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

[Zed Duke of Banville]

the dirty little secret of ToEE is that the actual dungeon was sort of precedurally built by Gygax for his kids to play around in and wasn't ever really going to be a commercial product, but people reacted so well to T1 The Village of Hommlet and constantly wrote into Dragon Magazine requesting the full dungeon, that the company felt like they had to release something, so Gygax tasked Frank Mentzer to flesh out it from his copious stacks of notes, because he was so busy trying to run the business side of D&D, and was out in Hollywood trying to negotiate film deals and handling the cartoon, etc. The bottom line is that ToEE is a really crappy example of a dungeon; it's linear, it doesn't make a whole helluva lot of sense, and it's a slog. I was always surprised that ToEE got adapted into a CRPG, because it was always sort of looked at with mild disappointment by the people I gamed with in the mid to late 80s..

The cover of the original version of T1 The Village of Hommlet in 1979 (as with the later 1981 version) states that it "is a lead-in to Dungeon Module T2, The Temple of Elemental Evil". I won't argue about the quality of the final product T1-4 released in 1985, and Gary Gygax certainly ended up being distracted by other ambitions, but T1 was intended to be part of a larger series from the beginning, not an isolated module in a T series without any other entries.

 

[Cael]

Also, some spells on 5E dish way more damage. Meteor Swarm is an example. Sadly, necromancy, conjuration, alteration and illusion are IMO worthless on 5E.

----------------------------

On 2E you also don't pick which spells to learn. The spells found is up to the DM discretion. If you wanna learn knock and invisibility but no shop or treasure found has a copy of it, deal with it.

PS : I agree with Cael that WoTC is the Electronic Farts of the TT gaming. But 3E is still a amazing edition and Paizo PF1e improved it.

5shits making Evocations better is probably a reaction to how people laughed at Evocations in 3.x. The way they also neutered Conjuration, Transmutation/Alteration and Illusion is further proof that they were stung by 3.x criticisms as those were amongst the most powerful schools, with Conjuration and Transmutation being the most powerful bar none.

3.x is amazing simply because there is very little limit as to the kind of character you can play. The dramaqueens love to point out how a Rogue 3/Barb 11/Fighter 6 is unrealistic and shouldn't be allowed while a real player of the game is more than happy with Conan. Newfag whingers hate the whole idea of Paladin 2/Sorcerer 6/Spellsword 4/Dragonslayer 1/Eldritch Knight 7, while a real player of the game is more than happy with his version of Odin.

Dramaqueens and newfags fucked up DnD.

 

[Reinhardt]

I an just 1,84m

Lol, manlet!

 

[Cryomancer]

Cael, I would prefer the "kits" of 2E but in overall, 3E is good.

WoTC is the Electronic Farts of tabletop gaming. Most of their revenue comes from "surprise mechanics"(fifa lootbox/magic card packs), both wanna impose their woke agenda on all of their products and both produce decline on their RPG games. Both wanna let their cool old stuff to die

 

[Semper]

A 2E Rogue 10 with 18 Str and a +3 longsword backstabbing for 4x damage would do on average (4.5+3+2)x4 = 38 average damage.

A 3E Rogue 10 with 18 Str and a +3 longsword will backstab for 4.5+3+4+5x3.5 = 29 average damage.

you don't multiply the strength and weapon bonus damage, just the weapon's base damage. the correct example would be: 4.5x4+5=23 on average.

 

[Nortar]

A 2E Rogue 10 with 18 Str and a +3 longsword backstabbing for 4x damage would do on average (4.5+3+2)x4 = 38 average damage.

A 3E Rogue 10 with 18 Str and a +3 longsword will backstab for 4.5+3+4+5x3.5 = 29 average damage.

you don't multiply the strength and weapon bonus damage, just the weapon's base damage. the correct example would be: 4.5x4+5=23 on average.

Good point. Besides, a lvl 10 thief in 2E has 1 attack per round, while lvl 10 rogue in 3E has 2 attacks per round.

 

[Rean]

I play everything , my rpg knowledge is unmatched, started in 80's on BECMI. Casters are expanded in later editions, in 5E you will spec a warlock or/and sorcerer fordamage. Wizards are shining as control roles . I am not for forcing political agenda in games , but the rulesest by itself does not have so many flaws.

And so he goes off on an unrelated tangent in order to avoid admitting that his claim was retarded in the first place.

