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.
|
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.
Yep, we have a 2e game running. Core (black books) rules only.
Playing RAW to boot!
I haven't played 2nd edition yet, but my group (the one I've played Pathfinder, GURPS and 4e with) plans to play it after we try out Dark Heresy and maybe another 4e campaign in Forgotten Realms. The DM allowed us to use the Complete book of Humanoids or whatever it was called, so I'm playing a Lizardman/Lizardfolk Druid.
|
|
Does that even work? Everywhere I read about 2E people are saying it was designed to be half houserules.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.Yep, we have a 2e game running. Core (black books) rules only.
Playing RAW to boot!
Works fine. Most house rules I have seen involve changing things that in some cases the authors clearly state not to change, i.e. class/race/level restrictions. I can't think of a house rule we needed, any more than in 3e/PF, using 2e from pretty much day one of it's release.
Any examples for 'required' house rules that you were thinking of?
We find 2e refreshing and more 'role playing' than the mechanically heavy PF. Players are more concerned with what their characters do in game rather than in rule book - if you get my meaning.
S.
I never stopped playing 2E. We only ported in the weapon mastery rules from the black covered Player's Options books or 2.5E. What is nice, and it's been stated already by Stefan Hill, the group is so much more focused on what their characters do in the game, not building the most optimized character or working the rules to break the game. We still play with level restrictions, however, only if the class being pursued was not the favored class for your race - Wizard for Elves, Fighter for Dwarves, Thief for Halfings, Bard for Half-Elves, Illusionist for Gnomes; all other level limits and class restrictions for those races apply as listed. Are thinking being that it fits with cultural developments for those races, as well as matches physiological evolution for them - thigns like Wizards or Bards for Dwarves due to their inherent save bonuses against magic.
Recently, we've been giving a soon to be released 2E inspired d20 based system called Myth and Magic, from New Haven Games, a try. It's basically 2E with some of the trappings of of d20 mechanics - like Fort, Ref, and Will saves, rounds split up into Primary (Standard), Secondary (Move), Full Round, and Free actions, ACs that ascend from 10 to 30, proficiency system set up more like a skill system, spellcasters can gain bonus spells depending on attribute rating, multi-classing that can work as what is known as 'Gestalt' or the staggered format that has been the norm since d20 was released, the inclusion of Barbarians and Monks as part of the core classes, Half-Orcs as a PC race.
Things that are definately 2E in nature - Cleric spells that cap at 7th level, Warrior classes being the only classes that gain a natural multiple attack progression, arcane spellcasters unable to cast spells in armor without selecting a specific talent, varying experience charts for each class, attributes that cap at 25, a system designed around the idea that you don't need attributes with in the 16 to 20 range to be playable.
Check it out if you wish. The authors of the system actually encourage the idea of houserules, the idea being that you make the game your own.
I see some advertised on Meetup every now and again, so there must be some out there.
We bounce back and forth between 2E AD&D and 3.X every other campaign.
|
We played 2E RAW from about '94 to about 98. In fact, it's the only time I really supported a completely RAW game.
But I have no desire to go back.
I went through the 2E PHB & DMG about 5 years ago -- looking for something -- it's was nostalgic but didn't compel me to play any.
About 3 years ago we were talking about playing some 1E, we broke out our old 1E books from the 70s. We spent a couple weeks talking about playing a few sessions but I moved away before the group played. No loss, I wasn't really interested the way a few of the other players were.
|
Playing a cleric of Mask (with some weird kit/specialization stuff) in a really long running Forgotten Realms campaign.
The more I play, the more the system shows its limits. Non-weapon proficiencies are cluncky and unrefined, spells are horribly unbalanced or sorely lacking, even the combat round structure has way too many grey areas.
The DM isn't happy either, but the stuff he'd have to change updating the whole game to a later edition is honestly way too much.
|
|
Playing a cleric of Mask (with some weird kit/specialization stuff) in a really long running Forgotten Realms campaign.
The more I play, the more the system shows its limits. Non-weapon proficiencies are cluncky and unrefined, spells are horribly unbalanced or sorely lacking, even the combat round structure has way too many grey areas.
The DM isn't happy either, but the stuff he'd have to change updating the whole game to a later edition is honestly way too much.
I am NOT saying this wasn't true in your experience. Just asking what you mean about NWP being clunkly, spells being lacking, and combat round unstructured? These aren't things that we experienced.
Interesting,
S.
