D&D Red Box vs. AD&D 1st vs. AD&D 2nd vs. D&D 3.0 vs. D&D v.3.5

[geoffrey d`glanville]

There are still some players out there who love to play the old versions of our beloved hobby.

If so, why do you still play the old versions of D&D and in what way do you think they are superior/inferior to the other versions?

Thanks a lot, Geoffrey D`Glanville

 

[diaglo]

in my opinion i still find all those mentioned in your thread title to be poor imitations of the real thing. OD&D(1974) is the only true game.

and here is why i think so: http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=164754

 

[Henry]

Admin's Note:

I'll preface this by saying up front we don't like Edition Wars here, because of the bad feelings it often generates between fellow posters.

I won't shut this down out of hand, but the second the mods think that the atmosphere in here is getting too heated, we'll have to close it -- fair warning.

As a suggestion, perhaps we should stick to the "why do you still play the old versions of D&D" part of the question?

 

[francisca]

There are still some players out there who love to play the old versions of our beloved hobby.

If so, why do you still play the old versions of D&D and in what way do you think they are superior/inferior to the other versions?

Thanks a lot, Geoffrey D`Glanville

Not inferior/superior, just different.

I prefer B/X D&D and 1e AD&D to 3e for various reasons, but none of that really matters. My group currently plays 1e because we have a darn good time doing so and that's the best reason of all.

 

[Particle_Man]

Easy. I *play* old or new editions for the simple reason that the relevant DM wants to run that edition. Thus I am currently in a 2nd ed, 3.0 and 3.5 game.

There are things to love in each edition.

That said, I am seriously thinking of *running* a game of Castles and Crusades, which seems to have a lot of the things I personally like from various editions.

 

[Psion]

Egads. I see dark clouds of edition wars looming overhead.

I've said this before, and I'll probably say it again.

The great things about the various editions as published are:
1e: The adventures
2e: The settings
3e: The rules

Fortunately, I can (and have) tap the two previous editions for materials. This sort of question is really asking what rules you are most interested in; for me it's 3e without a doubt. But really, if you think about it, I'm playing all 3 editions -- just tapping the best aspects of each.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

I offered my take on this question in the thread that Diaglo linked to, above.

Hey, Particle Man, if you need any books for C&C, now's the time. Troll Lord is running a $10 sale.

 

[ashockney]

Egads. I see dark clouds of edition wars looming overhead.

I've said this before, and I'll probably say it again.

The great things about the various editions as published are:
1e: The adventures
2e: The settings
3e: The rules

Fortunately, I can (and have) tap the two previous editions for materials. This sort of question is really asking what rules you are most interested in; for me it's 3e without a doubt. But really, if you think about it, I'm playing all 3 editions -- just tapping the best aspects of each.

Wow, that was kind of an obvious, but eye-opening comment. Based upon my personal experience, I completely agree with it. I have always loved the original 1st ed adventures, and still run them at local conventions and with my gaming group to this day. I've always played in the FR. I'm a huge fanboy of the 3rd edition rules. As a game, it's much more fun to play overall. If I run a campaign, there's a good chance it will: be set in third edition, take place in the Forgotten Realms, and will include at least one of the original 1st Ed modules in the story arc. Funny!

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I run a C&C game, but I use a lot of 1e and BECM D&D stuff in there. The 1e DMG is still referenced heavily.

 

[Kragar00]

I agree with Psion as well. I usually play 2e though the DM uses many of the 1e and 3e adventures.