How is 2nd Edition?

[Sebastian1992]

I am interested in trying out 2nd edition. I am wondering, what is it like? I have played 3.5 and 4th editions, so compare it to them. I understand that many people believe it is an extremely broken system. Is this true, and how so? What is the feel of the overall system? Thanks to anyone that answers my question. It looks like I can get then core books for under $10 apiece on Amazon, so I might do that, if only for some reading. Thanks again!

 

[Korgoth]

Broken? I wouldn't say that. The core of 2E is basically like the core of 1E, but with some of the later optional material (aspects of Unearthed Arcana and the Survival Guides) thrown in.

The only thing I think is broken in the 2E core is the ability to add your damage bonus from high Strength to thrown weapons. Specifically, daggers and especially darts. Someone with super-high strength (hard to get, but it happens) with dart specialization is basically a machinegun. So I'd either disallow all Str mods to thrown weapons or just to very light thrown weapons (thus an axe lets you take advantage of your strenght in a way that a dart doesn't... seems fair to me).

2E was unlike previous editions in that it experienced true "supplement bloat", probably a first in the annals of role playing gamedom. I'm not talking about adventures (which were relatively few for 2E and usually not any good) or campaign settings (numerous for 2E and pretty good)... I'm talking about the infamous "splatbooks"... the Complete Fighter's Handbook, etc. ad nauseam. Some of that stuff seemed poorly thought out.

Then toward the end of the run, when TSR was moving toward its ultimate implosion, you get these "Player's Option" things that were probably well-intentioned... a bunch of powers and options you could use to basically mix and match class abilities, etc. To me, that's the worst of D&D... fiddly, min-maxy, power-gamey, and overall attempting to expand play possibilities and solve rules issues with yet more rules. IMO, a decadent product line from a decadent time. But I'm a diehard "less is more" type with D&D rules.

Basically, if you stick with the core of 2E, you'll have a game that plays like 1E except with most of the flavor stripped out and some of the more confusing rules issues (like initiative) reorganized and simplified.

Now, if you don't know what I mean when I say that it plays like 1E... ? Basically, consider 3.5 without skills (maybe) and feats, and monster statblocks that are only about 60% - 20% the length of 3.5 statblocks. Saving throws depend not on the spell level or the caster's stats but solely on the guy making the throw. Whether you roll to do everything, i.e. "skill rollery" (a signature of New School gaming) , depended on whether you used the "Nonweapon Proficiencies" that may be either a breath of fresh modern air or the worst idea ever depending on who you ask.

I'd say 2E is a transition game between Old School and New School.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I am interested in trying out 2nd edition. I am wondering, what is it like? I have played 3.5 and 4th editions, so compare it to them. I understand that many people believe it is an extremely broken system. Is this true, and how so? What is the feel of the overall system? Thanks to anyone that answers my question. It looks like I can get then core books for under $10 apiece on Amazon, so I might do that, if only for some reading. Thanks again!

I wouldn't call it extremely broken. I don't know how you will see it coming from the latest editions looking backwards. Its much less grid/mini focused although you can still use them in your games. I'm not wild about it but for those low prices I recommend giving them a read and trying it yourself.

Nice avatar BTW............other bands play, Manowar kills!!

 

[delericho]

I had an absurd amount of fun with 2nd Edition over the years. That said, I wouldn't go back to it at this point - too many of the rules oddities would just drive me crazy over time.

The advice about sticking reasonably close to the core is also good - a lot of the supplements were well intentioned but poorly implemented.

Oh, also: 2nd Edition gave us some fantastic campaign settings. Dark Sun, Birthright, Planescape, Ravenloft, Spelljammer...

 

[Spatula]

Core 2e (PHB + DMG) is pretty close to 1e. Basically 1e + the most common house rules at the time.

There's lots and lots (and lots more) supplementary material. Class books, race books, lots of different settings, historical period books, and so on. The quality there can be very uneven.

