Quote from: Razor 007;1077937How about using the 1E DMG and 1E MM, with the 2E PHB?  I like it!!!

That's what I did, back in the day!

Quote from: Brad;1077875 2nd turned Greyhawk OD&D into a very bland generic fantasy game.

Very much this for me. And Karemeikos from BX. And from what I have heard, others felt the same for Forgotten Realms.

In all three they had to fill in every single freaking blank and pack a town what feels like every freaking other hex and each setting lost its openness and "make of it what you will" framework.

Quote from: Razor 007;1077937How about using the 1E DMG and 1E MM, with the 2E PHB?  I like it!!!

Quote from: Brad;1077941That's actually not a bad idea at all.

Quote from: amacris;1077949I'm in. When does the campaign start!

No thanks. I prefer Aragorn to Drizzt.

Quote from: Shasarak;10779532e should be most famous for the DnD Setting support and for my favorite Spelljammer.

I am not really seeing how 2e is any more 'boring' then 1e.  :confused:

Rules wise, 2nd was so close to AD&D, I don't think it was. Most people could and did continue to use their 1st edition stuff when 2nd came out. You could easily ignore the rules you didn't like.
Settings, 2nd edition marks the infamous period where TSR sanitized itself to avoid the moral panic of the time. Renaming demons and devils, and taking out the minor nudity (mostly boobies) in the art.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1078032Rules wise, 2nd was so close to AD&D, I don't think it was. Most people could and did continue to use their 1st edition stuff when 2nd came out. You could easily ignore the rules you didn't like.
Settings, 2nd edition marks the infamous period where TSR sanitized itself to avoid the moral panic of the time. Renaming demons and devils, and taking out the minor nudity (mostly boobies) in the art.

I asked my gaming group this question last night and the main consensus was that some of the character rules changed, for example a Thief can split his skill pool rather then advancing a fixed amount per level.  No one could agree that would make the game more boring though.

I've never seen a reason to use anything beyond 1E. If there were changes or additions to the rules that anyone wanted to incorporate for their own world/campaigns then just do it.
DIY, that was the underlying premise of D&D to begin with.
Everything else was just marketing.

I remember buying 2e on the day it came out in the UK, from Hamleys no less. I read it on the way back...and was hugely underwhelmed. At the very least I expected THAC0 to go away.

Quote from: Son of Warvan;1078105I've never seen a reason to use anything beyond 1E. If there were changes or additions to the rules that anyone wanted to incorporate for their own world/campaigns then just do it.
DIY, that was the underlying premise of D&D to begin with.
Everything else was just marketing.

I respect those who are still rocking 1E AD&D.  But there are also those who are still rocking OD&D.

Quote from: Snowman0147;1077819Edit:  Upon reading my comment I realized I am not clear to what I meant.  What was I trying to say is did the edition made a simple formula to handle THACO?  

ThAC0 was around before 2e.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1078032Rules wise, 2nd was so close to AD&D, I don't think it was. Most people could and did continue to use their 1st edition stuff when 2nd came out. You could easily ignore the rules you didn't like.
Settings, 2nd edition marks the infamous period where TSR sanitized itself to avoid the moral panic of the time. Renaming demons and devils, and taking out the minor nudity (mostly boobies) in the art.

We still used classes from the 1E PHB in our games. I think they had some good settings in 2E. Quality-wise things were all over the map, and in terms of content, it was very PG (occasionally PG-13). Still I'd be lying if I said I didn't adore Ravenloft when it came out (but then I think because it had kind of a black and white horror movie vibe, the toning down of some of the content to avoid the moral panic didn't feel so out of place). Dark Sun was pretty good too. I remember liking Al-Qadim as well (though I think I did end up trading it with someone for some Ravenloft material). Also, while I wasn't hugely into Krynn, I did like the Taladas boxed set. And I remember liking a lot of the Green Books. It has been a while so I don't remember if the green books were particularly accurate, but they were partly responsible for getting me interested in stuff like Rome. So they at least sparked my historical curiosity in a good way.

Quote from: Shasarak;1078083I asked my gaming group this question last night and the main consensus was that some of the character rules changed, for example a Thief can split his skill pool rather then advancing a fixed amount per level.  No one could agree that would make the game more boring though.

They also took out the assassin, which I think almost impacted some of the novel content in weird ways (RA Salvatore mentioned something about this in an interview where I think they wanted him to change or remove Artemis Entreri because the assassin was being taken out of the game----and so he responded by saying he wasn't an assassin but some kind of multi-class character (so he could keep the character as is).

The scrutiny D&D was under was pretty intense at the time. And it was very easy for people to get set off from a single poorly done news story on the subject (and it was kind of bound up in a lot of other things that were worrying people at the time----recovered memories, cults, etc). I think the Dead Alewives sketch on the topic pretty much captures how stupid that idea was. Playing D&D pretty much, for the most part, meant you were avoiding less savory activities. Exceptions of course.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1078876They also took out the assassin, which I think almost impacted some of the novel content in weird ways (RA Salvatore mentioned something about this in an interview where I think they wanted him to change or remove Artemis Entreri because the assassin was being taken out of the game----and so he responded by saying he wasn't an assassin but some kind of multi-class character (so he could keep the character as is).

   I think that had more to do with the way the Forgotten Realms wound up taking the assassin out of the game--by having Bhaal absorb all their souls during the Time of Troubles. And Zeb Cook claimed, at least at the time, that the reason for the removal of the assassin was less 'angry mothers getting the wrong impression about the game' than 'immature players turning off new players by using the assassin as cheap PvP."

No it does not.  The amount of vitriol the game gets is amazing to this day.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1078880'immature players turning off new players by using the assassin as cheap PvP."

I saw that happen at first hand in a game. And he killed a brand new first time player as well. Way to grow the hobby asshat. The DM should have intervened and had the character struck by a freak bolt of lightning. because, you know, that just happens sometimes...

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1078876They also took out the assassin, which I think almost impacted some of the novel content in weird ways (RA Salvatore mentioned something about this in an interview where I think they wanted him to change or remove Artemis Entreri because the assassin was being taken out of the game----and so he responded by saying he wasn't an assassin but some kind of multi-class character (so he could keep the character as is).

I never considered how Entreri may have been effected by the Time of Troubles.  I dont think that there were any novels that detailed their adventures during that time.  I have to give props to Salvatore though, that was quick thinking on his feet - a sign of a great DM!  Look what he had to do to keep writing Drizzt novels during the 4e era.

QuoteThe scrutiny D&D was under was pretty intense at the time. And it was very easy for people to get set off from a single poorly done news story on the subject (and it was kind of bound up in a lot of other things that were worrying people at the time----recovered memories, cults, etc). I think the Dead Alewives sketch on the topic pretty much captures how stupid that idea was. Playing D&D pretty much, for the most part, meant you were avoiding less savory activities. Exceptions of course.

You know the funny thing that highly amuses me about changing Demons and Devils, the things were still in the game just called a different name!  If someone had actually read the books then they would have seen exactly the same stuff that they were complaining about.  Talk about Dog Whistles.