Manbearcat
Legend
[MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION] has been making that argument over much more dramatic rules distinctions in later games and how things like NOT having save or dies or a presented timeclock based on wandering monsters and YES not having gold for experience points all generate different experiences.
Didn't see this thread.
I mentioned it in my thread (and elsewhere) that my thoughts on the primary changes from 1e and Basic/Expert to 2e weren't about rules organization, classes, bending the knee to mainstream outrage et al. There were a few very specific things that changed the culture of D&D play that were contemporary zeitgeist coinciding with (not coincidentally) 2e rules and ethos changes.
1) The Dragonlance novels (a few years leading up to release) and the Forgotten Realms novels. Metaplot becomes central to play.
2) "Big setting" with Forgotten Realms and Planescape.
3) The fundamental engine and reward cycle of 1e and Basic/Expert (Exploration Turns/Rest > Wandering Monster Clock > Monster Reaction > Morale > xp for Gold/Treasure) becomes muted or optional and xp for roleplaying (GM discretion) and xp for skill deployment (pseudo process sim) become mainstream.
4) Neutral refereeing mixed with the subtlety of D&D's Rule 0 gets basically culturally consumed by White Wolf's ("system doesn't matter") Golden Rule (effectively, “the GM may ignore or change any rule at any time for the sake of story/fun").
The combination of all of the above served, holistically, to change D&D fundamentally from a paradigm where neutral refereeing and system impetus rewarded skilled dungeoneering (which included meta/powergaming) and punished unskilled dungeoneering...to one of big metaplot/big setting and mandated GM Force/Illusionism which ensured the experience as players were rewarded for good characterizations/archetypal roleplaying and admonished for power/metagaming.
This was the big change I experienced (and the reasons for it).