It's good to see people are stil playing the second edition. I just recieved the second edition Dungeon's Master guide in the mail today. What a great feeling to see this book again! I have went through the book in extreme detail taking note of all the rules in the Player's Handbook. This game has a certain feel to it that the others don't have and I remember it well. I also wish they published some of the old adventures again because there was some great one's. I remember one called "The Orc's Nest" and it was one of the best dungeons I ever played. Had such a good time playing that module, I wish I still had it but I was foolish and traded in a bunch of my old gaming stuff back before the internet hit big. I am thankful I am able to get some of this stuff back in this day and age. I need to get my hands on the Monster Compendium next get some of those AC's. I really miss the world of Ravenloft and Forgotton Realms. We used to leave in the mists of Ravenloft what a creepy great campaign that was.
What do people think of the organization of the AD&D 2nd edition Player's Handbook compared to some other games? There is rules scattered througout in just about every paragraph. The wording is not the best in some cases but I still find the book entertaining to read and it gets me in the D&D mood. Now that I have re-read the book I realized that I was leaving some rulses out when I was younger I have grasped the game better now and I'm eager to play again. Also this time I reading the DM guide all the way through, something I never did before so I can become a better DM.
What do people think of the organization of the AD&D 2nd edition Player's Handbook compared to some other games?
Looking back, I can see that the layout was actually fairly poor. I remember being able to naviagte it well, but that was proably just from heavy use, though we regularly discovered, and still do sometimes, rules that had fallen through the cracks and were missed after years of play. I liked that all of the charts were compiled in the back of the DMG, well most of them at any rate, though it seemed that they were just sort of shoved together at the last minute. I complain about the layout of more recent books (3.X PHB and PF CRB), but when I really do think about it, they've come a long way from where they were and where they could've ended up.
|
What do people think of the organization of the AD&D 2nd edition Player's Handbook compared to some other games? There is rules scattered througout in just about every paragraph. The wording is not the best in some cases but I still find the book entertaining to read and it gets me in the D&D mood. Now that I have re-read the book I realized that I was leaving some rulses out when I was younger I have grasped the game better now and I'm eager to play again. Also this time I reading the DM guide all the way through, something I never did before so I can become a better DM.
If you're worried about the organization of the book, have you checked out the 2e retroclone Myth & Magic? I haven't used it personally, but I understand it's supposed to be easier to read and understand. Have fun!
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 rules are scattered about in the first 124 pages of the book. I have them all down now, about to start the Dungeon Masters guide research. I have played several games in the past just want to try and sharpen my DM skills and utilize the more rules that used to slide abit. I have have had some adventures in Waterdeep, what a town that was.
I am trying to decide whether or not to get rid of all my 2nd ed stuff as I havent used it in years. Keep teetering back and forth; I have a whole lot of stuff and cant imagine using it again; but it is hard to get rid of also. There sure are some things I still like about it; the simplicty for one; all these classes just go way overboard to me and it has become much much harder to be a DM and make up npc, humanoid classed villains and such.
|
|
I am trying to decide whether or not to get rid of all my 2nd ed stuff as I havent used it in years. Keep teetering back and forth; I have a whole lot of stuff and cant imagine using it again; but it is hard to get rid of also. There sure are some things I still like about it; the simplicty for one; all these classes just go way overboard to me and it has become much much harder to be a DM and make up npc, humanoid classed villains and such.
I vote keep. It is nice to play an rpg that doesn't require a PhD from the Paizo LLC University to play!!!
Pathfinder has it's place, but the older I get the less I can be bothered investing time into making a character in terms of mechanics and the more I just want to play.
Out of the games I play semi-regularly I order them Warhammer 2e > 2e D&D > Pathfinder = 4e D&D.
So potentially you could be selling your second most fun fantasy RPG. Warhammer 2e wins however by a LONG way on my fun scale.
S.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
If you think the 2nd Edition books are poorly organized, take a half-hour to read through the 1st Edition DMG, and then go back to 2nd Edition. The difference is astonishing.
Without the skill system of 3rd Edition, the game presumes that most characters can succeed at most tasks. Everybody can swim, everybody can light a fire and forage for food. Everybody can negotiate with the town guards, to the extent that a player's skills allow.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, sure, TOZ.
Imagine a very, very stripped down role-playing game, virtually "make-believe with a combat system". You're the judge, and one of your players asks if he can grab one of the vines along the riverside and swing across the river to avoid the search party of hobgoblins.
There's nothing in that simple game system to accommodate that, so you say "Sure. Make me a Dexterity check" but you set the bar very low, because only a botch is going to indicate failure. (If you set the bar at, like, 50% or so, then players will learn that they can never have their characters try anything heroic.)
In 3rd Edition, there's a skill called Rope Use. And you can penalize the PC if he hasn't bought ranks in that skill. If he falls in, there's a skill called Swim, and you can further limit the character if he hasn't bought ranks in that. Is he trying to avoid the hobgoblins. He needs to have Move Silent and Hide. Or Feats that simulate those skill ranks.
