*** You do know we've moved away from 2nd edition, don't you? There's a brand new 3rd edition you really should try out. ***
Yes I know. Yes I know it's certainly much better than the 2nd.
Yes I understand how the 3rd ed appeals to new player
and even old players cause it's well-done.
No I won't play with it except maybe in many years if I ever
get bored with the 1st which I don't think will happen since
it's my imagination (helped with the 1st edition) working well
with ME.
*** Well, saying 'real' demonology is an interesting concept Nonetheless, both 2e and 3e have 'real' demons (think incubi, succubi, lemures...), and they aren't called 'type I' or 'type II' either ***
Names like Baalzebul, Baphomet, Mephistopheles, Mammon, Asmodeus, Baal.
*** It has druids and illusionists as separate classes
even in the spells sections (and the druid is my favorite class). ***
*** However, I don't think an entirely seperate class is necessary for illusionists. ***
Why not ? If the "specialist" concept would have been part of the 1st ed,
I'm sure the details-maniac would have made a spells section for each.
*** Haven't seen enough 1e artwork to comment much on this, though I'd say plenty of 2e and 3e art is very evocative - especially the Planescape range of art, IMO. ***
Honestly, 3rd ed has great pictures, much better than 2nd,
but only the 1st had pictures like they were drawn in our
real historic past, simply, like "engravings" which FEEL
old.
(((It has 6 saving throws.)))
*** And in what way is this a good thing? ***
Much more interesting
Where's the saving throw against spell, petrification, etc
in 3rd ed ? I feel without them it's NOT Dungeon as I know it.
(((It is the original version by the very guy who created RPG
or at least D&D (reason enough?).
Subsequent AD&D and D&D are just copies without the feel.)))
*** I strongly disagree on this one, at least in terms of 3e which is a huge step forwards. ***
Ok, just remember that when you'll see EVERY video game that uses
a "characters levels" system that was inspired
by the 1st ed system created by Mr Gygax.
Is he getting paid for every such video game ?
Hmmm...
(((Legends & Lore had pictures in it !!! (duh))))
*** Eh? ***
2nd edition Legends & Lore ain't got no pic, not one, zero, zip, nada.
I don't know about the 3rd (?)
(((1st ed Oriental Adventures presented ALL-NEW PC classes
and was written through intensive and passionate research
while 2nd ed Complete Handbooks and I hear Arabian Adventures
only had DISAPPOINTING and NO FUN AT ALL
CHARACTERS KITS which are a real RIP OFF
instead of new PC classes.)))
(((It has the assassin and the barbarian NOT CHARACTERS KITS.)))
*** Fortunately 3e resolves this problem. ***
Ok I don't know how.
*** I have to agree with left-handed hummingbird - we're onto 3e now! ***
Are we ? Have fun
that's the point of it.
I just wanna yell to the world how the 1st ed
is at least as good as the 3rd.
(((It has the real demons from real demonology.
It has a spell to summon some.))0
*** So does 3e. ***
I don't know.
*** Well, Illusionist isn't separate in 3e, but Druid sure is. It has its own spell list. ***
Cool ! At least !
(((1st ed Oriental Adventures presented ALL-NEW PC classes
and was written through intensive and passionate research
while 2nd ed Complete Handbooks and I hear Arabian Adventures
only had DISAPPOINTING and NO FUN AT ALL
CHARACTERS KITS which are a real RIP OFF
instead of new PC classes.)))
*** 3e Oriental Adventures has new classes also, and is not that different from 1e. Al-Qadim, or Arabian Adventures, was a FANTASTIC book, almost universally praised. You might want to actually read it before judging it. ***
Ok but if it ain't got any new class, it can't be accepted as a book
like 1st ed Oriental Adventures cause it causes an imbalance between
regions of the real world (one having different classes while the other not)
*** 3e has the Barbarian as a core class. The Assassin is a Prestige Class, very different from kits. Kits don't exist in 3e. ***
Damn good thing.
(((I am presently re-reading every book from the 1st ed even if
I'm French though very good in English
and I will NOT play another edition...)))
