Random thoughts on 2nd Ed.

[Sekhmet]

When I rolled Sekhmet (a 2e Necromancer), she had a 9 Con, a Str of 8, Cha of 7, and Dex 11. Int and Wis were 17 each.

My companions weren't saying "Wow, you got two 17's", they were saying "Haha, you got low rolls".
Basically, instead of going into the rolling process with a preconceived notion of what you're going to play, you roll your stats and THEN decide what your character will be.

I played 3d6 for the first 10ish years of my gaming, and (while it did produce low stats nearly every time), it provided a more average player character over the course of time. I don't like that the 4d6-Lowest method produces characters that are almost always above average.
I get it, we're supposed to be heroes. However, most heroes started out form humble beginnings - they weren't always the strongest, they weren't always the fastest, they weren't always the smartest, but their deeds and their experience are what made them fantastic.

 

[Leif]

Basically, instead of going into the rolling process with a preconceived notion of what you're going to play, you roll your stats and THEN decide what your character will be.

This is very true. While I did have a general idea of what sort of character I wanted to play, you couldn't make a final decision until you saw the stats.

I played 3d6 for the first 10ish years of my gaming, and (while it did produce low stats nearly every time), it provided a more average player character over the course of time. I don't like that the 4d6-Lowest method produces characters that are almost always above average.

Reading this almost makes me sad that we started right out of the gate with 4d6-drop lowest. My hat's off to you!

I get it, we're supposed to be heroes. However, most heroes started out form humble beginnings - they weren't always the strongest, they weren't always the fastest, they weren't always the smartest, but their deeds and their experience are what made them fantastic.

Well said!

 

[PrinceAngore]

My group still plays 2e (well actually 2.5 but anyways) and we have always done 3d6 reroll ones straight down to start our characters, scores usually end up slightly above avg..but we don't get a lot of Rangers/Specialty Wizards/Paladins..I love the fact that optimizing is a lot harder, and makes character creation a lot more intriguing imo...

 

[the Jester]

They must've known nobody was using the 3d6 stat roll option, or else they wouldn't require a diviner to have a 16 Wisdom or paladins to have a 17 Charisma.

You are entirely incorrect. Many, many, MANY groups used 3d6 for stats; some even used straight-up "3d6 in order".

Not every party was supposed to have a diviner or paladin. The idea was to make those classes, which were exceptional, exceptionally rare.

Thinking back, I don't think I ever played anything requiring outlandish requirements. The one time somebody brought a paladin, I'm sure we all assumed he was cheating.

The thing about 2e and earlier is that it is high-lethality. You would see the occasional paladin by virtue of how many characters each player went through.

I'm kind of dwelling on this whole 3d6?!?! premise. Although I'm sure nobody seriously attempted to game with that, I'm so tired of optimized point builds that I'm really tempted to try it. While I'm sure there's a great sense of "hurrah" that comes from getting a good set of stats ("check it, I qualify to play a ranger!"), I doubt that chance would be much comfort to the guy with straight 10s...

I'm not sure off the top of my head what the 2e rules for "hopeless characters" were, but take a look at them and you'll see that there was a slight slight nod towards heroic characters in the default rules.

 

[PrinceAngore]

???

A Tome of Clear Thought is worth 8,000 XP[/]i]. That is, a mage who creates such an item is awarded that number of XP.

2nd Edition RAW does not allow magic items for purchase by default. Indeed, the DMG contains many dire warnings about allowing PCs to do this.

Actually in Second Ed, creating magical items COST the mage XP not rewarded it, IIRC...

 

[fletch137]

Actually in Second Ed, creating magical items COST the mage XP not rewarded it, IIRC...

Negative. In 2nd Ed., different classes could receive class-specific XP awards (something I like but don't recall ever using). For wizards, they would receive the XP value of a magic item they created.

Interesting how that completely reverses to 3rd Ed. I like to imagine the magical dot-com bust that must've occurred when the Forgotten Realms and Greyhawk wizards lost a notable source of XP. How the magic item market must've dried up...

 

[Alzrius]

You did, however, sacrifice points of Constitution to create permanent magical items, so it's not like it was something done lightly.

I also only vaguely remember what the magical item creation rules were, but they certainly weren't as simple as 3.X's.

 

[Mongo]

One of the best campaigns I ever ran was 2nd Ed. AD&D in the late 1990s. It lasted 3 years and characters went from 1st to around 15 level when we stopped.

mongo

 

[Leif]

I'm not sure off the top of my head what the 2e rules for "hopeless characters" were, but take a look at them and you'll see that there was a slight slight nod towards heroic characters in the default rules.

The 1E DMG specifically says: "While it is possible to generate some fairly playable characters by rolling 3d6, there is often an extended period of attempts at finding a suitable one due to quirks of the dice. Furthermore, these rather marginal characters tend to have a short life-expectancy - which tends to discourage new players, as does having to make do with some character of a race and/or class which he or she really can't or won't identify with. Character generation, then, is a serious matter, and it is recommended that the following systems be used. Folur alternatives are offered for player characters:

[I have paraphrased the methods for brevity and clarity but retained the intent]

1. Scores are recorded and arranged as the player desires using 4d6 and dropping the lowest die.

2. Scores recorded and arranged as player desires. 3d6 are rolled 12 times and the highest 6 scores retained.

3. Scores are rolled for each ability in order. 3d6 are rolled 6 times for each ability, and the highest score in each set of six is retained.

4. 3d6 are rolled to generate the six abilities in order for 12 characters. The player then selects one of the twelve characters generated.

This is at the top of the second column of page 11 of the 1E DMG. I wish that I had bothered to find it back in the day when 1E AD&D was all we had!

The 2E DMG lists SEVEN methods of character generation:

1. 3d6 in order "Very high scores are rare, so classes that require high scores (paladin, ranger, illusionist, druid, bard) are correspondingly rare...The majority of player characters will be fighters, clerics, mages, and thieves. Characters with exceptional ability scores will tend to stand out from their comrades."

2. 3d6 twice, keep desired score. [This one doesn't actually mention rolling in order in the method itself, but it is stated in the descriptive text.]

3. 3d6, arrange to taste

4. 3d6 twice for each ability, arranged to taste.

5. 4d6 six times, drop lowest, arrange as desired.

6. POINTS PLUS DICE -- This method is actually described in the 2E PH: Each ability starts at 8. Seven dice are rolled and added to the six abilities as desired. All points shown on each of the seven dice must be added to the same ability score, and no score may start with a value above 18. "If you cannot make an 18 by exact count on the dice, you cannot have an 18 [for that] score."

I learned something by going back and reading this stuff just now! I had mistakenly thought that Gary G. intended to impose draconian dice-rolling methods, but many of the methods he, himself, suggested in both 1E AD&D and 2E AD&D are more generous and 'player-centric' than the methods we always used.

 

[Sekhmet]

As I recall from a Q&A he did, he used the 3d6 arranged to taste method.