D&D 2E 2e, the most lethal edition?

Umbran · Jul 17, 2019

lowkey13 said:
OD&D > B/X > 1e > 2e > 3e > 5e > 4e

Not only is this true in terms of lethality, but it's also ALMOST completely chronological.

Weird huh?

Not at all (he said, taking the rhetorical bait). Remember the wargame root. In a wargame, you don't have characters, you have *units*. You only care about the survival of a unit in terms of its tactical value in the wargame scenario - you expect units to die, and you just move on. The old rules are not far from that. As time goes on, the game evolves away from that, to having a different concept of what the character is, and thus a different conception of when it is fun to have them die.

the Jester · Jul 17, 2019

ccs said:
Have you factored in wether or not helmets were worn in 1e?

You know, I've long thought that helmets should work like shields, offering a bonus to AC on top of that offered by armor- maybe +1 for a coif or +2 for a great helm. Possibly at the cost of disadvantage on Perception checks. [/digression]

lowkey13 · Jul 17, 2019

*Deleted by user*

Sacrosanct · Jul 17, 2019

lowkey13 said:
Yeah, but no. I don't particularly feel like going through your methodology, but I find most of it suspect and/or incorrect.

For example-

1e and 2e both used the same state generation. When 1e was released with the PHB, it defaulted to OD&D state generation since the DMG wasn't out. When the DMG was released, 3d6 was listed as the default with four alternative methods. Here's the pull quote-

"Four alternatives {to 3d6 in order} areoffered for player characters:"

4d6k1 (Method 1) wasn't the default, either- just the first of the four alternatives listed. It's the same with 2e.

No, it's not. As has been pointed out, 4d6 drop lowest was Method I in 1e; in 2e, it was method V. Method I in 2e was 3d6 in order. The 1e PHB didn't default to OD&D, but referenced the DMG:

Each ability score is determined by
random number generation. The referee has several methods of how this
random number generation should be accomplished suggested to him or
her in the DUNGEON MASTERS GUIDE. The Dungeon Master will inform
you as to which method you may use to determine your character's
abilities. The principal abilities are detailed as follows:

And in the DMG says that 3d6 is a bad way to go, so use Method I instead (4d6 drop lowest).

Second, as we just discussed, you couldn't just "go to -10hp before dying." Instead, if you happened to have something that knocked you down to EXACTLY 0 hp, but no lower, there was a rule for that.

And 2e didn't even have a rule for that. At 0, you died. Full stop. Ergo, 2e was tougher

I don't think that using dragons as the one example for monsters is particularly illuminating, and I also think you are giving extremely short shrift to the extreme change in focus to player-centric options in 2e that started the codification of proficiencies in the PHB and continued on through all the softcover expansion books.

I used two iconic monsters, but the trend was pretty consistent for most monsters. If you're going to talk prof, then 2e didn't have anything near double or triple weapon specialization that 1e had. And if you're gonna bring up expansions of optional rules, then 2e didn't have ability stat generation method that was in UA, which essentially guaranteed 18s in your top three abilities, with everything else being high as well.

In short, you can't take small parts of the rules in isolation. the switch to 2e (arguably starting with UA) was the start of the kinder, gentler D&D, it just happened to have some of the OSR underpinnings.

UA was not a switch to 2e. Not even remotely close. It came years before, and none of the uber rules in UA were in 2e. I'm sorry, you know I love 1e better than 2e, but the facts seem to be the facts.

Sacrosanct · Jul 17, 2019

Looking at the rules and how they are written, it seems pretty clear that 2e was, "We're gonna keep the really brutal things like save or die, and level drain that came from 1e. Then we're gonna make it even harder by saying 3d6 in order is the number one option, get rid of the 0 hp bleed out rule, and make you make a save or die if you take 50 or more points of damage, and then beef up the monsters' combat abilities."

Not sure how one can argue 2e is not more lethal, when looking at the actual core rules. If you factor in 2e's Player's Options into the argument, then to be fair you have to factor in 1e's Unearthed Arcana rules as well. And suffice to say, UA make PC's superheroes by comparison.

lowkey13 · Jul 17, 2019

*Deleted by user*

Sacrosanct · Jul 17, 2019

lowkey13 said:
*sigh*

When was the PHB published?

