What is your favorite edition of D&D to play
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
Poll: Favorite version of Dungeons &  Dragons

1st Ed. 58%       58%  [ 21 ]
2nd Ed. 17%       17%  [ 6 ]
3rd Ed. 14%       14%  [ 5 ]
Basic D&D 6%       6%  [ 2 ]
Original D&D 3%       3%  [ 1 ]
What! people play this game? 3%       3%  [ 1 ]
Total votes : 36

Author

User avatar

Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3593
Joined: Dec 20, 2003
Last Visit: Jul 27, 2021
Location: Canada

Post Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2004 3:38 pm 
 

Just curious of all the editions of D&D that are out there, which ones are everybodies favorite to play. :roll:  :roll:


Games can get you through times of no money but money can not get you through times of no games!!

 WWW  


Prolific Collector

Posts: 193
Joined: Nov 05, 2002
Last Visit: Jul 18, 2012
Location: Charleston, SC

Post Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2004 7:27 pm 
 

I voted 1st ed. but I must admit v3.5 is growing on me :oops:

 WWW  

User avatar

Verbose Collector
Acaeum Donor
Valuation Board

Posts: 1148
Joined: Nov 07, 2003
Last Visit: Jul 23, 2021
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Post Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2004 8:57 pm 
 

Started with 1st, transitioned to 2nd when it came out and did the most playing with that edition.  Tried 3.0 when it came out, didn't like it at all.



 WWW  


Prolific Collector

Posts: 350
Joined: Feb 19, 2003
Last Visit: Apr 03, 2018
Location: CA

Post Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2004 10:12 pm 
 

3.0+ is for WIMPS!  Man.. can a character even DIE in 3.0?  All they need is Spandex outfits and they are freakin' super heros!

Encounter Level? WIMPS!

Feats!?  WIMPS!

True gaming skill is being able to describe in detail the ways of medieval combat maneuvers and out grognarding your DM.  Taking 20 is for the illiterates who can't argue their way out of a Latin Translation Debate or who have never actually taken the trouble to learn the proper dressing order for field plate!

1.0 FOREVER!  And I tip my hat to those old guard who still play ORIGINAL D&D. (9th level and you get followers and a tower... sweeet)

-Jon
:wink:


-------------------------------------------------

  

User avatar

Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3861
Joined: Feb 21, 2004
Last Visit: Jul 20, 2021
Location: Milford, Michigan

Post Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2004 10:44 pm 
 

Played 1st edition almost exclusively from 1978 through the late 80s. Second edition just sucked. Had some good ideas, but was not worth a change. Never played 3rd, but read the rules...and read rules...and read rules...
So what if a first level magic user had the life expectancy of a fruit fly. As a player or DM, the game was balanced and FUN.

I do have to add, that Basic D&D is a close second. The pure simplicity just has a natural brilliance.


And I could've bought these damn modules off the 1$ rack!!!

New modules for your Old School game http://pacesettergames.com/

Everything Pacesetter at http://pacesettergames.blog.com/

 WWW  


Prolific Collector

Posts: 171
Joined: Apr 02, 2003
Last Visit: Feb 16, 2005
Location: Maryland, USA

Post Posted: Sat Mar 27, 2004 11:27 am 
 

I'd have to say 3rd/3.5, because alot of effort went into rules balance, and its alot more anti-munchkin IMHO.  Of course, like any other game, it all depends on the DM...  but in the games I've played where I've had a competent DM, its been alot more fun than 2e.

  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector

Posts: 5634
Joined: Jun 30, 2003
Last Visit: Jul 27, 2021
Location: New Hampsha

Post Posted: Sat Mar 27, 2004 5:38 pm 
 

2E and 3E both suck. 3E is for kids/power gamers and 2E is for WoTC's coffers.


If you hit a Rowsdower, you get to keep it.

 WWW  


Active Collector

Posts: 23
Joined: Nov 18, 2002
Last Visit: May 17, 2021
Location: Chicago, IL

Post Posted: Sun Mar 28, 2004 5:38 pm 
 

I started gaming as a player in the late 90's, when Basic was out of print and AD&D 2e was the only D&D there was. 3e came out and promised a return to the glory days of 1e, but I flat out hated it. Now that I was an OOPer, I decided to check out the supposed glories of 1e, and was not disappointed. It had everything I loved about 2e, yet simpler, more elegant, more flavorful, more fun.

I DM a 1e campaign weekly.

I recently rolled up a character in my friend's new 2e campaign, and I have to say, I don't even have nostalgia for it anymore. All the changes 2e made just really irk me. Regards.


