TSR On the Relative Merits of the TSR Editions

DammitVictor

Trust the Fungus
Supporter
In this thread, @Sacrosanct asked why so many paleo-grognards and neo-grognards-- two distinct camps I have separate feet in-- prefer AD&D 1E to 2E and why there are so many more clones and offshoots of the former than the latter.

I can easily go off at length about why 1E is my least favorite version of D&D, and how the history of D&D is subsequent designers removing its errors one at a time. But nobody enjoys or benefits from that discussion and the people who prefer 1E have a point.

So, this isn't a [+] thread, but it's not for Edition Warriors, either-- this is a thread for why we like our most-preferred rulesets better than others, not why we like our least-preferred rulesets less. Or, if you prefer, a thread for telling people who disagree with you why they're right.




Caveat: I have no real firsthand experience with OD&D. Never owned it (outside of PDF), never played it. I know a little bit about it, from a historical perspective, but that's about it.

Advanced (1E): Second-most popular basis for retroclones, and the first D&D to get cloned. You get the complete experience from the core rulebooks and  maybe UA/OA, making it easy to make an all-in-one corebook out of it. As much more content as 2E recieved... everything that was missing from 1E was (IMO) sorely missed.

Basic/Expert (Moldvay/Cook): The least popular edition in its original run, the most popular in the OSR. Classic is (IMO) cleaner and better designed than AD&D. I will die on the hill that Classic "race as class" was a better mechanic than "race as class" ever got until 3PP PF1 supplements published after Paizo published PF2. (Fight me.) Much as I prefer high-level play in other editions, it's hard to argue that spells above 5th level have always problematic for game balance.

BECMI/Rules Cyclopedia: Real D&D goes up to level 36. Then starts over, goes back up to level 36, and then actually starts. (I'm only exaggerating a little.) Best "weapon mastery" rules in D&D,  period, proto- PrCs/PPs for "the Four in the Core"... so much tasty.

Advanced (2E): In the core rules, this is just cleaned up/watered down AD&D with some of the (worst IMO) supplemental rules included as "optional" rules. But if you asked "What is D&D?", every 2E campaign setting (including the green leatherettes) had a different answer. The PHBRs, especially 5/10/15, brought back most of what was  removed from Classic and Advanced.

"2.5" -- Black Borders and Player's Option: This is my game. (If only it was based on BECMI!) This is the version of the rules that takes all of the modularity of the 2E core and gives umpires the tools to use it. Replace all of the subraces, or even core races, with your setting-specific preference. Replace the Mage with the Schools of Effect and Thaumaturgy. Replace the Cleric and Druid with a Specialty Priest (with its own Kit) for every religion in your setting. Use a different spellcasting mechanic for every magic class. Combine it with PHBR15 to give every class WFM.

Between 1996 and 2000, I did all of that and more for every single AD&D campaign I ran. I fell for 3.X/PF1 hard... and spent fifteen years chasing what I'd left behind! (Though, admittedly, the 3.PF ecosystem has caught back up in the following decade.)




So, which edition of TSR D&D do you prefer, for your preferred playstyle, and what kind of game would prompt you to use a different one?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Basic/Expert (Moldvay/Cook): The least popular edition in its original run
We have the actual sales data that disproves this claim.

Over here.

 


I'll repost this from the other thread

We still used Gold for XP in 2e. It was stupid not too. Unless one uses the completely arbitrary story awards which have no real basis (IMO) of what standard to really rely on except DM judgement and the "feel" of it in an analogous way to some suggestions, levelling is slowed down to a snails pace in 2e comparatively to other editions without the Gold for XP option.

We didn't use story awards (often).

Overall, though, with that, 2e core was really just a cleaned up 1e. With the inclusion (for those who read it) of the Grandfather clause (everything in 1e was grandfathered into 2e, thus 2e also was ALL of 1e with you being able to pick and choose which rule to use if they conflicted), the core rules of 2e were basically just a version of 1e.

The problem for me is with all the additions that came in and made it overly complicated or broken (many of the complete books, Spells and Powers, etc). That's what is the real division between what some 2e players love and 1e.

I love the 2e core rules for some of the things they made easier and simpler (I actually really like 2e's take on THACO and I prefer the 2e initiative rules for example).

