Would YOU play AD&D 2e?

Would you play in an AD&D 2e campaign?

  • YES--If it was a good DM with a good group of players.

    Votes: 200 58.5%
  • NO--It just isn't for me.

    Votes: 142 41.5%


First Post
Some context: some friends of mine and I on this group and RPGnet are thinking of starting up a big, epic-scale AD&D 2e campaign. We want to recruit some players at our local university and FLGS. The question we started discussing was how easy or difficult this might prove to be. As an informal means of gauging interest, we thought we'd run a poll here and at enworld.

NOTE: If you vote in this poll, please don't also vote in the RPGnet poll!


log in or register to remove this ad


2e is my least favourite edition, but with a good DM and group, it could be fun -- especially if you were using one of the great 2e campaign settings (Dark Sun, Birthright, etc.).


*shrug* If the DM was good I'd be up to playing under virtually any system. Rules take a backseat to the quality of the DM, the other players, and the setting.

I've never played 2e so I can't say I'm that up on the game mechanics of the system, but Christ Almighty, 2e had some gorgeous campaign settings. I can't honestly comment on the actual system of that edition, but the non mechanical elements of the design philosophy of that time that I've seen I really appreciate.
Last edited:


First Post
Yes. With a good GM and other good players, I would play 2e. I would even *run* a 2e game if my group generated enough interest in it.


I'd have to dig out my old books and re-familiarize myself with the rules, but sure, I don't see why not.


First Post
No. I mean, I can imagine obscure cases where I'd be up for a 2e game (mostly involving playing with old friends, celebrities, or hot single twentysomething gamer girls), but the people I play with -- and those of my old college gaming group that still game -- have long since moved to 3.x, and I'd certainly advocate D&D 3.x, True20, or some other system instead.


First Post
2 ed

Second ed never had the feel of 1st ed, it was like a step child that was never allowed to grow up. The modules were haphazard and did not flow like the original 1st ed modules. Any campaign is ok, it is the rules that matter. I love conversions of 1st ed to 3.0/3.5, the history and challenge is much better than anything out now.

For me, almost certainly not.

Six years ago I played AD&D 2e because it was the best we had, it had a lot of arbitrary rules I thought were silly at the time, but I assumed it was the best way people had to play the game. We over the years had to come up with piles of house rules to make the game bearable (a majority of which were implemented, at least in spirit, in 3e).

When 3e came out, I practically cried out "Why didn't we do it like this all along?!", and didn't look back. I use AD&D 1e/2e now as an "Idea Mine" of plundering it for spells and NWP's to convert, bits of flavor to translate over (like the Master titles for Monks from 1e), and the excellent 2e setting materials that were made.

It would be monumentally difficult to get me to play a AD&D 2e game (with a healthy dose of the "2.5" Players/DM's Option rules it's tolerable), and bordering on impossible to get me to play a core-rules 2e game. If it was a DM I knew to be excellent, with players I really enjoyed playing with, that would change it somewhat, but it would be a case of enjoying the company so much that it was making up for a system I didn't want to play.

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads