D&D 2E What does AD&D 2E do better than 5E?

[Talinfein]

My gaming group has been switching back and forth between 2E and 5E over the last few years and we really like both. However, we also find that both systems have parts that irritate us. Obviously, many discussions about the benefits and drawbacks of both systems followed. So, I thought I'd see what this forum has to say. It's been a long time since I've been active in one, but ENworld does seem like a rather nice community.

As an example answer to my question: Magic. I know magic was considered overpowered in older editions (hell, even in 5E), but we never saw it that way. I love how special magic feels and that it isn't just one saving throw away from going away.

What do you think?

 

[Enrico Poli1]

• Settings done well (in particular, when I want to play in Dark Sun, I have to use AD&D2e rules)
• Psionics
• Variety in classes, spells, items and monsters

That said, I choose what rule system to use case-by-case

 

[DarkCrisis]

Tone. 5E is superhero’s who never really have to deal with real consequences. Easy to raise dead. Tons of HP. Multiple saves. Gods among men.

2E you have to be more careful. Same goes for the monsters. I had my 5E group play 2E and one player who never played 2E before said “I feel like what a I do matters.”

And that right there is right. Everyone’s role in important. Everyone is important. Teamwork makes the dream work.

 

[billd91]

2e is probably my 2nd favorite version of D&D after 5e and I'd be hard pressed to find anything that 2e definitely does better. I think I mainly like the development of dragons a bit better in 2e - they had gotten a major upgrade from 1e days and had a full 12-stage gradation in age groups. Also, maybe the emphasis put on magic weapons and armor in the random treasure table (held over from 1e) compared to wizardly items - an absolutely necessary recognition that martial characters are dependent on gear for magic rather than spells.

Otherwise, there are so many ways that 5e harkens BACK to 2e compared to 3e from handling magic items to giants being as threatening at range as they are close up that I'm pretty pleased with it.

 

[Velderan]

Tone. 5E is superhero’s who never really have to deal with real consequences. Easy to raise dead. Tons of HP. Multiple saves. Gods among men.

2E you have to be more careful. Same goes for the monsters. I had my 5E group play 2E and one player who never played 2E before said “I feel like what a I do matters.”

And that right there is right. Everyone’s role in important. Everyone is important. Teamwork makes the dream work.

To piggyback off this, magic items in 2e made more of a difference in your character's combat effectiveness. 5e gives players so many abilities it causes magic items to lose a bit of their luster IMO.

 

[Willie the Duck]

To piggyback off this, magic items in 2e made more of a difference in your character's combat effectiveness. 5e gives players so many abilities it causes magic items to lose a bit of their luster IMO.

At the same time, magic items (or special regular items) can make less of a difference (to combat effectiveness or anything else), which means you can have more of them to play around with. 5e has compressed the total range of scores and simplified the mechanics where advantage/disadvantage cover many situations. That's usually good, but when you want to hand out tiny little bonuses, it can be a problem.

Best example might be 2E Thief abilities and the equipment section of the Complete Thieves' Handbook. There are all sorts of items like tar paper to quietly break glass windows and hand-warming lamps to help pick locks in the cold and dog pepper to evade being tracked and all sorts of bits and bobs which give +1-5% to your percentile chances or alter specific checks under super-specific circumstances. Towards the tail-end of my original time with 2E, I dismissed such things as 'faffing around at the margins, rather than addressing the actual issues [that being a thief in TSR-era A/D&D kinda sucked, also that you just have to convince your DM that a roll isn't called for in a given circumstance and you've probably contributed more to your overall success than all that special equipment ever would].' Thing is, and I realize this now, a certain type of gamer really likes that faffing about and minutiae-focus, and it works much better when it's 1-3% (that the system has room to accommodate) than if it is truly immaterial (except for roleplay).

Same is true for the magic items. Because AC is 10 thru -20 or whatever and your fighter's modified ThAC0 changes 20+ point over 20 levels, you as the DM can hand out an toe-ring of +1 AC here and a merit-badge of +1-to-hit there; along with (because there are so many sub-components of skill and attribute checks, which in 5e are rolled up into something simpler) weight belts of +5% bend bars/lift gates and blessings of +3% system shock checks and snorkels of +3 ocean swimming and so on.

 

[Voadam]

2e specialty priests allow a ton more PC divine power customization than 5e cleric domains.

I like a lot of 2e's various psionics better than the few subclasses we have gotten for 5e.

In depth monster entries. I like the 5e MM and a lot of Volo's but the 2e monstrous compendium series is fantastic and I like a lot of the 2e descriptions. The 2e Monstrous Arcanas and such (draconomicon, giantcraft) are a lot of fun too.