However, throwing everything in 2e and the kitchen sink (all the supplements and other rule additions) made 2e overly large and burdensome to handle.

That right there is one big reason to prefer 1e. Even with all the 1e hardback rulebooks you had far less to know and remember than if you had all the 2e rulebooks at the table.

I'll get back sometime later on the editions themselves.

But personally, I'd probably prefer them in an order similar to

2e core with 1e grandfathered in (as it was at the start of 2e, all 1e stuff was grandfathered into 2e). (occasionally can include Complete Fighter/Wizard/Cleric/Rogue/Bard/Ninja/Psionic if one REALLY REALLY feels strongly about it).

BECMI

AD&D 1e

BX

OD&D

RC

AD&D 2e/2.5 with just the Core and Combat and Tactics

AD&D 2e (with all supplements)

AD&D 2.5 (as you would put it)

AD&D 2.5 (as you would put it) with all the supplements
 


I mostly remember 1e being more gonzo with us being kids and middle-schoolers. We had fun and we made a lot of stuff up like items and monsters. 2e made some of the PCs rules better or more straightlined. all of the editions seem to have added more PC rules and PCs seem to become more complex and have more options as we go along. We played 2e in High School and in the Army and it was still fun. We still made up stuff like monsters and items to give out. Knowing the rules for monsters helped and players with knowledge could combat the gotcha DMs. Modules seemed to all have things that took away powers to fit the challenge. Some modules did not allow teleporting or to be able to cast find traps and such.

I think more is that I look back with fond memories of playing with friends and not the actual mechanics. Similar to 3e and 4e. I liked them at the time, but would rather play the new edition then have to recall how to play the older editions for some amount of time.
 

At this point, you could sell me on playing just about any TSR edition of D&D. To my mind, they all have their charms.

OD&D - I never really encountered it until the deluxe reprint boxed set came out some years ago). Even it is fun to play in an ultra-retro, rough and free-wheeling fashion.

B/X - Another edition I picked up later in life. Impressive in how much it packs into those slim booklets while remaining easily understood.

BECMI - Where I got started. It's entirely tied up in nostalgia; to my mind, it's the best version of D&D released when rated for presentation and ease-of-use. You pick up that red box and immediately get drawn into a thrilling world of adventure and danger.

AD&D 1e - Occultic, dense, shambolic, completely Gygaxian. Just looking at those Elmore covers is exciting, takes me back.

AD&D 2e - When settings were king. I go back and forth on the value of kits, but the settings were gold. The work done then resonates to this day. Granted, the abundance of different settings didn't help sales. But arguably the Forgotten Realms of current D&D was shaped more by the 2e setting than anything else.
 

In this thread, @Sacrosanct asked why so many paleo-grognards and neo-grognards-- two distinct camps I have separate feet in-- prefer AD&D 1E to 2E and why there are so many more clones and offshoots of the former than the latter.

I can easily go off at length about why 1E is my least favorite version of D&D, and how the history of D&D is subsequent designers removing its errors one at a time. But nobody enjoys or benefits from that discussion and the people who prefer 1E have a point.

So, this isn't a [+] thread, but it's not for Edition Warriors, either-- this is a thread for why we like our most-preferred rulesets better than others, not why we like our least-preferred rulesets less. Or, if you prefer, a thread for telling people who disagree with you why they're right.




Caveat: I have no real firsthand experience with OD&D. Never owned it (outside of PDF), never played it. I know a little bit about it, from a historical perspective, but that's about it.

Advanced (1E): Second-most popular basis for retroclones, and the first D&D to get cloned. You get the complete experience from the core rulebooks and  maybe UA/OA, making it easy to make an all-in-one corebook out of it. As much more content as 2E recieved... everything that was missing from 1E was (IMO) sorely missed.

Basic/Expert (Moldvay/Cook): The least popular edition in its original run, the most popular in the OSR. Classic is (IMO) cleaner and better designed than AD&D. I will die on the hill that Classic "race as class" was a better mechanic than "race as class" ever got until 3PP PF1 supplements published after Paizo published PF2. (Fight me.) Much as I prefer high-level play in other editions, it's hard to argue that spells above 5th level have always problematic for game balance.

