D&D 2E 2e, the most lethal edition?

the Jester said:

I may be missing something- where do these increased weapon dice come from?

Click to expand...

Size modfiers vs large critters longswords deal 1d12, shortswords 1d8

Umbran said:

Ergo, the game of 1e, in practice, was more lethal. You just said it had higher kill rates. Done.




You effectively just said, "This analysis gives me result A. Therefore, I must do another analysis that gets me a different result." That's not solid reasoning.

Games are not cleanly separable from their playstyles. Trying to level set outside of the playstyle introduces a bias - because whatever method you introduce will implicitly represent a playstyle!

This was part of my original comment, actually - the only *really* fair way to see which game is more lethal is to see which one will kill more people when you drop it on them from out of a tree. Yes, this wasn't how the rules were intended to be used. But, you're analysis is also not about how each edition was to be used - why is your arbitrary choice better than mine?

Click to expand...

2E was designed to be backwards compatible. 2,E characters in 1E adventures will die slightly more often. 2E had killer dungeons and well but they're not as well known as the 1E ones.

More people played 1E as well so the 1E adventures are played as lot more.

2E fighters got weapon specialization built in, 1E ones didn't but generally 1E PCs are more powerful than 2E.

Objectively though

2E PCs are weaker (without kits)
2E PCs level up slower
2E monsters are tougher.

Sacrosanct said:

I did not say that. I said we need to look at how the rules were built, RAW, without subjectivity. ... How people used those modules later is the subjective part, because not everyone did. I'm only evaluating the actual core rules themselves.

Click to expand...

That's an issue, because we have no guide as to which of the various deadly monsters in TSR eds parties were supposed to face at a given level. We have decades of experience giving us a really good idea, but that's still all subjective, and it would tend to shift the game towards whatever desired level of lethality we were working towards...

Tony addressed most of what my reply would have been, so I won't bother reiterating.

However, there are factors that you are not considering. For starters, 2e had a morale system (2e DMG pg 71 - the DMG with the Jeff Easley cover, not the later printing). You didn't have to kill every monster. A group might route from losing as little as 25% of their group. Offering them a chance to surrender would prompt a second check if they were successful on the first.

Additionally, critical hits were optional (DMG 61). Since randomness tends to favor the monsters, this also worked in the players' favor, as anyone crit by a greataxe or scythe in 3e could attest.

As one can see on DMG 73, most poisons had a lengthy delayed onset time and only dealt hit point damage, not instant death. The onset times also gave players time to treat or neutralize the poison.

While death at zero was the default, on DMG 75 you'll see a sidebar labeled "Hovering on Death's Door" that allows PCs to survive until their hp reach -10.

Additionally, DMG 104 has an entire chapter devoted to hirelings and henchmen. You didn't need a feat to find muscle to take risks for/with you! (3e did have a chapter on hirelings in the DMG2, but that was pretty late in the edition lifecycle, when compared with being right there from the beginning in 2e.)

If you disagree that's fine, but I'm still of the opinion that (based on both a reading of the rules as well as my personal experiences) 3e grew far deadlier than 2e as levels progressed.

Fanaelialae said:

Tony addressed most of what my reply would have been, so I won't bother reiterating.

However, there are factors that you are not considering. For starters, 2e had a morale system (2e DMG pg 71 - the DMG with the Jeff Easley cover, not the later printing). You didn't have to kill every monster. A group might route from losing as little as 25% of their group. Offering them a chance to surrender would prompt a second check if they were successful on the first.

Additionally, critical hits were optional (DMG 61). Since randomness tends to favor the monsters, this also worked in the players' favor, as anyone crit by a greataxe or scythe in 3e could attest.

As one can see on DMG 73, most poisons had a lengthy delayed onset time and only dealt hit point damage, not instant death. The onset times also gave players time to treat or neutralize the poison.

While death at zero was the default, on DMG 75 you'll see a sidebar labeled "Hovering on Death's Door" that allows PCs to survive until their hp reach -10.

Additionally, DMG 104 has an entire chapter devoted to hirelings and henchmen. You didn't need a feat to find muscle to take risks for/with you! (3e did have a chapter on hirelings in the DMG2, but that was pretty late in the edition lifecycle, when compared with being right there from the beginning in 2e.)

If you disagree that's fine, but I'm still of the opinion that (based on both a reading of the rules as well as my personal experiences) 3e grew far deadlier than 2e as levels progressed.

Click to expand...

I still think with things like worse results on a failed save (poison, level draining, etc), super easy spell interruption, weaker casters and thieves, and a few other reasons mentioned upthread, 2e still takes the crown (or dunce hat, however your preferences align) for the deadliest edition. But I will give you credit for a compelling point about morale. It could make a big difference.