In AD&D, before the introduction of Nonweapon Proficiencies in the Dungeoneer and Wilderness Survival Guides, a party traveling through the wilderness stops for the night, finds shelter, and makes a discrete campfire. In 3rd Edition, there are all sorts of ways a DM can make that difficult for the party. (No Survival skill, or rolled low on your checks?)
Skill systems aren't a mechanism for the referee to let player-characters do stuff. Player characters were always doing stuff. Skills are a way to prevent player characters from doing stuff. by discriminating among them in different ways.
If you think the 2nd Edition books are poorly organized, take a half-hour to read through the 1st Edition DMG, and then go back to 2nd Edition. The difference is astonishing.
True, but the disorganization was part of what made it fun to read. All kinds of disgressions on the properties of gemstones, Boot Hill conversions, cartoons, terms for prostitutes and alchemical equipment, etc.
|
|
If you think the 2nd Edition books are poorly organized, take a half-hour to read through the 1st Edition DMG, and then go back to 2nd Edition. The difference is astonishing.True, but the disorganization was part of what made it fun to read. All kinds of disgressions on the properties of gemstones, Boot Hill conversions, cartoons, terms for prostitutes and alchemical equipment, etc.
Yep, one was fun to read and helped grow my love for roleplaying. The other made me skip an entire edition.
|
I never played 2e. I used to play 1e back in the 80's, then stopped playing for 20+ years, and just came back 2 months ago. Trying 4e and Pathfinder now. But in searching for playing groups at local gaming shops recently, I actually ended up playing a session using the 1980 red box Basic Set (D&D, not AD&D).
I have been thinking alot of late about digging out and rereading my 2e books.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So now I've read that both skills and feats take away and limit character options. Interesting.If you're interested when you get back for good, I could run you through some 1e gaming if you like.
Mmm, not really. I'll take a limiting of my characters options over never knowing if my character can do something. I'm not really looking to play Mother May I with the DM for every action.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Playing a cleric of Mask (with some weird kit/specialization stuff) in a really long running Forgotten Realms campaign.
The more I play, the more the system shows its limits. Non-weapon proficiencies are cluncky and unrefined, spells are horribly unbalanced or sorely lacking, even the combat round structure has way too many grey areas.
The DM isn't happy either, but the stuff he'd have to change updating the whole game to a later edition is honestly way too much.
If by clunky and unrefined, you mean that they were not described with the same degree of crunch - er - clarity - er - this is what you can do with said skill and that's that - then yes, they are unrefined and clunky. Refreshingly so for me. NWPs were never meant to be used like a skill system. They meant to cover a broad smattering of interelated skills without having to have everything spelled out.
Spells are horribly unbalanced? Every edition has had that problem. It's the nature of magic.
The combat round structure has too many grey areas? Yes, in that it is not a tactical 6 second round, it's a cinematic, story oriented one minute round.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not really looking to play Mother May I with the DM for every action.
But with 3.x and PF, many of the DC's are set by the DM/GM. There is little difference between the GM telling you that your character has a x% chance of succeeding, or he needs to beat a DC of x...
|
|
But with 3.x and PF, many of the DC's are set by the DM/GM. There is little difference between the GM telling you that your character has a x% chance of succeeding, or he needs to beat a DC of x...
Actually, there is a difference. I can put points into a skill, which tells the DM that I want to be good at it. If there is a baseline DC, I can see how consistent the DM is being, whereas if he is just making a gut call he will almost certainly be inconsistent.
|
|
If there is a baseline DC, I can see how consistent the DM is being, whereas if he is just making a gut call he will almost certainly be inconsistent.
Just using Paizo's APs and modules for example, the DC for doing things are all over the place. One says the DC is 30, another says the DC is 15...
Sure much of that is built-in (and thus unseen) situational modifiers, but that is my point; a GM is not always going to tell you what the modifiers are for a DC, even if the baseline DC for the given task is in the Core Rulebook...
So it's going to be inconsistent at times...
The same thing applied to giving actions a percentage chance of success or failure; the DM made a gut call and rolled with it...
So it was at times, inconsistent...
Good to hear people are still enjoying the 2nd edition. Spread it around and make the game come alive again.
I just finished rereading the 2nd Edition Player's Handbook and now have the rules down solid. Now I'm diving into the Dungeon Master's guide because I never read it, I just became a DM off of watching others. The paintings in the Dungeon Master's guide look amazing still to this day. I hope one day Pathfinder can get their art up to par with the D&D 2nd edition. The Monster Manual is in the mail on the way too! I can't wait to get back to playing some 2nd edition.
|
|
I am DMing Rise of the Runelords using 2nd edition. We just finished Hook Mountain. It is fantastic.
