Random thoughts on 2nd Ed.

[Leif]

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

Fair enough! I guess he just included all the more generous methods for
those of us who aren't quite as 'hard core' as others.

 

[Sekhmet]

He did enjoy his "ordinary folk become legends and heroes" fantasy, rather than the "exceptional individuals do what they're supposed to do" type.

 

[Leif]

He did enjoy his "ordinary folk become legends and heroes" fantasy, rather than the "exceptional individuals do what they're supposed to do" type.

I wonder if that's because he saw himself as an ordinary guy who became a legend by creating the hobby that's still captivating millions?

But, eveybody winds up at the same place, whether they start out mild-mannered, or bursting with potential.

 

[delericho]

The 1E DMG specifically says:

And, of course, "Unearthed Arcana" introduces a bunch of even more generous methods.

The 2E DMG lists SEVEN methods of character generation:

You sure those are in the DMG? I was under the impression that the six character generation methods were in the PHB in second edition. There is a discussion of the various merits of the methods in the DMG (IIRC), including a dire warning that 4d6-drop-lowest is for munchkins (and will therefore break your game).

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.

Careful now. Gary had left TSR by the time 2nd Edition came around. He's not responsible for that one - whether the good or the bad.

 

[Leif]

And, of course, "Unearthed Arcana" introduces a bunch of even more generous methods.

I never consider UA to be a part of 1E.

You sure those are in the DMG? I was under the impression that the six character generation methods were in the PHB in second edition. There is a discussion of the various merits of the methods in the DMG (IIRC), including a dire warning that 4d6-drop-lowest is for munchkins (and will therefore break your game).

Yes, the first 5 are also described in 2e DMG. Number 6, the point-buy method, is only detailed in 2E PHB but it is mentioned in 2E DMG.

Careful now. Gary had left TSR by the time 2nd Edition came around. He's not responsible for that one - whether the good or the bad.

EEEEK! Sorry! I never meant to confuse GG with the abomination David "Zeb" Cook! And I think you've confused "left" with "was forced out'!

 

[delericho]

I never consider UA to be a part of 1E.

Yes, the first 5 are also described in 2e DMG. Number 6, the point-buy method, is only detailed in 2E PHB but it is mentioned in 2E DMG.

Guess I've learned something new today.

EEEEK! Sorry! I never meant to confuse GG with the abomination David "Zeb" Cook! And I think you've confused "left" with "was forced out'!

Heh. One of my dirty little secrets is that I only ever played a couple of hours of 1st Edition. I played an absurd amount of 2nd, and had huge fun doing it, so I have nothing but thanks for DZC.

(And, indeed, having read the 1st Ed books for the first time last year, I'm now convinced that had I not jumped straight to 2nd Ed, I wouldn't now be a gamer.)

As for the circumstances of GG's departure from TSR - yeah, I know.

 

[Leif]

Heh. One of my dirty little secrets is that I only ever played a couple of hours of 1st Edition. I played an absurd amount of 2nd, and had huge fun doing it, so I have nothing but thanks for DZC.

(And, indeed, having read the 1st Ed books for the first time last year, I'm now convinced that had I not jumped straight to 2nd Ed, I wouldn't now be a gamer.)

I understand your feelings, then. I dunno, 1E wasn't so bad -- remember, at that time, it wasn't just the only game in town, it was the only game in the WORLD, pretty much, 'cept for some knockoffs and wannabes.

 

[delericho]

I dunno, 1E wasn't so bad -- remember, at that time, it wasn't just the only game in town, it was the only game in the WORLD, pretty much, 'cept for some knockoffs and wannabes.

It's not the rules that are the issue, particularly. But the text, man... I found it incredibly dry, and very hard to follow in places (I read the Initiative rules carefully three times, and still couldn't make sense of them). Basically, I found the conversational style of 2nd Edition a breeze, but found 1st Ed to be really hard to read through - and knowing myself as a twelve-year-old, I wouldn't have made it through.

But as a game in actual use? Yeah, my few memories of 1st Ed are good ones.

 

[David Howery]

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

That's what all the groups I was in did. Mostly to ensure that you get a mix of character classes... the problem with the '3d6 in order' rule is that vagaries of the dice might mean that you end up with a party with no cleric, no mage, etc... something that doesn't bode well for the longevity of the group. You can survive with a group of PCs who all have average stats, but it's harder to survive if you're missing one or more of the basic classes...

 

[Leif]

It's not the rules that are the issue, particularly. But the text, man... I found it incredibly dry, and very hard to follow in places (I read the Initiative rules carefully three times, and still couldn't make sense of them). Basically, I found the conversational style of 2nd Edition a breeze, but found 1st Ed to be really hard to read through - and knowing myself as a twelve-year-old, I wouldn't have made it through.

But as a game in actual use? Yeah, my few memories of 1st Ed are good ones.

Oh, I admit that 'Gygax Prose' takes some getting used to, but after I read some of the rules through c-a-r-e-f-u-l-l-y and s-l-o-w-l-y six or seven hunderd times, they began to sink in by osmosis. And once I got used to Gygax's style, I preferred it to Zeb Cook's, for sure. Just a matter of personal taste I suppose, but, hey, Zeb didn't even last as long as Gary, did he? What's up with that?