tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post3460556925655379939..comments2024-03-29T00:32:33.920-04:00Comments on GROGNARDIA: 2e LoveJames Maliszewskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comBlogger89125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-33271820321545954062009-09-16T09:10:28.886-04:002009-09-16T09:10:28.886-04:00i created a site to celebrate AD&D 2nd edition...i created a site to celebrate AD&D 2nd edition and to argue that, in some ways, it was better than current D&D (from 3.0 on).<br /><br />For those who are able to read italian language, it's here:<br /><br />http://addsecondaedizione.blogspot.com/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-8107000897386861022009-08-08T11:35:31.944-04:002009-08-08T11:35:31.944-04:00It is ridiculous and rather pitiful that the very ...It is ridiculous and rather pitiful that the very small gaming community tends to splinter into mutually hostile subcamps based upon arcane disagreements about which rules system is optimal.<br /><br />The rules are just an interface. D&D is fun because it brings intelligent and imaginative people together in the collective creation of an epic fantasy saga. If you do it right, that saga is more compelling than a mere novel, because the players' strategic creativity and roleplaying flair take the narrative in unexpected directions, with results that range from comic to tragic to truly inspiring. <br /><br />Squabbles over rules systems only contribute to the continued anemia of our already marginalized, misunderstood, stigmatized and maligned hobby. Given the degree of external intolerance our pastime faces, we would be wise to be more tolerant of one another.Brian MacKenziehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12752842049666489041noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-24141291924800832862009-08-08T02:17:02.576-04:002009-08-08T02:17:02.576-04:00I don't think I EVER saw anyone use a kit or a...<i>I don't think I EVER saw anyone use a kit or a power in them. I was the only one I knew to use anything out of one, and that was the Humanoids book and its selection of more PC races. Not the powers or kits.</i><br /><br />Excellent recollection... I never did either. I abhorred kits; hate prestige classes almost as much. I never cared for multiclassing either and that's an unpopular position with players. Give me base classes! But the combinations (along with race) are more ridiculous than they've ever been. I mean what is a half-dragon fighter/rogue/cleric/wizard anyway if not just plain confused?<br /><br />Word verification: reekin. How prophetic. ;)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03078137184651956189noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-57964516170729955012009-08-07T23:38:27.689-04:002009-08-07T23:38:27.689-04:00(9_9)
Who said they were forced to use anything? ...(9_9)<br /><br />Who said they were forced to use anything? I wholeheartedly embraced 2e when it came out. 3e as well. I enjoyed them both. Am I <em>bound</em> to now not admit to not liking anything about them? In any case, I’d much rather read criticism from someone who actually gave a game an honest try.<br /><br />RPGs are a coöperative activity, so not every individual at the table gets to play with exactly the set of rules they want to. I happily leave the choice of rules up to whoever is willing to GM. Does that take away my right to comment on those rules?<br /><br />And who ever denied that there were people in the ’80s that didn’t like 1e? I <em>was</em> one of those people. But I now feel that in many ways I was unfair to those rules, and I no longer feel that other games are clearly superior as I once did.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16733274876782876659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-42923671106132856372009-08-07T23:18:58.962-04:002009-08-07T23:18:58.962-04:00"Even in the 80s lots of people found AD&..."Even in the 80s lots of people found AD&D's idiosyncracies stupid and pointless."<br /><br />Yes, but there's no accounting for taste. I'm sure there are people out there who hate chocolate, sex, and the music of Beethoven.Will Mistrettahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18403399118961902073noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-9529805136233675042009-08-07T19:44:36.225-04:002009-08-07T19:44:36.225-04:00"They changed A, and left out B, and ..."..."They changed A, and left out B, and ..."<br />Hold on. How did you know this?<br />"What do you mean? I had my 1E books!"<br />Ah. Please continue. 'And ...'<br />"Uh, yeah ... and they put out all these option books and settings ..."<br />Hold on. So, you <i>had</i> A and B, but somehow could not use them; and you did <i>not</i> have these other things, yet somehow were forced to use them? How does that work?