Why D&D 2e is the BEST edition ever.

[Cryomancer]

griffins

Why griffins? Other question. Why the gnome merchant guild refuses to sell dominate person scrolls to non gnomes?

 

[zapotec]

Encounter reactions are based upon DM choice, you have the option to roll on the reaction table.
Yea you played the AD&D videogames and that's why you have no clue to how run encounters

 

[JarlFrank]

Encounter reactions are based upon DM choice, you have the option to roll on the reaction table.
Yea you played the AD&D videogames and that's why you have no clue to how run encounters

If the reaction tables exist, they are part of the intended game, otherwise they wouldn't exist.

 

[JamesDixon]

I don't know how to run an AD&D 2E game....

Once the encounter is set and the DM is ready to role-play the situation, he needs to know how the NPCs or monsters will react. The creatures should react in the manner the DM thinks is most appropriate to the situation.

If the player characters charge a band of randomly encountered orcs with weapons drawn, the DM can easily say, “They snarl and leap to the defense!” Selection of the reaction based on the situation ensures rational behavior and avoids the illogical results that random die rolls can often give.

However, there are times when the DM doesn’t have a clue about what the monsters will do. This is not a disaster—it’s not even all that unusual. When this happens, the DM can randomly determine an encounter reaction by rolling for a result on Table 59. To use the table, roll 2d10 and add the numbers on the two dice. Increase or decrease this number by any modifiers in the creature description or the morale modifiers (see Table 50 in Chapter 9: Combat).

Players choose how the interactions go. I choose to roll on the random reaction table as it's in the rules on page 140.

There is the matter of page 72 in Chapter 9 Combat.

Since this isn’t a combat game, the rules are not ultra-detailed, defining the exact effect of every blow, the subtle differences between obscure weapons, the location of every piece of armor on the body, or the horrifying results of an actual sword fight. Too many rules slow down play (taking away from the real adventure) and restrict imagination. How much fun is it when a character, ready to try an amazing and heroic deed, is told, “You can’t do that because it’s against the rules.”

Players should be allowed to try whatever they want—especially if what they want will add to the spirit of adventure and excitement. Just remember that there is a difference between trying and succeeding.

Oh look it says I have to let my players try anything including parlaying with monsters. Go figure.

Notice how Dildotec hasn't answered how long he's actually run AD&D 2E. In fact, it downright ignores the question.

 

[JarlFrank]

Our party encountered several monster groups way too tough for our level yet we managed to survive by either
a) figuring out they're too tough and not engaging in the first place
b) using diplomacy and making a deal
c) running the fuck away when it turned out this is too much for us
d) using clever tactics and tools to overcome the enemy

 

[MerchantKing]

griffins

Why griffins? Other question.

Griffins are the mortal enemy of the Gnome.

Why the gnome merchant guild refuses to sell dominate person scrolls to non gnomes?

Stop asking antinanatic questions.

 

[JamesDixon]

Griffins are the mortal enemy of the Gnome.

That's because griffons like gnomes on crackers...

 

[Caim]

I like this critter from the Monstrous Manual:

A large golden badger that can really fuck a dude up. 2d4 on the initial bite, follwed by a flat 8 and 2d4 hits of 2d4 damage can really shred a dude when paired with that THAC0 of 9 (especially when it has kids). Several immunities, a good AC and a cool 12 HD means that taking one down's gonna be a bitch and a half as well. Really makes a party think as to how to tackle one.

I also like how the thing's body is its main treasure. Its fur makes better armor than regular armor based on its weight-to-AC ratio, but it sure draws attention when you walk into the inn wearing the Golden Fleece. And getting up to 200 pounds of gold is nice, but I can't really find how much practical worth this is. Both 3e and 5e claim that 1 GP is a third of an ounce, which is 50 GP per pound, so 150-200 pounds of gold is a nice 7.5k to 10k gold. This goes up by 1-2k if you also burn the fur, and you get a few dozen GP from the claws and teeth.

I don't know, there's something just charming about this thing past the paycheck you get out of its corpse.

