Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Deset Gled" data-source="post: 9674883" data-attributes="member: 7808">I'm going to ignore everything related to preferences, aesthetic, nostalgia, hero worship, etc, and look at the simple issue of defining 1e and 2e (and other early editions).AD&amp;D 1e has the most defined set of &quot;core&quot; books and rules in all of early D&amp;D.&nbsp; It has a PHB, a DMG, and a MM.&nbsp; Beyond that, it has a limited number of clearly identified supplements.&nbsp; The settings that exist for 1e are likewise limited, and reasonably well defined in their difference.AD&amp;D 2e starts as a well defined core with Zeb Cook's books.&nbsp; But it immediately goes off the rails with over a dozen &quot;Complete ____&quot; books, and continued with supplements like the Arms and Equipment Guide, multiple monster manuals, and multiple rules expantions.&nbsp; The number of settings is just bonkers, with lots of creativity but also lots of overlap.&nbsp; The number of rules that a re-written multiple times is extreme.&nbsp; I was at a con panel once where one of the 3e designers mentioned that they found 6 completely different sets of drowning rules publised by TSR in different 2e books.The result of the above is that there really is much of a less defined zeitgeist for exactly what &quot;2e&quot; means.&nbsp; Different groups at different times have completely different ideas of what the rules are, what the baseline of the system is, and what &quot;D&amp;D&quot; means in terms of setting and flavor.It's also worse noting that Pre-AD&amp;D 1e is messy, with Chainmail rules falling in and out, Holmes Moldvay and Mentzer all vying for dominance, and the whole BECMI branching thing.&nbsp; There are a lot of good rule sets, but no One True Ruleset.&nbsp; Lots of good supplements, but it's all mix-and-match.The net effect of all this is that AD&amp;D 1e simply has the best branding for history and notariety.&nbsp; It has the clearest focus.&nbsp; It gives the clearest set of &quot;this&quot; without too much &quot;that&quot;.&nbsp; It has just enough expansion for people to explore alternate rules and settings without being overwhelmed.&nbsp; It has just enough books for collectors to enjoy hunting down products without there being too many to attain.&nbsp; You can come up with an example of things that beat it on almost any front, but no example that beats it on all the fronts that collectively give it strength.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Deset Gled, post: 9674883, member: 7808"] I'm going to ignore everything related to preferences, aesthetic, nostalgia, hero worship, etc, and look at the simple issue of defining 1e and 2e (and other early editions). AD&D 1e has the most defined set of "core" books and rules in all of early D&D. It has a PHB, a DMG, and a MM. Beyond that, it has a limited number of clearly identified supplements. The settings that exist for 1e are likewise limited, and reasonably well defined in their difference. AD&D 2e starts as a well defined core with Zeb Cook's books. But it immediately goes off the rails with over a dozen "Complete ____" books, and continued with supplements like the Arms and Equipment Guide, multiple monster manuals, and multiple rules expantions. The number of settings is just bonkers, with lots of creativity but also lots of overlap. The number of rules that a re-written multiple times is extreme. I was at a con panel once where one of the 3e designers mentioned that they found 6 completely different sets of drowning rules publised by TSR in different 2e books. The result of the above is that there really is much of a less defined zeitgeist for exactly what "2e" means. Different groups at different times have completely different ideas of what the rules are, what the baseline of the system is, and what "D&D" means in terms of setting and flavor. It's also worse noting that Pre-AD&D 1e is messy, with Chainmail rules falling in and out, Holmes Moldvay and Mentzer all vying for dominance, and the whole BECMI branching thing. There are a lot of good rule sets, but no One True Ruleset. Lots of good supplements, but it's all mix-and-match. The net effect of all this is that AD&D 1e simply has the best branding for history and notariety. It has the clearest focus. It gives the clearest set of "this" without too much "that". It has just enough expansion for people to explore alternate rules and settings without being overwhelmed. It has just enough books for collectors to enjoy hunting down products without there being too many to attain. You can come up with an example of things that beat it on almost any front, but no example that beats it on all the fronts that collectively give it strength. [/QUOTE]

Verification