Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RFisher" data-source="post: 3460929" data-attributes="member: 3608"><a href="http://users.rcn.com/aardy/faq/rgfdfaq4.html#E13" target="_blank">The rec.games.frp.dnd FAQ</a> had a decent list of the changes between 1e & 2e.For me, 2e is enough like 1e & classic D&D that my opinion of it doesn't fall far from my opinion of them. Anything that follows is nitpicking for the sake of nitpicking. Ask me to play or run a 2e game, & (after making my case for classic D&D) I'm in!From an AD&D viewpoint:Specialty priests are a great idea, but they are basically creating a custom class, which is hard to do well. Even the Druid class seemed like an awful kludge compared to the 1e version. Good in theory, less so in implementation. I finally decided it they weren't worth the trouble, & at that point, 2e isn't giving you much of anything over 1e on the Cleric front.The specialty MU thing I have similar opinions of. It worked out much better than things did on the Cleric side, but I would've rather had professional game designers & a serious playtesting effort put towards creating MU subclasses more in the vein of the 1e Illusionist.(Although, probably more importantly, I don't think a huge range of classes or mechanical customization of PCs is something (A)D&D needs. There are plenty of games that do that sort of things better.)The Monstrous Compendium was another one of those great ideas. The difference is that I don't know that--in the long run--I would've liked the result no matter how well implemented.I think those are the biggies. So--from the AD&D perspective--I'd prefer to ignore large chunks of 1e (perhaps effectively Osric) than play 2e. The 1e books, however, I find to be the most inspirational of any edition. No matter what edition I may claim as my base, I'll treasure my 1e books for inspiration.From a classic D&D perspective, however, I find 2e more interesting. If you don't use all the optional rules, it starts to look pretty similar to classic D&D. Still, I don't currently have any compelling reason to choose it over 2e.Of course, the big caveat is that I'm not very familiar with late 2e.(O_O) I see at least four or five different shades of 3e.When you're trying to generalize, though, you almost have to recognize at least two flavors of each edition: Core & core+supplements. There can be a huge continuum based on what supplements & what bits of what supplements you add, but you can't ignore that oD&D & oD&D+supplements or 1e & 1e+supplements or 2e & 2e+supplements or 3e & 3e+supplements can be significantly different. (The classic D&D line beyond oD&D doesn't quite follow the core+supplements pattern as neatly.)</blockquote>

Verification