Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8684855" data-attributes="member: 82106">Meh, obviously you could find people that were exercised about most anything, but its hard IMHO to make a case that there was much of a partisan divide between editions or Basic/AD&amp;D either. It was all just 'stuff to use', grist for the mill. I mean, one of the major campaigns I played in during the '80s was a fusion of 1e, Gamma World, Boot Hill, Fight in The Skies, Car Wars, and various other games. Nobody was concerned about a 1 point AC mismatch between a Basic Fighter and a 1e or 2e Fighter. 1e vs 2e was an ESPECIALLY minor difference, as a 1e Fighter for example is literally 100% 2e compatible (unless you used certain options from UA or certain flavors of NWPs, then you might have to make some adjustments, assuming anyone actually cared). Even classes that got some changes to them, like Rangers, your 1e Ranger would STILL WORK FINE in 2e! I mean, to the level of every number works out perfectly well, etc. You have a few spells the 2e version won't give you, and a few options that 1e lacks which you probably would have chosen, and your special abilities are a tiny bit different.Even 'kit level' 2e is not actually 1e incompatible. I would say if you backported one of those PCs to 1e, then they would likely be overpowered, as 1e really assumes PCs have pretty minor and restricted special abilities, but some of the kits go a bit overboard. Even 1e has that problem with itself though, as UA and OA add some stuff that is a LOT stronger than bog standard PHB 1e (martial arts for example are TOTALLY broken if you min/max them vs any 1e PC).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 8684855, member: 82106"] Meh, obviously you could find people that were exercised about most anything, but its hard IMHO to make a case that there was much of a partisan divide between editions or Basic/AD&D either. It was all just 'stuff to use', grist for the mill. I mean, one of the major campaigns I played in during the '80s was a fusion of 1e, Gamma World, Boot Hill, Fight in The Skies, Car Wars, and various other games. Nobody was concerned about a 1 point AC mismatch between a Basic Fighter and a 1e or 2e Fighter. 1e vs 2e was an ESPECIALLY minor difference, as a 1e Fighter for example is literally 100% 2e compatible (unless you used certain options from UA or certain flavors of NWPs, then you might have to make some adjustments, assuming anyone actually cared). Even classes that got some changes to them, like Rangers, your 1e Ranger would STILL WORK FINE in 2e! I mean, to the level of every number works out perfectly well, etc. You have a few spells the 2e version won't give you, and a few options that 1e lacks which you probably would have chosen, and your special abilities are a tiny bit different. Even 'kit level' 2e is not actually 1e incompatible. I would say if you backported one of those PCs to 1e, then they would likely be overpowered, as 1e really assumes PCs have pretty minor and restricted special abilities, but some of the kits go a bit overboard. Even 1e has that problem with itself though, as UA and OA add some stuff that is a LOT stronger than bog standard PHB 1e (martial arts for example are TOTALLY broken if you min/max them vs any 1e PC). [/QUOTE]

Verification