tactics was amazing. The Players Option (and DMs Option) books were mostly good, it was just S&P that was awful (in my opinion).

I think that you aren't wrong. Skills and powers was the really unbalanced part and it "infected " my feelings about the other books. I'm sure that there must have been some good stuff in there that could be mined for other editions . ..

 

[Emerikol]

I'd just like to take this opportunity to gripe about Skills & Powers, especially subabilities, which were the biggest chunk of min-maxing material to ever be official in D&D. I strongly recommend against using them, or really, anything in that book. It was a travesty of interwoven ways to unbalance the game. It was easy, for instance, to build a "cleric" with all the abilities of a fighter plus some spellcasting and faster advancement.

I think prior to 4e, nothing was considered "official" except for the core books. By default, I only allowed the core books and a player would have to advocate for something from one of the other books if he wanted it. Otherwise it was assumed to not be official.

 

[Ath-kethin]

We used a smattering of everything. Kits, hell yeah. Non-weapon proficiencies, weapon type vs. armor type modifiers, weapon speeds, the gamut.

The DM Option: High Level Campaigns book is full of still-useful advice. The Spells & Magic book had a ton of cool ideas and approaches. Combat & Tactics was great for the weapon table (even if it nerfed scimitars) and the 6-second combat round.

Skills & Powers . . .well, that one had some issues. I used the subabilities in my campaigns but not the point-buy class ability stuff.

I played in a campaign that did once, though, and it was funny. I took over a kobold thief NPC who was considered a joke, and who also was the only character not custom-built from the S&P options. Due to that fact, I also ended up being the only useful character in the group; everyone else was so loaded with disadvantages and compromises that they really couldn't do ANYTHING effectively.

It was a great campaign. For me anyway.

 

[Gladius Legis]

Complete series kits, and attack options, weapon expertise, weapon mastery and fighting styles from Combat and Tactics.

And I'd also like to count myself in among those who thought Skills and Powers was godawful.

 

[Chad Hooper]

I used all the optional rules for Weapon Proficiencies from the CFHB, not mentioned on the poll.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

When we played 2E we used kits and NWP's of course, and for one or two particular campaigns used psionics, but later dropped them entirely. The rest we may or may not have tried briefly but dropped them quickly for various reasons, from, "we just don't like it at all," to, "it's not worth the paper it's printed on".

 

[giant.robot]

My group used kits, spell points, and played around with psionics a little. We didn't just allow any kit, some were munchkin bait, but I think overall I liked the idea of them. Spell points and psionics I felt were cut from the same cloth and made spell casting a but more RuneQuest-y. Letting casters have a bit more flexibility in the middle of a game (in our games) reduced the Christmas tree effect and one hour work day.

We used NWPs as well but not as written. For a proficiency check you (IIRC) halved your ability score and the proficiency gave a flat bonus (I think +6). So an average ability with proficiency would have just better than even odds, a high ability score with no proficiency had similar odds.

I would pile on and say S&P was mostly garbage. Besides the munchkining the damn book allowed it vastly over complicated the game. It turned character creation into a chore and disproportionately rewarded rules lawyers. It was filled with "I Win" buttons which usually doubled as "No One Else Has Fun" buttons.

 

[Tyler Do'Urden]

Virtually everything.

I used Combat and Tactics and Skills and Powers, with the class modification SP systems from Spells and Magic and Michael Morris' Dusk materials (which included a system like the one found in Spells & Magic for Warriors and Rogues, to replace the systems found in in Skills and Powers (which didn't combine Warriors and Rogues into a universal system, but separated them by subclass). I then went through EVERY SINGLE BROWN BOOK and shoehorned every ability from every kit into the S&P system... thus creating what my players referred to as "the big red binder of brokenness", which was the system we used until 3e came out.

I was very, very relieved when 3e came out.

 

[Zardnaar]

I have recently played 2E and reread the Skils and Powers book but I don't mind it BUT as long as its DM options. Its good for making class variants bad if you let the players have at it.

Anyway I use these rules.

Weapon speed
spell casting speed
Kits (some are not allowed)
Death at -10
WP/NWP


Now I use BAB over THAC0, fighters get +1 to hit level 2,3,4, 5 etc.

Bit of Combat and Tactics might get used as well.

I did try the sub ability scores back in the day in Skills and Powers but yeah its out right broken. A score of 16 can easily let you roll for exceptional muscle or whatever.