Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
On AD&D 2E
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Bedrockgames" data-source="post: 8983194" data-attributes="member: 85555"><p>On the balance issue, I found the core classes fairly balanced, but I also think that is because 2E was before the era of optimization you had with 3E (the entire spirit of play was different so it just wasn't as typical in my own experience for issues between classes to become a problem). I am still a big fan of the different XP tiers.</p><p></p><p>On options this is a pretty interesting discussion. Honestly I would need to compare book by book to give a truly genuine assessment, so anything I say here is with the caveat that I am persuadable if someone reminds me of a detail I am not immediately recollecting (I have been playing a lot of 2E lately, but haven't played 3E for a few years)</p><p></p><p>Again here the spirit of the games (two editions that I love a lot) were very different, and that makes comparing them hard. On the one hand, 3E gets the crown for the mechanical heft of its options and how those could be used to build so many different concepts. But it was also one of the more uniform editions. If I went from one group to another during the 3E era, the game was usually played very much the same from group to group, whereas in the 2E era, tables varied widely. Part of this is due to the fact that 2E was built around options. 3E had plenty of optional rules too, and it is possible I am not eyeballing the tally well (so perhaps in the end this conclusion is incorrect), but my sense and memory is so much of the core system in 2E (EDIT) is optional that this led to hugely different play experiences. NWPs, which most people think of as the default skill system for 2E were like one of two or three options (and I think they may have been the second one presented). Plus both weapon and non-weapon proficiencies were 100% optional. A lot of groups didn't even use those (most of the Ravenloft modules I have don't even bother with them in NPC entries). Then you had all those optional rules around things like weapon type versus armor, spell components, optional initiative methods, optional modifiers, weapon speed, parrying, jogging and running, etc. When I think of the 2E PHB, I think of the "Optional" tag.</p><p></p><p>Even the expanded books like the Complete series are described as optional. This may have been the case with 3E as well, I can't recall, but one thing I know is they were not viewed as optional by most people the way the brown books were for 2E. Much of that though I think had to do with the spirit of play. In the 2E days, as the GM I vetted everything that went into a campaign. By 3E you just didn't feel like you had the same level of authority over the setting when it came to players wanting to include a new class, prestige class, etc (and this was also the age of wish lists, which catered to optimization-----and I don't consider optimization a dirty word, it is just a key distinction between the systems in my view: 3E is very good if you want optimized play).</p><p></p><p>In terms of expanded material. 2E did have the complete books, the blue books and the green books. It also had a ton of GM optional material (for example the Van Richten Guides were littered with options for monsters from the GM POV). Stuff like the complete Bard was filled with material. However what it probably lacked that 3E had more of was mechanical heft. But this is either a pro or con depending on your perspective. Second edition emphasized flavor and the setting more, whereas 3E placed more emphasis on the system and crunch. The latter is great for creating characters with meaningful mechanical distinctions, and you could use it to create very focused characters that did something very well. 2E was more interested in characters that fit the setting, that gave players more roleplaying options, and help them outfit their character (for example the expanded musical equipment list in the Complete Bard was incredibly useful if you wanted to play a bard but didn't know a lot about musical instruments). Kits were also very good roleplaying tools because they were, usually, more about the concept and flavor and having a solid character idea, than they were about giving you huge mechanical effects (some notoriously did the latter, but mostly kits boiled down to minor things like NWP bonuses and such). I never saw a kit break a campaign, but I did see character builds strain a campaign in 3E (again, I don't see that as a flaw but as a GM it meant I had to boost my mastery of the system to appropriately manage things like challenge levels of encounters---which were pretty key in 3rd edition).</p><p></p><p>My feeling is these editions are not at war. Both had options. They approached options in very different ways (I would say 2E was much more focused on presenting options that helped the GM, whereas 3E was more focused on giving player options).</p><p></p><p>Also you can't tackle this without getting into things like Skills and Powers for 2E. That stuff was pretty hefty in terms of the options they provided. I actually prohibited it from my campaigns because I found it changed the way the game felt too much.