Quote from: 2nd Edition RocksAt least mine was a typo!

I had to quote just for the rich comedy action. In case 2er wants to edit more history.

Yow, times like this I wish I had it set to send me a daily list of the posts instead of just a notice of a reply, seems I missed a lot, and don't ever get to read most of it as it's been edited away...

Oh, the bulk of it is in either his first post to the thread, or quoted later. You didn't miss much.

Quote from: 2nd Edition RocksHave a nice life!

Awww, it looks like the troll took his ball and went home.

Well, assuming he had a ball to begin with.  He was short at least one.

-O

Quote from: 2nd Edition RocksI started playing D&D way back ....(whatever year)......

The artwork.  Oh, the artwork! The artwork of 3.5 can only be described as GAS (Gay As $hit).  It looks terrible.  If I saw some of that stuff in real life (characters or monsters) I would probably die from laughter.  It used to have high quality color artwork and the women were women you would want to be seduced by.  Now, I get to look at some anime chick with a big head and a stick body.  The artwork used to be very realistic and evoke a feeling that you were really there.  Now, everybody looks like a pussy or and ugly anime chick.

If you couldn't figure out THAC0, then you're retarded!

 Before he changes and edits this post into  : Have a Nice Life ...

 I don't know what the fuck he is talking about. I LOVE some of the artwork connected to D&D 3.09/3.5. Lidda the halfling Rogue ?  She looks  VERY hot , depening on which artist is portraying her.  Hell, I'm not even playing  D&D for the most part - and yet I still rip-offd.....er um "borrow" plenty of the artwork to use with my BANESTORM game.  Some Caldwell and Parkinson stuff that was meant for 2E AD&D is quite good too.

- Ed C.

For the record, I checked the IP addresses and I don't think 2ER is a sock puppet.

Quote from: jrientsFor the record, I checked the IP addresses and I don't think 2ER is a sock puppet.

That's actually more pathetic, I think.

I frankly roll more with Elmore, Easley, Parkinson and Caldwell, if it's D&D art we're talkin'. Just appeals to me more is all.

That said...many's been the time I've wanted to whip out some AD&D 2nd Ed. and totally wail on it like a ninja wails on his ghee-tar, but I'm actually more drawn to 1st Edition.

Why?

I prefer Second Edition art -it told a story as someone once said on tBP. But I REALLY loved the artwork in the boxed (Red,Blue...what the hell was the fourth colour...and Gold) D&D sets.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David RI prefer Second Edition art -it told a story as someone once said on tBP. But I REALLY loved the artwork in the boxed (Red,Blue...what the hell was the fourth colour...and Gold) D&D sets.

Regards,
David R

Red, Blue, Teal, Black, Gold (Basic, Expert, Companion, Master, Immortals)

I know it's unpopular to say it, but I'll do it anyway. I LIKE SECOND EDITION. (AD&D, that is)

The rules aren't perfect, but they're easy enough for me to understand, and if I need to change something, I can do it in a snap. I'd also like to mention that the 2e Player's Handbook is clear, concise, and well-organized. The 2e DMG is boring, but that's ok, as it gives me the basic info I need. I plug in a few 1e rules to style things up, and I've got my magic 1e/2e hybrid. I dig that.

The 2e rules I find most useful (that I've read) are:

(1.) Player's Handbook
(2.) DMG
(3.) Monster Manual
(4.) Tome of Magic
(5.) The Complete Book of Necromancers
(6.) Vikings Campaign Sourcebook

The other stuff is unnecessary, though I have many other supplements I like.

Quote from: Sacrificial LambI know it's unpopular to say it, but I'll do it anyway. I LIKE SECOND EDITION. (AD&D, that is)

*shrug* Rock on, Lamb Dude.  I'd rather see a someone who's happy with his game, than one who's gonna poop on mine.

See?  This is how to be excellent to each other.

Quote from: Dr Rotwang!See?  This is how to be excellent to each other.

Agreed, and once we can master that vital skill, we can take the next step, and Party On Dudes!!!

Quote from: GabrielThe bad thing is that it doesn't consider player intelligence or ingenuity.  All that matters is the character build and a die roll. That's why I strongly feel Example #1 is superior.  The player's skill and attentiveness to game detail is involved.  D&D3 encourages Example 2, and downplays Example 1.

The two examples you provided aren't mutually exclusive. But more importantly, these things should, IMO, be based more on the character than on the player's intelligence and skill. Otherwise, why bother having half the ability scores? Why even bother to make up a name? Just say "I'm playing myself, but stronger and more badass than I actually am." Part of having the character is accepting that it might, in the game world, have limitations that you wouldn't.

Sure, maybe you can figure out that stupid fucking riddle that serves no purpose other than to waste time, but that doesn't mean the character has the knowledge, skill, or insight to do so. Then what you end up with is too many situations where Grog DumbOrcBarbarian, who (to paraphrase from Battlelords), couldn't spell cat if you spotted him the C and the A, suddenly can figure out some arcane 13-digit puzzle lock on the vault door, or which candles have to be moved when, etc.

"Grog am idiot savant. With big axe."

I don't have a problem with GrogIdiotSavant I. It's kind of annoying after GrogIdiotSavant XIV.

And, IMO, the art for pretty much every edition has kind of sucked, except for Brom's DS art.

I always liked Planescape's. Actually, the whole damn setting was cool. If I'd play 2nd these days, it be for the Darksun or the Planescape, actually. But considering it's just as easy to port these things over, I don't feel the need.

I don't like 2nd, but I don't have anything against those that do. It meets and exceeds their needs! That's good times. Just as long as they don't mind me playing 3rd Ed. or something over here. ^_^