D&D 2E On AD&D 2E

[ilgatto]

Better layout, better index and new art, along with typos corrections and errata included. Not bad.

I hated the art in the revised

Well, if there's anything to be said about post-2E editions it's that the art has become better and better. That is, not counting 1E/2E art by Trampier, Erol Otus, Russ Nicholson, Roslof, Emmanuel, Easley, Elmore, Caldwell, Mark Nelson, Ken Frank, Brian Despain, ...

Erm...,

I guess it's a matter of taste.

 

[deganawida]

This one?
View attachment 273504

Yes! Love it!

 

[cbwjm]

The cover especially. First time I saw that fighter charging with sword drawn on the cover, I knew I wanted to play fighter types.

When I got my PoD copy, I was so disappointed by the art that I looked up pieces from the 2e PHB. The female warrior who has the hill giant on his back and is pulling his nose ring? I showed that to my girls as an example of a strong female character in D&D back in the day.

I was always a little disappointed that the no/lightly armoured warrior never quite worked in 2e without magical items. Having grown up reading every Conan book I could find in the 2nd-hand bookstores, I kind of wanted to run that archetype. Nowadays, I'd probably figure something out by porting something from later editions into 2e.

 

[James Gasik]

I was always a little disappointed that the no/lightly armoured warrior never quite worked in 2e without magical items. Having grown up reading every Conan book I could find in the 2nd-hand bookstores, I kind of wanted to run that archetype. Nowadays, I'd probably figure something out by porting something from later editions into 2e.

Actually you can do it. Try this.

18 Dexterity (-4 defensive adjustment to AC). Fighter with Swashbuckler Kit from Complete Fighter's Handbook (-2 bonus to AC when wearing no armor, padded armor, or leather armor). Also from Complete Fighter's Handbook, devote two weapon proficiency slots to the Single Weapon Style (+2 bonus to AC when using a single one-handed weapon with no shield).

Entirely doable at level 1, and gives you, with leather armor (AC 8), an AC of 0!

*As an aside, an astute observer will note that while the bonus to AC from Dexterity and the Kit are negative numbers, the bonus from Single Weapon Style is a positive number, yet all lower AC! Not confusing at all!

 

[Jack Daniel]

*As an aside, an astute observer will note that while the bonus to AC from Dexterity and the Kit are negative numbers, the bonus from Single Weapon Style is a positive number, yet all lower AC! Not confusing at all!

All you have to remember is that the sign carries no semantic content at all and can be safely ignored either way, as long as you're paying attention to whether the text calls the adjustment a "bonus" or a "penalty"!

 

[James Gasik]

All you have to remember is that the sign carries no semantic content at all and can be safely ignored either way, as long as you're paying attention to whether the text calls the adjustment a "bonus" or a "penalty"!

It's pretty odd though. Younger me was never confused by "negative" bonuses it (but to this day my brain sometimes trips over the simple Thac0 calculation), but I remember getting into a debate with another player long ago about how a negative number can't be a bonus!

I can't understand why AC bonuses would flip between positive and negative values seemingly at random, if the ultimate calculation was to arrive at a lower value, lol.

 

[cbwjm]

Actually you can do it. Try this.

18 Dexterity (-4 defensive adjustment to AC). Fighter with Swashbuckler Kit from Complete Fighter's Handbook (-2 bonus to AC when wearing no armor, padded armor, or leather armor). Also from Complete Fighter's Handbook, devote two weapon proficiency slots to the Single Weapon Style (+2 bonus to AC when using a single one-handed weapon with no shield).

Entirely doable at level 1, and gives you, with leather armor (AC 8), an AC of 0!

*As an aside, an astute observer will note that while the bonus to AC from Dexterity and the Kit are negative numbers, the bonus from Single Weapon Style is a positive number, yet all lower AC! Not confusing at all!

The problem being that's as good as it ever gets, also never had all of the complete series of books when I was younger so the kits and style wouldn't have been accessible by me then. Part of the issue if I had the books was that it would lock me into the swashbuckler kit, doesn't quite fit for a bare chested barbarian warrior!

 

[James Gasik]

The problem being that's as good as it ever gets, also never had all of the complete series of books when I was younger so the kits and style wouldn't have been accessible by me then. Part of the issue if I had the books was that it would lock me into the swashbuckler kit, doesn't quite fit for a bare chested barbarian warrior!

Well I mean, without magic, AC never gets better than Full Plate + Shield and Dexterity either, for an AC of -4, so I dunno if that's really a problem. The Swashbuckler, on the other hand, can get complete benefit from Rings and Cloaks of Protection, magical leather armor, or even Bracers of Defense.

 

[Reynard]

I was always a little disappointed that the no/lightly armoured warrior never quite worked in 2e without magical items. Having grown up reading every Conan book I could find in the 2nd-hand bookstores, I kind of wanted to run that archetype. Nowadays, I'd probably figure something out by porting something from later editions into 2e.

Weird. Conan wore armor all the time in the original stories.

 

[James Gasik]

Weird. Conan wore armor all the time in the original stories.

