BlueBlackRed
Explorer
2E would be on the bottom of the pile of D&D games I'd play.
Would YOU play AD&D 2e?
- Thread starter Vindicator
- Start date
MrFilthyIke
First Post
I'd play and run 2e, I don't care about ed...I just love gaming.
and I own enough books to never run out of 2e stuff.
and I own enough books to never run out of 2e stuff.
Haloq Jakar
First Post
not anymore
Last October I got a chance to rejoin a campaign I had played in years before that was more or less a 1st or 2nd ed game. It has been running for over 20 years that I know. So after 1 session I had to tell the dm thanks but no thanks when asked if I wanted to become a regular. Because the game has changed that much between 2nd and 3rd I really didn't want to have to relearn or unlearn the 3.5 ed mindset.
Last October I got a chance to rejoin a campaign I had played in years before that was more or less a 1st or 2nd ed game. It has been running for over 20 years that I know. So after 1 session I had to tell the dm thanks but no thanks when asked if I wanted to become a regular. Because the game has changed that much between 2nd and 3rd I really didn't want to have to relearn or unlearn the 3.5 ed mindset.
loki44
Explorer
Nightfall said:
I think even IF you don't.....Dark Sun is not my cup of tea by any means but I still enjoyed at least several games in that setting because the DM was good and I liked the people I was playing with. And I hope you're joking.....who the heck wants to play a paladin in Lankhmar?!
Put me up there with the "no way" crowd. Any group of gamers who I would feel comfortable and happy gaming with would already agree with me that AD&D2 is not a good choice of gaming system, and could suggest many other alternatives to use instead.
I guess the question to ask here is "why AD&D2 specifically?".
Vindicator said:
I guess the question to ask here is "why AD&D2 specifically?".
Teflon Billy
Explorer
I'd play Al Qadim in a heartbeat, but just regular old 2E? Not likley.
I didn't switch from 2E to 3E...I had abandoned D&D entirely before 3E appeared.
I didn't switch from 2E to 3E...I had abandoned D&D entirely before 3E appeared.
talinthas
First Post
normally? no, i wouldnt. But here in japan, it's pretty much the only game i have available, and the crew are really good folks, so i'm happy to pull up to the table. Systems are immaterial, as long as there is fun to be had.
besides, there's something to be said about playing Oriental Adventures while actually on one =)
besides, there's something to be said about playing Oriental Adventures while actually on one =)
Nope. If I were going to play an older version of D&D, I'd much rather play 1e. I know I'm supposed to say, "Yes, if the DM was right, and the gaming group was good." But I remember all too well the 3-ring binders full of houserules for 2nd Edition AD&D. The thought makes me shudder. There are many, many games I'd rather play.
I would definately play. Never had a problem with 2nd edition. I always wondered why so many people had trouble figuring out Thac0. I know 3rd edition simplified everything, but it just seems so bland. Not that I'm bashing 3rd, because I've been in some great games using it.
Actually now that I think about it, my main gripe with 3rd edition is the combat system. It just seems to easy to hit, or be hit. It seems the only way to get armor class to go up is magic items, and when youre running a low magic game the last thing you want to do is give a way a lot of magic items. I know 2nd edition was the same way with magic items, but combat was better (especially with fighters being the only ones with multiple attacks).
Anyway, to get back on track, yes I'd play 2nd edition, although if I had a choice I would just use Hackmaster since it's mostly 1st edition with some 2nd mixed in.
Actually now that I think about it, my main gripe with 3rd edition is the combat system. It just seems to easy to hit, or be hit. It seems the only way to get armor class to go up is magic items, and when youre running a low magic game the last thing you want to do is give a way a lot of magic items. I know 2nd edition was the same way with magic items, but combat was better (especially with fighters being the only ones with multiple attacks).
Anyway, to get back on track, yes I'd play 2nd edition, although if I had a choice I would just use Hackmaster since it's mostly 1st edition with some 2nd mixed in.
WayneLigon
Adventurer
Under an awesome GM, I would play. I'd constantly be tripping over some parts of the game, though, and misremembering how things work.
TheAuldGrump
First Post
Teflon Billy said:
He! I forgot about AQ... though I would love to see a full rewrite for 3.X...
The Auld Grump
Michael Tree
First Post
With a decent DM and a good group of players I'd consider it, but I'd try to convince the DM and players to use a better system. If everyone was dead set on 2e, I'd likely still play, but I don't know if I'd stick with it, and I'd almost certainly complain about stupid rules that 3e fixed (like THAC0, nonsensical saving throws, etc).
If the DM let me use the character customization options from Skills & Powers and Spells & Magic, I'd be more likely to give it a try. They were broken, but broken in a fun way.
If the DM let me use the character customization options from Skills & Powers and Spells & Magic, I'd be more likely to give it a try. They were broken, but broken in a fun way.
FireLance
Legend
To me, playing 2e instead of 3e is like eating hamburger instead of steak. 2e is acceptable, but it isn't great.
You're probably not the only one, but I happen to disagree strongly with your opinion. In my view, the 2e kits varied too much in power, were too frontloaded, and were too restricting. 3e PrCs are (mostly) better balanced, and allow for more organic growth of characters, so you don't need to decide at 1st level that you want to become a Blademaster of Fung Doo. This is particularly useful if you haven't even heard of Fung Doo until after you've travelled halfway around the world and are 6th level. Meat, poison, whatever.loki44 said:
tek2way
First Post
In a heartbeat. While 3.x is a simpler system, it wasn't until 3.0, and moreso 3.5, that I -- and everyone in my group -- began to think of characters in terms of how to minmax a PrC, fret over miniature placement and use, or become obsessed with having magical gear. We're better now, but then again, we're taking a break from 3.x, and are playing SR3 instead.
Back in the 2e days, we were worried about the story, and how that would play out. In fact, we never accumulated XP in the traditional sense. The DM would, when he felt like it, tell us to level.
I miss games where playing the characters is more important than levelling them. (Can't wait for A Game of Thrones Tri-Stat!) If, by epic, you mean grand story, then I'm on board with both feet. If you mean high-level, then I will hedge just a bit before attempting to bring in my kender handler. :-D
Back in the 2e days, we were worried about the story, and how that would play out. In fact, we never accumulated XP in the traditional sense. The DM would, when he felt like it, tell us to level.
I miss games where playing the characters is more important than levelling them. (Can't wait for A Game of Thrones Tri-Stat!) If, by epic, you mean grand story, then I'm on board with both feet. If you mean high-level, then I will hedge just a bit before attempting to bring in my kender handler. :-D