*** Then you're missing out, and basing your decision on 3e according to how bad 2e was. 3e is very different from 2e. ***
I realize 3rd ed is far better than 2nd ed and easily the equal of the 1st
but between the two I prefer the original if they're equals !
Can't beat the original. But I understand your point !
Just doesn't work for me.
(((I finally answered the question)))
*** Yes, you did, but it sems like you may never have even heard of 3e. It's not 2e at all. ***
I went through the pages a bit.
The pictures are great.
(while a little out-of-this-world
out-of-this-planet's-lore feel)
The rules seem better than ever.
But I would miss something
because of every little thing
removed from the 1st
I want it all.
They don't have the right
to remove anything.
The creator has been removed.
I think I would switch to "Lejendary Adventures" from Gary Gygax
before switching to the 2nd or 3rd
cause the creator himself surely has surpassed himself
and corrected things, if you will, with his new baby.
*** *wink* *wink* *nudge* *nudge* ***
*** I'm dubious, but I'll bite.
Just one point.
AD&D 1e is not the original.
That would be Original D&D ***
Agreed and bowing.
I've played it a long time ago.
In French !
This introduced me to RPG.
The picture of the OwlBear
in the Basic module
will stay printed in my mind
as how a real OwlBear
should really look like.
I've never seen another picture
looking like a real OwlBear
after that.
*** Okay, I may sound like an echo below. However, I really must ask: have you PLAYED 3e? It sounds like you are describing 2e in many places below. ***
No I've not played it cause I've never even explored every possibility with
1st ed yet ! And I will explore every bit of possibly with 1st ed
for a few years before switching - probably to Lejendary Adventures
if I ever buy it.
*** Oh, yeah. I remember reading my folklore talking about type I-IV demons. Not. ***
*** If you want authentically named demons, see if you can dig up a copy of Stephan Michael Seechi's Atlantis setting. It is more true to the folklore than anything D&D has done to date. ***
I get you. The point is why abolish the demons from the 1st ed ?
To be politically correct ? Let me laugh.
*** You mean like 3e's summon monster spell (which unlike 1e's version is actually useful) and the planar ally and planar binding spells, which are far more useful that the silly cacodemon spell. ***
Who's talking about useful ?
1st ed has everything if you start there and change everything to suit your needs instead of buying subsequent editions where some other people have changed things in their view to suit your (?) needs.
*** Druids have a separate spell list. Again, are you sure you are talking about 3e? ***
Ok, ok, I know about that now
(((It has 6 saving throws.)))
*** Actually it has 5. And unlike 3e, there is little rhyme or reason behind them. ***
5 ? Yes, I guess you're right.
But they had style, they were not just technical.
Why not change Armor Class to Defense Points then ?
Why not change for 10 Defense Points equals Armor Class -10 ?
Cause Armor Class got style
I wouldn't play a AD&D without Armor Class
and I wouldn't play a AD&D without spells and petrification saving throws.
(((It is the original version by the very guy who created RPG or at least D&D (reason enough?).)))
*** Nope.
The players and DMs are ultimately responsible for providing the feel. The mechanics must be funtional. And 3e is much more functional than 1e's, IMNSHO. ***
Ok but 1st inspires me to be a better DM.
It has, for me, the feel, it feels right.
Not a game where some people stole ideas
from someone else and are trying to make them
better. Do you prefer Coke or Pepsi ?
(((1st ed Oriental Adventures presented ALL-NEW PC classes and was written through intensive and passionate research while 2nd ed Complete Handbooks and I hear Arabian Adventures
only had DISAPPOINTING and NO FUN AT ALL CHARACTERS KITS which are a real RIP OFF instead of new PC classes.)))
*** Uh... hello! Wake up and smell the new edition. That was second. ***
Sniff !!! Sniff !!!
The new edition smells new.
The old edition smells like an old library.
(((It has the assassin and the barbarian NOT CHARACTERS KITS.)))
*** So does 3e. The difference is that unlike in 1e, they are balanced. ***
That could well be the case. Thanks.
But I like those extreme classes.
The DM just has to be careful.
(((I could go on and on.)))