 

[DavidBVal]

I prefer D&D "Basic" (B/X or Rules Cyclopedia) to AD&D, overall. The main reason is HP inflation, which begins to be a thing in AD&D, becomes horrible in 3e and makes 5e extremely boring past level five.

Having said this, AD&D has improvements over Basic, such as better organized magic (Schools) and more fun spells, separation between races & classes, etc.

AD&D also introduces some silliness, like for instance stats granting no bonus under 15, which means you either need some lenient stat generation for your players or they won't have any bonuses.

For the last game I DM'ed, I created my own houseruled mix of RC plus a bunch of ideas from AD&D, adding my own rules for initiative, death & injury, and Weapon Specialization. It worked fine, and maybe next year I'll run a campaign based on it.

I'd like to comment on an aspect of old D&D edition that was absolutely fantastic, and turned to shit on 3e and forward: skills.

In 3e and 5e, your brave level 1 ranger is the party tracker, because he ads +3 or +4 on a d20 when following tracks. Then rolls a 5 and sulks away. The cleric with 18 WIS comes in with a better bonus, but eventually it is pure randomness what decides who's best at stuff. In 5e with the fixed proficiency bonus it is even worse. Even at 8th level you get a +3, which completely sucks.

Old editions? *IF YOU HAVE THE SKILL* you roll your stat, or lower (not the bonus, the stat) on a d20. Nice way to make every stat point count, even if it doesn't bring any bonuses. If you don't have the skill, it can be half the stat, or just no rolling at all. In my experience as DM it works infinitely better than any modern skill rules. And you can purchase the skill multiple times for a +1. So your ranger, for instance, with 14 WIS and 2 purchases of the skill, rolls 15 or less to track.

 

[Erebus]

The Habitat/Society and Ecology sections of 2nd Edition's Monstrous Manuals/Compendiums were so fucking great.

 

[agris]

I like this critter from the Monstrous Manual:

A large golden badger that can really fuck a dude up. 2d4 on the initial bite, follwed by a flat 8 and 2d4 hits of 2d4 damage can really shred a dude when paired with that THAC0 of 9 (especially when it has kids). Several immunities, a good AC and a cool 12 HD means that taking one down's gonna be a bitch and a half as well. Really makes a party think as to how to tackle one.

I also like how the thing's body is its main treasure. Its fur makes better armor than regular armor based on its weight-to-AC ratio, but it sure draws attention when you walk into the inn wearing the Golden Fleece. And getting up to 200 pounds of gold is nice, but I can't really find how much practical worth this is. Both 3e and 5e claim that 1 GP is a third of an ounce, which is 50 GP per pound, so 150-200 pounds of gold is a nice 7.5k to 10k gold. This goes up by 1-2k if you also burn the fur, and you get a few dozen GP from the claws and teeth.

I don't know, there's something just charming about this thing past the paycheck you get out of its corpse.

i raise you the Centisteed

 

[Caim]

I like this critter from the Monstrous Manual:

A large golden badger that can really fuck a dude up. 2d4 on the initial bite, follwed by a flat 8 and 2d4 hits of 2d4 damage can really shred a dude when paired with that THAC0 of 9 (especially when it has kids). Several immunities, a good AC and a cool 12 HD means that taking one down's gonna be a bitch and a half as well. Really makes a party think as to how to tackle one.

I also like how the thing's body is its main treasure. Its fur makes better armor than regular armor based on its weight-to-AC ratio, but it sure draws attention when you walk into the inn wearing the Golden Fleece. And getting up to 200 pounds of gold is nice, but I can't really find how much practical worth this is. Both 3e and 5e claim that 1 GP is a third of an ounce, which is 50 GP per pound, so 150-200 pounds of gold is a nice 7.5k to 10k gold. This goes up by 1-2k if you also burn the fur, and you get a few dozen GP from the claws and teeth.

I don't know, there's something just charming about this thing past the paycheck you get out of its corpse.

i raise you the Centisteed

View attachment 44027

more like

centisneed

lmao got em

 

[Luka-boy]

AD&D had the best paladins.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

AD&D had the best paladins.

