D&D 2E Now I have the hankering to play a 2E game...

[Mark Hope]

I went back to 2e after giving 3e and Pathfinder a good shake. It's just such a robust system, compatible with all the other TSR editions to one degree or another, and you can hack the hell out of it and it still sings. I'm running a Dark Sun game now (streaming it on Twitch, actually) and it's just so nice to see how the various classes feel so different to one another in play. Such a great edition.

 

[Retreater]

It's funny; I had friends who refused to switch to 3e because they said it was too different a game, and I didn't understand that at all at the time. After all, I could still play my favorite type of character (an elven mage/thief, made possible in 3e by a sidebar in the DMG), so what was to worry about?

It took me years of regular play to understand 3e, and I'm not exaggerating. When I first got the books, I had to pass them to another player to take over as DM because I just didn't get it. He ran the first adventure series from "Sunless Citadel" through "Speaker in Dreams." Eventually I got to the point where I could even write professionally in the OGL, but it took significantly more time for me to learn that system than any other RPG I tried to learn.

I don't disagree with your Ship of Theseus point. I guess I just don't see it as being a problem. D&D as of the Greyhawk supplement in 1975 was a different game than the original publication. The evolution has been underway for a LONG time. I think the 2e/3e demarcation is one of the easiest to spot, maybe, but I think it was less severe than the shift from 3e to 4e in most respects.

I don't think it's a problem either - all editions are welcome with me.
I think the 2e/3e shift was more substantial to me than 3e/4e, because once I had the mindset of 3e down, I could build on that to any other d20-based system. (Without implying any quality comparisons) 2e to 3e is about like going from Palladium to Savage Worlds, or Call of Cthulhu to Monster of the Week.

Before 3e I didn't have a concept of likelihood on a d20 roll; average die results from d4, d6, d8, etc.; didn't use any tactics in play other than "creatures move up and attack this random target."

 

[Gorg]

Every D&D player from 3e on ... "I love D&D, but you know what ... it's so unfair how wizards are so powerful, and martials suck now. Also? What ever happened to niche protection?"

D&D players going back to the old editions after playing 3e+ for years .... "How will I ever play those weak magic users?"

I'm not one of those players. Never once whined about "B B B But XXX outshines my character!!!!" (that's one of the message board-isms that never made it's way into our game.) Guys played fighters because they WANTED to be that guy in the heavy armor, tough as nails, and waving around a pointy stick. If that's not the solution to every problem, so what? That's what your buddy in the robe and pointy hat is for, lol. Or the pious guy with the Holy symbol, and giant waggling No, No!! finger, he can wave at undead, Or the sneaky guy with the skillz, and penchant for jamming his dagger in monsters' backs.

We mostly remember the wizard as the guy who died quickly and often, had to be protected at all costs, and carried throughout most of the adventure. The most straitforward solution was to play a multi-classed wizard- so you had something else you could contribute when you'd cast your 1 spell. This problem tended to magnify itself in games run by sticklers for the 3d6- and no re-rolls! in order stat creation method, which produced far more terrible characters than decent ones.

We all benefitted from that small infusion of extra spells at low levels- it meant that they COULD prepare a variety of useful magicks. Nor are they as reliant on an arsenal of toys.

At the time, RAW wasn't in our vocabulary and sticklers for that sort of thing were mostly considered wet blankets. (DM's to be avoided, and players not to invite too often) I still think it's pretty obnoxious- and so, apparently, did Gary Gygax, the inventor of rule 0, lol. The modern tendency for players to insist on RAW is irritating, and imo, is a red flag warning for: Beware! Rules lawyer alert!

I'm trying to remember what our house rules were. iirc, it was mostly a matter of which parts of the rules we didn't use vs. add- ons or customized stuff.

- no racial class or level limitations.

- we didn't use encumbrance; % chance to know/learn a spell; NWP's; Kits; etc.

- a natural 20 = double damage. (and often an opportunity for something epic) a Natural 1 = critical miss. (the perfect example would be a d20 I saw on E-Bay upon which the 1 was replaced by the work F%$K, lol)

- we used a variety of ability roll methods over the years, like 1's got re-rolled; 4d6; 4d6 x 12 and pick the 6 best etc. Or simply rolling sets until you got a decent one. You NEEDED decent stats to survive long in a "Bill Dungeon" (Bill being or main DM)

The bonus spells by Intelligence for wizards thing someone suggested is a good idea. They even made it official for ALL full casters in 3E.

Or, I could simply use a more current edition for the mechanics- and the older ones for the fluff and feel.

 

[Alzrius]

At the time, RAW wasn't in our vocabulary and sticklers for that sort of thing were mostly considered wet blankets. (DM's to be avoided, and players not to invite too often) I still think it's pretty obnoxious- and so, apparently, did Gary Gygax, the inventor of rule 0, lol.

Forgive the pedantry, but Gary didn't invent Rule 0, either the idea or that particular term.

 

[GreyLord]

Well, you'd have to redo that one math problem every time you got a new magic item, an appropriate level, etc. and that would give you a chart that you'd have to look up...cough "200,000,000+ infinity" cough times. A lot of people would rather do basic addition than look up numbers on a chart repeatedly. But the math is the same, so it's just preference.

That's really slick.

How often do you get a new magic item?