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Bedrockgames, post: 8983194, member: 85555"] On the balance issue, I found the core classes fairly balanced, but I also think that is because 2E was before the era of optimization you had with 3E (the entire spirit of play was different so it just wasn't as typical in my own experience for issues between classes to become a problem). I am still a big fan of the different XP tiers. On options this is a pretty interesting discussion. Honestly I would need to compare book by book to give a truly genuine assessment, so anything I say here is with the caveat that I am persuadable if someone reminds me of a detail I am not immediately recollecting (I have been playing a lot of 2E lately, but haven't played 3E for a few years) Again here the spirit of the games (two editions that I love a lot) were very different, and that makes comparing them hard. On the one hand, 3E gets the crown for the mechanical heft of its options and how those could be used to build so many different concepts. But it was also one of the more uniform editions. If I went from one group to another during the 3E era, the game was usually played very much the same from group to group, whereas in the 2E era, tables varied widely. Part of this is due to the fact that 2E was built around options. 3E had plenty of optional rules too, and it is possible I am not eyeballing the tally well (so perhaps in the end this conclusion is incorrect), but my sense and memory is so much of the core system in 2E (EDIT) is optional that this led to hugely different play experiences. NWPs, which most people think of as the default skill system for 2E were like one of two or three options (and I think they may have been the second one presented). Plus both weapon and non-weapon proficiencies were 100% optional. A lot of groups didn't even use those (most of the Ravenloft modules I have don't even bother with them in NPC entries). Then you had all those optional rules around things like weapon type versus armor, spell components, optional initiative methods, optional modifiers, weapon speed, parrying, jogging and running, etc. When I think of the 2E PHB, I think of the "Optional" tag. Even the expanded books like the Complete series are described as optional. This may have been the case with 3E as well, I can't recall, but one thing I know is they were not viewed as optional by most people the way the brown books were for 2E. Much of that though I think had to do with the spirit of play. In the 2E days, as the GM I vetted everything that went into a campaign. By 3E you just didn't feel like you had the same level of authority over the setting when it came to players wanting to include a new class, prestige class, etc (and this was also the age of wish lists, which catered to optimization-----and I don't consider optimization a dirty word, it is just a key distinction between the systems in my view: 3E is very good if you want optimized play). In terms of expanded material. 2E did have the complete books, the blue books and the green books. It also had a ton of GM optional material (for example the Van Richten Guides were littered with options for monsters from the GM POV). Stuff like the complete Bard was filled with material. However what it probably lacked that 3E had more of was mechanical heft. But this is either a pro or con depending on your perspective. Second edition emphasized flavor and the setting more, whereas 3E placed more emphasis on the system and crunch. The latter is great for creating characters with meaningful mechanical distinctions, and you could use it to create very focused characters that did something very well. 2E was more interested in characters that fit the setting, that gave players more roleplaying options, and help them outfit their character (for example the expanded musical equipment list in the Complete Bard was incredibly useful if you wanted to play a bard but didn't know a lot about musical instruments). Kits were also very good roleplaying tools because they were, usually, more about the concept and flavor and having a solid character idea, than they were about giving you huge mechanical effects (some notoriously did the latter, but mostly kits boiled down to minor things like NWP bonuses and such). I never saw a kit break a campaign, but I did see character builds strain a campaign in 3E (again, I don't see that as a flaw but as a GM it meant I had to boost my mastery of the system to appropriately manage things like challenge levels of encounters---which were pretty key in 3rd edition). My feeling is these editions are not at war. Both had options. They approached options in very different ways (I would say 2E was much more focused on presenting options that helped the GM, whereas 3E was more focused on giving player options). Also you can't tackle this without getting into things like Skills and Powers for 2E. That stuff was pretty hefty in terms of the options they provided. I actually prohibited it from my campaigns because I found it changed the way the game felt too much. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
On AD&D 2E
Top