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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6036307" data-attributes="member: 996">I have to agree.  As much for the impression it gives you of D&D's co-creator as for the content.  While obviously not written as a retrospective, it works as one. OD&D, I'm tempted to say Blackmoor, because it contains the first published adventure (Temple of the Frog).2e is tough, because it was such a large yet stodgy edition.  The one book I found memorable was the Complete Priests Handbook, by Aaron Alston.  Alston worked a lot on Champions! and it showed in the CPH which was less a list of kits and stuff and more a toolkit for the DM (or player) to create faiths (cleric variations).  A level of customization D&D had never tried before, and wouldn't try again until 3e.3e, I'm going to stray slightly and say the SRD.  Though 3e had some great stuff in the rules (modular multi-classing, feats, the Fighter class design) and other materials, it's single biggest contribution to the hobby was legitimizing open-source RPGs (open source RPGs like FUDGE or Fuzion had already been tried, but lending the D&D name to the concept was a big deal).4e, the PH1, because it had the biggest, seemingly impossible, innovation in D&D history: classes that actually balanced, not to mention the first new class in a long time to really click for me: the Warlord.Essentials, the Monster Vault, mainly because I didn't say MM3 for 4e.  The MM3 refinements that finally got monsters working just-right, plus expanded fluff, plus pogs, and a module as a bonus.</blockquote>

Verification