Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DammitVictor" data-source="post: 9801991" data-attributes="member: 6750908">In <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/why-would-anyone-want-to-play-1e.713641/" target="_blank">this thread</a>, [USER=15700]@Sacrosanct[/USER] 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.[HR][/HR]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.)[HR][/HR]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?</blockquote>

Verification