D&D 2E On AD&D 2E

[Micah Sweet]

But they'd learn what milieu and puissant mean!

I hope that wasn't sarcasm.

 

[Ath'kethin]

If someone wants to play something that isn't in the rules of the game we're playing (and I can reconcile the concept with the setting), I just make new rules for it.

Exactly! Doing so has never been a problem.

 

[Belen]

If someone wants to play something that isn't in the rules of the game we're playing (and I can reconcile the concept with the setting), I just make new rules for it.

Yep. I created a 5e blade master with sword forms for a player just recently.

 

[PHATsakk43]

Yep. I created a 5e blade master with sword forms for a player just recently.

Which to bring it back to 2E, I say that a 2E single-class human fighter with a fairly standard set of optional rules—specifically weapon mastery from the Fighters’ handbook or Players’ Option: Combat & Tactics—is the best martial class out of every edition at every level of play.

Add in the fairly common 18 in strength or the myriad of items to boost strength and the extremely high attack and damage bonuses that accompany strength in AD&D and a fighter can seriously put out some damage.

 

[rabindranath72]

Which to bring it back to 2E, I say that a 2E single-class human fighter with a fairly standard set of optional rules—specifically weapon mastery from the Fighters’ handbook or Players’ Option: Combat & Tactics—is the best martial class out of every edition at every level of play.

Add in the fairly common 18 in strength or the myriad of items to boost strength and the extremely high attack and damage bonuses that accompany strength in AD&D and a fighter can seriously put out some damage.

And the 1e fighter was even better due to how initiative worked; they automatically won initiative against enemies who didn't have multiple attacks, and they opened with two attacks rather than one attack like the 2e fighter. Magic-users and clerics were toast against a 1e fighter in close combat.

 

[PHATsakk43]

And the 1e fighter was even better due to how initiative worked; they automatically won initiative against enemies who didn't have multiple attacks, and they opened with two attacks rather than one attack like the 2e fighter. Magic-users and clerics were toast against a 1e fighter in close combat.

I don’t think that anyone used 1E initiative RAW. It was probably the worst mechanic of the entire game.1E initiative was so bad, it alone could have warranted a 2nd edition. To that end, weapon mastery rules and fight style specialization did boost initiative for fighters in 2E so, they would strike not only harder and more often, but also earlier in the combat round.

I’ll also say that 2E initiative was the best out of any of the TSR or WotC editions. “Lower is better” is a better mechanism for initiative. Having a bounding floor value for the “fastest” action is better than any of the d20 games. The d10 provides enough variability to allow for some “luck” in the combat sequence but keeps everything fairly tight unlike a d20. The d6 initiative was fine if weapon speeds, casting times, and other initiative modifiers from AD&D were not used.

It also highlights an inherent problem with “higher as better” as a design choice which caused both the ridiculous DCs of 3/3.5 and the introduction of bounded accuracy (which also is IMHO a hack to stick with “higher is better” design). AD&D and other TSR D&D games were touted as being “too complicated” because of not having an inherent and single core mechanic. Which I suppose is somewhat of an intuitive concept, until you consider the constraints of constantly increasing DC targets and the associated constantly increasing skill bonus associated with the DC roll.

Initiative isn’t the only thing that this applies to either, as the “roll under” mechanic for ability score checks and NWPs is also better (IMHO) than the DC system, period. “Roll under” and “lower is better” are slightly different as the former also allows for “Price is Right rules” for skill or ability score challenges. Additionally, it made 2E psionics the best implementation of a mostly bad system of any other variety of D&D.

Having a system that has the “DC” something inherent to the character opposed to some arbitrary target value also creates a path to avoid things that shouldn’t increase with class level. 2E NWPs were the best skill system the game has had because of this. I suppose technically, they are nearly identical to “1.5” NWPs, so they really aren’t solely a 2E thing.

 

[rabindranath72]

I don’t think that anyone used 1E initiative RAW. It was probably the worst mechanic of the entire game. To that end, weapon mastery rules and fight style specialization did boost initiative for fighters in 2E so, they would strike not only harder and more often, but also earlier in the combat round.

I was referring to the core rules, not any of the later splats (from what I recall from POCT, high masters increased the attack speed, but that wasn't a guarantee of going first). By the 2e DMG (earliest print, p.57, first column), there's an example of initiative and multiple attacks, and Fighters are still subject to initiative determination even when they have multiple attacks.
Also, when the spellcasting times and weapon speeds were used, Fighters could still be disadvantaged against spellcasters if they used slower nonmagical weapons. In 1e weapon speeds were used only when the fighter lost initiative (whereas spellcasters were always bounded by spellcasting time), so even without multiple attacks, it was easier for them to attack before a spellcaster; winning initiative wasn't a guarantee for a spellcaster to cast a spell.

