alright need to know! 2e, 3e or 4e

[Legacy_lordofworms]

               I am old school, I loved 2e more than any other. (yeah I just gave my age away)

I LIKED that you had to be a different race to be any type of multiclass.
I LIKED that a human was the only way to create that one of a kind dual-class character....remember not being able to use your first classes skills until you leveled it by 1 with your new class then the excitement of using ALL your skills finally!
how about THAC0!! lol (probably THEE most confusing thing ever to explain to a new player)
remember when clerics could only use blunt weapons?


the only things I have gotten excitment out of from 4e is the pretty pictures in the monster manuals.


so how bout it, how many 2e lovers out there? and while we are at it, what about 3e and 4e?
any lovers of those out there? and why? give me some shiners on what makes YOUR edition your favorite?
and for you fellow brothers and sisters of mine that still hold the 2e torch, why is it YOUR favorite? I would love to hear...

lets keep the flames to a minimum as I am sure this could turn heated...lol
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_CBrachyrhynchos]

               I'm kind of split between 2e and 3e myself. 2e was actually a nice, minimal framework that allowed you to homebrew your own custom class around roleplay. 3e had better skill implementation and more sensible approaches to multiclassing but quickly suffered from huge feature bloat. I have a soft spot in my heart for the humor and inside jokes of 1e (Giant Space Hamsters! Gelatinous Cubes!).
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Guest_Lowlander_*]

               My first exposure was playing AD&D first edition PnP... I also played a bit of 2nd Edition PnP, but I preferred first to 2nd edition.

But AD&D, 2e and 3e all have the same feel for me.  I like them all in computer games.

3e does streamline and make many things a lot more sensible. Like no more 18(78) strength.

3.5e as in NWN2 goes too far, too many stacking feats/abilities and crazy classes. Feels more PRC fan creation than a serious balanced work. You can build a character that gets double intelligence bonuse to damage for instance... Many oddities like this ruin it for me.

4e is blech... Doesn't seem remotely related to D&D in any previous form.
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Lowlander, 05 mai 2011 - 12:10 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_AndarianTD]

               I cut my AD&D teeth way back in 1980 on the 1st Edition books just after they came out. So even though some aspects of the game mechanics were primitive compared to later systems, I'll always have a soft spot in my heart for the old first edition rules. I stopped playing P&P right around when the 2nd edition came out, so while I studied them and ran some later games with the updated rules, I never had a lot of experience with them. Most of my 2e experience was with computer games that used them (e.g. BG), and my only real experience with 3e (again, aside from buying and skimming the books) was playing NWN and NWN2. And I know nothing about 4e.

I'm not sure I can easily answer which edition is my favorite. Each has its own charm in my mind. I really like the flexibility of 3e in terms of using and customizing skills, and I definitely did find the multi-classing restrictions of the earler editions to be arbitrary and annoying (even if I did understand them from a game balance perspective). But there was a charming kind of "untamed wild west" feel to the 1e rules that I'll probably never forget -- because it's what came first before we had enough gaming experience to start refining the rules to be more systmatic. I felt like I had more room to improvise with 1e, but I may be biased since I was the DM and was actually the one who got to do most of the improvising. '>
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Beerfish]

               Bwa ha ha 1E!  Like Andarian I'm........experienced (ie old)
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_omen_shepperd]

               The first time I can remember hearing about dungeons and
dragons in 1984 when I was nine years old almost turning ten. The kids in the
elementary school that played informed me I could not play until I was ten. Therefore,
I can remember the buildup of excitement over four months until I could finely
play. My first real D&D was the red basic D&D box set followed by the
blue expert set, and a few more I cannot remember the names of. I soon got into
first edition D&D when I found modules at a bookstore at the old mall.

 I really did not
learn about role-playing until second edition came out. I think I can safely
say it was my favorite edition mostly due to my owning almost every book made
for it. I lost so much in a flood years ago, it would take the rest of my
lifetime hunting down and buying it all back.

I played both 3.0 and 3.5 and enjoyed it variety it offered.
However, as I soon found out it had flaws that when exploited created legal
mega uber PC’s. This is what angered more than one group of gamers that I and a
couple of my friends played with. Hence, why we are still looking for a gaming
group to this day.

I purchased a number of the fourth edition book’s and read
through them. I have not played the new edition yet but I found one of my old
second edition groups and will be trying the game out with them.