The guy with the funny tag is correct in saying that 5e was made by woketards. WoTC is a company that should burn from the ground up. That's a fact, but it doesn't matter in the least when it comes to actually playing the game. Does it matter who changed a bunch of numbers around? You can do the same.
Any good GM/storyteller understands the game system is bound to them, not the other way around. The game maker is meant to be one of the most creative individuals around, a god among men, especially when it comes to the game. The system is nothing but a bunch of arbitrary numbers and text on a page. This whole debate is pointless. Nothing says the GM can't change 5E, 2E or anything else to create a fun to play, balanced game. All it takes is time and creativity.
So, the 80's GM is indeed correct that 5E is perfectly playable, if you make it so.

 

[Mortmal]

Glad some young guy gets it too, earth maybe not doomed. The choice of rulesets are unimportant, what you make from it is important. 2e superiority is by settings quality only. Yes wotc enforce a woke agenda in public with disclaimer and such on their old products in an absurd way. Their discord is freaky too and lets not get started on not wanting to publish dragonlance . If the company burn to the ground no big deal for me, i can play pathfinder just fine , and 5E still exist as SOTDL , if only there was a fantasy ground version .
However i ran some adventure modules from wotc , curse of strahd ,tomb of annihilation, there's no political agenda in those at all. They are perfectly classic adventures. The woke thing is more like a public kow tow to the dominating agenda. Better to be seen as inclusive than satanists.

 

[Cryomancer]

othing says the GM can't change 5E, 2E or anything else to create a fun to play, balanced game. All it takes is time and creativity.
So, the 80's GM is indeed correct that 5E is perfectly playable, if you make it so.

The choice of rulesets are unimportant,

Everything that you said about 5E can be said about 4E. Ideally, game rules should REINFORCE and FACILITE the RP and immersion from the players, like 2E did. Not be in the way of it. My point is that the ruleset is important.

For example, if I wanna to play a roman highly historical setting, no magic and only roman tech, GURPS would be far better than D&D 4e. Or even D&D 2e. Of course, if the DM and group is used to a ruleset, maybe a conversion would take less work than learning a new ruleset, but you got the idea. Playing as a vampire in D&D and in world of darkness are two completely different experiences due the different ruleset.

i can play pathfinder just fine , and 5E still exist as SOTDL , if only there was a fantasy ground version .

If WoTC is destroyed, I an pretty sure that it will be alive in a "5.5e" clone by other company, 5e is too popular to die. Just like when Woketards of the C**** decided to try to destroy D&D 3e and force 4e upon the players, Paizo launched Pathfinder 1e which for some time become the most popular tabletop game.

This Dragonlance novels, would be a IP violation if the writers remove all mention to "D&D places", change to Golarion, all D&D deities for Pathfinder deities and launches it as a pathfinder novel? Imagine they doing it and becoming the top seller fantasy novel. The Woketards butthurt would be insane.

 

[Cael]

Cael, I would prefer the "kits" of 2E but in overall, 3E is good.

WoTC is the Electronic Farts of tabletop gaming. Most of their revenue comes from "surprise mechanics"(fifa lootbox/magic card packs), both wanna impose their woke agenda on all of their products and both produce decline on their RPG games. Both wanna let their cool old stuff to die

I enjoy 2E kits as well, although I lament how Rangers have been nerfed (compared to 1E) to divine spells and dual-classing is restricted to base classes only. The old Ranger/Mage or Paladin/Mage duals were pretty fun.

That said, the sheer flexibility of 3.x is where it really shines, but it requires a bit of brains to make a character that is both thematic and effective. This is probably why the braindead newfags and dramaqueens hate 3.x.

 

[DavidBVal]

2e is alright, but... Lethality? If I am not mistaken the rule for negative HP starts with AD&D 2e. If you want lethality stick to B/X or BECMI. Less hp than AD&D (Fighter has D8, no barbarian), less defensive spells, and at 0hp you die. How lethal is that?

Things I dislike in AD&D 1e and 2e:
-thac0 advancement on every level opened the gates of inflation, which didn't happen with OD&D or B/X, although it wasn't still as terrible as in 3.x.
-ability bonuses are silly, basically if you really generate stats by rolling dice you are screwed. Up to 14 they grant nothing, then maybe a +1, which sucks. Back in B/X the bonus distribution was much better, and 3.x also made it better.
-initiative system. I mean, it is a mess and nobody uses it as written, with declarations before rolling) because it takes forever.

Still 2e is pure incline, and indeed the settings were amazing. The adventures, certainly not as good as the B/X or 1e ones.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

-initiative system. I mean, it is a mess and nobody uses it as written, with declarations before rolling) because it takes forever.