 

[PHATsakk43]

I was referring to the core rules, not any of the later splats. By the 2e DMG (earliest print, p.57, first column), there's an example of initiative and multiple attacks, and Fighters are still subject to initiative determination even when they have multiple attacks.
Also, when the spellcasting times and weapon speeds were used, Fighters could still be disadvantaged against spellcasters if they used slower nonmagical weapons. In 1e weapon speeds were used only when the fighter lost initiative (whereas spellcasters were always bounded by spellcasting time), so even without multiple attacks, it was easier for them to attack before a spellcaster.

If that’s how a fighter with multiple attacks worked in 1E, that’s broken AF. 2E rules for multiple attacks was the first was in order of initiative plus modifiers, subsequent attacks after all others were done, and in order of initiative if more than one character had multiple attacks.

That didn’t apply to things like dual wielding or claw/claw/bite attack routines, as these were all to occur at the same time.

Again, you can have any opinion you want, but I think you’re going to be hard pressed to find many people who will defend 1E initiative. Gary didn’t even use it for instance.

 

[James Gasik]

I don’t think that anyone used 1E initiative RAW. It was probably the worst mechanic of the entire game.1E initiative was so bad, it alone could have warranted a 2nd edition. To that end, weapon mastery rules and fight style specialization did boost initiative for fighters in 2E so, they would strike not only harder and more often, but also earlier in the combat round.

I’ll also say that 2E initiative was the best out of any of the TSR or WotC editions. “Lower is better” is a better mechanism for initiative. Having a bounding floor value for the “fastest” action is better than any of the d20 games. The d10 provides enough variability to allow for some “luck” in the combat sequence but keeps everything fairly tight unlike a d20. The d6 initiative was fine if weapon speeds, casting times, and other initiative modifiers from AD&D were used.

It also highlights an inherent problem with “higher as better” as a design choice which caused both the ridiculous DCs of 3/3.5 and the introduction of bounded accuracy (which also is IMHO a hack to stick with “higher is better” design). AD&D and other TSR D&D games were touted as being “too complicated” because of not having an inherent and single core mechanic. Which I suppose is somewhat of an intuitive concept, until you consider the constraints of constantly increasing DC targets and the associated constantly increasing skill bonus associated with the DC roll.

Initiative isn’t the only thing that this applies to either, as the “roll under” mechanic for ability score checks and NWPs is also better (IMHO) than the DC system, period. “Roll under” and “lower is better” are slightly different as the former also allows for “Price is Right rules” for skill or ability score challenges. Additionally, it made 2E psionics the best implementation of a mostly bad system of any other variety of D&D.

Having a system that has the “DC” something inherent to the character opposed to some arbitrary target value also creates a path to avoid things that shouldn’t either increase with class level. 2E NWPs were the best skill system the game has had because of this. I suppose technically, they are nearly identical to “1.5” NWPs, so they really aren’t solely a 2E thing.

Just wanted to comment about your statement that there was a bound floor to initiative. Do you mean you couldn't get lower than 1, or am I misunderstanding you?

Beyond the Short Sword of Quickness and the Scimitar of Speed, which simply "go first" in initiative, there were effects, like haste, setting for a charge, enchanted weapons and Two Handed Style Specialization that reduced Speed Factor/Initiative. I never saw anything in the PHB or DMG that indicated that you couldn't have a negative initiative number- thus there's really no difference between lower or higher being better when it comes to initiative.

Though it being AD&D, there may be a rule tucked away somewhere that I never saw.

 

[Bedrockgames]

It also highlights an inherent problem with “higher as better” as a design choice which caused both the ridiculous DCs of 3/3.5 and the introduction of bounded accuracy (which also is IMHO a hack to stick with “higher is better” design). AD&D and other TSR D&D games were touted as being “too complicated” because of not having an inherent and single core mechanic. Which I suppose is somewhat of an intuitive concept, until you consider the constraints of constantly increasing DC targets and the associated constantly increasing skill bonus associated with the DC roll.

In my opinion, I enjoy D&D way more when it isn't fitting everything into a core d20 mechanic. Initiative is a good case in point and I agree with lower being better working well (also it isn't terrible complicated to switch to a d10 and go with lower values).