ADnD 2nd ED VS. 3.5

[JoeGKushner]

The skill system in 2nd ed came about due to the 'non-weapon profiencies' introduced in the latter end of 1st edition Wilderness Survial Guide and Dungeoneer Survival Guide. They were poor.

Fighters were all cookie cutters.

Point distribution for rogues was annoying.

Some fantastic books like School of Wizardry (where special abilities in essence became MetaMagic Feats), and some great settings like Planescape. The support with Monstrous Compendium Annuals and updating Mystara to 2nd edition (cursed CD boxed set kits!) also brought some interesting bits to the game.

It took me a long time to switch from 2nd to 3rd ed.

Once I did I never went back or even though about it. 3rd ed just offers so many more options in and of itself.

 

[Gnarlo]

I stopped playing D&D at the end of 1e, probably as a result of burnout on DMing, lack of time, moving on to other things, and poverty giving the feeling that "great, they want me to pay them all over again for stuff I already have", much like the feeling some have expressed over 3.5 I didn't pick up D&D again until 3e came out, so pretty much 2e never had much appeal for me.

I've since enjoyed picking up a lot of the ESD background materials, particularly the Forgotten Realms and Planescape stuff, as I enjoy the fluffiness of what came out. I look at a lot of the other releases from that time as power creep and munchkinitis; understanding of course that many people look upon the releases from WOTC over the last couple years ("Races of...", "The Complete...") as being the same spirit. Maybe its just having a real job and a bit more disposable income now that helps me to view current releases in a more favorable light?

 

[Ferox4]

I also fall into the 3.x crowd. There are some downsides (munchkinism), but they are tolerable balanced against the better ruleset. To me, 2E will forever be the red-headed middle child - outranked by it's draconic older brother and outshined by it's illustrious younger sibling. Maybe I'll take 2E out for ice cream later to cheer him up........

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

For me, 3E was love at first sight.

To be specific, what I fell in love with was the ability bonus table. In 2E, you had a different table for each ability, and only the extreme values were really interesting. In 3E, the table is the same for all attributes, even less than spectacular ability values bring some bonuses, and the table is so simple that you don't need to refer to it unless you are playing a spellcaster!

I never looked back. Everyhing is more streamlined and makes more sense.

 

[Zappo]

If I was stuck in a desert island with a few gamers and 2E books only, I'd still play 3E, from memory.

That said, 2E produced many of the best D&D settings ever.

 

[der_kluge]

I grew up playing 2nd ed primarily. And I have a lot of fond memories of the campaign settings, like others. Planescape, Al-Qadim, the Ravenloft Boxed set, Masque of the Red Death - all were (and still are) some of my most favorite settings. 2e also has some of the best D&D books, IMO, of all time, including the Aurora's Whole Realm's Catalogue, and the Fr priests' books. Those are just awesome.

I find the 3e rules to be far far superior in so many ways. The lack of racial level limits, no race/class restrictions, consistent ability scores (no oddbal 18/00 strength), the ability to increase ability scores, increased customization for characters with the feats system, the addition of sorcerer and barbarian - all these are huge improvements over 2nd edition.

Yea, I loved 2nd edition at the time, and I still love many of the campaign settings, and rule books, but I'll never go back to it.

 

[Geoffrey]

I prefer the Holmes' edit of D&D from 1977. It is only 48 pages long, and it is simplicity itself. The combat rules, for example, take up a mere 4 pages. While this rulebook only goes up to 3rd level, it is simple to supplement it with the complete tables, spell lists, and magic items from the 1974 OD&D rules.

 

[Dark Jezter]

Definately 3.5 here. While I did have a lot of fun with 2e back in the 1990s, I didn't really turn into a D&D fan until 3e came along. I instantly fell in love with 3e's character customization options, consistant rolling rules, removal of race restrictions for classes, etc.

I do admit, though, that I'm puzzled that some people seem to be saying that "munchkinism" is a problem only with 3e. Do they not remember some of the class kits and player options found in 2e?

 

[the Jester]

Well, I've loved every version of dnd and each edition has its own something to offer, if you know what I mean, but 3e really brought the game to a new level overall for me. I don't think I've ever had as much fun gaming as I have had with the 3e rules- there's so much cool stuff you can do that you didn't really have a mechanism for earlier, and a lot of the rules changes are really well thought out. A great example is the rules for making magic items. It used to earn you xp- so you got more powerful on two different counts, items and xps- and now it's much easier to do and costs xps, making it a meaningful choice whether to make magic items or not.

I freely mix in a lot of earlier edition stuff though, either converted, flavor, art, or whatever. Why, just the other night I used a 2e MC Annual for the picture.

 

[Mr. Lobo]

I can't really answer the question per se because I've never played 2E. I have played various basic versions (Holmes, Moldvay, and Mentzer) and AD&D, however.

I watched a 2E game played over several weeks and was thinking of joining the group ( I got an offer to join and they were a good low key group) but then I started working PT for a WoTC store and my free time vanished. One of the perks of working for WoTC was running a gaming session in store for the customers. I also gamed in, or ran, two out of store sessions with friends.

Well, currently I am back to running a Basic edition of the game (Moldvay). I've come to the conclusion that I am just not very good at keeping track of the way that all the rules interlock and affect each other. Out of the three 3E groups that I played or DM'ed in, two of them were very concious of following the rules to the letter and it really bogged down the game.

I love the theory of 3E rules and how everything fits together. I want to get another 3E game going sometime (or be a player) and give it another crack. Re-reading the rules has got my fire stoked and hopefully all it will take is a lot more practice to master the system.

But right now I prefer an older edition for my style and for ease of playability.