A simplified D&D? Aren't you all forgetting something...

[Pants]

I've always been curious to run a 2e game and see how it holds up after the years of playing 3e.

Well, anyways... have fun with 2e at least. I know that I had fun with it back in the day.

 

[Aust Diamondew]

Whatever floats your boat.

 

[BSF]

If I were going backward, I would probably return to my 1st ed AD&D + Unearthed Arcana days. 2nd Ed had nice changes but eventually became so dobbled that I dropped it in favor of HERO. I like 3.x and I don't really plan on moving backwards.

 

[Akrasia]

My feeling is that 3E supports long campaigns and high-level play much better than previous editions. It also works better if you don't want to adhere to the 1E stereotypes.

Cheers!

My experience has been that RC DnD does the best job at handling high-level campaigns. 3.x really begins to drag at the higher levels (combat with 15th level characters can take for ages), and the epic-level rules are a mess IMO.

RC did a pretty good job in giving players easy-to-use (and DMs easy-to-tweak) rules for running domains, engaging in large-scale conflicts, and eventually becoming immortal!

 

[Akrasia]

My random thought: If I wanted to go back to 2nd edition...I'd make sure to give myself a lobotomy.

Serious, while no system is ever perfect, at least with 3.x and d20 I have MUCH more fun and much more flavor to use what I want than being stuck in 2nd.

What a relief that someone has pointed out to Johnnie Freedom that he has been having bad fun!

 

[Akrasia]

You might want to give Rules Cyclopedia basic D&D a shot. Aside from the races-as-classes silliness, it's arguably a smoother, simpler and more cinematic system than 2e. ...

Wow -- I actually agree with something MoogleEmpMog said!

... I actually like a great deal about 3e, especially the added character customization ...

You can avoid the "races-as-classes silliness" mentioned by MoogleEmpMog, and get "character customization" for RC DnD quite easily. Download an issue of OD&Dities (I think issue 7, available as a free pdf) that gives very simple rules for creating customized classes for RC DnD!

Rules-lite cinematic action AND customized classes. Two great tastes that go great together.

 

[Henry]

It's true that some of the restrictions in 2e seem silly and need to be house-ruled (such as race/class restrictions), but what system doesn't have players adding house rules?

3E, and 3.5, for my group. I don't think we've added a single house rule in either yet, unless you count setting-specific restrictions as house rules. I am glad that AD&D is going well for your group, though! We used to play it, and I couldn't get my group to try it now under durance vile.

 

[Mercule]

I don't think I could ever do 2E again. 1E, maybe, but I never used 2E, anyway. It was more like 1E with some rules cribbed from 2E (rangers can sneak, thieves distribute points, etc.). But that's a hair split, in comparisson. I don't think I'd go back to 1E, either -- the core d20/3E engine is much better, IMO.

One thing I have considered for my next campaign, though, is to use only core rules. Expansions (Complete X, etc.) will be either verboten or picking single rules from them for specific needs, but not generally advertised. There's a good chance some of the tweaks from UA would make it in, too.

Speaking of UA, if I really wanted a simplified game, I'd use 3E, with a couple of modifications from UA. First, use the level-based skills option where there are no choices involved -- in class skills are equal to level, cross class skills are 0. Second, use the generic classes from UA with no PrCs. Warrior, Expert, and Spellcaster are pretty straightforward and generally easier to manage than 13? base classes. If you do those two things, you've pretty much got OD&D running with a more stable base. Sure, you've got feats, but if that's the only complexity, you're fine.

If you want to refine things further, you can always pull in some other variants, like the UA facing rules.

 

[Meadred]

Well, if I'd ever go retro it would probably be AD&D 1st Ed. - have some really fond memories of that. About a year ago I got all warm and fuzzy thinking about Basic D&D, so I bought PDF versions of some old Basic D&D/Mystara stuff, but it didn't seem as fun anymore.

Sometimes I think that this longing for a simpler rules set might have something to do with the avalanche of d20 stuff that has been thundering along for a couple of years?! In my search for the perfect PC, campaign world, PrC, rules for situation XX, etc. I've purchased book upon book on a whole lot of subjects. I use rules for Action Points from UA, fear and insanity rules from CoC, spells and PrCs from X different splatbooks, and even new core classes. It feels like a gigantic patchwork, and sometimes I get the urge to strip away a lot of it, and return to just using the core rule books together with a few selected supplements. Anyone else get the same feeling - too much "sugar" ruins your appetite?

Cheers,
Meadred

 

[yipwyg]

I have been having the same sort of thoughts, going back to an earlier edition of D&D. I do not run any actual D&D campaigns at all currently, mainly dabbling in various ogl products. If I were going to go back I would do the following.

1: Get rid of Thac0, I mean all you have to do is reverse Ac and have attack values go up instead of down. You would also have to make all combat bonuses and penalties match.

I find it funny how my group says the reason they do not like earlier editions of D&D is mainly due to Thac0. That is one of the simplest things to fix.

2: Remove level limits and default racial class restrictions. I support class restrictions only if the campaign setting supports it.



What drives me nuts the most is this, our group has been playing 3.0/3.5 since the first day it has came out. None of us know the rules enough not to have to constantly look up DC's and other mechanical issues dealing with the various feats and combat moves.

We used to play for months without having to crack open the players guide in earlier editons. The people who DM in our group were very familiar and comfortable with the rules.

I also thought kits, eventhough most were unbalanced, were better than Prestige Classes. In 2nd edtion you started out as a fledgling character based on your concept. If you wanted to be a ninja you began as a fledgling ninja.

In 3.0/3.5 you create a character who dreams of one day joining a ninja clan. I do not know off hand how many start-stop games I have had were I never got to the level to even get the prestige class my character was after.

This is just a few of my thoughts on earlier editions of D&D

yipwyg

I currently have the RC, looking for the full Wrath of Immortals
All the Gazateers for the known world.

I would love to run an old school game, hopefully when C&C comes out I can adapt all that stuff to it.