Poll: 1E or 2E?

[Jhaelen]

I generally preferred 1E to 2E but the Monster Manuals in 2E were kind of neat. They've got tons of fluff for every monster which continues to be useful - even (or is that especially?) if you're switching to 4E.

 

[el-remmen]

I voted for 2E - but really I would do "basic" i.e. the Rules Cyclopedia.

 

[Mercule]

I've considered returning to 1e. 2e is why I stopped playing D&D until 3e.

 

[Desdichado]

Ignore both and play the Mentzer sets.

 

[pr1]

I started with 2e, played 3e for awhile, and picked up the 1e books for a change of pace. Philosophically, 1e is better, because 2e was a rip just to keep the original writers out of the royalties and corresponded with some horrible business interest taking over the company to screw gamers and make mega bucks (which, or course, never materialized). The source books for 2e are... really bad. Late 2e is kind of shadow 3e, with no elegance, like Skills & Powers. That book sucks really bad in my opinion ("bane of my existence" in high school, actually), as well.

2e fixes some things, but you can always get non-weapon proficiencies from Wilderness and Dungeoneers' Survival Guides. Combat in 1st edition is nearly impossible to decipher because of some contradictory statements, but if you look on Dragonsfoot forums, you can find some ok answers around the contradictions. If you actually get it right, I think what 1e combat is supposed to be is a little better.

One more thing, 1e rulebooks are not arranged so well. But they're fun to read!

 

[pr1]

2E does the best campaign settings.

No way! I respectfully disagree; I think 2e over-laden Forgotten Realms with high-powered NPCs (a trend continued to this day, it semes). The settings most identified with it -- Dark Sun, Spell Jammer, the Sims "lets-go-on-adventure-dates-with-Drizzt-and-Elminster" version of Forgotten Realms -- impose the setting too much on the party and limit an agile game.

 

[Greg K]

1E does the best adventures.
2E does the best campaign settings.
3E does the best character creation.
4E does the best combat rules.

I agree with the first three.

 

[Obryn]

I've run D&D for decades. I'd say that 1e really captures my sense of wonder, but 2e was a better rule set.

However, were I to run old school, I'd be tempted to run RC.

-O

 

[rounser]

No way! I respectfully disagree; I think 2e over-laden Forgotten Realms with high-powered NPCs (a trend continued to this day, it semes). The settings most identified with it -- Dark Sun, Spell Jammer, the Sims "lets-go-on-adventure-dates-with-Drizzt-and-Elminster" version of Forgotten Realms -- impose the setting too much on the party and limit an agile game.

It has the cream of the crop: Al Qadim, Birthright, Ravenloft, Dark Sun, Planescape.

2E wins gold, silver and bronze in this department, IMO.

 

[RFisher]

The companion poll would be: If you needed inspiration no matter what system you planned to play, which edition would you look to? (^_^)

For me, that’d be a completely different answer.