Full on campaign settings.

Fleshing out campaign settings.

Campaign setting sourcebooks detailing one area.

Ravenloft I prefer the 2e setting with politics between dark lords over the 5e isolated dream prisons.

Greyhawk.

I prefer 2e fleshed out FR over advanced 100 years 5e FR soft reboot where most old lore is now inapplicable.

2e God books are pretty fantastic. 5e only has a set of decent charts in the PH appendix.

 

[Twiggly the Gnome]

2e specialty priests allow a ton more PC divine power customization than 5e cleric domains.

This. When it comes to making different faiths feel distinctive, 5e doesn't even come close.

 

[Atomoctba]

I know lots of people will disagree, but I love how, in 2e, the world did not need set "proper level challenges". You could have a party of 10th level characters that slashes against 1/2 HD kobolds (Dragon Mountain, anyone?) or a 3rd level party that meets a beholder in a random encounter. That made the world feel more real for me as a player. I never had the illusion that all challenges would be proper to my level and take care with my actions. Also, run away was almost always a valid option

 

[TheHand]

Mechanics-wise, I'm not sure there's anything that I personally think I like ~better~ about 2e, but as far as settings, lore, campaign materials, and just imaginative writing, I don't think the 2e can be beat. I still reference a lot of my 2E books for my current games, and I've adapted a lot of 2E modules for 5e.

 

[eyeheartawk]

Tanar'ri
Baatezu
Yugoloths

Serious answer: If you want to play that classic lower-power level AD&D game. Since AD&D 2E is really just a cleaned up re-stated 1E it's going to be the best bet for that if you have players and expect them to read and learn from the books, as they lack the off-putting High Gygaxian.

 

[Firwood]

What does it do best? Simple: everything!
Obviously I have been a master/player for a long time now, having started in 1985.
In my opinion AD&D 2e is the best version of all those published. The only flaw is that the information is scattered throughout the manuals, which are not very well organised internally.
For the rest you have:

• well-defined and distinct classes;
• to create a character doesn't take 10 hours scrabbling through talents, origins, etc. (this was especially true for 3.x);
• characters are not demi-gods even at level 1. If they act stupidly, they die extremely quickly;
• in AD&D it is not the setting that revolves around the characters, but the characters themselves who must immerse themselves in it;
• the geographic modules are the best ever published for D&D: there are so many of them and they cover practically every aspect of settings, from Forgotten Realms to Planescape, from Red Steel to Mystara, from Greyhawk to Dragonlance, not to mention Spelljammer, Ravenloft, Lankhmar, Lendor, Conan, Diablo and others that I probably don't remember at the moment;
• the three basic manuals are absolutely more than enough to play great games. If one then wants to expand the range of options, one is spoilt for choice;
• NO miniatures are needed: the theatre of the mind is the master. This means a much faster pace of play and not totally focused on combat (this was also true of 3.x and especially 4e).
• the preparation of adventures is much faster than in later versions, and
• ... if you don't want to waste time writing your own campaign, there are tons of adventures ready to be played (taking into account that you can easily use those published for D&D BECMI and AD&D 1e practically on the fly;
• last but not least, the balancing of the game, so much demanded and boasted by so many, is unnecessary. As mentioned at the beginning the classes are well diversified and with unique characteristics, some are weak at the beginning and stronger as you advance, for others the reverse is true. This ensures that all participants have their space and their moment of glory during an adventure.

Ultimately, AD&D 2e allows a purely fantasy, sword & sorcery version to be played and not a superhero version disguised as fantasy.
These are obviously my very personal opinions on the game.

 

[eyeheartawk]

I agree with every thing you said except for this part.

Ultimately, AD&D 2e allows a purely fantasy, sword & sorcery version to be played and not a superhero version disguised as fantasy.
These are obviously my very personal opinions on the game.

2E is clearly designed to a morally unambiguous heroic fantasy game. They removed assassins, changed demon names etc. In Jim Ward's quest to be loved by angry moms that will never love him back he thoroughly sanitized the game. I can't think of anything even approaching sword and sorcery until much later in the line with stuff like Dark Sun and Planescape. Those core books are all sunshine and rainbows, as much as I love them I have to admit that much.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Better supports the zero to hero model, and feels more rewarding when you defeat challenges (due to risk).
Psionics were well done.
Thief skill progression (not only could you specialize in how you distributed points, but they were the only class that could do these superhuman skills (well, bard partially). 3e and on, and it feels like anyone and everyone has the same skills, just how you pumped your points we different. 5e in particular seems to have taken the thief's deal and diluted it by giving it to everyone.
Spell school specialties and spheres of influence.
HP bloat is not nearly as bad

 

[Voadam]

Thief skill progression (not only could you specialize in how you distributed points, but they were the only class that could do these superhuman skills (well, bard partially).

