Super 2E Hybrid

[thecasualoblivion]

I am brainstorming for an AD&D game I may run at some point. I'm a 2E fanboy, so that's my starting point. Certain things from newer editions I'm definitely going to add, like 4E skills and movement, 3E BAB and AC, some sort of at-will magic for Wizards, ect. I'm looking at codifying the class/multiclass system of 2E, combining some concepts and making things more transparent, though I have a small question for the crowd. What to do with the Druid? I'm trying to maintain game balance and keep character choices attractive. The 1E/2E Druid always seemed like a weak choice to me, and I was wondering if someone who is familiar with them can tell me where they really fit into 1E/2E game balance.

 

[Calico_Jack73]

I never felt that the Druid was a weak choice. In AD&D they shoot up the levels and leave most of the other PCs in the dust until they get to higher levels where they slow down. I never did like the True Neutral limitation so I'd get rid of that.

Personally I'd use the Players Option books. Combat & Tactics introduces 3e style combat in 2e. With Skills & Powers you can allow your players to purchase their race and class abilities so they aren't so vanilla. In Spells & Magic I preferred the Channelling method of magic. You can cast as many spells as you like (no daily limit) but each casting can cause fatigue. It is possible to kill yourself through the casting of spells.

 

[Remathilis]

I'm guessing your looking at at a 2e++ edition, which takes a few things from 3e/4e and keeps the rest right?

Players Options are your friends.

My own "perfect" 2e might look like this...

Ability scores: no matter what, dump exception Str. I'd use either Basic/RC's ability progress (9-12 +0, 13-15 +1, 16-17 +2, 18 +3) or 3e/4e's (bonus equals ability score -10, /2) but if you wish to keep the other scores the same, I have an excellent alt Str chart removing % Str

Races: I'd take a few hints from 3e (elven wpn profs, gnome cantrips). Add half-orc from PO/Humanoids HB.

Classes: Fighters would do well from the weapon-mastery rules in PO: Combat & Tactics. Wizards might do from something akin to Reserve Feats from Complete Mage for at-wills (make sure to add the new specialist bennies from Spells & Magic). Clerics and other priests might be served with the cure-swap from 3e. Remove that silly level cap/fighting requirement from druids; high level bennies can be extrapolated from the cleric spell chart, the mystic (Faiths & Avatars) XP chart, and the 3e druid/heirophant abilities. Thieves need a lot of love; I'd look at giving them some of 3e's defensive bennies (uncanny dodge, evasion) and perhaps fixing backstab multiplies for extra +d6 damage (or just fixing backstab to work closer to SA, making more useful).

Skills: The trained + 1/2 level system should work fine.

Combat: I like flipping the AC upwards and replacing THAC0 with BAB. Not sure on saves though. It might be possible to replace these with 3e's Fort/Ref/Will

Spells; Use Spells & Magic update spell lists, ESP its updated cleric spheres.

FINAL THOUGHT: If your big on this type of idea but don't want to put as much leg-room re-writing the PHB, I might suggest looking at Castles & Crusades as a baseline rather than 2e. It did a lot of work for you (upwards AC, re-jiggering classes) and adding a few new powers (at-wills and a skill system) shouldn't be too hard there either.

Anyway, good luck.

 

[Ulrick]

2e Druids are sort of like regular priests, but not quite--they cannot wear armor like clerics or turn undead. I can understand the whole not wearing armor, but turning undead? One would thing that with a Druid's concern with the balance of natural he or she would figure out ways to defend against "unnatural" creatures like undead. Perhaps instead of turning undead, the Druid can "paralyze them in place" or something like that.

But kudos for making a 2e Hybrid. I've been considering doing the same thing as of late. It's been a conundrum for me, deciding which edition to run for my next campaign. I like 4e, but its too video-gamey for my taste and I just don't like how they treated hp (dire rats have 38 hp?--I just find that odd). I like 3.5e as a player, but its a pain in the butt to ruin as a DM who like to plan his own adventures and tinker with rules. I ran 1e and OD&D but my players didn't like those for various reasons. So that leaves 2e.

Good Luck!

 

[Jack Daniel]

A while ago, I wrote up a document of house rules for my 2nd edition campaign. Mainly, changes to the character classes, multi-classing, and commonsense 3e-isms like positive Attack Bonus and AC.

 

[rounser]

I ran 1e and OD&D but my players didn't like those for various reasons. So that leaves 2e.

It's the kits, isn't it? There's a lot of fun from the PC side to be had with kits like the Swashbuckler, Assassin and Blade. In need of a major balance overhaul though.

I quite like some of the classes and races from Tales of the Lance, too. It really goes to town with dodgy game balance (e.g. minotaurs and their weapons, cavalier for 2E etc.) but the flavour is great. It's a good example of how truly customisable for your campaign the 2E and earlier game can be if you get your head out of the RAW hole.

 

[jdsivyer]

I never felt that the Druid was a weak choice. In AD&D they shoot up the levels and leave most of the other PCs in the dust until they get to higher levels where they slow down. I never did like the True Neutral limitation so I'd get rid of that.

Personally I'd use the Players Option books. Combat & Tactics introduces 3e style combat in 2e. With Skills & Powers you can allow your players to purchase their race and class abilities so they aren't so vanilla. In Spells & Magic I preferred the Channelling method of magic. You can cast as many spells as you like (no daily limit) but each casting can cause fatigue. It is possible to kill yourself through the casting of spells.

I can't help but agree with this. I, too, would use the POs books. C&T was pretty good with the lists of weapons, etc...and I was even a fan of the Initiative system they introduced

The channelling in S&M was excellent, and S&P gave you some excellent variety without sacrificing the uniqueness of the classes.

The more I think about it, the more I want to play 2e with PO books again

 

[RFisher]

If balance is the concern, it might be better to keep druids, call them wizards, and drop wizards.

 

[Thanael]

It's 2E, don't occupy yourself with balance.

My 2E would encompass character kits, critical hits and other weapon rules from Combat & Tactics, spells and some optional rules from Spells & Magic, lots of specialty priests, and some stuff from 1E (Monk , Assassin classes).

Leave the druid as is it's powerful enough.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

tell me where they really fit into 1E/2E game balance.

There's your trouble. 1E/2E game balance is illusory at best and most commonly is actually delusional. Forget balance because the idea of "balance" is that all class/race/etc. choices must be equivalent. Bah! IMbalance is always far more interesting and dynamic. Just roll the dice.