Xaelvaen
Stuck in the 90s
We made these little custom blocks where you would write in the AC you would hit based on what showed up on the d20, so there was no math involved, but your point is completely valid nonetheless haha.
D&D 2E Returning to 2nd Edition
We made these little custom blocks where you would write in the AC you would hit based on what showed up on the d20, so there was no math involved, but your point is completely valid nonetheless haha.
billd91
Not your screen monkey (he/him)
There was some power there, but the trick was in successfully casting. It was highly interruptable in 2e to a degree not easily matched in subsequent editions. Initiative, action declaration, and casting time played a significant role in this, though it could be fairly complex at times. Stoneskin may have been a fairly useful counter to that, but it was ablated away by attacks directed at the wizard - whether they hit or not. So it never lasted that long. The material of diamond dust wasn't given a defined cost until Players Option: Spells and Magic and that put it at 100gp/casting. So, unless the DM was handwaving that away, it wasn't the cheapest spell to cast willy nilly.
Save or die spells were also increasingly sketchy as you went up in levels compared to 3e in particular. There was no way to increase the difficulty of the save and the tougher the monster, the easier it made its saves.
Enevhar Aldarion
Hero
Reading through threads like these makes me remember just how many house rules the groups I played in/Dmed for actually used back in the 80's and early 90's. lol
mach1.9pants
Hero
And Fighter's saves became really good at higher levels, LFQW was def something introduced in 3E. Maybe Linear Fighters Doubling Wizards is true in older editions, but man you started from a very low base and it wasn't until the teens that problems arised - or so I gather. I never got beyond 13 or so, and MUs were always fine IME.
Sacrosanct
Legend
Yep. Between spell interruption (every fighter I knew carried a bag of pebbles just for this reason) and a ton of monsters having magic resistance (a % to flat out ignore the effect), and mages still had a fairly rough go even at higher levels. It only took a couple hits even at name level to bring a magic user down.
Zardnaar
Legend
High Level AD&D wizards were easy to interrupt, kill, and their save or suck spells became very unreliable.
A 5E T Rex for example flunks a wisdom save around 75% of the time. A 2E one makes the save 75% of the time.
And 2E magic resistance was the strongest D&D ever had. Unlike 1E damage spells were also capped. It was probably the best balanced of the edition except for 4E but was better to play at mid to high level.
A 5E T Rex for example flunks a wisdom save around 75% of the time. A 2E one makes the save 75% of the time.
And 2E magic resistance was the strongest D&D ever had. Unlike 1E damage spells were also capped. It was probably the best balanced of the edition except for 4E but was better to play at mid to high level.
Last edited:
To be clear, I am not saying that 2e is itself inherently low fantasy, but rather that I want to do low fantasy and I think 2e works better for that than 5e and with less adjustments to either the rules or the implied setting. We played a lot of high fantasy 2e back in the day, too, whether homebrew airship campaigns or epic Dragonlance pastiches. But if you keep magic rare and keep advancement slow and maintain a consistent atmosphere, 2e I think lends itself better to Abercrombie or Martin or any fantasy movie starring Rutger Hauer.
thundershot
Adventurer
Looking back, I had the most FUN playing 2E. I started with BECMI, had a couple 1E books before 2E came out and we graduated to that. Played for 10 years. Definitely had lots of fun adventures in various settings.
3E was all well and good and was very modular and easily customized, but it just took forever for combat. 4E... I won't go there. We moved to PF after a failed 4E experience. 5E, to me, is the best experience and most fun since 2E.
However, there are elements of 2E that I still feel could be incorporated. It's not about limitations for me (you could limit yourself on classes and races all you want). I think it's the flavor of the classes. Mostly the SPELLS. I loved the unbalanced over the top spells. I loved the "save or die" anxiety. I loved the monster entries with ecology and habitat (which you can still use with 5E just not with newer monsters). Also there was monster magic resistance. I loved some of the crazy magic items that could make or break a campaign. I loved how ability scores gave you more than a + bonus to things.
With 5E, I would keep the static XP table. The mostly balanced races. I love how cantrips are early spells are more plentiful. Rogue sneak attack I'd keep. Also the easier multiclassing rules (though the 3.5 mutliclassing was fine).
If I had the time, I'd do test runs on certain things... but I don't...
3E was all well and good and was very modular and easily customized, but it just took forever for combat. 4E... I won't go there. We moved to PF after a failed 4E experience. 5E, to me, is the best experience and most fun since 2E.
However, there are elements of 2E that I still feel could be incorporated. It's not about limitations for me (you could limit yourself on classes and races all you want). I think it's the flavor of the classes. Mostly the SPELLS. I loved the unbalanced over the top spells. I loved the "save or die" anxiety. I loved the monster entries with ecology and habitat (which you can still use with 5E just not with newer monsters). Also there was monster magic resistance. I loved some of the crazy magic items that could make or break a campaign. I loved how ability scores gave you more than a + bonus to things.
With 5E, I would keep the static XP table. The mostly balanced races. I love how cantrips are early spells are more plentiful. Rogue sneak attack I'd keep. Also the easier multiclassing rules (though the 3.5 mutliclassing was fine).
If I had the time, I'd do test runs on certain things... but I don't...
