The difference between Ad&d 1st and 2nd edition?

aramis erak

Legend
Just that? No "longer weapon gets first strike when closing to melee"? No "fighters with multiple attacks always strike first with their first attack"? No "when not closing to melee, on a tied initiative roll, lighter/shorter weapon strikes first"? Did you guys require casters to declare spellcasting before initiative was rolled?

I definitely remember most groups just rolling d6, side-based initiative like you describe. But how ties were treated or whether any of the exceptions were included varied a bit from table to table.
That's essentially how initiative works in Moldvay and Mentzer. it's simple, it's fast, and it's easy to explain.

Yeah. They did massive surveys on what fans wanted to see in 2E, but some of the design decisions I really shake my head at in retrospect.

Like going with 3d6x6 for ability scores, while retaining (somewhat cleaned up and slightly simplified) ability score charts which really require numbers of 15+ for bonuses in most cases. Which was just nuts. When Gary made the original version of those charts in the 1E PH, he stated that he expected PCs to have at least two scores of 15+, and when the DMG came out, the primary ability score generation method was 4d6 drop the lowest, arrange to taste.

Or the initiative system which made shorter, lighter weapons virtually always win initiative over longer ones with more reach. TBF, the 1E initiative system was FAMOUSLY confusing, bad, and overly complex with special sub-rules, and basically impossible to play as written. 2E's system was definitely much better and cleaner than the mess 1E had, but the core basic concepts in the 1E system were definitely more realistic (and to my mind, more fun as mechanics) and could have been simplified easily without switching entirely to the new system which had its own issues.

Or relegating gold for XP to optional rule status without giving any serious guidance on how to award xp for stuff other than killing monsters.
Understand that AD&D 2 was coming out knowing that it was in fact going to be competing with B/E/C; the master rules are about the same time as AD&D2 in release.... B/E/C/M is a different game with many overlapping mechanics - both deriving from Original Edition... So they didn't feel the need to "keep it simple" since Frank Mentzer had the simple side covered with the B/E/C boxed sets.

Too bad the retailers generally only understood the difference if they actually played, and most didn't. Hell, many players BITD didn't. I wasn't cognizant of it when I bought the (then brand spanking new) Basic Rulebook (Tom Moldvay's version). (It was available either as part of the $15 box, or as a $9 shrinkwrapped book. Due to allowance issues, I got the latter... )

As for the higher stats for modifiers?
OE had +1 at 16, and -1 at 6.
Sup 1 added some mods. That's Gygax's work.
AD&D 1E follows Gary's lead, as it was basically "Gary Gygax's D&D as of 1978"...
AD&D 2E follows AD&D 1E. So it's clearly a "Blame Gary" situation.

Holmes uses a different chart, and I don't have my books to hand. ISTR it being simplified from OE Sup 1&2..

Meanwhile, the simpler modifiers in Moldvay follow a smoother distribution... not quite as smooth as modern, but I prefer it...:
Att34-56-89-1213-1516-1718
Mod-3-2-1±0+1+2+3
(Note that in the Immortals rules, this chart gets expanded to about a 100, which, IIRC, is +44 - too lazy to check at the moment)

Frank Mentzer rewrites and slightly revises Moldvay's work, then expands it later, into a whole 36 level game (for human PCs; The demi-humans get essentially 16 to 18 levels, but HP only for 8-12 of them, via the Attack Ranks system.) But he keeps the same simple modifiers table. (I do wish he'd gone to d20's roll-high for thief abilities, and for general skills... but, nope...)

Aaron Alston and Troy Denning revised the Basic to Immortals line in the early 1990s... Troy doing the BBBB¹, with its cardstock paper figures and big battle mat, single volume rulebook aimed at levels 1-5, and a nifty adventure which uses the figs and battlemat. Aaron did the Cyclopedia, which covers levels 1-36, and adds an option for the demis to hit that level as well... He also did the Wrath of the Immortals big box, which revises Mentzer's Immortals rules, and adds a big campaign...

D&D 3E takes a cue from B/X, B/E/C/M/I, and BBBB/Cyclopedia on stat mods. 3E is really about dead center between the two in complexity. At least at first.

As for AD&D 2E Initiative? I've known groups who used it with all the bells and whistles, others who used individual initiative with WSF, others using individual without WSF, and others using side-by-side; those last two also exist in B/X and B/E/C/M/I... This also is part of the design calculus: by having the two be significantly different, but still largely interoperable, the adventures could sell across the gap, and groups could customize.

Unfortunately, customizing was becoming less and less common, in parallel with the rise of videogames. There's a paradigm shift in attitudes towards rules in wargaming in the 1980's, and it also permeated the RPG sphere. If there's one good thing the OGL has done, it's to make homebrewing legit. (There are others, but irrelevant to this issue.) Between the OGL and the OSR, mix-n-match and create your own variant attitudes are back. The best are great... most are, as Theodore Sturgeon's maxim² states, "Crap."

