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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jer" data-source="post: 7808598" data-attributes="member: 19857">Eh - I remember it differently in my neck of the woods.  The things that you point out were certainly a part of it - there was very much an idea that the core books had an "attitude" towards the game that wasn't what the folks I knew who stuck with 1e felt like the game was "about".  They thought that 2e pushed the game more towards "rescue the princess" style gaming than they liked.  But there were other concerns that I can remember.  There was anger that the new classes from UA weren't fixed and included in the core rules.  There was irritation that the illusionist as a class disappeared and was replaced by something they thought was far lesser.  There was a general feeling that the edition as a whole wasn't well thought out and was kind of slapdash in production - especially the DMG.  And I remember a strong annoyance by a number of folks about the Monstrous Compendium format - because a whole page for a monster was wasted space that wasn't needed and felt like a "cash grab" when they could have fit far more monsters into a real book.(Actually on that front I don't remember the new MC being universally loved outside of the pages of Dragon magazine, tbh - most of the people I gamed with - even the 2e converts - thought it was a stupid idea, that monsters didn't need that much space, that you never were going to be able to organize it properly anyway because you were printing on both sides of the page so you'd have monsters that would have to be out of order, and that having things in a binder meant that pages were more easily ripped and lost than in a book.)</blockquote>

Verification