1E and 2E differ a lot, 2E is much easier to understand and does a better job of explaining it.
Neither of them are nearly as bad as some of the ones that came before e.g., the Eldrich Wizardry(titty cover book) broke each round down into ... eight? segments iirc

also -- humorously -- the IE games do a better job of implementing RAW 2E initiative than probably any other 2E adaptation

 

[rusty_shackleford]

A 2E Rogue 10 with 18 Str

A what?

 

[Snorkack]

Rusty, it's obvious you only know 2ed from pc games where you can reroll your stats for hours since no one would ever want to have you at his actual dnd table, so it's no wonder the point of my question eludes you:
If you managed to roll 18 Str, you probably wouldn't play a rogue.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Rusty, it's obvious you only know 2ed from pc games where you can reroll your stats for hours since no one would ever want to have you at his actual dnd table, so it's no wonder the point of my question eludes you:
If you managed to roll 18 Str, you probably wouldn't play a rogue.

Your implication was (wrongly) that 2E doesn't have rogues.

 

[Cryomancer]

Thief = Rogue. Is like "fighting man"/fighter or "magic user"/wizard. Same thing, different name.

As for re rolling stats, my S&W dm allowed me to roll 3d6 per stat and chose where to put each one and to reduce a stat to enhance another at the 2x1 rate. And yes, video games gives much more freedom on stat allocation. I have a half giant gladiator on Dark Sun : Wake of the Ravager with 23 STR. I also wish that I could run test of warlords on 2E but never found a group for it.

 

[Poseidon00]

2e is the best edition ever because they gave so much love to my boys, the druids. They have by far the most interesting level up system of any class and the higher level powers they get are some of the most flexible and interesting.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

2e is alright, but... Lethality? If I am not mistaken the rule for negative HP starts with AD&D 2e.

Although the AD&D (1st edition) Players Handbook released in 1978 specified that death occurs when any creature reaches zero or negative hit points, the Dungeon Masters Guide released the following year included a mandatory rule in which creatures fall unconscious at zero hit points and then lose one hit point per round until death occurs at -10 hit points.
Except that Gygax probably intended unconsciousness to occur only at exactly zero hit points or "optionally as low as -3 hit points if from the same blow which brought the total to 0".

Also, the AD&D 2nd edition "Hovering on Death's Door" rule was explicitly labelled as optional; otherwise death occurs at zero hit points.

 

[Cryomancer]

IMO should be like :

• 0 hp to - 5 hp = unconscious -> After few hours, the char wakes with 1 hp.
• -6 to -10 = Comatose -> Requires that a party member feed potion or casts spells to heal. Char loses 1 hp per hour.
• -11 to -30 hp = Dead -> Raise dead can bring back *NOTE
• -31 to -50 hp = Dead with heavily damaged corpse -> The body is so heavily damaged that is above raise dead. Only ressurection can bring him back.
• -51 or less hp = The body is eradicated -> Only miracle of wish can bring him back.

And ressurecting should be a check, like roll a D20 UNDER the char con and after being revived, the character permanently loses a point on constitution.

 

[nikolokolus]

lose 1 HP per hour?! Pretty "hardcore" there man.

 

[Cael]

Rusty, it's obvious you only know 2ed from pc games where you can reroll your stats for hours since no one would ever want to have you at his actual dnd table, so it's no wonder the point of my question eludes you:
If you managed to roll 18 Str, you probably wouldn't play a rogue.

Right, because people only played the game your way as that is the only "correct" way to play...

 

[Gregz]

3.5 > 3 > 2 > AD&D > 5 > 4

 

[DraQ]

CLASS RESTRICTIONS :

Manlet races should't be allowed to be magic users. When I mean manlet races, think on classes that can't be over 6 feet tall, like halflings, dwarf and so on. Races that are a bit smaller than humans such as elves but some of then can be over six feet are fine. The exception to that rule is gnomes and 2e did it right. Gnomes must be illusionists. Because they are all about creating illusions to steal money from non gnomes.

It is a central point of certain conflicts and reason which some places in Mystara like Glantri threats this manlet races so bad.

Class restrictions were actually peak retardation.
There should be a cost to choosing an atypical background, however, to offset the snowflakeness.

And of course, the DM has entire power to not allow a player to pick any kit, class or whatever.

Uh, that's kind of the definition of DM - they can override and overrule practically everything. Regardless of edition or system (unless playing some faggy narrativist one, in which case what the fuck is wrong with you?).

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Class restrictions were actually peak retardation.

Letting anyone be anything is exactly the point where you can mark the era of decline.

 

[Cryomancer]

Yep. Manlet races(Dwarf, hobbit halfling), and Brainlet races(Half giant, half orc) should't be able to become magic users. Gnomes are the sole exception, the unique manlet race that should be able to learn magic and they should be forced into specializing in illusion or alteration.