The difference between Ad&d 1st and 2nd edition?

[Achan hiArusa]

Changes

Races
The Half-orc was taken out of the corebook, but was given an entry in the Monstrous Manual I. It was placed back in the game in the Book of Humanoids and Skills & Powers

Classes
Classes in 1st Edition were organized with classes and subclasses. The classes were Cleric, Fighter, Thief, Wizard, and Monk; the subclasses were Druid (Cleric), Paladin, Ranger (Fighter), Assassin (Thief), and Illusionist (Wizard). In 2nd Edition classes were placed in groups: the Warrior Group (Fighter, Paladin, Ranger), the Priest Group (Cleric, Druid, and Specialty Priest), the Rogue Group (Thief, Bard), and the Wizard Group (Mage and Specialist). Weapon and nonweapon (from DSG and WSG) proficiencies were based on group, not on individual class

Class Changes
Fighter: Optional Weapon Specialization was made core. Additional multiple attacks for Bows were removed.
Paladin: Experience chart was changed to match Ranger.
Ranger: Hit Dice changed from d8 to d10, Species enemy bonus was changed to +4 to hit with -4 to reaction checks from +1 damage/level. Changed from being useable on every "giant class" creature to one specific enemy. Two-weapon fighting added when in light or no armor, tracking changed to proficiency system, move silently and hide in shadows added. Attacks per round changed to match other warriors.
Cleric: Spell access altered by sphere access system.
Druid: Spell access altered by sphere access system. Spell access not accelerated by one level.
Specialty Priest: New class.
Thief: Skill scores not fixed by level, instead the character gets a pool of points that he can spend as he likes within certain limits.
Bard: No longer required fighter and thief levels, spell casting altered from druid list to wizard list. Druid powers taken away, gain rogue skills. Bonus languages taken away, Charm ability replaced by ability to influence moods. Suggestion ability removed. Colleges removed.
Wizard: Max HD reduced from 11 to 10
Specialist: New class, replaces old illusionist.
Monk: Class removed.

Arquebus, Blowgun, Mancatcher, and Whip added to weapon list, Bo stick, Jo Stick, and Broad Sword removed, Weapons vs. AC table, weapon length, and space required removed (placed as optional rule), weapon type introduced.

Proficiency system was core but optional, classes gain NWPs based on group, not class.

Climate/Terrain, Organization, Activity Cycle, Diet, Morale added. Level/XP Value moved from DMG to Monster Manual stat block. Habitat/Society and Ecology added to description.

Psionics instead of being a powerful add on were made the province of a class and the powers acted like proficiencies

 

[Ariosto]

The classes were Cleric, Fighter, Thief, Wizard, and Monk

Again, a Wizard was a high-level Magic-user. (It's the same class name in EPT!)

IIRC, fireballs, lightning bolts and the like got capped at 10 dice in 2nd edition. (I think a cap is a good idea. I am inclined to go for 11 for 1st edition.)

 

[Achan hiArusa]

Yep, just missed that one, you won't catch the other one I made because I fixed it. I forgot the big one, almost all classes had level titles that they were supposed to use instead of the class name. And alignment languages were eliminated in 2nd Edition.

 

[The Shaman]

For me, the difference is that I played first edition but I never played second edition.

I'm not sure that really adds much to the discussion, I'm afraid.

 

[Mircoles]

Both dragons and giants were given a boost in power in comparison to their 1e equivalents.

 

[john112364]

For me the big difference between 1e and 2e was that 2e tried to clarify and fix the massive jumble of rules that was 1e AD&D. They stream lined a lot of rules and nerfed some (I'm looking at you ranger!). They weren't always successful but it was avery good effort. The best part was that you could use 1e rules with minimal to no modifications.

I for one didn't miss the half-orc and if anyone really wanted to play one, the 1e halforc was certainly no game breaker in a 2e game.

We house ruled the rangers favored enemy bonus to a +4 to hit and damage rather than just to hit. (I think. It's been a while.)

I liked the non weapon proficiencies because it was cool that you now had skills outside of combat, but we used to joke about how when you pick up a new nwp you could be an instant master. (Hey I just got the riding proficiency and now I can do tricks on my horse like I was born in the saddle! )

And the surpise system in 1e was such a mess that we never used it. You roll 1d6 for surprise. So far so good. But there were so many exceptions that you couldn't keep track. For instance some creature were only surprised on a 1 whereas others surprised other creatures on a 1-4. Wtf! How do you resolve that.

But the best part of 1e was definetly the DMG. This was (and still is) such a good reference book especially the appendices. There is information in this book that crosses any edition and is just plain useful! And who doesn't love the detailed castle building cost. It practically breaks down the cost of a keep brick by brick. I know that's level of detail that most people don't want to deal with, but it's there if you want it.

 

[Ariosto]

For instance some creature were only surprised on a 1 whereas others surprised other creatures on a 1-4. Wtf! How do you resolve that.

Surprised 1-3. DMG p. 62, second example.

(Note, however, errata in the table on that page; PHB p. 103 is correct. The next to last entry should read "monster surprised", the last entry "party surprised".)

Did 2E deprive, e.g., elves, halflings and rangers of their bonuses to surprise others, and, e.g., rangers of their bonuses not to be surprised? Otherwise, I guess there still "were so many exceptions you couldn't keep track".

Good thing it isn't necessary to "keep track" of every character, monster and magic item in the game at once! All you need to know about are the ones present at the start of an encounter.

But the best part of 1e was definetly the DMG. This was (and still is) such a good reference book especially the appendices.

I'll second that!

 

[Shemeska]

The thing I remember most about 2E was not the rules - it was the settings. A vast, glorious, cornucopia of settings with their own peculiar rules and sub-genre of flavor.

Amen to that. I never formally played 2e, but the setting material from the period inspired me to an incredible degree and had a massive influence on my preferred playstyle to the present day.

 

[Thanael]

Hi there,

I guess the thread title explains everything. I´m just curious as I began playing with AD&D 2nd edition but never knew how it differs from 1st edition AD&D. Also, would you say that 2nd edition improved the game?

Why not grab a used 1E PHB and a 1E DMG (plus perhaps the Unearthed Arcana) from ebay and find out for yourself? Should be available for under $ 10 for all if you're not too concerned with condition.

That's what i did. I started with 2E too, and found the 1E DMG a very interesting read. It's a classic.

 

[john112364]

Surprised 1-3. DMG p. 62, second example.

(Note, however, errata in the table on that page; PHB p. 103 is correct. The next to last entry should read "monster surprised", the last entry "party surprised".)

Did 2E deprive, e.g., elves, halflings and rangers of their bonuses to surprise others, and, e.g., rangers of their bonuses not to be surprised? Otherwise, I guess there still "were so many exceptions you couldn't keep track".

Good thing it isn't necessary to "keep track" of every character, monster and magic item in the game at once! All you need to know about are the ones present at the start of an encounter.

I'll second that!

It wasn't keeping track of characters it was that not everyone used the same dice. Most used d6, but some used d8 (I can't remember if any other dice were used. The d8 just kinda stuck in my head.) And I still don't know how to figure surprise when one character is surprised only on a 1 and another surprises everyone on a 1-4 (cause they're sneaky bastards ) Maybe if I went back and reread it I may figure it out now, but it made no sense then.