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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MerricB" data-source="post: 6089300" data-attributes="member: 3586">I'd love to see how 2E runs this time around; although I started with 1E (and Moldvay Basic), my first real DMing of a campaign came during the 2E days. (My first session had eight players, so some things don't change that much!)It's fascinating to see 2E's inconsistent approach towards rules: the result of freelancing out the Complete series with not much internal oversight. Great rules and complete rubbish all mixed in together. With 1E, I can blame Gary Gygax for the missteps; I don't know who to blame in 2E! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Unfortunately, I kind of get the same vibe from character options in 2E as I do with Pathfinder. PF allows amazing character variety, but that goes hand-in-hand with amazing character optimization, and there's a few (common) combinations that give me pause. This session it wasn't a problem, because the session lacked straight-up fights, but every so often I get extremely frustrated with how combats run. 4E really spoiled me for interesting fights. This isn't to say that I haven't had great fights in 3E and PF, but they tended to be the exception and not the rule. (I've had a lot of boring, grindy fights in 4E, but fewer since Essentials came along).Cheers!</blockquote>

Verification