If you fight one battle vs. a Dragon...let's say you have 15 rolls in 3e. That's 15 math calculations.

With THAC0...that's ONE calculation.

Get a magic item. Recalculate THAC0. That's ONE calculation.

Recalculate bonuses for 3e...that's ONE calculation.

Fight another battle vs. Dragon...that's another 15 rolls...that's 15 math calculations in 3e.

ONE calculation with THAC0.

3e has more math going on in that ratio...UNLESS...suddenly you don't have a problem with subtraction and treat it similarly to how you did with THAC0...

 

[David Howery]

I'd have to find a replacement for level drain that is scary, but not as frustratingly punishing as it was back in 1E/2E, though.

or you could steal from the Baldurs Gate 2 game and have super dooper Restoration spells that will reverse all level losses on a single PC, put them on scrolls, and have them available for sale at every temple the PCs run across...

 

[GreyLord]

Not to quibble, but this is a forum on the internet and therefore the very ideal of quibble-space:

1. I remember people complaining about hit point bloat in the 2e era, since Thieves had a d6 Hit Die instead of the original d4.

2. Death saves, like much of 5e's "innovations," appeared as early as the 1991 D&D Rules Cyclopedia (and probably before that).

3. I knew DMs in the early 90s who refused to use the Proficiency or ever the Secondary Skills systems in AD&D/2e due to the same complaints.

4. See 3, above.

TL;DR - we've been trying to get these darn kids off our lawns for DECADES, at least.

1. Thieves actually had 1d6 with AD&D which was before 2e. I have no idea why anyone would complain over 10 years after thieves had gotten 1d6...unless they had only been playing BECMI or BX prior to that.

2. Save vs. Death was a Saving Throw in AD&D as well (which was before 2e).

3. True. There were many who did not use Proficiency or Secondary Skills. 2e specifically let you grandfather 1e ideas into it...as well as allowing things to be optional without "unbalancing" the system.

4. There WERE, however, for many (but not all) ability score checks to resolve things. No skills required. Wish to move quietly...roll under Dex. Hide behind something and not be noticed...roll under DEX. Of course, this was over and on top of Thief skills. 3e sort of combined confusion on the differences between hiding and hiding shadows or moving quietly and moving silently by combing them into one skill. Many already didn't realize the differences but 3e codified it. This type of skill enforcement and focus has continued ever since...though 5e has slightly de-emphasized it with the bounded accuracy and ability to still do things without having a proficiency bonus in it.

 

[overgeeked]

With all the restrictions on magic-users in TSR editions of D&D, was there really a LFQW problem? Reading the AD&D2E PHB it's kinda glaring just how much control over MU and cleric spells the DM has. The MU has to find or be given any spells, so pure DM fiat. Then they have to roll to actually learn the spells they find. Then there's hit points. MU cap out at a laughable 10d4, so 40 max, +2 per level after 10th. On the off chance a MU gets to 50 hit points, there's the massive damage rules. CON decreasing with each return to life. Spell research is basically DM fiat. Spellcasting being spoiled. INT-based spell level limits. INT-based max number of spells. Having to have the spellbook to memorize spells each day. How long it takes to memorize spells each day. Seriously, how did TSR wizards get a reputation for being absurdly OP? Or is that more of a WotC D&D thing?

 

[overgeeked]

or you could steal from the Baldurs Gate 2 game and have super dooper Restoration spells that will reverse all level losses on a single PC, put them on scrolls, and have them available for sale at every temple the PCs run across...

I'm reading the AD&D2E PHB and my jaw dropped when I hit the section on energy drains. Holy hell. That's nasty. No wonder players hated energy drain. Especially casters. Damn.

 

[Ath'kethin]

1. Thieves actually had 1d6 with AD&D which was before 2e. I have no idea why anyone would complain over 10 years after thieves had gotten 1d6...unless they had only been playing BECMI or BX prior to that.

2. Save vs. Death was a Saving Throw in AD&D as well (which was before 2e).

3. True. There were many who did not use Proficiency or Secondary Skills. 2e specifically let you grandfather 1e ideas into it...as well as allowing things to be optional without "unbalancing" the system.

4. There WERE, however, for many (but not all) ability score checks to resolve things. No skills required. Wish to move quietly...roll under Dex. Hide behind something and not be noticed...roll under DEX. Of course, this was over and on top of Thief skills. 3e sort of combined confusion on the differences between hiding and hiding shadows or moving quietly and moving silently by combing them into one skill. Many already didn't realize the differences but 3e codified it. This type of skill enforcement and focus has continued ever since...though 5e has slightly de-emphasized it with the bounded accuracy and ability to still do things without having a proficiency bonus in it.

1. If online forums prove anything, it's that people will find reasons to complain about ANYTHING. I know d4 HD thieves hadn't been a thing since like 1976. I also know people griping about the move to d6s for them in 1994.

2. But the Rules Cyclopedia had death saves like the ones in 5e: that is, you hit 0 HP, make a save of this sort. Fail 3 of them and you're dead.

3. Of course, in the TSR era the concept of "balance" and "imbalance" were very different. It's part of why wizards started out so wimpy; by 12th level they could bend the world to their will. Meanwhile, fighters would use their Name Level granted armies to just CONQUER the world.

4. I still use roll-under mechanics to resolve many skill type checks. I like ability scores to matter regardless of what bonus they grant.