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

[FormerlyHemlock]

@Hemlock, I'm not 100% sure what the significance of your laughter is - but I would have thought (from your posting history) that you might be into a monk using his open hand technique to push an enemy 15 feet towards his fellow monk, so that she can then use her martial arts to knock the enemy prone, so that the barbarian berserker can then use his/her bonus attack from frenzy to do extra damage before pushing the enemy off the ledge.

The laughter was an appreciative response to your wit in the first few paragraphs:

I've noticed that many of the people who favour 4e - eg many posters on these boards, as well as the group I play with - have been playing D&D since the 70s or early 80s. In my own case, the relevant date is 1982.

I've also noticed, based on posts on these boards plus talking to people I know who play 5e, that many of those who play 5e haven't played D&D before.

I'm not sure that anything much follows from all these observations, though.

I originally had something to say about the substance of that post too, but Enworld was being super slow at the time and now I've forgotten what it was. The only thing that actually got through the slowness was the laugh.

 

[pemerton]

[MENTION=6787650]Hemlock[/MENTION], thanks for the reply!

 

[ZzarkLinux]

I wish the mobile site had a laugh button... Hope it gets fixed soon.

I've noticed that many of the people who favour 4e - eg many posters on these boards, as well as the group I play with - have been playing D&D since the 70s or early 80s. In my own case, the relevant date is 1982.

I was in a big 3.5 game back in 2004 and had minor exposure to 2e before that. I prefer 4e a lot, but acknowledge that I have no attachment to any novels or settings. The first official setting I recognize is "3.5 Great Wheel" (yes yes, I know the Plane of Salt & stuff goes back before 3.5). Of course I prefer the Wold Axis version X-D I didn't buy settings before 4e !

CCGs are wargames or boardgames whose business model is based around (i) constantly selling new components by (ii) managing (via marketing, accreditation, market churn, etc) an ever-changing "official" play environment.

4e, like all editions of D&D, resembles a wargame or a boardgame in few respects

The CCG term is wierd for me. If someone accuses 4e of "being a CCG" then I disagree. But if someone says "I feel like 4e is a CCG" then I acknowledge their view. CCG is kinda shorthand for:

4e PHB bucked tradition. 2e PHB claimed OD&D 1e compatability.
4e PHB had brighter fantasy artwork. 2e had dark shading & realistic artwork.
4e PHB didn't reference old settings much. 2e PHB didn't have settings to refer to?
4e PHB/MM were organized rulebooks. 2e core books were I assume rules novels?
4e PHB denied the OGL, and was funded by MtG - The Company. Did TSR sell CCGs?
4e PHB cleric was just another healer. 2e PHB cleric was the only allowed healer.
4e PHB had back-to-back pages of power cards with no artwork... or "toon" artwork.
4e MM had the Nymph and Succubus as Politically correct. 2e showed skin.

So what did we miss from 2e? It attempted backward compatability, it used realistic artwork, it didn't ignore settings, it was written like a novel, it wasn't tied to a prominent CCG company, it wasn't responsible for ending the OGL, it enshrined the cleric with exclusive healing, didn't have back-to-back pages of Rules Boxes (with a token line of flavor text at the top), and it took the clothes off the succubus.

What did I miss?

 

[hejtmane]

Huh. I read those books several times but until you wrote that it never occurred to me that I didn't know how old Fflewddur Fflam was. I guess I thought of him as kind of middle-aged or something, purely because he was old (i.e. grown-up) compared to Taran and Eilonwy.

This slightly changes how I few Ffleddur.

I thought of him in his 25-30 range older than the teens but his roaming would suggest something young and he was a good swordsman so I guess he would be a valor bard in the 5e world

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I thought of him in his 25-30 range older than the teens but his roaming would suggest something young and he was a good swordsman so I guess he would be a valor bard in the 5e world

Now I want to see a Valor Bard take on four enemies at once via Hypnotic Pattern to incapacitate most of them and then going to town with his sword and shield. (Shield Master + Athletics Expertise FTW!)

That would be an awesome scene.

 

[Tony Vargas]

To show this, just using 2e I decided to put together two character concepts with nothing more than just the Player's Handbook. No Complete books. No Player's Options. My PHB is the recently released green cover one - which is the equivalent of the 1995 release.

[sblock]...
Weapon Prof (4)
1. Broad Sword...[/sblock]

I miss broadswords.

 

[Ath'kethin]

Someone FAR up this thread had posted that you need the backgrounds in 5e in order to have alternative character concepts (instead of just a straight fighter). Although backgrounds are interesting, I don't think they are necessary. To show this, just using 2e I decided to put together two character concepts with nothing more than just the Player's Handbook. No Complete books. No Player's Options. My PHB is the recently released green cover one - which is the equivalent of the 1995 release.

There you go again, making characters with personalities and stories and motivations instead of just a list of possible actions. How many times do we have to tell you that your way of playing the game is just wrong?

 

[Dorian_Grey]

There you go again, making characters with personalities and stories and motivations instead of just a list of possible actions. How many times do we have to tell you that your way of playing the game is just wrong?

Ha! I know right? I get that everyone has a different way to play, but I just don't feel that you need specific rules for every situation.

 

[Ath'kethin]

I never understood the "all characters of type X are exactly the same" argument. A simple look at characters from popular books is enough to demonstrate the falsehood of such an idea.

 

[pemerton]

Ha! I know right? I get that everyone has a different way to play, but I just don't feel that you need specific rules for every situation.

Except that the rules need to cover the difference between a longsword and a broadsword? (As per your XP to post 240.)

Also, in building your two characters you've used the optional NWP rules. And you seem to be using those NWP to signal the difference between a religious background and a criminal background.

Do you have a criterion for distinguishing "good" rules from "bad" rules?