<br />"Well, uh, like, you ever see The Wizard of Oz? Yeah? You know those winged monkey things the Wicked Witch had? Right, so TSR had a whole <i>army</i> of them, man. They'd swoop down, and, and the next thing I knew, I was in a store, see, and I, I just couldn't <i>help myself</i>! For the love of God, <b>stop me before I buy again</b>! Aaaagh!"Dwayanuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07388657516129827977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-12263400940977521432009-08-07T17:13:14.879-04:002009-08-07T17:13:14.879-04:00What's interesting is at the time 2nd ed was k...What's interesting is at the time 2nd ed was king (because its got D&D on the cover and is thus the de facto most popular RPG regardless of quality as it pretty much has been since 79 or so..) nobody really cared if it was first or 2nd ed. We al pretty much used all the books together. UA, 1st ed MM, Basic... we just took whatever the hell we wanted and didn't really care. It all worked together and nobody ever played AD&D with the full on rules as Gary had wrote.<br /><br />(Mainly because playing full on AD&D with all of Gary's will was something nobody I ever met would want to endure. It would be like playing full on Advanced Squad Leader.)<br /><br />I ran it closer to the Gold Box series except without minis. Most other DMs were about the same.<br /><br />2nd ed was actually far more readable and usable than 1st ed, and many things most people ignored anyhow were in nice optional rules boxes.<br /><br />If anything 2nd ed's biggest flaw was that it was too close to 1st ed, instead of being closer to the streamlined awesome of Moldvay/Mentzer/Cook Basic D&D which is more how most people really played it.<br /><br />Plus these oh so horrible complete books and the Player's Option series?<br /><br />I don't think I EVER saw anyone use a kit or a power in them. I was the only one I knew to use anything out of one, and that was the Humanoids book and its selection of more PC races. Not the powers or kits.<br /><br />My distaste for 2nd is really a distaste for AD&D 1 and 2 in general.<br /><br />Once you see games like Call of Cthulhu and D6 Star Wars the needlessly complex for no reason, fidgety, and Garyism filled AD&D games with its multitude of resolution mechanics that really could have been a base percentile system just falls flat to me.<br /><br />Plus I got into RPGs from the electronic side and things like racial and gender based limits on classes never made any bloody sense to begin with.<br /><br />See 1st ed worshippers? Even in the 80s lots of people found AD&D's idiosyncracies stupid and pointless.<br /><br />(What a better gaming world we would have if Tunnels & Trolls or Runequest had managed to pull ahead or equal with D&D in mindshare...)<br /><br />And now we just get to argue 4 editions worth of differences with each other online, with every group seemingly disdaining every other one.Captain Rufushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00296697477771399357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-70850653964996579612009-08-07T13:56:20.733-04:002009-08-07T13:56:20.733-04:00I don't remember making much of a distinction....<i>I don't remember making much of a distinction. Book editions were on the gaming table. And when someone said, "Can I see the player's for a second?" they got the one closest at hand.</i><br /><br />This is true for me as well, though more applicable to the DMG. The things TSR failed to carry forward into 2E I continued to use from 1E, particularly the "idea and adjective" indexes of the DMG, including:<br /><br />Appendix G: Traps<br />Appendix H: Tricks<br />Appendix I: Dungeon Dressing<br />Appendix J: Herbs, Spices and Medicinal Vegetables<br />Appendix K: Describing Magic Substances<br /><br />Appendix N (Inspirational and Educational Reading) should have been republished as well.<br /><br />One of the things each successive version of D&D increasingly fails at is education, about itself and the things its based on. Players can also no longer expect or hope to have the game "hook into" real world knowledge from the game at all, about armor, weapons, herbs, history or anything else. In some cases it even misinforms; somewhere, someone thinks the Urgosh is a "real" weapon and belladonna is the classic cure for lycanthropy.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03078137184651956189noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-58246619984049570022009-08-06T14:54:28.439-04:002009-08-06T14:54:28.439-04:00“This is a concern for D&D throughout the last...“<b>This is a concern for D&D throughout the last two decades actually</b>...”<br /><br />You know, Wally, there was a time when I think I would’ve agreed whole-heartedly with everything you wrote in that comment. Today, however, I genuinely prefer classic D&D to GURPS. (Not to mention a good number of other games on my shelf.)Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16733274876782876659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-76451176108695697972009-08-06T12:44:21.448-04:002009-08-06T12:44:21.448-04:00Carl: I must have missed your comment above. Thin...Carl: I must have missed your comment above. Things seem to get kind of crotchety around here some of the time and it makes things a bit frenetic.;)<br /><br />I've said before in other places that Gary's style, voice, and intent are quite overbearing, even if you enjoy them. Sometimes, I really want to play 1e games, and for that I'll grab my old books. But for the most part, I like a more neutral book to which I can apply anything else I want.<br /><br />As for the mercantalism bent of TSR in that day . . . I can only say this:<br /><br />WELL DUH!<br /><br />I'll never defend what TSR did in some ways. They truly took the comodification of fun to absurd levels compared to what had gone before, though it still pales compared to the supplement of the week attitude of 3.x and 4e. In a lot of ways, it was a very bad thing, but I will say that if it weren't for that style, D&D would probably have died entirely at that point and would never have made it to the point where WOTC could have picked it up.<br /><br />In a twisted and evil sort of way, Williams saved D&D.Hamlethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05135081554790749914noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-16629993688658422922009-08-06T12:32:40.017-04:002009-08-06T12:32:40.017-04:00@Hamlet -
I made that point above, and then Will ...@Hamlet -<br /><br />I made that point above, and then Will pointed out that <br /><i>"there's no upside to 'removing some of the default flavor from the core rules.' And I don't think that's wise or proper, since the core rules are the one and only thing that are assumed to be used by all players."</i><br /><br />I still agree with you that the more neutral tone of the core rules allowed 2e to go some many wildly different places, not just for published campaign worlds but for your own if you wanted to create them. I also think that Will's point is a good one and probably points to a conscious decision by TSR to push consumers towards buying published campaign settings. The PHB and DMG are less inspiring, IMO, for a potential worldbuilder.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07648499022366444265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-59544227955508103022009-08-06T12:02:13.961-04:002009-08-06T12:02:13.961-04:00The most common theme is that the settings were th...The most common theme is that the settings were the strength of 2nd edition. I think that's getting it backwards.<br /><br />Rather, the neutral tone of the rules books (i.e., mostly divorced of Gary speak and Greyhawk specific material) is its greatest strength because it allows those rules to be applied better to various styles of play whether they be survival fantasy, pulp fantasy, pirate adventure, space fantasy, whatever you care to play.Hamlethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05135081554790749914noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-70994665802016239562009-08-06T11:16:36.985-04:002009-08-06T11:16:36.985-04:00To speak deepest heresy 3E is about what 2E should...<em>To speak deepest heresy 3E is about what 2E should have been if it wanted to be anything more than "AD&D revised".</em><br /><br />Yes.Whttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12215651059418273961noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-1258103578102131982009-08-06T11:15:57.706-04:002009-08-06T11:15:57.706-04:00I also think there is much to the “between two wor...<em>I also think there is much to the “between two worlds” thing. 2e had a lot of good ideas that—for me—weren’t implemented well or didn’t go far enough.</em><br /><br />This is a concern for D&D throughout the last two decades actually - long predating 2e. OD&D and AD&D were never much as simulations, but were also unwieldy tools ill-suited to complex 'roleplaying.' They clearly wanted to solve certain problems, but it's not clear to me <em>which</em> those might be.<br /><br />2e attempted to remedy this situation by providing lots of raw story material; 3e attempted to solve it by rationalizing mechanics and balancing the math (to make customization and the like easier, among other reasons).<br /><br />Meanwhile both systems were surpassed in every measure - GURPS had the swell crunch and variety, any of a dozen systems had the flavour, games like Over the Edge and Feng Shui pushed forward toward storytelling mechanics that materially <em>aided</em> storytelling, etc. White Wolf showed, if nothing else, that power fantasies needn't involve swords and sorcery (along with WW's mechanics/design innovations - have you ever read one of the scenarios from the new Changeling game? They're bracing stuff).