Sacrosanct said:

I said method I in 1e was 4d6 drop lowest. I am in fact correct. Since you quoted the DMG, I’m sure you saw the very next sentence was how it labels method I as 4d6. Not method II or V, but the very first method. You also ignore the meat of that paragraph where it says not to use 3d6 if you want decent PCs or are serious about the game

Click to expand...

You are in fact wrong. It seems you don't understand what alternative means. By definition, an alternative is not the default. It's an ALTERNATIVE to the default. I'm sure you saw how the sentence right before method I is mentioned, it explicitly says method I is an alternative.

It also seems like you and @Jer are confused by Gygax recommending that you try an alternative to the default. Suggesting an alternative to the default, because the default will often result in PC death does not change the default from 3d6 to another method. It just means that he doesn't like the default.

First four pages...a LOT of picking and choosing here on rules...

When this rule is in use, a character can remain alive until his hitpoints reach -10. However, as soon as the character reaches 0 hit points, he falls to the ground unconscious.

Thereafter, he automatically loses one hit point each round. His survival from this point on depends on the quick thinking of his companions. If they reach the character before his hitpoints reach -10 and spenda t least one round tendint to hiswounds (staunching the flow of blood...etc) the character does not die immediately. If the only action is to bind his wounds, the injured character no longer loses one hit point each round, but neither does he gain any.

Click to expand...

(2e DMG, original printing, pg 75).

If you are including the optional rules of 1e, you should also use the optional rules of 2e. 2e also isn't a 0 HP point (at exactly 0 HP you are unconscious, lower than that...you be DEAD...though a DM can allow it as low as -3 I suppose), and a LOT more lenient and nicer overall.

Rogues, Mages, and Clerics also have their THAC0 become better faster in 2e, and Fighters have weapon specialization in the CORE rules (no weapon specialization in the Core 1e rules). If we allow added rules, then we get many more broken combinations from the handbooks and AD&D 2.5 (skills and powers) which were FAR more broken than what we even got in UA.

In that light, I'd say 1e was actually FAR more lethal than 2e if PLAYED like 2e was generally, and especially if played like 3e.

However, if played differently, 2e could be more lethal.

Really...it depends more on your DM's style of gaming overall as the rules are close enough that it was the DM that made more of a difference than the specific rules in many instances.

For example...if the DM used the Death's door rule in 2e (page 75) or the unconscious at 0 HP for 1e, or interpreted the rules to allow you to go down to -10 HP in 1e (we didn't, most groups didn't...but hey...it WAS there...which is why DEATH's DOOR is an optional rule in 2e found in the 2e DMG), or myriads of other factors that could come into play.

In that same light, 3e could also be more lethal. One DM's 3e game could be far more lethal than another DM's 2e or 1e game. it really boils down to what options the DMs used, how they gamed, and how they interpreted various rules in the books.

Tony Vargas said:

Any chance your formative play experience with 4e included Keep on the Shadowfell, Thunderspire Labyrinth, and/or Pyramid of Shadows?

(Because, while the middle one was actually mostly pretty good, each included at least one example of completely whacked encounter design.)

...or, y'know, alternately, maybe your DM just liked killing you...


Vs encounters run closely to guidelines, 4e characters were often dropped, sometimes very greatful for the next long rest, but rarely killed outright, let alone TPKd. You could make that happen pretty easily by just dialing it up - EL mostly delivered as advertised - but you could, with enough experience & artistry, make any ed as deadly or survivable as desired.

Click to expand...

No we had a homebrewed campaign which at low levels was based on B10 Night's Dark Terror. We had a TPK around 5th level were we got caught up in overlapping auras or blasts from from some undead and went down quickly. It was rather embarrassing because by the time we worked out we were in trouble, it was too late.

Garthanos said:

I have heard DMs say in 4th they can go full out.... also a level +4 encounter is an acceptable encounter in 4e. Th DM has so much control over how dangerous things are by RAW the comparisons fail

Click to expand...

Agree. Different types of pacing within editions in addition to pacing across editions is an issue that makes comparisons really tricky. We had a lot of encounters in mid to high level 4e where were beyond level +4, if you had daily powers or even party synergised encounter powers on tap.

We also used to also get really strung out in terms of long rests in 4e. We once went a whole level/ 8-9 encounters (when we were about 26th level) on one long rest, we had no daily abilities and about 3 healing surges left in whole party by the end. Good times.

the Jester said:

I may be missing something- where do these increased weapon dice come from?

Click to expand...

Larger than man sized target.