That is really interesting and never occurred to me. For all the balancing 3e was meant to usher in I think is broke more than it fixed at higher levels. I REALLY love Paizo's AP's but due to the fundamental flawed rules of high level 3e play we NEVER finished one. The last one was 'again' ruled by the Druid & Cleric destroying everything and the Wizard coming a close second. The Rogue was at his most useful when getting us pizza. 2e Thieves are much more useful then their d20 counter-part.
Might have to look into this for the next AP (the werewolf one, whatever that is called) that I intend to run. I have been putting it off as under 3.5e things were bad under PF (after reading the AM thread) I'm very afraid the adventure will devolve into the PC's showing of their 'awesome builds' and missing the whole point of the story...
S.
|
|
Good to hear people are still enjoying the 2nd edition. Spread it around and make the game come alive again.
I just finished rereading the 2nd Edition Player's Handbook and now have the rules down solid. Now I'm diving into the Dungeon Master's guide because I never read it, I just became a DM off of watching others. The paintings in the Dungeon Master's guide look amazing still to this day. I hope one day Pathfinder can get their art up to par with the D&D 2nd edition. The Monster Manual is in the mail on the way too! I can't wait to get back to playing some 2nd edition.
If you are grabbing the 'Black cover' three books then I would suggest perhaps you consider the Complete Pscionists Handbook. NOT for the players, but things like the Mindflayer and Gemstone Dragons in the MM have psionic abilities detailed in this book. Not required as they give suggestions on using magic spells as proxies. Unless you really want to change the nature of the Keep It Simple Stupid than don't stress about the Options books.
S.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The difference I see, is that with the skill system the player can actually make choices to affect the outcome.
The NWP system worked very much like the Skill system of 3e. I fail to see a huge difference. Skills that are controlled by a Stat in some way, if anything the NWP gives the player I clearer idea of their success chance, assuming no situation modifiers.
S.
Good to hear people are still enjoying the 2nd edition. Spread it around and make the game come alive again.
I just finished rereading the 2nd Edition Player's Handbook and now have the rules down solid. Now I'm diving into the Dungeon Master's guide because I never read it, I just became a DM off of watching others. The paintings in the Dungeon Master's guide look amazing still to this day. I hope one day Pathfinder can get their art up to par with the D&D 2nd edition. The Monster Manual is in the mail on the way too! I can't wait to get back to playing some 2nd edition.
If you are grabbing the 'Black cover' three books then I would suggest perhaps you consider the Complete Pscionists Handbook. NOT for the players, but things like the Mindflayer and Gemstone Dragons in the MM have psionic abilities detailed in this book. Not required as they give suggestions on using magic spells as proxies. Unless you really want to change the nature of the Keep It Simple Stupid than don't stress about the Options books.
S.
I am using the black cover monster Compendium with the older Player's Handbook the one that came out in 93. I used to have the Psionics handbook and I didn't like it and I never used it once.
Sorry I meant to say Player's Handbook from 1989 with the black book MC from 95. I tried to get into Psionics but seemed I was already tied up with so much I never had time to bring them into the campaign before the end. Now that I have got rid of all my gaming stuff I am having to buy much all over again and the prices are high sometimes.
Ahh yes Hackmaster I have heard about it and seen it around at the game stores. From what I am told it is a mixture of 1st edition AD&D rules with some 2nd edition AD&D rules and elements of humor. Sounds interesting I might look into it abit later.
I have played AD&D a hundred times before so I know what the game is like I just haven't played it in years. I was missing my old D&D books that's why I rebought all this stuff used.
The difference I see, is that with the skill system the player can actually make choices to affect the outcome.The NWP system worked very much like the Skill system of 3e. I fail to see a huge difference. Skills that are controlled by a Stat in some way, if anything the NWP gives the player I clearer idea of their success chance, assuming no situation modifiers.
S.
I looked at the 2E NWP system a year ago and I was surprised by how useful it was, in retrospect. For instance, it had rules for climbing (for non-thieves), jumping and swimming which was a big leap forward from 1E.
|
|
I looked at the 2E NWP system a year ago and I was surprised by how useful it was, in retrospect. For instance, it had rules for climbing (for non-thieves), jumping and swimming which was a big leap forward from 1E.The difference I see, is that with the skill system the player can actually make choices to affect the outcome.The NWP system worked very much like the Skill system of 3e. I fail to see a huge difference. Skills that are controlled by a Stat in some way, if anything the NWP gives the player I clearer idea of their success chance, assuming no situation modifiers.
S.
I am always surprised at how much stuff they packed into the 2e DMG.