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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ariosto" data-source="post: 5665783" data-attributes="member: 80487">With 2e, the range of material pretty much runs the gamut from near-1st edition to near-3rd. So, how "2e" plays depends, I think, on which 2e you're playing. My regular group was playing nominally 2e AD&D -- really just "D&D", the same old DM-personalized shindig since 0e. Most of the players actually had 1st ed. books, only the DM having the 2e ones. Then we switched to 3.5 for a while. For us, the latter was not a good match. The detailed character 'building' did not appeal to most of our gang, and really turned off a significant minority. The old game is better for guys who just want to get right into adventuring, whereas the newer one is better for people who get into all the game factors (skills, feats) describing characters. Combats had always taken a long time (meaning 30 minutes or so in old D&D), because we had a lot of other socializing going on at the same time. We were also used to playing it pretty fast and loose. Small unit tactics were important, but mainly the interest was in the outcome -- what we were fighting for, and what it cost. With 3.5, the zoom in on fine points (full action, 5' step, attack of opportunity, etc.) really suited one player who got into it, but the slow pace of the adventures -- exacerbated by our lack of "knuckling down" to the rules -- really bugged at least one other. There was too much time spent on fights, and too much on discussion of rules (which most of the guys could not be bothered to study). I think the same would have happened if we had been using all the chrome from 2e supplements -- but the chrome seems rather more central to 3e (and certainly was in the eyes of our 3e-enthusiast DM).</blockquote>

Verification