When was the DMG published?

Now, here's what I wrote-
"When 1e was released with the PHB, it defaulted to OD&D state generation since the DMG wasn't out."

Do you understand what I wrote now? Good.

I quoted the text in the PHB. Don't like it, take it up with Gary. Besides, there were only a few months between the PHB and DMG. Are you really arguing that most people defaulted to 3d6 in order because that's what they knew in 1978 in those brief months between the publications, as opposed to an exponentially higher number of gamers over the following 10 years when they had both book available? Needless, so say, I'd find that very dubious. How many D&D players were there in 1978 compared to the amount that started after 1979? And then also assume that when the DMG did come out a few months later, all of those gamers from 1978 kept 3d6 in order instead of doing what the DMG advised?

And please refrain from the condescension. It's unbecoming. Especially when you can't refute my arguments with actual evidence.

The other part you wrote is incorrect as well- it did not say to use method 1, and I quoted the exact part stating there were four alternatives.

Yes, yes it did. It literally said that 3d6 wouldn't get good results, and if you're serious, to use the other methods instead, starting with Method I: 4d6 drop lowest. It's right there in the DMG, look it up. There is a reason 4d6 drop lowest was Method I, instead, of say...method V like in 2e.

Look, your "argument" is basically, "Look guys, I just learned that 2e increased the toughness of dragons!"

Good for you. The rest is BS, but you're welcome to your opinion, as incorrect as it may be. I mean, when you keep making statements like:

"Not sure how one can argue 2e is not more lethal"

It's clear you're not looking for discussion, but validation. And you're not getting that from me.

I don't know what your problem is, but of the two of us, it seems like it's you who isn't looking for a discussion. I haven't just said, "Look guys, I just learned that 2e increased the toughness of dragons!" I gave a pretty detailed list of examples. Examples you seem to be ignoring. Then you accuse me of being wrong when I literally pointed out to you where it's coming from. This isn't my opinion. And it's not BS. It's text literally from the rulebooks.

Sacrosanct · Jul 18, 2019

Wait, what? It looks like lowkey13 blocked me. I don’t mind if people put others on ignore for whatever reason, but this strikes me odd because over the past 10 years, we’ve agreed and got along on 99% of our posts. We’re both 1e fans as our favorite edition. I don’t know if there is something going on outside of here that caused him to be so aggressive in his response, but if there is, I sincerely hope he gets resolution. Just odd to have someone you’ve agreed with and got along with for so many years to suddenly block you because you don’t agree that with confirmation bias of 1e. A confirmation bias I shared myself until I looked at the actual rules.

Seramus · Jul 18, 2019

Sacrosanct said:
Wait, what? It looks like lowkey13 blocked me. I don’t mind if people put others on ignore for whatever reason, but this strikes me odd because over the past 10 years, we’ve agreed and got along on 99% of our posts. We’re both 1e fans as our favorite edition. I don’t know if there is something going on outside of here that caused him to be so aggressive in his response, but if there is, I sincerely hope he gets resolution. Just odd to have someone you’ve agreed with and got along with for so many years to suddenly block you because you don’t agree that with confirmation bias of 1e. A confirmation bias I shared myself until I looked at the actual rules.

If he blocked you, doesn’t that mean by default that your account auto-blocks him? And since you are the OP, he can no longer get into the thread? Which means none of us can reply to him and get a response in this discussion.

Huh. I blame too many gnome paladins in his lawn.

Sacrosanct · Jul 18, 2019

Seramus said:
If he blocked you, doesn’t that mean by default that your account auto-blocks him? And since you are the OP, he can no longer get into the thread? Which means none of us can reply to him and get a response in this discussion.

Huh. I blame too many gnome paladins in his lawn.

Used to be that way. Not sure if it still is. Used to be if he blocked me or I blocked him and I created the thread, and anyone who quoted him, he would get a notification he was quoted, but “post hidden” message would display.

Either way, it feels like a long time friend just blocked me over this, which is why it feels like a bummer (normally I couldn’t care less if someone blocked me; it happens). If I could, I’d apologize if my responses were harsher than they should have been