Notes:
¹: Big Black Box Basic. By Troy Denning - a rework of Mentzer to go with Aaron Alston's rework of B/E/C/M/I into two components - the Cyclopedia including all of B/E/C/M, and Wrath of the Immortals, reworking entirely the Immortals ruleset.
²: Sturgeon notes, "90% of ëverything is crap.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Yeah. They did massive surveys on what fans wanted to see in 2E, but some of the design decisions I really shake my head at in retrospect.
It wasn't many surveys and really wasn't massive either. They did what they could but they had no way to communicate reliably with their customer base. They had one survey in Dragon magazine, and they were reading other suggestions that people made - but this was before the internet existed. Everything was plain ol' USPS snail mail - both in letting players know they were looking for their ideas, and in players getting responses TO TSR. They did what they could but it wasn't exhaustive or scientific - and then they still did what they they wanted.
Like going with 3d6x6 for ability scores, while retaining (somewhat cleaned up and slightly simplified) ability score charts which really require numbers of 15+ for bonuses in most cases. Which was just nuts.
Yeah, I've complained about that particular lack of understanding of their own game for decades (though it took me a decade to realize it myself prior to that - but then I wasn't designing a new edition to publish). They should have picked ONE single ability score rolling method intended to be used by everyone, and then adjusted the bonuses on the charts to fit the probabilities for that one method. But backward compatibility with 1E was a huge design focus they unnecessarily burdened themselves with, and it KILLED most really significant changes that should have been made.
 

aramis erak

Legend
It wasn't many surveys and really wasn't massive either. They did what they could but they had no way to communicate reliably with their customer base.
Actually, they did have a way to reach many of their customers... not a majority, sure, but definitely the "invested in the future of the game" crowd... the Dragon magazine subscriber list. Complete with snail-mail addresses!
I wasn't a subscriber, but had friends who were. They got the survey.

It's worth noting that in about 1990, another survey was done - I suspect it was using the retail play membership list... because I got it. There was also a box to tick if one wanted the results. It was NOT an anonymous survey, either.

So, there were a number of ways to get surveys to players. How many actually got sent, and how many returned? the people who know are few and getting fewer by the year.

TSR's marketing department did pretty well for the era.
 



aramis erak

Legend
I don't think that's the case. There were a lot of supplements, but they were mostly mechanics-free. Just lots of lore dumps, honestly. I think 3e's bloat far surpassed anything from 2e.
Core, of course, is PHB, DMG, MC (MC1)
Tome of Magic, Al Qadim: Arabian Advendures, Dark Sun, Dark Sun: Dragon Kings, Spelljammer, Spelljammer Captain's Companion, Council of Wyrms - all are rules heavy expansions. There's fluff in AQ, DS, DSDK, SJ, CoW, but it's still more than 30% mechanics in those.
15 PHBR¹ series. 9 DMGR² series, Most of which are 90% mechanics, the rest about 50%. These mass as much or more than all of AD&D1e's hardcovers combined.
PO:C&T, PO:S&P, PO:S&M, DMO: High Level Campaigns³ - functionally, these form what is essentially a new edition. They're all optional rules, and not fluffy at all.
The D&D Master Set was published in 1985, and the 2e player's handbook in 1989. I wouldn't consider that about the same time.
AD&D 2E was also essentially restarted from scratch in 1987; Gygax and others had started the project in 1984... That does, however, put it up against Denning Big Black Box Basic and Alston Cyclopedia development... Same dual line issue.

I know that I didn't encounter a black box until 1987, either... and I was looking... Street date and publishing date often have local discrepancies. (In fact, I didn't find it until I was out of Anchorage... I found it while on a trip. I don't remember if it was Seattle, Corvallis, or Los Disneys Florida) Regardless, it was still direct competition, and while it added a BUNCH of complexity, it still is less complex than AD&D 1E or 2E core rules. (Master adds the Weapon Mastery system - which is in many ways far superior to anything before the PO:C&T, and many who've used both consider it better than PO:C&T). I never have seen a complete gold Immortals box.
It's also worth noting that BECMI was released through toy stores and big box stores; book stores usually carried AD&D only. If they had more than AD&D, it wasn't going to be the D&D line, but would be other game lines... Such as DragonQuest, The Fantasy Trip (until 1983), Star Wars (1987 on), rarely Traveller, Car Wars, or MSH/AMSH. Cyborg Commando made it into (and sat on shelves worthily unloved in) Waldenbooks.


¹: PHBR series
²: DMGR series
³: 2nd edition sourcebooks
 

James Gasik

We don't talk about Pun-Pun
Supporter
It's true, 2e had a massive ton of books, many of which had character options. And just like what happened in 3e, many of these were mixed and matched to create rather nightmarish amalgamations of characters. Balancing of races was busted pretty early on (Complete Book of Elves), balancing of Kits also went out the window pretty quickly. As the attempt to reign in the Cleric failed (Complete Priest's Handbook), Legends & Lore as well as Monstrous Mythology boosted Specialty Priests (a trend that exploded in the Forgotten Realms books). Toss in creative ways to use Weapon Proficiencies starting with Complete Warrior (and never really stopping, see Bladesong Fighting Style or Wild Fighting as later examples), plus more published spells and magic items than any other edition, and yeah, late-2e had insane bloat and supported even crazier characters.

And I haven't even gotten to Chronomancer yet...
 

Core, of course, is PHB, DMG, MC (MC1)
Tome of Magic, Al Qadim: Arabian Advendures, Dark Sun, Dark Sun: Dragon Kings, Spelljammer, Spelljammer Captain's Companion, Council of Wyrms - all are rules heavy expansions. There's fluff in AQ, DS, DSDK, SJ, CoW, but it's still more than 30% mechanics in those.
15 PHBR¹ series. 9 DMGR² series, Most of which are 90% mechanics, the rest about 50%. These mass as much or more than all of AD&D1e's hardcovers combined.
PO:C&T, PO:S&P, PO:S&M, DMO: High Level Campaigns³ - functionally, these form what is essentially a new edition. They're all optional rules, and not fluffy at all.
You lost me when you claimed every campaign setting was a core book.

The Player's Options came in so late, and replaced all the class books, that it can hardly be seen as bloat.

The DMGR series is mostly fluff. I bet the actual mechanics could fit on 2-3 pages.

Did 2e have more rules than 1e? No one is going to deny that. But nothing in 2e compares to the hundreds of feats alone from 3e.
 



Remove ads

Top