So who still plays AD&D 2nd edition?


3.5/d20/OGL

101 to 150 of 155 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

Lorm Dragonheart wrote:
I do not understand why people keep saying that 2nd ed had no skills. The nonweapon proficiencies(NWP) were skills that were based on a specific stat. If a NWP was based on agility, and you had a 17 agility, then you had a 17 in that NWP and would have to roll equal to or under that to succeed. Right now I do not remember the mechanics to raise that number, but I remember there being one.

The skills in AD&D 2nd edition were called Proficiencies. There was weapon and non-weapon proficiencies. Also, there is secondary skills to choose from. These skill choices are optional.

The DM can raise or lower a character's chances of success if the situation calls for it. Factors include availability and quality of tools, quality of raw material used, time spent doing the job, difficulty of job, familar of job. Positive modifier is added to ability score used for the check. A negative modifier is subtracted from the ability score.


I should be. :)


Jerry Wright 307 wrote:
Didn't the martial arts use regular weapon proficiency slots?

yea it did but it really wasn't worth it from what I remember. The chance of a knock out was there but very slim. From the way I remember it there was no real monk class the way there was in 1st and 3rd so unarmed and or martial arts damage was not very well explored. You had a chart in the back of the complete fighter for knockouts and what type of martial arts move you did. Best thing outta that book was the amazon and the engineering expansion. Then again I played casters almost exclusively so what do I know about sword swingers.

Grand Lodge

My group no longer plays 2e but we do occasionally play one of its incarnations called Hackmaster every once in a while when we get stagnet on Pathfinder/3.5

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lorm Dragonheart wrote:
I do not understand why people keep saying that 2nd ed had no skills. The nonweapon proficiencies(NWP) were skills that were based on a specific stat. If a NWP was based on agility, and you had a 17 agility, then you had a 17 in that NWP and would have to roll equal to or under that to succeed. Right now I do not remember the mechanics to raise that number, but I remember there being one.

I believe that what they are saying is that skill training had less of an impact on success then it does in later versions of the game. In 2nd edition skill training was a minor mod of an ability check, whereas in 3rd and after the ability became a minor mod of a skill roll.

I might get a copy of the reprint books mainly for collecting purposes, but I'd have to be bound and gagged... or paid very heavily to play AD&D again.


Steven Tindall wrote:

Jerry Wright 307 wrote:

Didn't the martial arts use regular weapon proficiency slots?
yea it did but it really wasn't worth it from what I remember. The chance of a knock out was there but very slim. From the way I remember it there was no real monk class the way there was in 1st and 3rd so unarmed and or martial arts damage was not very well explored. You had a chart in the back of the complete fighter for knockouts and what type of martial arts move you did. Best thing outta that book was the amazon and the engineering expansion. Then again I played casters almost exclusively so what do I know about sword swingers.

I wasn't really bothered by the low possibility of a knockout. I've been playing D&D since 1978, and I've never seen a successful use of the monk's stunning fist ability. The chance to save against it has always been so high that it's effectively useless.

I decided long ago that the basic philosophy of D&D is to prevent any chance of knockouts and the like.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I haven't ever stopped playing 2e since it came out. In fact, I'm proud to say I have never played any other version (except 1e in its day). I have been converting modules and adventure paths all along the way. Was an original pathfinder subscriber and only quit because I have so much more material than I can ever use.
I don't find the books confusing at all or poorly organized especially in comparison to 3e or 3.5. (I do buy the new edition books to help with conversions although I have nothing 4e).
I've heard numerous complaints over the years that 2e requires too many house rules but that is not true from my experience. I have very few house rules.
One house rule that I do have though addresses the problems with NWP (what newer editions call skills). In my game, proficiencies start at 20%. Every time a character attempts to use the skill he improves by 1% regardless if he succeeds or fails. He gets 100 xp if he succeeds or his current percentage chance with a failure. I think my system is far superior to the marketed mechanics. Why should your character be a better swimmer just because he's 10th level and I'm 3rd? Maybe I live next to a lake or have been engaged in lots of water scenarios and you've been exploring in a desert. The experience point bonuses encourage PCs to use their NWPs as much as possible, especially at low levels when chances of success are low. The new and inventive ways PCs use their skills adds great flavor and depth to the game, especially the role-playing aspects. In addition, any character has a 5% chance to succeed at any skill (even if untrained you might get lucky) and no character has better than a 95% chance of success in any skill (nobody's perfect)
I know 2e isn't everybody's cup of tea but my group has always had great fun. I think the class restrictions and other strict rules maintain a sense of variety in the game and tend to limit min-maxing. The streamlined rules make it easy to learn and easy to play, imo. Also, since I am usually the DM, I appreciate the cinematic, story-telling flow of the game versus laborious mechanical drudgery of later editions.
Go 2nd Edition!!