It's just he has a tendency to lose any gear he has, and often in art he'd be reduced to this sort of state.

 

[cbwjm]

Weird. Conan wore armor all the time in the original stories.

He'd wear whatever Armour he'd find, but as James mentioned, seemed to lose it just as often, and the artwork would often show him as a stereotypical barechested barbarian.

 

[Alzrius]

I was always a little disappointed that the no/lightly armoured warrior never quite worked in 2e without magical items.

Isn't that the case for most editions of D&D?

 

[cbwjm]

Isn't that the case for most editions of D&D?

Yeah it is, i think 4e and 5e have been the best for playing armourless/lightly armoured warriors but since the 90s was when I started DnD (Becmi to 2e) and some of the 2e art, as well as the media that I was consuming at the time, didn't match up with how dnd really played when it comes to no armour, it was then that it really stuck out for me.

 

[James Gasik]

Yeah it is, i think 4e and 5e have been the best for playing armourless/lightly armoured warriors but since the 90s was when I started DnD (Becmi to 2e) and some of the 2e art, as well as the media that I was consuming at the time, didn't match up with how dnd really played when it comes to no armour, it was then that it really stuck out for me.

There were some options for it over the years (infamously the Monk), but there were other classes that could get an unarmored AC in 3.x. Pathfinder 1e had a few ways to go about it, but to keep up with someone just wearing plain old armor usually required a lot of optimization.

D&D doesn't often map out the real reasons someone would go without armor into combat, like say, needing to move quickly, or deal with uneven terrain. And it tends to really fall apart in situations where you wouldn't be wearing armor at all, like say, on the deck of a ship or attending a fancy ball, lol.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That was fuel, like healing potions so we could keep playing, LOL.

I just talked to my group, and we all agreed that were going to switch over to 2E, so I'm excited to dig out my books and start refreshing my memory on the rules. I think they are so ingrained in my mind that it wont take long. I think one reason that I've had trouble keeping rules straight from 3E forward was that subconsciously my brain was always trying to interpret and resolve things in 2E terms.

My wife was a 3.5 player, and has the same issue keeping rules straight in 5e. For me, I started in BECMI/1e.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Thats what I thought, makes sense because I think the players options books came out about the same time. I understand that the amount of releases was what killed TSR, but It really is a shame that WotC doesnt release more varied products like TSR did in 2E

It is the  best part of 2e from the consumer side. So much great content! So much creativity!

 

[cbwjm]

There were some options for it over the years (infamously the Monk), but there were other classes that could get an unarmored AC in 3.x. Pathfinder 1e had a few ways to go about it, but to keep up with someone just wearing plain old armor usually required a lot of optimization.

D&D doesn't often map out the real reasons someone would go without armor into combat, like say, needing to move quickly, or deal with uneven terrain. And it tends to really fall apart in situations where you wouldn't be wearing armor at all, like say, on the deck of a ship or attending a fancy ball, lol.

Yeah, it was something that really stood out to me back when I started playing DnD, nowadays I just accept the hit to AC when my fighter goes without armour.

 

[James Gasik]

Yeah, it was something that really stood out to me back when I started playing DnD, nowadays I just accept the hit to AC when my fighter goes without armour.

My friend is working on his own system where armor provides DR but limits your ability to dodge attacks (so you get hit more often) and he's having a heck of a time trying to balance the two extremes. I keep shaking my head and pointing out that AC is certainly weird, but there's a reason it's endured for so long.

The ability to not get hit at all is always going to be better than getting hit easily and taking less damage, unless the amount of damage reduction is monstrous. Like even in 5e, where Barbarian rage means you're taking 1/2 damage, if you ignore your AC and use reckless attack all the time, you will fall over if you take enough hits; high AC is just better, and armor is the easy path to get it.

 

[Scars Unseen]

It is the  best part of 2e from the consumer side. So much great content! So much creativity!

Honestly, you can say what you want about the quality of specific products, but on the whole, 2E was pretty much the golden age of D&D in terms of settings and fluff. There were definitely some questionable decisions with the rules themselves, and I imagine most (who were playing back then) would place the golden age for adventures at around a decade prior, give or take, but between all of the setting sourcebooks and the monster ecologies articles in Dragon, there was practically no end of material to use either whole cloth or as inspiration for homebrew.

Granted, this is only when considering 1st party. The OGL definitely changed things in terms of 3rd party options.

 

[James Gasik]

Honestly, you can say what you want about the quality of specific products, but on the whole, 2E was pretty much the golden age of D&D in terms of settings and fluff. There were definitely some questionable decisions with the rules themselves, and I imagine most (who were playing back then) would place the golden age for adventures at around a decade prior, give or take, but between all of the setting sourcebooks and the monster ecologies articles in Dragon, there was practically no end of material to use either whole cloth or as inspiration for homebrew.

Granted, this is only when considering 1st party. The OGL definitely changed things in terms of 3rd party options.

I don't know, I have some good 3rd party products from the AD&D era, like Arch Magic, Fantastic Treasures, and Grimtooth's Traps.