*** And from all appearances, I could go on an on. Or at least I would if it didn't appear that you are laboring under the incorrect assumption that the current edition is 2e. ***
Well that's because I won't spend a dime for a copy
while I've got the original.
I've been had once with the 2nd, no more.
But Gary Gygax himself is praising the 3rd.
I don't really care.
I guess he likes the 1st
(((Go buy them all before they become an expensive rarity)))
*** Uh, want mine? ***
I bought them already.
(((I am presently re-reading every book from the 1st ed even if I'm French though very good in English and I will NOT play another edition.)))
*** At least you are comfortable in your closed-mindedness. ***
Yes !
*** Well, first off, sorry about that figure skating thing last night. I think those Canucks deserved the gold too. ***
I guess the term Canuck don't fit well a French Canadian
(Quebecers, more precisely)
but Thanks ! I don't know about it all but I've heard about it.
Looks like our whole world is falsified.
*** Back on topic, I just recently found my old 1ed player's handbook I re-read it. While I remember how fun the game was, I kept thinking "man am I glad this changed ... this too... this too" ***
*** So, I guess I will be getting rid of the 1st ed PHB soon. I have some old 1ed D&D modules too. ***
Having fun aren't you ?
See where the world will go without loyalty or respect
for the originals who made this world.
Hehe.
*** Go 1e! and OD&D! I love 'em both. ***
*** the funny thing of these thread is that all editions have been translated in French. Even the 3° one. You can allready find "Le Manuel des Joueurs", "Le Guide du Maitre" et le "Manuel des Monstres" de la 3° edition....
***
Ok merci ben mais ici au Québec je l'ai jamais vue la 1ère édition en français.
Peut-être qu'elle ne s'est pas rendue ici ?
Vous les avez toutes, vous, les traductions, en France.
Comme les Livres Dont Vous Êtes Le Héros.
(mais ceux-là on les a eus)
*** I too much perfer the art in MM & MM2 from 1e to 3e. In fact I usually haul the MM's with me so I can show the players what stuff looks like. The 1e MM's were just great products with tons of feel and atmosphere, MUCH better than the 3e MM. I still love to flip through the deamons, demons, & devils of 1e and read the descriptions and look at the art. The individual pictures of all the creatures was great too, half the in the new MM doesn't even have a pic! ***
Now you tell me about it !
I was about to go out and buy it !
Thanks !!!
*** I never played 2e, but I don't find 1e to be lacking even when compared to game systems written 20 years later. ***
It has everything... I believe new editions should have added,
not removed... like Unearthed Arcana did, respecting the game.
*** I recommend anyone interested in 1e ask around at the Hackmaster community to see what they have to say. It has the "1e" feel. ***
http://pub18.ezboard.com/fhmpafrm4
Cool.
*** Note I am biased since I wrote a lot of HM. I do so love the "1e" feel and we tried real hard to preserve it and even expand on it. ***
That's what I mean.
When I bought the 2nd, it's because I believed I could not buy the 1st back.
I was young and wrong, sorry.
*** But you certainly shouldn't take my word for it. The products speak for themselves. ***
Right. Someone called me closed-minded earlier.
I believe maybe they too see the 1st ed as black & white
old
while they would not believe how treasurable it is.
*** OK- I just have to reply to this. Not sure why? But seeing as how I started playing in 1981 with 1e I guess I qualify. ***
(((It has the real demons from real demonology.
It has a spell to summon some.)))
*** To some degree true...but most were in name only and a lot were just invented. For example....Graz'zt, Fraz Urb' Luu. There are no real world equivalents. And the true version of Demogorgon is not a two-headed baboon with tentacles. ***
I understand. Still. No AD&D came closer to the "truth" then the 1st.
Hehehe.
*** So does 3e (and so did 2e). Druids are still a separate class (they always have been AFAIK) and illusionists are specialist wizards. ***
Yes I know I was wrong the way I wrote it.
They just felt separated then melted.
(((It has a darker and older feel,
even in the way the printing is done,
the pictures look and feel older and
stimulate the imagination more.)))
