D&D 5E what is it about 2nd ed that we miss?

[billd91]

Fair enough. During 4th edition I was DMing my step-son and his friends, ages 12-14, so that probably accounts for my experience. They were children of the CCG era and tended to play D&D that way. I am sure if I was running the group of adults I currently DM, it would have been a different experience.

We played as a bunch of 30-40 somethings and we ended up managing with a bunch of cards and figuring out synergies too - this despite having played since the days of Basic D&D. It was a way of trying to assimilate all of the options in 4e while getting through grindy combat as quickly as we could. And it's one of the main reasons one of our biggest 4e fans threw in the towel on the edition.

 

[TwoSix]

I prefer this:

In 4th ed. it became more like "I am going to use XXX and push the target 5 feet, player 2 can then trip him with his XXX ability, so player 3 gets his bonus attack and do extra damage and then push him off the ledge".

to this:

Earlier editions of D&D, you worked with your party to overcome a foe, but it was more like "I am going to block the door so you can fireball the room".

Not to mention the random guttersniping of 3e/4e that started this digression was pretty unnecessary.

 

[RotGrub]

We played as a bunch of 30-40 somethings and we ended up managing with a bunch of cards and figuring out synergies too - this despite having played since the days of Basic D&D. It was a way of trying to assimilate all of the options in 4e while getting through grindy combat as quickly as we could. And it's one of the main reasons one of our biggest 4e fans threw in the towel on the edition.

I think a lot of groups gave 4e more than a fair try.

 

[Tony Vargas]

One of the big, overblown, fears when WotC bought out TSR, was that D&D would be turned into a CCG.

'Spell cards' were published by WotC for 3e, 'power cards' for 4e, and 'spell cards,' again, for 5e. The only difference being whether having so many cool abilities you needed cards to keep track of them was caster-exclusive or not. But none of them were anything like the use of cards in CCGs. They were just a way of tracking abilities.

'D&D' Gamma World's 'alpha mutation' and 'omega tech' cards, and Essentials/Encounters 'Fortune Cards,' came closest to crossing the line. The former were sold in blind/random packs and were an assumed, fairly important, part of the game - though you could get by well enough with the standard cards that came with the boxed set. They weren't nearly the whole game, as in a CCG, though. The latter were a trivial, optional adjunct to certain encounter seasons - but they were sold in blind/random packs.

But 'lack of spell cards' can't very well be a reason for missing 2e, since Spell Cards were a TSR product for 2e AD&D.

 

[Shemeska]

Planescape and the other myriad settings.

Classic tieflings who were overtly designed for D&D as being wildly varied in appearance and fiendish heritage. I'm still hoping that they return.

 

[ZzarkLinux]

Cards were good for monsters. 4e simplified monster stat blocks from 3e and focused on the combat-only stats, which made it easier to game the monsters but did cause dislikes. Personally, I'm okay if the Balor doesn't list Unseen Servant and Dancing Lights in his stat block. Though it did hurt the flavoring of the monsters quite a bit, especially since all the core books downplayed fluff.

Anyway, I have a question for the 2e experts:
4e had "Paragon Paths" which were streamlined Prestiege Classes built-in at Level 11.
3e had "Prestiege Classes", which were more piecemeal and less organized at level 6+ or so.

Did 2e have Prestiege Classes, Paragon Paths, or some "Expand your Character Leveling" feature besides multiclassing? Well, besides the Druid being required to join a fluffy Druid Circle.
Were 2e Prestiege Classes implemented well in the core books? Or were these options more "bolted-on" like in Skills & Powers or other non-core areas? Edit: Typos

 

[RotGrub]

Cards were good for monsters. 4e simplified monster stat blocks from 3e and focused on the combat-only stats, which made it easier to game the monsters but did cause dislikes. Personally, I'm okay if the Balor doesn't list Unseen Servant and Dancing Lights in his stat block. Though it did hurt the flavoring of the monsters quite a bit, especially since all the core books downplayed fluff.