BECMI/Rules Cyclopedia: Real D&D goes up to level 36. Then starts over, goes back up to level 36, and then actually starts. (I'm only exaggerating a little.) Best "weapon mastery" rules in D&D,  period, proto- PrCs/PPs for "the Four in the Core"... so much tasty.

Advanced (2E): In the core rules, this is just cleaned up/watered down AD&D with some of the (worst IMO) supplemental rules included as "optional" rules. But if you asked "What is D&D?", every 2E campaign setting (including the green leatherettes) had a different answer. The PHBRs, especially 5/10/15, brought back most of what was  removed from Classic and Advanced.

"2.5" -- Black Borders and Player's Option: This is my game. (If only it was based on BECMI!) This is the version of the rules that takes all of the modularity of the 2E core and gives umpires the tools to use it. Replace all of the subraces, or even core races, with your setting-specific preference. Replace the Mage with the Schools of Effect and Thaumaturgy. Replace the Cleric and Druid with a Specialty Priest (with its own Kit) for every religion in your setting. Use a different spellcasting mechanic for every magic class. Combine it with PHBR15 to give every class WFM.

Between 1996 and 2000, I did all of that and more for every single AD&D campaign I ran. I fell for 3.X/PF1 hard... and spent fifteen years chasing what I'd left behind! (Though, admittedly, the 3.PF ecosystem has caught back up in the following decade.)




So, which edition of TSR D&D do you prefer, for your preferred playstyle, and what kind of game would prompt you to use a different one?
I and my original group(s) played with 1e as our core rules from 1988 to 2000, and again from 2002 to 2009, and again from 2010 to 2014. Our experiments with WotC editions never lasted more than a year or two until 5e was released. Even after that, we occasionally ran 1e until my best friend passed away in 2018 and my old group broke up permanently.

Those rules (yes, we houseruled a bit like most everyone else) were D&D to us, and still are in a lot of ways. The playstyle espoused by 1e has always been the playstyle I want from D&D, and every move WotC makes to move the game away from it has made it less palatable to me. 5e stuck with us because (at the time) it didn't actively work against the 1e playstyle to an uncomfortable degree (the way we felt 4e and now 5.5 have), and the rules were more accommodating for new players we brought in.

As far as 2e goes, we used pieces of it throughout our 1e games as we saw fit, and personally it's my favorite edition because I absolutely love all the settings and supplements from that era. The creativity of the 2e era IMO blows away everything before or since, and the 2e versions of those settings (and especially the immense amount of product released) are what I see as the best versions of those settings. Material made since that can't be reconciled with the older stuff just doesn't work for me. Of course, I've always been more of a reader and worldbuilder than a GM or player, and no edition had more and better stuff to read and worldbuild with than 2e.

All that being said, my first exposure to D&D was the BECMI red box, and in recent years I've really gotten into games that used it and its close cousin B/X as a rules basis. It helps that the playstyle I've always favored from 1e is easily doable in games based on those systems.

TL; DR: the way I enjoy playing, running, and reading D&D works best in editions prior to 4e (3e was ok and 5e prior to the revision was pretty good for a while), so I vastly prefer games based on those systems. I also greatly miss the settings of 2e and was very unhappy that the recent designers of the official game basically ended those stories.
 

We have the actual sales data that disproves this claim.

Over here.

Are sales really the important thing to take away from this discussion?
 

Advanced (2E): In the core rules, this is just cleaned up/watered down AD&D with some of the (worst IMO) supplemental rules included as "optional" rules. But if you asked "What is D&D?", every 2E campaign setting (including the green leatherettes) had a different answer. The PHBRs, especially 5/10/15, brought back most of what was  removed from Classic and Advanced.

"2.5" -- Black Borders and Player's Option: This is my game. (If only it was based on BECMI!) This is the version of the rules that takes all of the modularity of the 2E core and gives umpires the tools to use it. Replace all of the subraces, or even core races, with your setting-specific preference. Replace the Mage with the Schools of Effect and Thaumaturgy. Replace the Cleric and Druid with a Specialty Priest (with its own Kit) for every religion in your setting. Use a different spellcasting mechanic for every magic class. Combine it with PHBR15 to give every class WFM.
The black border core books were the same text as the blue books, just different (worse) art and layout. The Players/DMs option books were essentially a new edition.
 

Remove ads

Top