D&D 5E what is it about 2nd ed that we miss?

[FormerlyHemlock]

The 'old' settings that pre-dated 2e included Greyhawk, Mystara, FR, Spelljammer, and Kara-Tur, among others, 2e was setting-happy publishing more of them than any other edition.

I'm 99% sure that Spelljammer did not predate 2E. That 1% is if there's some kind of obscure story I just haven't heard about Spelljammer originating as Jeff Grub's 1E home campaign or something. It was definitely first published as a 2nd edition setting.

 

[Maxperson]

I'm 99% sure that Spelljammer did not predate 2E. That 1% is if there's some kind of obscure story I just haven't heard about Spelljammer originating as Jeff Grub's 1E home campaign or something. It was definitely first published as a 2nd edition setting.

It was published as a campaign setting for the first time during 2e. Another possibility, though, is that articles for it were in the Dragon Magazine dating back to 1e, but I've never heard of anything like that.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I'm not 100% sure, but I thought that it still used the AD&D conventions of 0-level NPCs, mercenaries with 1d4+3 hp attacking as 0-level fighters, etc.

It was not until 3E that NPCs were put into a universal class-level framework. (Although they still had to invent pseudo-classes - the so-called NPC classes - to actually make this work.)

Like Saelorn, my approach to 2nd edition NPCs was the same as my approach to 5E NPCs: (N)PCs all use the same rules. The only difference between a PC and an NPC is whether you have a player attached. I even had rules for 0th level PCs although they never got used.

Although it is also acknowledged that the 2nd edition Monstrous Manual had various entries for human "monsters" like knights and peasants, all using monster-style d8 hit dice and most of them having "average" Int (8-10) which was decidedly below-average Int for a PC. Those stats informed my NPC designs and were arguably a subset of them, but I never used MM stats for any NPC with a name.

 

[ZzarkLinux]

Also, why are people arguing about 4e in a thread where we try to understand the appeal of 2nd edition?

Because 2e and 4e are history, and this thread is the museum. Long live the legacy !

Interesting question (about castle artwork).
(...) In the 4e PHB and DMG, all I found was a picture of a German-style turret tower sticking out of trees (PHB, p 40), an audience chamber (PHB, p184) and a tower surrounded in swirling energy (DMG, p 109). There were more illustrations of structures and settlements in various later books.

Thanks for checking; I sold my PHB a while ago. I guess my gut was right, somehow. Maybe castle artwork (in the PHB) is a sacred cow that should survive. I guess Just Add Dragons is a recipe for any PHB (even though my characters were never dragons nor lived in castles).

Actually, the direction I was aiming for was Wittgenstein's "Language City" applied to gaming.
(...)
ask not "What route would I have used?" (rules for rules) but instead, "Did the route achieve the objective?" (Getting to the restaurant, or the use made from the form of the rules).

This was a thoughtful post and a good read. Thanks. Unfortunately, now I'm left imagining some 2e and 4e gamers stuck in a car during a zombiepocalypse. Would they be able to play a game of D&D together? Or would they take their chances with the zombies? Anyway, it was a nice read.

 

[pemerton]

The main card gamist/WotC influences I see in 5E, relative to 2nd edition, are that:

<snip>

Capabilities are defined primarily in gamist terms. WotC will think up a mechanically-cool ability like Bardic Inspiration, Cutting Words, give it a snappy name per #1 and a place in the action economy (bonus action/reaction), and give absolutely no thought to roleplaying considerations such as just how exactly a bard is using one mouth simultaneously to give an inspiring speech to a companion (bonus action Bardic Inspiration), insult an enemy (reaction Cutting Words), and cast a spell (action Fireball) using his kazoo as an arcane focus, all in the same six seconds.

<snip>

There's an implicit structure to capabilities, and the writers avoid going outside the box. Capabilities are strictly-defined to avoid potentially upsetting mechanical balances, even when it's probably not necessary.

<snip>

All three of these aspects remind me of card games.

I think 4e is basically the same as 5e in these respects. I think 3E probably is as well, but I don't know it so well and so am not quite as confident in making that judgement.

For me, there is no particular resemblance to card games as opposed to (say) board games, but I don't think much turns on that.

I like the 6 second round, in so far as it generates movement and positioning that are interesting and, in general terms, plausible for the entities involved, and yet don't involve moving distances that become hard to keep track of in visual terms. But in some respects I think the 1 minute round was a better compromise. It puts less pressure on the verisimilitude of the action economy in the sorts of ways you point to (though perhaps puts more pressure on that verisimilitude from the point of view of character mobility).

I think the tarrasque issue that you raise is easier to change (if desired) than the PC build/abilities issue. I think the PC issue might be a bit more pointed in 5e than 4e because 4e is a bit more relaxed in its articulation between mechanics and fiction. For instance, it doesn't have anything analogous to spell components, and so what exactly is going on when a bard casts a spell is left a bit looser; the game is also a bit looser in its expectation as to how much using a standard action spell on this occasion will, in the fiction, resemble or be identical to using a standard action spell on that occasion.

This "looseness" of fit - I see it as something of a combination of the AD&D 1 minute round looseness with the 6-second turn-based initiative of 3E - is a recurring subject of conversation in regard to 4e, and like many things something that some find to be good/helpful and others find to be bad/disruptive of verisimilitude.

 

[Dorian_Grey]

I think we can all agree that, in the event of a zombie apocalypse, we'd all switch to LARPing with real weapons...

 

[Shasarak]

And the 4e community encourages you to print your own power cards.
If it was a CCG, you'd get scolded for "counterfeit" printing.
Definitely not a card game.

When I played L5R, our group used to print our own cards all the time because we would rather play against the best deck you could make rather then the best deck you could afford. Much better competition.

 

[ZzarkLinux]

Didn't have access to printers back when I was Magic the Gaming in high school. I was into MtG during the "6th Core Edition" era... Yea, I bought a lot of Mercadian Masques boosters, because those were the hot new product :-/ still had a good time though. I also bought singles (with my allowance) from a rural FLGS that was about 40 minutes towards the city. I was kinda bummed when they closed up shop.

I was just reading this thread about FLGS in the other forum. Those days really were golden years of gaming. I remember me and my cousin going onto his mom's computer because we could watch the screensavers. That's right, CCGs &RPGs were competing with screensavers for entertainment, and the printing presses were winning !

 

[DoveSinger]

I have never played 5 E because after looking a 3 E I shook my head and said just give me AD&D 2 and that has been how it is ever since. maybe I should check out 5 E , but truly, I love the world Ulear that my husband created using AD&D 2. Perhaps I will check out 5 and if I like it I will buy it and then see if my husband and work his world using 5's system. Just a thought. Though I agree perhaps it is the nostalgia I like the most.

 

[Henry]

I have never played 5 E because after looking a 3 E I shook my head and said just give me AD&D 2 and that has been how it is ever since. maybe I should check out 5 E , but truly, I love the world Ulear that my husband created using AD&D 2. Perhaps I will check out 5 and if I like it I will buy it and then see if my husband and work his world using 5's system. Just a thought. Though I agree perhaps it is the nostalgia I like the most.

Truly it's a matter of what the group's most comfortable with, and especially what the DM's most comfortable with. The good news is that the basic rules (and the 5e system reference document) are available for free on Wizards of the coast's website, and if you and your husband try it and don't like it, you've invested little to nothing in the game:

http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/basicrules
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/systems-reference-document-srd

Oh, and looks like you're new, if so welcome to the forums!