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Forgot to mention ... I much prefer the initiative system in 2e to the mechanics of later editions. It just seems easier and more efficient to me. Now granted, as I've already admitted, I haven't actually played newer editions so maybe I'm offbase.
But the bottom line is, I haven't seen anything in 3.x or 4th ed that inspires me to abandon a system that has served me so well all these years. I understand that WotC and others need to make money and the best way to profit is to make things newer (I won't say better). But despite rabid advertizing campaigns designed to convince me and the numerous others in my group that 2e is broken and needs (or needed) a complete overhaul, I'm not buying it. Call me old-fashioned, I don't mind. I see more broken than "fixed" in newer editions (though I prefer Pathfinder's mechanics to the either 3rd or 4th).

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber

No system is better than another, only different.

There is no reason to switch to another system if the one you have is working just fine.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:

No system is better than another, only different.

There is no reason to switch to another system if the one you have is working just fine.

Amen, brother

Silver Crusade

Steven Tindall wrote:
Jerry Wright 307 wrote:
Didn't the martial arts use regular weapon proficiency slots?
yea it did but it really wasn't worth it from what I remember. The chance of a knock out was there but very slim. From the way I remember it there was no real monk class the way there was in 1st and 3rd so unarmed and or martial arts damage was not very well explored. You had a chart in the back of the complete fighter for knockouts and what type of martial arts move you did. Best thing outta that book was the amazon and the engineering expansion. Then again I played casters almost exclusively so what do I know about sword swingers.

I never liked the martial art systems in 2e or 1e.

Dark Archive

Lady Aurora, which APs have you converted? Would you mind sharing some notes on this thread or even via email?


TriOmegaZero wrote:
No system is better than another, only different.

I want to be first in line for your F.A.T.A.L. campaign. Vive la difference!

Shadow Lodge

That would make sense, if I were running F.A.T.A.L. and not 3.5 D&D. :)


You don't combine the best of both?

Wait, that would pretty much be 3.5 with a couple of extra stats...

Liberty's Edge

hogarth wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
No system is better than another, only different.
I want to be first in line for your F.A.T.A.L. campaign. Vive la difference!

The fact that anyone would want to be 'first in line' for a game of F.A.T.A.L brings a great disturbance to the force...


Actually, I'm going to start a AD&D 2E sandbox game this Saturday


TOZ wrote:
That would make sense, if I were running F.A.T.A.L. and not 3.5 D&D. :)

Don't worry, I'll wait. You're the first person I've met who doesn't think it's a bad game!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber

Can I get you something? A comfy chair? Copy of War and Peace?

Wait, when did I say F.A.T.A.L. wasn't a bad game?


TriOmegaZero wrote:

Can I get you something? A comfy chair? Copy of War and Peace?

Wait, when did I say F.A.T.A.L. wasn't a bad game?

That's true -- you only said "no system is better than another". That could mean that you think all systems are bad!


Playing in a core book + combat & tactics game this weekend. It will be the first time for 2e since 99/00! Should be a blast.