<br /><br />To say nothing of <em>actually</em> mature systems like Call of Cthulhu.<br /><br />The D&D line has always contained a healthy dose of neat ideas. But D&D has rarely been the go-to game for elegant implementations of design ideas.<br /><br />(Though I'd argue that that's no longer true. But never mind.)Whttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12215651059418273961noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-77469946624295833132009-08-06T11:10:08.970-04:002009-08-06T11:10:08.970-04:00I've long considered 2E to be a ruleset outcla...I've long considered 2E to be a ruleset outclassed by its setting material. To speak deepest heresy 3E is about what 2E should have been if it wanted to be anything more than "AD&D revised".<br /><br />I can't bring myself to actively dislike the edition that gave us material like Planescape, Dark Sun, Birthright, Al-Qadim, etc. <br /><br />To be honest though, even when we had the 2E books we were really always playing a cargo cult mash-up of BD&D/1E during the 2E era.Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04072272223837426211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-4663425121244256962009-08-06T11:02:33.240-04:002009-08-06T11:02:33.240-04:00Removing mature themed items from the game (assass...<em>Removing mature themed items from the game (assassins, half-orcs, demons, and devils) was just part of this shift.</em><br /><br />This must be some usage of the word 'mature' I'm not familiar with.<br /><br />AD&D's handling of those topics has never, ever been 'mature.' That's just PR gobbledygook. This usage does shine a light on one of the cultural archaisms of D&D though: the 'pulp morality' that let(s) grownups feel good about playing in a fantasy world in which good, evil, law, and chaos were <em>clearly labelled</em>, by allowing them to play characters who were Just Not Very Nice.<br /><br />I'm not trolling here, just trying to point out that when people talk about 'paradigm shifts' and 'major changes' they're describing a much smaller-scale conceptual transition than they think they are. Marketing juvenilia to children instead of marketing juvenilia to adults sounds more like honesty than betrayal to me.Whttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12215651059418273961noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-27149389618719677142009-08-06T08:37:29.831-04:002009-08-06T08:37:29.831-04:00Anyway James my other post which somehow didn'...<i>Anyway James my other post which somehow didn't make it was to say thank you James for giving people who enjoyed 2ed a chance to express why.</i><br /><br>You're very welcome. As I say, it's not my edition of choice, but so many people involved in the old school revival started off with it that, whatever flaws I perceive in it, they obviously weren't enough to snuff out an appreciation for the Old Ways. And that's what really counts.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-67766513198317849682009-08-06T07:42:04.271-04:002009-08-06T07:42:04.271-04:00I have to agree. I don't dislike 2nd Ed, I di...I have to agree. I don't dislike 2nd Ed, I dislike what 2nd Ed meant. Now I have fond memories of playing 2e when it first came out and the glee of getting those huge oversized Monstrous Compendium binders. But I hated the later end of 2e. <br /><br />One day maybe I'll pull down my 2E books again. Who knows really.Timothy S. Brannanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02923526503305233715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-91810842303588757662009-08-06T06:47:01.270-04:002009-08-06T06:47:01.270-04:00I will finally add that I "moved" from M...I will finally add that I "moved" from Mentzer to 2e, and only in the last 3 or 4 years I "discovered" 1e (it was not easy to get those books in Italy). Knowing 2e helped me a lot to understand 1e, at least in terms of rules, which for about 90% are the same. The flavor is definitely different as someone pointed out, but 2e took flavor from its settings, not something "built" into the rules, or the writing style of Gygax. I can also see where 1e material needed to be better organised. I never had problems with finding rules in the 2e books, whereas with 1e it's somewhat more of a "hunt". If I had to start playing AD&D with 1e, I would probably never got into the game (and the fact that my native language is not english would surely not help)Antoniohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17258180992723371727noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-64198230120552841112009-08-06T06:40:37.854-04:002009-08-06T06:40:37.854-04:00Also, many oldschoolers seem to be more royalist t...Also, many oldschoolers seem to be more royalist than the king. Even