|
Post by Kainguru on Feb 23, 2017 15:56:22 GMT -8
This is a question that has been floating about the internets . . . Why no love for 2e? It's like the often forgotten cousin that everyone forgets to invite to family get togethers, ODnD and ADnD 1e are talked about, vigorously defended and cloned endlessly but poor 2e is often left to it's own devices - cast aside by the nu-kidz and ignored by the OSR Grognards . . . Aaron
|
|
|
Post by Houndin on Feb 24, 2017 4:33:51 GMT -8
2e was how I started in d&d. I still have nearly all my books and it has a special place in my heart, at least pre "players options" I never liked that. My love was and is for the kits that came out in the red/maroon books. I love the flavor they added without all the crunching of feats.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Feb 24, 2017 5:33:36 GMT -8
2e was how I started in d&d. I still have nearly all my books and it has a special place in my heart, at least pre "players options" I never liked that. My love was and is for the kits that came out in the red/maroon books. I love the flavor they added without all the crunching of feats. Me too, which is what prompted the initial question. I do like the critical hit tables in the Players Option books and the cleaned up weapon mastery/specialisation (basically the same rules but they reduced the page count with some clever editing). Aaron
|
|
tomes
Supporter
Hello madness
Posts: 1,438
Currently Running: Dungeon World, hippie games, Fallout Shelter RPG hack
|
Post by tomes on Feb 24, 2017 7:46:32 GMT -8
Prior to 5E, it would probably be the only edition of D&D I'd run. Also, I tried reading the 1E books and holy fuck, no wonder we ran it our own way. It's a bit of an organizational mess. 2E is still pretty to read.
(But of course, I'd rather run Dungeon World, or barring that, Savage Worlds... although I'm hearing great things about the Black Hack / Indie Hack)
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on Feb 24, 2017 9:26:53 GMT -8
I love 2e. Kits were some of my favourite aspects. As well as the various settings that came out. In a large way, I was saddened that they discontinued those.
|
|
|
Post by ilina on Feb 24, 2017 14:07:42 GMT -8
i loved the 2e kits. and actually, Bladesinger wasn't broken if you enforced the drawbacks of being one. the kit had a lot of built in drawbacks that everybody ignored, which gave it the perception of being overpowered. this is also true of paladins, clerics, and monks. bladesingers had an image to upkeep and a role within the world as a champion and paragon of the elven people, so they had responsibilities akin to what every knight possessed.
|
|
|
Post by ericfromnj on Feb 24, 2017 16:18:34 GMT -8
Kainguru, I am playing 2e right now. My friend put together an avatar campaign where we build our own classes based on ourselves. He modified it slightly so that we could add stuff as we learned about the world.
I am a 4th level Eric!
|
|
|
Post by Probie Tim on Feb 25, 2017 16:50:34 GMT -8
Were Swords & Wizardry not a thing, 2E would be my fantasy system of choice. It is the D&D I know the best, and the one which I have run the most. I heart 2E very hard.
|
|
|
Post by ilina on Feb 25, 2017 22:53:54 GMT -8
i would Actually play 2e if it had the option for a point buy system for Attributes that allowed you to play any of the kits or subclasses, even if stats outside the requirements had to suffer.
|
|
fredrix
Master Douchebag
Posts: 2,142
Preferred Game Systems: Fate, L5R, Pendragon, Gumshoe, Feng Shui
Currently Playing: Pendragon, Song of Ice and Fire, L5R, Feng Shui, Traveller
Currently Running: Fate, Coriolis, Nights Black Agents
Favorite Species of Monkey: 1970's NTV, dubbed by the BBC (though The Water Margin beats it)
|
Post by fredrix on Feb 26, 2017 0:10:52 GMT -8
I can't recall why I hate 2e, but I do. I was brought up (gaming wise) on the GW print Bluebook D&D, hardly played before graduating to AD&D first edition, both of which were, I'll admit pretty difficult to read. But in a school club, where you learned through play, they weren't so bad. My hate for 2e may therefore be, the somewhat irrational hate of an immature gamer: why the heck are they changing the rules/dumbing down AD&D/trying to get us poor kids to buy another load of books? Anyhow in my head, that's where it all went wrong, from 2e to Magic the Gathering and the demise of TSR. We abandoned the whole brand then in favour of Runequest/BRP and Traveller. I've only come back to the fold with 5e, which is very good. A note to Comrade Stalin, I'm not pissing on any one's pizza here. You guys go ahead, play your stinking 2e with your pineapple chunks. I'm just answering the question posed at the top.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Feb 26, 2017 3:33:30 GMT -8
i would Actually play 2e if it had the option for a point buy system for Attributes that allowed you to play any of the kits or subclasses, even if stats outside the requirements had to suffer. Two words: It Did Another two words: 'Players Option' Not to be confused with the 'Complete *' brown books, they were 3 hardcover tomes done right at the end of the TSR 2e line. In these books you find the genesis of 3e, nearly all the 'revolutionary' mechanics of the 3e d20 era birthed in the 'Players Option' books - and many more which didn't reach the final cut for print (like ascending AC) were birthed in the writing of those three books. (psssst: Monte Cooks name doesn't appear in any of the credits, so many of the aspects he took credit for with 3e he had actually appropriated from his former TSR colleagues who left after 'TSR proper' had collapsed) Aaron
|
|
sbloyd
Supporter
WHAT! A human in a Precursor service vehicle?!
Posts: 2,762
Preferred Game Systems: Storyteller; Dresden; Mage
Favorite Species of Monkey: Goddamnit, Curious George is a CHIMP not a monkey! Stop teaching my daughter improper classification!
|
Post by sbloyd on Mar 10, 2017 8:03:08 GMT -8
Ah.. 2e. I *loved* 2e. I'd still *play* 2e, if I were running an AD&D game. Bards as a Rogue class. Specialty mages. Specialty Priests. Non-fucking-weapon proficiencies.
And the Complete* books. Yeah, they were the splatbook treadmill gone wild, but there was really some good stuff in there, and nobody was saying you couldn't just pick and choose what to include in your game. The DM's Complete books - the ones with the blue covers - were super great.
|
|
|
Post by ericfromnj on Mar 13, 2017 6:52:12 GMT -8
Ah.. 2e. I *loved* 2e. I'd still *play* 2e, if I were running an AD&D game. Bards as a Rogue class. Specialty mages. Specialty Priests. Non-fucking-weapon proficiencies. And the Complete* books. Yeah, they were the splatbook treadmill gone wild, but there was really some good stuff in there, and nobody was saying you couldn't just pick and choose what to include in your game. The DM's Complete books - the ones with the blue covers - were super great. I still use the complete book of villains when my brain gets stuck on creating bad guys.
|
|
|
Post by ilina on Mar 13, 2017 11:32:52 GMT -8
i found complete book of elves to be rather charming by enforcing roleplay related consequences in a roleplaying game. i mean, bladesinger was only truly broken when those roleplay consequences were ignored. being one basically meant you had similar responsibilities to a knight or paladin. you were a paragon of your people and held to higher standards, so bladesingers had to upkeep an image.
|
|