Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="HoolMarshes Dweller" data-source="post: 5963178" data-attributes="member: 6696337">I love 2e, and　I'm a grognard through and through. When it came out, I was aghast at some of the changes and really happy with others. I just incorporated this into my 1e campaign. Overall, I love 2e where it was good and just incorporated that into my 1e campaigns. I still use a mix of both today. Even today my campaigns are 1e/2e mix just being 1e with the best of 2e included. 1. What was wrong with 2e that has earned so many haters?I wanted to preface this by saying, I don't think there's that much hate out there. I think many folks lump this in as a 1.5e if you will. Anyways...- DMG was an absolute mockery of the 1e version, I'm sure they thought they were streamlining things but it seemed more of a middle finger to Gary than anything else. They should have kept and reorganized the countless appendices and tables. I personally think this was the beginning of "dumbing down" DMing. - Removal of evil characters, half-orcs, the assassin, the psionic and the monk. - Devils and demons are tanar'ri and baatezu...blech, just call them for what they are.EDIT- the power creep with NPCs I think this is what brought us to the "hey, I can be fighter then switch to magic-user, then to druid, etc." kind of class progression. Players saw NPCs that were wizards wearing armor, fighters that could mentally control swords, etc. If I remember correctly, Mr. Gygax or one of that group even said (and I'm summarizing and restating at the same time so forgive me) "NPCs are different, they are special characters that go beyond the stated rules and can be/do things the players cannot / should not". I didn't think much of it then but it makes a lot of sense now, because you have players saying "hey, why can't i be a god?" The reality is that you WANT NPCs to go beyond what's possible, do things the PCs simply cannot do/attain, that is how worth adversaries are born. The funny thing about this is that some of Gary's original crew ended up being "quasi-deities", I'm sure it was just a nod to them but interesting nonetheless. 2. What was Right with 2e that got lost in the version shuffle?- hands down, specialty priests and spheres- Streamlined the presentation of the 1e/UA material- THAC0 and initiative made easier!- weapon specialization for fighters (too much silliness now in the name of "balance")3. If 2e were used as the baseline for 5e, what would the end product look like?This is a broader question but in a nutshell, I think they're on the right track with going back to the beginning and taking what worked there then working forward. Personally, I would love to see an OSR version come out that was an amalgam of 1e/2e/</blockquote>

Verification