*** While I tend to like the artwork more in 1e than any other edition....to each his own I guess. The "feel" is what you as DM make of it. ***
Yes, the 1st ed's pictures help ME get the feel.
The 3rd is great I guess.
But while the 2nd had some great pictures,
the flashy colourful graphic printing inside was so modern !!!
*** 3e has three saves. No need for anymore. Need to dodge something? Roll a Reflex save. Need to withstand a physical change or assault? Make a Fortitude save. Need to repel some mind-influencing spell? Make a Will save. Easy, simple, to the point. ***
I guess that's practical.
I want to keep the style.
(((It is the original version by the very guy who created RPG
or at least D&D (reason enough?).
Subsequent AD&D and D&D are just copies without the feel.)))
*** Possibly true to some degree, but as I said above....the DM is the one that puts the feel into it. ***
Yes, but as a master, I want the real feel of the real author.
Not some tampering by persons who did not invent anything
but just tampered with another's ideas.
Mr Gygax had a reason for every thing.
He knew where he was going.
Very much.
Nobody's perfect but at least he revolutionalized gaming.
(((Legends & Lore had pictures in it !!! (duh))))
*** You do mean Deities & Demigods right? The book was recovered near the mid to end of 1e as Legend & Lores, but the original book was called Deities & Demigods. ***
Yes, the one and the same.
I got Cthulhu and Melnibonéan mythos in PC format.
Yeah !
(((1st ed Oriental Adventures presented ALL-NEW PC classes
and was written through intensive and passionate research
while 2nd ed Complete Handbooks and I hear Arabian Adventures
only had DISAPPOINTING and NO FUN AT ALL
CHARACTERS KITS which are a real RIP OFF
instead of new PC classes.)))
*** The 3e version of OA is a conversion of the original book and then some. The classes are there; the spells, etc. I agree that KITS and the Complete Handbooks were well....garbage (more or less- though I did like the Thieves Handbook). Al-Qadim (the Arabian Adventures stuff) was good, at least IMO. ***
I never read Arabian Adventures but I want new classes, not kits.
I agree, the thief's handbook had great moments.
Mostly magic items in my case.
(((It has the assassin and the barbarian NOT CHARACTERS KITS.)))
*** The barbarian is a core class in the 3e PHB. The Assassin is a prestige class in the DMG. They are both in 3e as good/bad as ever. ***
Cool then !
(((I could go on and on.)))
*** Please don't. It seems a lot of what you are saying is #1 based on 2e rather than 1e, and #2 it doesn't seem like you have even seen or looked at 3e at all. ***
Right... I would buy it just for fun if I was rich...
cause the pictures are cool
but I would still want to play 1st ed.
(((I can always take a small thing here and there
from the 2nd edition and add it if I feel the need arise
which I don't till now.)))
*** Isn't taking a small thing from here or there and adding it to your game what D&D has ALWAYS been about? ***
YES !!!
*** You say you will never play another edition? Then you are missing out. ***
No, cause as you just said, WE can make our OWN 2nd and 3rd editions !!!
*** While I agree that 2e was bad, 3e is not. It is different, more streamlined, and a lot of fun. It has brought a ton of 1e players back to the game, and if anything can capture that 1e feel it is the new rules. ***
At least that. I don't hate the 3rd. I kinda hate the 2nd a bit.
Nah, not that much... almost... the first printing, yes...
*** Hell, look at the 3e DMG and the 1e DMG. The exact same sample scenario is in both books (the dungeon, the scroll tube, the ghouls, etc). It plays just as easily and fun with the 3e rules as it did using the 1e rules. ***
Cool.
*** 2e was about storytelling and driving the story. 3e takes the game back to the dungeon, where it should be. It is after all called DUNGEONS & Dragons. ***
Yes.
*** I don't see what that has to do with anything. Do all of your games feature dragons as well because it's called Dungeons & DRAGONS? Back to the dungeon was, IMO, the biggest step backwards for the 3e system, and quite surprising when in most respects it is such an improvement over prior games. ***
Dungeons are classic adventures.
I won't answer the second page, sorry, it's much too long now... (like you care or mind
)