Anyway, I have a question for the 2e experts:
4e had "Paragon Paths" which were streamlined Prestiege Classes built-in at Level 11.
3e had "Prestiege Classes", which were more piecemeal and less organized at level 6+ or so.

Did 2e have Prestiege Classes, Paragon Paths, or some "Expand your Character Leveling" feature besides multiclassing? Well, besides the Druid being required to join a fluffy Druid Circle.
Were 2e Prestiege Classes implemented well in the core books? Or were these options more "bolted-on" like in Skills & Powers or other non-core areas? Edit: Typos

Some campaign settings had what could be the first iteration of the PrC. The DL Knight of the Rose and Wizard of High Sorcery are two examples that come to mind.

In addition, 2e also had also introduced the concept of Sub Classes. For example, the 2e Viking Berserker is a Sub Class.

Personally, I never liked the level pre-reqs of PrCs. I think most concepts should be accessible at level 1. PrCs with pre-reqs above level 1 should be the exception not the norm. In fact, something along the lines of the 2e Specialty priests from Faith's and Avatars is the model I would have preferred.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Did 2e have Prestiege Classes, Paragon Paths, or some "Expand your Character Leveling" feature besides multiclassing?

Not exactly. 1e, however, did have a couple. 1e had the character-with-two-classes alternative to MCing, and it had an appendix in the PH that described the Bard class, which required you do the character-with-two-classes thing as a Fighter, then Thief, first, before becoming a Bard. That's arguably the earliest PrC-like feature. 1e UA, some years later, introduced the Thief-Acrobat, which was an alternate progression for the Thief class after, IIRC, 5th level. And, of course, sub-classes also go back to 1e (or maybe it was Blackmoor).

2e didn't have anything like that at launch, maybe in the later '..Option' books...

Were 2e Prestiege Classes implemented well in the core books? Or were these options more "bolted-on" like in Skills & Powers or other non-core areas?

The latter. Even Kits were in the 'Complete..' books.

 

[hejtmane]

More than anything else, I think it was because everything was new!

As an 11 y.o. playing in 1978 there wasn't much out there relating to fantasy 'culture'. The main source was novels, a few magazines, and almost no movies (stop action Jason and the Argonauts! lol). My friends and I devoured Tolkien, Moorcock, Lieber, and Howard. After that, things began to thin considerably. D&D expanded our horizons and our imaginations. It also led to an explosion of mainstream fantasy, which is still going on.

The kids drawn to D&D in those days tended to be the braniac nerdy types, and it gave them an instant peer group (besides chess club, debate team, or computer club lol). I still remember our discussion on the correct pronunciation of "Melee".

The rule system had it's flaws, but it did the job and learning the minutia was part of the fun (You use speed factor?!).

3rd/3.5 turned D&D into a min/max game. 4th ed. turned it into Magic Cards. 5th ed. brought it back to it roots, which accounts for its current renaissance.

The books are what led me to D&D and Moorcock was one of my favorites but the one that started me down the path was Loyd Alexander Book of Three but i started a few years after you 1980-81 time frame. Yes the books where the biggest influence slowly the movies started creeping in but then we had a new set of writers explode don the scene changing the narratives

David Eddings, Raymond Feist that started a next generation of Fantasy in 1982. Then in 1984 Dragon Lance that was a boon for TSR really changing the D&D realm. Anyways i could go on and on about early fantasy Novels I probably read a good three hundred novels to date.


That is when some movies started cropping up about fantasy realm in the early 80's
Beast master cult classic
Dragon Slayer solid
The sword and sorcerer only good part was the tri blade sword
Disney Black Cauldron (Butchered the book I still have some hate for Disney over that)

 

[Mouseferatu]

Disney Black Cauldron (Butchered the book I still have some hate for Disney over that)

They might, if we're really, really lucky, be about to make up for that: http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/41976/disney-sets-a-chronicles-of-prydian-film