After 12 years of 3e, C&C, AD&D3e, plus Myth & Magic, 2e sure does seem to have a few clunky bits (mostly holdovers from 1e). But it is still my game of choice, at least in style and tone. When I start running a game in a few weeks, I will be using Myth & Magic Starter Books, a 2e future clone- sort of how like Pathfinder is a 3.5 future clone. Linksy:

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/705393141/myth-and-magic-players-guide- 2e-revived-and-update

Cheers


Awesome guys! It's great to see AD&D is still thriving and doing well. People are still interested new and old alike. One thing about D&D is there is different mechanics/editions/systems, and if you enjoy the game, it's fun to try them all out and pick the ones you like best.... or even play all versions if you have the time. I enjoyed reading everyones comments and stories. I myself just recently re-acquired the Dark Sun and Ravenloft campaign settings! I'm going to try to rebuild my AD&D collection before the stuff is gone forever. I think I am going to DM a game soon.


Teazia wrote:
It will be the first time for 2e since 99/00!

Oh man, you just made me remember percentile Strength scores!


Played last night, and it went pretty well. There were a few roll low roll high head scratchers, but that is part of the stew. We used the gnome invention tables from 1e dragonlance, 2e core, combat & tactics, a bit from the 1e dmg, and return to keep on the borderlands. Pretty swell and it will only get better.

I can definitely say that switching to M&M will be high on my priority list when I get in the DM chain. Kickerstarter now fully funded, woot!.


I only played 2nd ed once (as in one session), then literally the next was 3rd. BUT now I have gotten obsessed with 2nd-ed style retro games.
I started with Castles and Crusades, then got even more primitive with the Basic Fantasy Roleplaying game (BFRPG) by Chris Gonnerman. (free and OGL by the way at basicroleplaying.org )

BFRPG went back to 4 classes (fighter, cleric, magic-user, thief....
sound familiar?) races that you just couldn't roll above or below certain numbers, limited abilities---in fact the fighter's only ability is proficiencies and the higherst bonus to hit. Quite fun, altough I stil give max hit points at first, and d6's where BFRPG has d4 HD for thief.

I also dabbled with Layrinth Lord, which my gaming mentor say is like playing a hybrid of 1st and 2nd ed.


always wanted to try 2nd ed! Playing 3.5 now...


Ekkonor1 wrote:
always wanted to try 2nd ed! Playing 3.5 now...

There are lots of old school AD&D games going on on google+ via video chat

if you're there you can add me https://plus.google.com/u/0/106791563133302266720/about and I can share my rpg circle there as well if you want.

Grand Lodge

I started a game last Saturday with my wife and a long-time friend. My wife is relatively new to RPGs (started with 3.5 in 2008), while my friend and I have been gaming together since the early 80's...

They both had a blast (I did too of course). It feels really good to be getting back to these old rules...

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Love me some 2nd Edition; I was late to roleplaying, but it's what I started with!

TOZ wrote:
The difference I see, is that with the skill system the player can actually make choices to affect the outcome.

I would still argue it's the illusion of choice. The DM still has control of the environment, so you have to trust them.

There is no practical difference between:

DM: You stand at the edge of a river, you hear the faint sound of a waterfall off in the distance but there are no rapids. You cannot see the bottom of the river. Your quarry has made it to the other side.
Player: I swim across the river.
DM: You get to the other side after about a minute. The rest of the party follows behind with no problem.

Or:

DM: You stand at the edge of a river. *Rolls Spot and Listen in secret, player fails because they don't have any ranks* You hear the faint sound of roaring water from downstream, but see no sign of your quarry. Perhaps they crossed here, but you can't be sure. You cannot see the bottom of the river.
Player: I have +2 to Swim, so I can take 10 and get across. How far was it?
DM: 100 feet.
Player: Okay, that's about 2 minutes at 5ft/round. I'll swim for it.
DM: Halfway across you're attacked by an eel. Roll a Swim check.
Player: 5! Dangit, now I'm going to drown!

Or:

DM: You stand at the edge of a river. *Rolls Spot and Listen in secret, player fails but the DM fudges the roll to keep things moving* You hear the faint sound of roaring water from downstream, and can see signs your quarry has already crossed. You cannot see the bottom of the river.
Player: I have +2 to Swim, so I can take 10 and get across. How far was it?
DM: 100 feet.
Player: Okay, that's about 2 minutes at 5ft/round. I'll swim for it.
DM: Okay, you make it to the other side. The rest of the party is stranded, but you could probably work out some sort of rope system. Do you have Use Rope?
Player: Nope.
DM: Screw it. You can improvise well enough.