I mostly play Rifts and Heroes Unlimited now. Besides NWN kind
of filled in the void of D&D for me.

 
               
               

               

                     Modifié par omen_shepperd, 05 mai 2011 - 05:14 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Aleron]

               Haven't played much 2E outside of baldur's gate (compy game) so don't feel I have enough to comment there. I can say parts still confuse the hell out of me (lower AC = better? wth!).

Personally I love 3.0/3.5 since that was what I got started on. I've played it the longest and it has all the nostalgia and good memories associated with it. My personal favourite is the Pathfinder version though. Excellently done and soon as I can get a group you can bet I'll be playing it. Awesome fun and unlimited levels and advancement or unti your DM got sick of it lol.

I like 4E for the ease of learning and the balance. For new players it is unparalleled. However, the various lore changes and similar they introduced into the settings means I generally actually stick to 3.0 lore for whatever I run but use 4th ed system. I'm also not big on the "skill challenges" but I can understand why they were added.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Elhanan]

               Been playing D&D since 1975; using copies of the old soft bound booklets. No polyhedral die; just d6's. pizza, pencil, paper, and imagination. Great fun, but vague.

AD&D was cool, and was where I spent my majority of a time as a player. But even then, the majority of games I pref were seasoned with House rules.

2E had some great settings (eg; Al-Qadim, Ravenloft), but I hated the plethora of books, esp for Kits.

Since that time, my fave general design is 3E, mainly because I do not like race and class restrictions. I already had quite a collection of various rules from many games I was using,  but pushed most aside with 3E. And while 3.5 had some good suggestions and fixes, I still prefer 3E for the beasic structure.

Then came the 4E & MMO mindset, and I ran for cover. It had become all about the combat, IMO. Little to no imagination seemed to be present; just the relentless push for mapboards. minis, and extended battles. Left it all on the shelves, and have not returned.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_The Amethyst Dragon]

               I started with 2nd Edition AD&D within a couple years of its release, and played/ran it for many years.  I was a fan of the Spelljammer setting, and ran my own homebrew campaign world (a little place called Aenea).

A couple years after 3rd Edition came out I finally took the plunge and converted my homebrew campaign...and was quite pleased with the results, since it did streamline lots of the calculations and such.  I never really used prestige classes (besides the few in the DMG), so the only thing I used supplemental books for was monsters and some spells...if a PC wanted to do something different, it was easy enough to do without a bunch of extra materials.

With NWN being 3rd Edition rules-based, I found it quite easy to slip right into playing and designing stuff for this game.

I've looked through the players handbook and DMG for 4th Edition...and put it right back on the shelf after a couple minutes.  The mechanics and entire ruleset seems so far from D&D that I figure I'll never bother with it.

So for me:
1st Edition: I've seen the books (and own a couple)
2nd Edition: Nostalgia (and I've still got things I've come up with that I can mine for ideas to this day)
3rd Edition: My favorite (both PnP & NWN!)
3.5: Never bothered with it, since I already bought what I wanted for 3rd Edition.
4th Edition: Won't bother with it.

And yes, I call them "editions".  Is it that difficult to type 7 or 8 extra letters to make a complete word?  (sorry, kind of a pet peeve of mine ever since 3rd Edition came out)
               
               

               

                     Modifié par The Amethyst Dragon, 05 mai 2011 - 09:20 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Karvon]

               'Nother old school guy here; started with the original white boxed rules in JHS and played thru 2nd in PNP.  Got acquainted with 3rd via NWN1. Haven't played anything later, and no interest at all in 4th from what I've heard/seen/read.

Fav is probably the original version with house rules and 3rd party stuff like Arduin Grimore. I did, however like the whole skill thing and the variety of options provided by kits in 2nd too. 3rd seems too PC to me, with all races able to play virtually all classes equally, but it is what it is '>

Karvon
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Aleron]

               I've never really understood the hate for 4th ed, but man there is a lot of it. I suspect it is the same for 2nd ed players when they encountered 3rd ed and the like lol.

It's much more logical and easier for players to learn. Without a doubt. This is a social experience so I think there should be an easy way for new people who are interested to join. Additionally, the way they set it up it is also much easier for a new DM to learn and run a module or even something of their own.