Gary Gygax defined 2e as "a passable version of the game". And it seems that Frank Mentzer uses it along with 1e.Antoniohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17258180992723371727noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-1141178282038509202009-08-06T06:38:40.990-04:002009-08-06T06:38:40.990-04:00The problems arise when dislike for the game trans...The problems arise when dislike for the game translates into personal attacks toward people who likes it, or people who worked on it. Tastes seem to become something objective. This is juvenile at best, pathetic at worst. I like 1e, 2e, classic etc. and I play them all. I would never dream of calling an "idiot" someone who plays 4e. I do not like it, and that's all. Yet, abrasive and offensive behaviour seems to be a "trademark" of some oldschooler.Antoniohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17258180992723371727noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-43959863165995242712009-08-06T05:17:27.750-04:002009-08-06T05:17:27.750-04:00I'll cop to liking AD&D2e. As Lee so right...I'll cop to liking AD&D2e. As Lee so rightly put it, 2e was better organized than 1e, at the cost of some of the Gygaxian charm. <br /><br />Also, 2e's idea of kits, especially the ones for clerics, was a basically sound way of diversifying character classes without adding new ones.Slaughtermillhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11970436092152284178noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-33536460845441340812009-08-05T22:31:18.472-04:002009-08-05T22:31:18.472-04:00good point Will. Perhaps that is exactly why 2e w...good point Will. Perhaps that is exactly why 2e will forever be remember for its settings, and not its rules.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07648499022366444265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-18571538277667670332009-08-05T22:31:09.094-04:002009-08-05T22:31:09.094-04:00I'll give it some love, I can't see the ne...I'll give it some love, I can't see the need for the hate. I played 1e for something like 8 years, and switched smoothly to 2nd. I don't think our group(s) made any real distinction about flavor or feel or atmosphere. We used some options, left a lot out, made up some house rules.<br /><br />System-bloat is not a problem for me. We ignored Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance entirely, nearly everyone I played with ran Greyhawk or Greyhawk-like homebrew worlds. {Me, I fell for Birthright when it appeared.} Maybe that's why I don't feel any hate. We did like most of the brown books (except the elves, we didn't like them in the first place) and all of the green books.<br /><br />When Player's Options appeared, we grabbed onto that and experimented with them. If 3e hadn't come along, I suspect my group would have regularly used 30-40% of the PO things, depending on the DM. They were similar to our own house rules, anyway.<br /><br />I have been playing 3e/3.5 since they came out, but there was some debate before it happened. We have not really adopted 4e as a group, and it may be a long time before we do. As we've aged, playing time (and rules-adaptation time) has dwindled a lot. I do not feel as comfortable as a 3.5 DM, rules-mastery-wise, as I did in 2e, and I think lack of time spent is a bigger reason than rules-intricacy. (I play Star Fleet Battles, I have +4 to saves vs. Fear of a rulebook!)<br /><br />I have sons 10 and 7, and I think I would like to try breaking them in with 2e first, especially when they want to read the books and take up DMing. <br /><br />Someone above commented that the 1e books are more fun to read, and another that the 2e books are much better organized. I *strongly* agree with both opinions. <br /><br />It may just be nostalgia, but I would like to give either (both!) editions a whirl again someday.Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13103472744612438430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-27263941452021270702009-08-05T22:23:06.380-04:002009-08-05T22:23:06.380-04:00"I personally feel like 2e couldn't have ..."I personally feel like 2e couldn't have had all those varied settings (everything from flying around in space to the outer planes, and two deserts in between!) without removing some of the default flavor from the core rules."<br /><br />This is getting into the larger issue of whether prepackaged campaign world sets are secondary optional elements or some vital component of the game.<br /><br />For those of us who don't use them, there's no upside to "removing some of the default flavor from the core rules." And I don't think that's wise or proper, since the core rules are the one and only thing that are assumed to be used by all players.Will Mistrettahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18403399118961902073noreply@blogger.com