And ranger (hide in shadows and move silently). And certain racial abilities for dwarves (detecting stonework traps and pits), and elves, half-elves, and halflings (moving quietly enough to enhance surprise chances).

And then outside of the PH there were kits and specialty priests.

2e provides lots of options.

 

[James Gasik]

Lore, some great settings, and magic items being cool things to find.

Power level was all over the place, depending on which books were allowed; most games I played in allowed everything, and while nobody really talks about 2e optimization (or if it's brought up, violently rejects that it was a thing for some reason), it was completely there, and having two supposedly 1st level characters who were miles apart in capability and effectiveness was the norm, so if you love gonzo wild games, 2e is the edition for you.

Ditto for being the golden age of multiclassing, though, like everything else, could range from overwhelmingly busted to flat-out miserable (especially if you hadn't read Dragon #243, where Skip finally explains some pertinent details about the process).

 

[Firwood]

I agree with every thing you said except for this part.



2E is clearly designed to a morally unambiguous heroic fantasy game. They removed assassins, changed demon names etc. In Jim Ward's quest to be loved by angry moms that will never love him back he thoroughly sanitized the game. I can't think of anything even approaching sword and sorcery until much later in the line with stuff like Dark Sun and Planescape. Those core books are all sunshine and rainbows, as much as I love them I have to admit that much.

Unfortunately, both Planescape and Dark Sun are not among my preferences.
I loathe psionics and don't much appreciate post-apocalyptic settings, while Planescape I've always found quirky and whimsical.
I have read the setting manuals and they are very well written, but too far from my tastes, to the point that I struggle not a little to consider them sword & sorcery.
As for moral ambiguity, well, I have never looked for it in the manuals, but in the players who play characters and in the master who sets up events. The books are mere tools that allow any style of play to be played. It is up to the people around the table to give a "tone and voice" to the material provided.

 

[Mannahnin]

I know lots of people will disagree, but I love how, in 2e, the world did not need set "proper level challenges". You could have a party of 10th level characters that slashes against 1/2 HD kobolds (Dragon Mountain, anyone?) or a 3rd level party that meets a beholder in a random encounter. That made the world feel more real for me as a player. I never had the illusion that all challenges would be proper to my level and take care with my actions. Also, run away was almost always a valid option

To be fair, every edition which has used CR has also given instructions with it that not all encounters need to be of appropriate level to fight.

4th ed was kind of the tightest on this, with the way its scaling math worked. 3E and 5E both are clear that "underleveled" and "overleveled" encounters are totally fine and should be used at least some of the time.

 

[Sacrosanct]

And ranger (hide in shadows and move silently). And certain racial abilities for dwarves (detecting stonework traps and pits), and elves, half-elves, and halflings (moving quietly enough to enhance surprise chances).

And then outside of the PH there were kits and specialty priests.

2e provides lots of options.

Rangers kept the 1 version, where you started really crappy and were dictated how well you improved (not by much). And the inherent racial traits weren't nearly as useful as the class (dwarves only detected stonework pits, and elves had to be by themselves or with halfings to get a -4 surprise--they didn't get a % to hide or move silently).

But more to the point, I was talking about how you could distribute how you put your points in 2e. And that was a huge improvement and something I like better compared to 5e because in 2e, the thief truly was the stealth class. I'm a fan of niche protection, and like someone mentioned above, it's because I view the party as a team sport where everyone has a different position. Not a group where everyone can do everything everyone else does mechanically.

 

[DammitVictor]

I am not certain whether 2e really offered more and better tools for altering the rules to fit a setting, or merely if the setting designers were more willing-- allowed-- to use them, but AD&D 2e campaign settings modified the rules to support the themes and tones of the settings while D&D 5e modifies the settings to drape them around the system like a cloak.

It certainly feels easier, as a DM in 2e, to add/subtract/modify the D&D rules for the campaign I want to run (and my players want to play) than it is as a DM in 5e to do the same thing. I am much more comfortable designing new classes/kits, new races/subraces, or banning official (core or supplemental) AD&D rules than I would attempting to do the same things in 5e.

The Priest Spheres in AD&D may not be perfect, but they are much more modular and flexible than the Cleric class with Domains.

And... again not perfect but the AD&D rules have the Player's Option series which a clever DM can use to make drastic modifications to the AD&D game's underlying systems in a (roughly) fair and balanced fashion. They are the Unearthed Arcana of 2e.