Illusion of control. Notice how the 2e version was faster (and there was nothing stopping the DM from having an eel fight there as well, and just calling for a Str check to fight while in the river).

The less there is codified, the more chance the DM has to create a world without obscure corner-cases. Like a dolphin needing an arbitrary +8 bonus to Swim checks just to act like a normal specimen. So much wasted space just to say "dolphins can do jumping flips out of the water".

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber

And the funny thing about the second instance is that it can easily be the first instance if the DM chooses.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
SuperSlayer wrote:
It's not to the point where I can't understand the book I just think it could of been designed better. I think it's good people are playing different versions of games. This game can't die someone needs to pick up the rights and republish it.

The rights haven't fallen down, they're still owned by WOTC. Pay a bunch of shekels and I"m sure they'll be happy to license it.


You can find AD&D clones for free on the web. For instance, there's one called OSRIC. There's also a Basic D&D clone called Labyrinth Lord, which has an "Advanced Edition Companion".

(As a disclaimer, I've never seen OSRIC, nor the Advanced Edition Companion to Labyrinth Lord, so I'm not saying whether they're good or bad, or true to the original or not. But you could take a look and judge for yourself.)


TriOmegaZero wrote:
And the funny thing about the second instance is that it can easily be the first instance if the DM chooses.

This caused me a ton of grief when we switched from 2nd to 3.0

If any time I would, for the sake of hurrying the game along, do this I would have my players say something to the effect of "Oh gee, glad I put ranks in swim" or "If you aren't going to make us roll a check, can I at least take my ranks out, and put them in something more useful?"

Don't get me wrong, I much prefer 3.5/PF, but there was something to be said about winging it.

Not sure I could go back to playing without a grid though...

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber

It really is about group expectations and keeping everyone on the same page. I'm still trying to find my style on skill checks. I don't use the social skills as often as I should, and worry that the players who invest in them feel cheated. :(


I still wing it, even using 3.5. I restrict skill checks to spot and listen, theify-type checks, and to those times when a character is doing something that isn't directly related to my narrative (i.e., when the player just has to make a roll).

In my game, having five ranks in a skill means that most of the time you don't have to make a roll. You only have to roll when there's some sort of circumstance that requires it (trying to use diplomacy in the middle of a fight, for instance, or forcing your mount to enter an area that reeks of undead, or maybe trying to spot the one flawed stone in a pile of gems, etc.).

I don't worry too much over players with "investment" in skills. The 5-ranks rule means they can diversify.

And for the record, I greatly prefer 1E over 2E. If I was going to switch back to pre-3E, I'd go with 1E combined with 3E/PF skills and some of the feats. I like my monks, assassins and half-orcs too much to go 2E.

I've been thinking about switching back more and more.... It will probably depend on how 5E turns out.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

At this point, I either play Pathfinder or 4th Edition. I can't seem to find any self-motivation for any older incarnation of D20... unless it's Villains and Vigilantes.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber

I like that five rank rule Jerry. It kind of mirrors how I handle things. I ask how many ranks the character has and judge if they need to roll based off of that. Usually I tell them not to bother if they have enough ranks, due to 1s not auto-failing.


It speeds things up, as well.


I played 2E for a long time back in the 90s and have a lot of the campaign material for Greyhawk, Ravenloft, Planescape and Mystara and have slowly been picking up items from eBay, etc. that I didn't have. When I ran 2E games, most of them were set in Ravenloft. The 2E era definitely provided many of the great settings and fluff for the game.

I haven't played a 2E game since 2000 since we pretty much switched to 3E right away after wrapping up our last adventures. Overall, for us, 3E made a lot of improvements but really captured the flavor of the older games. The main area of improvements for us were the skill system which unified thief skills, non-weapon proficiencies, etc., the base d20 roll + modifiers mechanic and Fort/Will/Reflex saves based on the target versus saves based on the source of the effect like poison. It was good to see half-orcs and monks and barbarians back in the core rules again too. I think 3.5 and PF have continued to improve upon this version and really provide a ton of options.

