What of each edition do you like?

[Umbran]

The thing I liked most about each edition is the games I played with each of them.

I do not hold to the idea that I should have one game, and only one game, to play. I think that with few exceptions, every system is good at something - when I want to run a game that has that something, I'll use the appropriate system.

By that method, there are few games that outright stink, and I never need to be down on a system for not doing what I want to do - because I may well come around to wanting to do what the system does eventually. And, if not, no big deal.

 

[CleverNickName]

???

1E and 2E are like BECMI. 3E still tips it's cap to it. 4E isn't even on the same page.

Nah, I wouldn't say that. There are a few similarities. Definitely not "a lot," but some.

Name level, for example. BECMI had a "tier" structure to character advancement like 4E does...once characters achieved Name level, they were eligible to take prestige classes (fighters could be paladins, clerics could be druids), own land and build castles, attract followers, that sort of thing.

Also in BECMI, races would advance in power with level. Of course, making all dwarves, elves, and halflings identical to each other wasn't so hot, but it set the stage for racial advancement.

I'm sure there are others, but these are the first to stick out in my mind.

Wow. I just defended 4E.

I should go lay down.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

Also in BECMI, races would advance in power with level. Of course, making all dwarves, elves, and halflings identical to each other wasn't so hot, but it set the stage for racial advancement.

FWIW, with all the TSR editions, I take the approach that classes are mainly representative of adventuring PCs, not the rest of the population, in general. Thus, there are many elves or dwarves that don't conform to the rules of Classic D&D Elf and Dwarf class; only leveled adventuring Elves and Dwarves do. Similarly, there are many priests and holy men that are "normal men" or 0-level, and not members of the Cleric class. In fact, there are priests and holy men that can cast spells, and are in positions of authority in the various churches or temples, but aren't leveled or members of the Cleric class. (I have no problem attaching whatever abilities I want to a monster or NPC. I don't believe NPCs and monsters need to use the rules that apply to PCs; I make them appropriate to the need at hand.)

 

[Agamon]

BECMI/RC: K.I.S.S. principle. Very simple and elegantly so.

1E: The memories. I'm not sure I had as much fun playing D&D as a kid as I do now, but it sometimes feels that way.

2E: The slickness. Compared to earlier versions, this edition was clean cut and easier (though less enjoyable) to read.

3E: My best campaign. The beginning of 3E marked probably the most fun campaign I'd ever homebrewed. the players and I had a blast.

4E: Fun. I'm enjoying running D&D again, and 4E is why. Here's to the new most fun campaign I've ever run.

 

[Aus_Snow]

* BECMI, well most B and E: My first experiences, so there's a love there, for sure. I couldn't go back to it, but sometimes there's a kind of pang, I guess. The covers were kinda cool, too. And some of the other artwork.

* AD&D 1e: The first kind of D&D I was DM for, so again, there's a special place in my heart for this one. The crazy, all-over-the-place rules, a certain 'byzantine' charm, I dunno. Something like that, anyway.

* D&D 3e: What brought me back to D&D. Brilliant design, mostly good presentation. It's very rare that I've been so stunned by the excellence of a RPG - going through my 3.5 books (I started 3e with 3.5) for the first time was one such occasion. Races and classes that are all more or less actually playable! Multiclassing that really appeals! A skill system, something I had become accustomed to, that isn't too shoddy. Feats, and the flexibility and differentation that comes with them. A largely transparent and symmetrical system, that is easy to modify in many, many ways (as I have done. )

The others, I haven't played or run. A few supplements for AD&D 2e, I still own and occasionally use, so there's something in its favour, from my PoV. Rules Compendium should get kudos for being basically an all-in-one-book game - that's neat. Pathfinder, while strictly not 'D&D' (in name, IOW) looks fantastic, for raising the level (so to speak) of the D&D experience, in a number of ways. OD&D, I'd love to try, even if just the once.

 

[Ander00]

I didn't really get to play earlier editions but exposure to them has shaped my idea of what D&D is or can be. One of the pre-3E stand-outs for me is Planescape.

3E: Removal of race/class restrictions. Players and DM playing by the same rules.

4E: Spellcasters and non-spellcasters playing by the same rules. Players and DMs not exactly playing by the same rules anymore.


cheers