 

[Dimitri Mazieres]

Mechanicaly, it isn't as intuitive as the later versions of D&D, which aimed at a unified approach (d20 roll + modifiers = DC or higher to succeed). There are situations where rolling higher is better (attack rolls, saving throws) and others where the opposite is true (non-weapon proficiencies checks, ability checks). You will see many mechanics that may initially confuse you (such as how saving throws are categorized, THAC0) but then you'll get them (THAC0 = an inverted BAB), or simply learn to live with them (ST).
There are also a lot of things that seem as poorly justified, such as demihuman level limits ("because human are more numerous" ) and multiclass combinations (or dual-class for humans).

In regards to AD&D 1e, it's pretty much what 3.5 was to 3.0, an update which incorporates many changes that were made during the 1e years, so IMHO, the only thing you're not getting is the Gygax prose.

Having said that, the mechanics I fell (or seem to remember) are less thorough than those of 3.x, so it leaves room for a lot of house ruling, as well as less need for miniatures and a battle mat.

Where AD&D 2e really shines, though, is in the proliferation of campaign settings published for it (which, ultimately, contributed to TSR's demise): Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, Dark Sun, Ravenloft, Planescape, Birthright, Spelljammer, Dragonlance, Mystara... A whole lot to chose from.

 

[Xyxox]

I play 2E and to this day it's still my favorite edition.

That said, nearly the entire run is available to this day in PDF form through ENWorld/RPGNow at 4.95/item.

Sticking with the Core is your best bet, especially if you've never played it. I pick and choose bits and pieces from teh splat books and options to form a basis for everything I do. It's easily customized and as you progress with it, you might want to do the same.

Also, I highly recommend obtaining the Core Rules 2 CD-Rom plus the Expansion to that product. If you can at all find copies of those two pieces of software, you'll be glad you did. The Core books, almost the 15 of the splat books, the four option books, and the Tome of Magic are all included as files in RTF, HTML, and Help File format. You get two different mapper programs and software for character generation, NPC generation, Monsters, treasures, magic items, etc. and it's easy to add custom data, too. Heck, I've even added Firbolgs as a character race to the thing.

Beyond that, the campaign settings are a treasure in the editiion.

The shear quantity of material for 2E would allow for play for years and years with never needing anything else.

 

[rogueattorney]

In comparison to 1e, 2e was a more generic fantasy take on AD&D, with more attempts to allow for increased options and customization. I think, on a basic level, as a "cleaned up, white bread" version of 1e, it works. But I think a lot of the added options - the proficiencies, the kits, the specialist wizards, specialist clerics, etc. - don't work, making it a lot more complicated and bloated than it really needs to be.

For what it is, I think the PHB is a pretty good book. The DMG is nearly devoid of any useful content - cleric's undead turning and magic items being about it. The original Monstrous Compendiums were disasters. Get the compiled Monstrous Manual instead. While I find it to be bloated with a lot of unnecessary fluff, a lot of people really like it.

If I were to run it, I'd run it core only, not using any of the options and none of the "Complete" books. However, for what I think 2e does well, I think the Rules Cyclopedia version of D&D does much better, and would use that instead if given the option.

 

[Spinachcat]

I preferred 1e Gygaxian insanity versus 2e's "mommy friendly corporate cleanup", but the 2e settings were fabulous - especially Planescape which still stands as the best fantasy RPG setting I have ever played. These days, if you want an AD&D gaming experience, I suggest downloading OSRIC for free (google it) or buy Castles & Crusades.

All forum talk about "broken systems" is complete nonsense. Millions of us played "broken" games for many years and had a tremendously great time with wonderful memories. Back then, gamers had guts - we would defy the sacred printed pages and the game police, quickly make up a cool house rule and keep rolling dice!

 

[weem]

2e is where I did most of my gaming (been playing for 20 years now, 12 to 32), but I have played all editions - I even have these guys

I really enjoyed 2e and even playing 4e (which I generally like) has got me thinking of 2e and considering starting up a second campaign using that system - I still have all of my 2e books so I might as well.

I have a horrible memory of specifics, but I agree with what has been said about sticking close to the core. Personally, I loved all the books, including the options books (you can see them in that pic too) but that was long ago and I was young - I have a feeling I too would be irritated with a number of issues now if I tried to include everything I had.

Give it a whirl though, I know many others IRL who absolutely loved their 2e times and some who still use it