Would I play 2E again? While I would never say never, I'm much more inclined to either take 2E materials and change them to 3E (or 4E or perhaps 5E) or simplify it and go with BECMI/RC which I like for the low complexity. 2E is a good game but for the most part I prefer the way other editions/versions handled various aspects of the mechanics.

L


LazarX wrote:
At this point, I either play Pathfinder or 4th Edition. I can't seem to find any self-motivation for any older incarnation of D20... unless it's Villains and Vigilantes.

Hold the phone, Mabel! Are you saying there's a d20 V&V?!?


I've always used a d20 with V&V. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
SuperSlayer wrote:
I busted out the old Player's handbook to tidy up on some old rules. Wow the magic of the old days came back to me with that old Player's Handbook back. I started rereading the book and forgot so much of the game but it's all coming back to me, coming back to me. I used to venture in the Forgotton Realms, and Ravenloft. I am eager to venture back to these places to catch up with some old friends.

How about AD&D 1st edition? I'm running a very long-lived 1E campaign.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
And the funny thing about the second instance is that it can easily be the first instance if the DM chooses.

Which was sort of my point - it doesn't matter what skill system you use when the DM controls the outcome. It's not an indictment of either system...

TriOmegaZero wrote:
It really is about group expectations and keeping everyone on the same page. I'm still trying to find my style on skill checks. I don't use the social skills as often as I should, and worry that the players who invest in them feel cheated.

...which is where we kind of agree. It should always be about consistency and fairness within the groups expectations.

I like allowing players to use the social skills to haggle with merchants - almost every group ends up buying and selling, so it makes sense to allow the player with Diplomacy and Sense Motive to put them to use to help the whole party regularly.

By the way, I hope it doesn't seem like I'm always harping on you TOZ - I just find your points interesting and good for generating discussion!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber

I try to leave lots of sharp jags for people to catch on, it makes discussion more exciting. :D

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

One could make the case that you yourself are one sharp jag, TOZ. :-p

Scarab Sages

Jeremiziah wrote:
One could make the case that you yourself are one sharp jag, TOZ. :-p

I can only guess that someone will flag that comment. ;)


I'm in a group that plays 2nd Ed for our Masque of the Red Death Campaign (3.0 never really quite got the right feel for the setting.)

Working on converting Ravenloft to Pathfinder and from there MotRD to Pathfinder as well though. I've never really had that much nostalgia for 2nd Ed., however, I've always found THAC0 and the "golf score" AC system to be counter-intuitive, that and 2nd Ed. had at least as much bloat as 3.0 / 3.5 developed. That and 2nd Ed. introduced me to my all out hatred for elves (daisy-eating, immortal peacnik, monastic warrior/mages so superior their poop doesn't stink prick ears) with the introduction of the most munchkin of all the kits in the complete PHB line, a line famous for introducing power creep into the system, The Bladesinger. 2nd Ed. also did a lot to neuter the Drow as villains (thank you R. A. Salvatore for Drizzt Do'Urden).

Sorry for the rant, yes I play 2nd Ed. but it is far from my preferred system, but my group prefers to use an RAW version if there is one, so until we finish our conversion of MotRD to Pathfinder, 2nd Ed will have to do.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber
Jal Dorak wrote:
Jeremiziah wrote:
One could make the case that you yourself are one sharp jag, TOZ. :-p
I can only guess that someone will flag that comment. ;)

Does favoriting count? :D

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Been playing my mash-up of 1e/2e for years... I was hiding under a rock for many years and didn't even know about 3.x till about 3-4 months before they were announced 4e was coming out. My group still plays my 2e game now and again, Pathfinder, and 3.x games. I am much more freeform, and we mix things together and use what works for us, and toss what doesn't.


I still play Second Edition and have many fond memories of my old, battered game books.. I found the entire Dark Sun product line tucked away in my attic and dug out my old Forgotten Realms stuff this weekend. (The boxed sets were awesome. Paizo needs boxed sets.)

101 to 150 of 155 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Gaming / D&D / 3.5/d20/OGL / So who still plays AD&D 2nd edition? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.