Yes, AD&D had the best paladins, as depicted by David C. Sutherland III:

 

[Caim]

I bet someone's really proud of themselves for this...

 

[JamesDixon]

This website claims to have every AD&D 2E monster made.

 

[MerchantKing]

This website claims to have every AD&D 2E monster made.

Here's what I got from pressing the button

 

[RPK]

This website claims to have every AD&D 2E monster made.

Here's what I got from pressing the button

Ravenloft had some really cool setting-specific monsters... and this one.

 

[JamesDixon]

This website claims to have every AD&D 2E monster made.

Here's what I got from pressing the button

So you found your dad huh?

 

[MerchantKing]

This website claims to have every AD&D 2E monster made.

Here's what I got from pressing the button

So you found your dad huh?

Cool it with the antisemitic remarks.

 

[Erebus]

The idea of a monstrous creature entirely made of maggots isn't a bad one. Lovecraft used it in The Festival.

But in that story, the creatures were intelligent, which made them much better than dumb golems. D&D has way too many golems ; other than dragons, I don't think there's a single type of monster with so many subtypes.

 

[Cryomancer]

D&D has way too many golems ; other than dragons, I don't think there's a single type of monster with so many subtypes.

And makes sense. I mean, they are the perfect work slaves. They don't rebel, they don't eat, drink, don't get disease, always follow your order to the letter. Not mentioning, they can be made with N different materials, in this aspect they are like elementals(fire,water,eart,wind,ice,blood,mist,pyre, clay,iron and tons of others)

Gnomes also spend a huge time and money researching golems.

 

[Caim]

The idea of a monstrous creature entirely made of maggots isn't a bad one. Lovecraft used it in The Festival.

But in that story, the creatures were intelligent, which made them much better than dumb golems. D&D has way too many golems ; other than dragons, I don't think there's a single type of monster with so many subtypes.

There's a dozen different Beholders in the Monstrous Manual alone, and probably more if you dig through the additional monster books and probably the dedicated Beholder book I, Tyrant (which is a great name).

 

[Erebus]

And makes sense. I mean, they are the perfect work slaves. They don't rebel, they don't eat, drink, don't get disease, always follow your order to the letter.

It does make sense that golems would be popular servants and that there'd be more than a single type of them. Still, I think that D&D might have overdone it a tiny little bit. Here are the subtypes of golem that existed in 2nd Edition : clay, stone, iron, flesh, bone, doll, gargoyle, glass, necrophidius, caryatid, juggernaut, stone guardian, scarecrow, brain, brass minotaur, burning man, chia, drolem, furnace, garbage, ruby, emerald, diamond, hammer, lightning, maggot, magic, metagolem, naaruk, salt, amber, skeletal, iron gargoyle, mud, rock, silver, mechanical, zombie, mist, flesh (Ravenloft), snow, wax, aelder, glassine horror, red, hulean juggernaut, and I probably missed a few others.

 

[Alex]

And makes sense. I mean, they are the perfect work slaves. They don't rebel, they don't eat, drink, don't get disease, always follow your order to the letter.

It does make sense that golems would be popular servants and that there'd be more than a single type of them. Still, I think that D&D might have overdone it a tiny little bit. Here are the subtypes of golem that existed in 2nd Edition : clay, stone, iron, flesh, bone, doll, gargoyle, glass, necrophidius, caryatid, juggernaut, stone guardian, scarecrow, brain, brass minotaur, burning man, chia, drolem, furnace, garbage, ruby, emerald, diamond, hammer, lightning, maggot, magic, metagolem, naaruk, salt, amber, skeletal, iron gargoyle, mud, rock, silver, mechanical, zombie, mist, flesh (Ravenloft), snow, wax, aelder, glassine horror, red, hulean juggernaut, and I probably missed a few others.

That website has a chocolate golem. They can even be filled with candy.

That said, as far as I am concerned, the more the merrier.

Edit: