D&D editions/eras timelines

[Keldryn]

I agree. I happened to read both the 1e DMG and the 2e DMG as I am trying to decide which of the two to run. The differences between the two in terms of tone, style and emphasis of play is huge. Do you realize there isn't even a distinct section on dungeons in the 2e DMG, and there are no lists of traps? I hadn't until I got to the end of the 2e DMG and thought I had accidentally skipped a section. I went to the index. Nope. No dungeons, no traps, no underground exploration.

The 1e DMG is really a comprehensive tome, covering damn near everything that might happen in a "normal" D&D game. The 2e DMG is a lot of fluff and advice and not a lot of help for the first time DM. By contrast, the 3e DMG managed to bring back a lot of that crunch and an emphasis on dungeons, while severely shortchanging the DM on issues that weren't specific to going down in holes, whacking things. Despite some occassional overblown prose and finger wagging by Gygax, the 1e DMG is a work of art and should be the standard by which all other books labelled "DMG" should be measured.

The 2e DMG was almost completely and utterly worthless, in my opinion. Granted, I had played B/X D&D and AD&D 1st Edition for 3 or 4 years by the time 2nd Edition came out. About the only thing I ever used the 2e DMG for was magic item descriptions. The 2e "Campaign Sourcebook and Catacomb Guide" contained much of the advice about running a game that should have been in the DMG.

I don't think I would go so far as to call the 1e DMG a work of art and the standard by which all other books should be measured, but it was far superior to the 2e DMG. The 1e DMG is a near-legendary example of poor organization (in the first 30 pages or so, we're getting stuff about diseases and mental disorders?) and does have a rather stream-of-consciousness feel to the writing. It also contains a lot of material that really belongs in the Player's Handbook. It's entertaining to read, but kind of stinks for looking something up in the middle of the game. The 3e DMG and the 3.5e DMG in particular were very well done and are nice throwbacks to the 1e DMG, in my opinion. But much better organized.

 

[jdrakeh]

The 2e DMG was almost completely and utterly worthless, in my opinion.

You know, I played 2e for about three years, and I'm not certain that I ever used the DMG save for the treasure tables.

 

[Glyfair]

Also, 3e came out in 2000. The 3e game I'm in started in early 2001, and the system had been around for at least half a year at that point....

Just a typo, fixed.

It also contains a lot of material that really belongs in the Player's Handbook.

Well, they did have the disadvantage of the PHB having been done for at least a year when the DMG was finalized. They couldn't very easily go "this belongs in the PHB, let's put it there."

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

What would be the calculation of the BX/BECMI/Rules Compendium fork of the rule set?

Calculate the total duration, then break down each revision.

Personally, I consider BX through Rules Compendium to be one long edition, just with very minor revisions.

 

[T. Foster]

The Holmes Basic Set was in print from mid 1977 through the end of 1979 (though backstock was still sold through at least 1980). Note that the "Original Collector's Edition" of the Original D&D rules remained in print through the entire run of the Holmes set, and the Holmes set wasn't a complete game (it topped out at level 3) so I tend not to count it as a full "edition." The Moldvay/Cook/Marsh version was released in early 1981 and only lasted until mid 1983 (but managed to sell so many copies in that two year span that it's still, along with 1E AD&D, probably the most widely known and remembered version of the game). The Mentzer Basic and Expert sets were released in mid 1983 and the subsequent sets followed 1 a year after that (i.e. Companion was released in 1984, Master in 1985 and Immortals in 1986). This edition lasted until 1991, when it was replaced by the "Black Box" Intro Game (covering levels 1-5) and the Rules Cyclopedia (covering levels 1-36). Wrath of the Immortals, updating the 1986 Immortals set, was released in 1992. All of these went out of print in 1994 (IIRC) and the entire non-A D&D line was dropped (except for two products -- "The Classic Dungeons & Dragons Game," a repackaged version of the 1991 Black Box, that was released in 1994 and then again (with different cover art) in 1996). A set called the "Dungeons & Dragons Adventure Game" was released in 1999, but (from what I understand, I never owned this) it wasn't part of the genealogy above and was, instead, a simplified intro version of 2E AD&D. So, in convenient list format:

Dungeons & Dragons (original edition) (1974-80) 7 years
(Holmes Basic Set (1977-80) 4 years)
Moldvay/Cook/Marsh Basic/Expert (1981-83) 2 years
Mentzer Basic/Expert/Companion/Master/Immortals (1983-91) 8 years
Black Box/Rules Cyclopedia/Wrath of the Immortals (1991-94) 3 years
The Classic Dungeons & Dragons Game (1994-96) 2 years
Entire Line: 1974-94; 20 years (22 if you count the two "Classic" sets, but since those weren't complete games (like the Black Box, they topped out at level 5) I tend not to)

EDIT: Your considering these "one long edition" matches TSR's practice -- if you look at the credits in the Mentzer Basic Set you'll see the following: "written by Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson, edited by Frank Mentzer; copyright 1974, 1977, 1978*, 1981, 1983." The credits for the Holmes and Moldvay/Cook/Marsh versions read similarly.

*For reasons that aren't entirely clear, TSR assigned a second copyright date to the "2nd edition" of the Holmes rulebook, even though it only contained minor errata-corrections -- perhaps it's something to do with the copyright laws changing in 1978 and different rules applying to works published pre-1978?

 

[Voadam]

The 2e DMG was almost completely and utterly worthless, in my opinion. Granted, I had played B/X D&D and AD&D 1st Edition for 3 or 4 years by the time 2nd Edition came out. About the only thing I ever used the 2e DMG for was magic item descriptions. The 2e "Campaign Sourcebook and Catacomb Guide" contained much of the advice about running a game that should have been in the DMG.

I loved the xp from 2e DMG, it was a lot easier for me than the 1e calculations even with individual class awards. I finally gave out xp within a reasonable time. That said, I copied out the charts and the expanded race class limits from a friend's copy and only used my 1e DMG, never buying the 2e DMG until I got the html version on the rules CD. Magic items were compatible across editions and I was fine using whatever DMG was handy at the time.

 

[TerraDave]

Editions in General: I think it is worth emphasising the fact that for many years, TSR would continue market multiple editions at the same time. There was a long period where you could order OD&D, B/ED&D, and AD&D, and you would see adds for all of them (in the back of products). But my favorite anecdote in this vein is this, from the aceam:

Later prints (of the 1st ed PHB) differ only in the printing number noted on the copyright page. The Twelfth printing was in November 1987, the Fourteenth printing was in October 1988, the Fifteenth printing was in July 1989, and the Seventeenth printing was in July 1990 (actually a year after the 2nd Edition Players Handbook had been released, since dealers were still placing orders to TSR for the 1st Edition PHB!).(emphasis added)

So in 1990, you could buy new B/E D&D, 2nd edition D&D and 1st edition D&D.

On Second Edition: They kept a lot of the rules, but changed the text. Each book was different, the DMG was really different, and the Monsters...oh good lord. (The Monstrous Manual released later, on the other hand, would be one of the best products of 2nd ed.). There was nothing like the classic AD&D adventures, the new worlds had a pretty different feel...AND there were all those suplements, and they really changed the game, for good and bad. These are major changes.

 

[prosfilaes]

As I recall (and remember, I wasn't playing D&D during this era) towards the end of 2E the book assumed you were using those expansions. I did pick up the Birthright books while waiting for 3E and it assumes you are using kits, which weren't in any core books I owned.

But kits weren't in Skills & Powers; they predated that system by a long time, and I'm pretty sure they were in some of the earliest add-on material printed for Second Edition. Functionally speaking, I don't think S & P amounted to a new edition of D&D; they were a collection of add-on optional rules. No matter the rules differences between Second Edition and First, they were sold as separate editions and I've always perceived them as such. For AD&D, I have no opinion on the UA split, but last three editions were 2cd (11 years), 3rd (3) and 3.5 (5); we didn't mix books across those lines very much.

 

[DaveyJones]

Limiting things as much as possible, though, we have:

OD&D (1973-1979*) 4-6 years
AD&D (1977**-1989) 10-12 years
AD&D 2nd edition (1989-2000) 11 years
D&D 3E (2000-2008) 8 years
D&D 4E (2008-?) TBD

fify.

i was still playing OD&D in 1979. heck, i played it last session.
edit: and i'm still writing material for it.

just not official material for mass consumption.

 

[Glyfair]

fify.

i was still playing OD&D in 1979. heck, i played it last session.
edit: and i'm still writing material for it.

just not official material for mass consumption.

Again, I know there are still people playing it now. Using that as a determining factor doesn't give a useful base for discussion.