NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sigma" data-source="post: 206195" data-attributes="member: 3066">18(XX) strength.  The only advantage orther than specialization that a fighter had, and you had to have an 18 in Strength to get it.  Thieves.  I don't think I ever saw anyone play a single classed thief in all the years I played 2e.  The way MS/HS worked was especially obnoxious.  Priest spheres.  Ill-defined and easily abused, especially if a player got to pick the ones they wanted.No magic in armor.  Period.  Best way to subdue a wizard in 2e?  Put him in a chain shirt.Humans.  Without heavy DM influence, the average group had more demi-humans than not.  There wasn't a point in playing them other than dual-classing (which also stunk).The weapons.  There were one or two good weapons per class, and you never touched any other.  Giving a character personality with a non-standard weapon meant having them attack slower or do less damage.Druids.  The limited alignment choice made them virtually unplayable (especially with the way True Neutral was described in the core books.)Charisma.  It's still the good munchkin's dump stat in 3e for most classes, but in 2e only paladins and specialists needed a decent score here.That's my short list.  Right before 3e came out, I had given up on 2e.  Every time I picked it up, I'd start tinkering and quickly become overwhelmed with how much I would have to change to make the game playable.  There are only so many pages of house rules you can expect players to digest.  If 3e hadn't come out, I probably wouldn't be playing D&D.</blockquote>

Verification