The arguments it is like an MMO and "nothing like D&D" I've never got either tbh. Sounds a bit jaded to me or like it hasn't been tried. The core experience is still there and whether there is story or simply all combat STILL falls on the sort of DM you have. There is every bit as much opportunity for storyline and RP as every other system. It has a combat system, yeah, and personally I like the idea that a wizard can actually *GASP* cast spells instead of throwing two magic missiles a day then using a crossbow. Bleh.

I hate seeing people knock something that while it might not be their cup of tea, is having a good impact overall and getting more players interested in D&D and this world in general.

I will say the Forgotten Realms story and lore they brought along with 4th ed is total crap though lol. Also don't get me wrong, I do prefer 3.0/3.5/pathfinder myself but balancewise and for ease of learning 4th is superior.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Elhanan]

               

Aleron wrote...

I've never really understood the hate for 4th ed, but man there is a lot of it. I suspect it is the same for 2nd ed players when they encountered 3rd ed and the like lol.

It's much more logical and easier for players to learn. Without a doubt. This is a social experience so I think there should be an easy way for new people who are interested to join. Additionally, the way they set it up it is also much easier for a new DM to learn and run a module or even something of their own.

The arguments it is like an MMO and "nothing like D&D" I've never got either tbh. Sounds a bit jaded to me or like it hasn't been tried. The core experience is still there and whether there is story or simply all combat STILL falls on the sort of DM you have. There is every bit as much opportunity for storyline and RP as every other system. It has a combat system, yeah, and personally I like the idea that a wizard can actually *GASP* cast spells instead of throwing two magic missiles a day then using a crossbow. Bleh.

I hate seeing people knock something that while it might not be their cup of tea, is having a good impact overall and getting more players interested in D&D and this world in general.

I will say the Forgotten Realms story and lore they brought along with 4th ed is total crap though lol. Also don't get me wrong, I do prefer 3.0/3.5/pathfinder myself but balancewise and for ease of learning 4th is superior.

Fair enough.

However, From my Ancient POV:

* At least some of those grabbing rules marked 4E are hardly newbies, and do not require use of the wheel again.

* As an imagination first DM, this is the last system I would choose available in which to teach them the concepts. I like boards, minis, carboard cutouts, pennies, grease pencil, chalkborads, etc as aids, but cannot and am unwilling to delve into the cost of making these into a 'must have' part of play. And it does appear to be strongly flavored from MMO seting to me; another link I wish to avoid.

As for spells, I offered a House rule to my party at Character Creation for the memorization system (which I loathe personally as you illustrated), or Free casting like Bards & Sorcerers; available to all. The last party I had chose Memorization/ reg rules; their choice. Much could be said about various rules using any rule set, as I have many varied rules gathered from 35+ yrs of play.

Now if I could only halt the aging effects of fantasy & magic on the DM....
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_TSMDude]

               Wow...we are old. I still miss Basic DnD in the red box.

Where Elf and Dwarf was a class.

Back then it seemed more about character devolpment than anything else as there was what? 8 choices?

Then Advanced showed up and introduced some okay things...

Then Unearthed Arcana with the Thief Acrobat....who has not played one? Cmon you all know you have been one before....

2nd was neat because it allowed more unique house rules and character options. Still not my fav though.

I do dig 3rd and 3.5 alot as the system with the feats and skills makes a lot of sense to me.

4th...I do not know if I like it at all yet. It is purdy. It does have some features I dig but at the same time it seems to be almost...dumbed down in a sense. That it is more video gamish than regualar PnP...

So yeah...3rd, basic, 2nd, then 4th in my eyes.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Elhanan]

               In my day we only had d6's aquired from board games; no plastic pyramids and fancy folded die. A DM screen was a notebook full of written notes, and a chalkboard was considered a luxury item; more so any chalk. We wet our fingers and drew; quickly.

We had to figure out monster, spell, and ability descriptions on the fly, as well as sound effects. We had paper thin walls on maps containing the mightiest of dragons, and these were often placed in the least likely of places because Dragon's don't die; players do.

We had maps made from water-stains, distance was a best guess, and the baddest item in the room was the DM's eraser.

We had Ftr/ MU/ Cleric/ and Thief; no silly spying Rogues cause we knew what he was doing. Dwarves and Elves all looked the same; even the womenfolk. And a RL lass in the party ate free, got to go first, and could do little wrong.

*and altogther* AND WE LIKED IT!!!
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Elhanan, 05 mai 2011 - 03:11 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Aleron]

               

Elhanan wrote...
 Dwarves and Elves all looked the same; even the womenfolk.

Well some things never change...