Michael Falconer – http://oldschooltrek.proboards.com/
“Not we but those who come after will make the legends of our time.  The green earth, say you?  That is a mighty matter of legend, though you tread it under the light of day!” —J.R.R. Tolkien

 WWW ICQ  


Prolific Collector

Posts: 171
Joined: Apr 02, 2003
Last Visit: Feb 16, 2005
Location: Maryland, USA

Post Posted: Sun Mar 28, 2004 11:47 pm 
 

ANY edition/system can be powergamed, but the thing to remember is with a good DM (which makes ALL the different regardless of edition/system) you can evenly match a good party.  Give some monsters a few classes (easier to do in 3e), or add some templates (easier to do in 3e), and watch the characters run in fear when that "cannon-fodder orc" nails them with its fiery breath and drops their tank with 2 well placed hits.  
I think the biggest thing is having a DM who is willing to say "x is not allowed in this game."  Thats always been my main complaint with rules lawyers... the DM is god.  Rule zero always should apply first and foremost.
One of the other things I like about 3e is that position and terrain make ALOT more difference in combat now, and give it IMHO a more "realistic" flavor.  You can't just run past that enemy to charge their spellcaster in the back without having them take a few free swipes at you.  Enemies now have "threat ranges."

  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector

Posts: 5634
Joined: Jun 30, 2003
Last Visit: Jul 27, 2021
Location: New Hampsha

Post Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2004 1:06 am 
 

OK. I had a 3E 5th level fighter/2nd level thief move 60', tumble past 5 opponents (no attacks allowed since tumble was successful), and jump over the head of the 8th level cleric leading the enemy forces. He then attacked and hit him for 1/3 of his hit points. It was all legal. Tell me that isn't power gaming. NO ONE could possibly pull that off in 1 round, in real life. Even a 12th level character in 1E wouldn't be able to do that, mainly because it's absurd. And my contention is that D&D should be based on real-life possibilities and limits, with some being stretched and/or broken due to the fact that it is a fantasy world. But fer chrissake, the fucking character was worse than Corwin of Amber. If he gained another level, I'd just proclaim him a minor deity and get him the fuck out. Thankfully he contracted super gangrene when he decided to rush 30 zombies and took a few bites (yes, my zombies actually can inflict disease). No cleric in the party, and no one wanted to raise him. He doesn't game with us anymore...
3E is a product of power-gaming, anime loving kids with too much money, and WoTC knows that. They also figure they can suck in a fair number of adults who refuse to give up gaming and will concede to 3E because that is what the majority of gamers know now. Things were fine and realistic with 1st ed., especially with the skills in Wilderness/DUngeoneer's Guide. I have always allowed characters to learn skills IF they invest time/money/research. A 3E thief can unlock a fucking Brinks truck at 4th level without breaking a sweat. And the leveling XP requirements are a joke. Just kill a few orcs per session and you will level weekly.
Let's not forget, now we have a plethora of fighter/sorcerer/thief/(insert desired prestige class here) characters. Class whores. 1 level of mage to be able to use mage hand and wizard items, etc.
The worst part is the lack of need for the remake. Lemme guess, in 3 years we'll be up to D&D 7.44 E? Sounds like a horror movie.........


If you hit a Rowsdower, you get to keep it.

 WWW  


Active Collector

Posts: 38
Joined: Mar 21, 2004
Last Visit: Jun 23, 2004
Location: Fl

Post Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2004 7:58 am 
 

Deadlord36 wrote:NO ONE could possibly pull that off in 1 round, in real life. ........


Have you looked at Riddle of Steel RPG, it is suppose to be very realistic.  Just curious, I have it but never had time to really read it/play it.

I play 3ed, I work in 3ed and enjoy it, BUT all 3 editions have issues, I only played 1&3 did not even play 2ed.  Got out of the RPG playing for awhile.  So play what make you happy, collect what makes you happy, that is the key.  As a side not Troll Lord Games is coming out with a d20 lite system called Castles and Crusades written in part by E.G.G., so that may be a nice altrenative.

Ok, back to lurking.
:P

*I do not work for TLG, so it is not a plug, just something of interest.


Hal Greenberg

Todd Lockwood art for sale on ebay at:

http://stores.ebay.com/Todd-Lockwood-Art

 WWW  


Prolific Collector

Posts: 350
Joined: Feb 19, 2003
Last Visit: Apr 03, 2018
Location: CA

Post Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2004 11:41 am 
 

3E is a product of power-gaming, anime loving kids with too much money, and WoTC knows that.


Too TRUE!  I think I'd enjoy Hackmaster since it's 'funny' and 1e-ish.

3E is an abomination of a game with much better art than 1 or 2e.

It's also a CRIME that 3.5 game out so soon after 3.0... what happened to 'years of play testing'?  How about a 'free' update rules WOTC instead of 100 bucks of new source books.

Anecdotally, I don't find people 'involved' with their game group or characters like I used to.  Perhaps it's because I'm older and don't have as much time to immerse myself in gaming as I used to.  Now, I find people who 'casually' run a 10th level wizard in a 'couple of different games' and they usually involve 'kicking the crap out of the DM'.  

Perhaps there needs to be better DM schooling but my early game days were exciting because every time we went into (B1,T1,G123,D12, s1, 2 and God Help Us S3!) we fought for our lives!  And it FELT like success if we made it back out alive much more if we actually beat the adventure.

I read the 3e modules now and they pretty much spoonfeed the victory ro the players.  Plus Challenge Ratings seem to be way too low.

Arggh.. Give me the OLD days.  Bring back D&D 'CLassic' Edition!


-------------------------------------------------

  


Active Collector

Posts: 38
Joined: Mar 21, 2004
Last Visit: Jun 23, 2004
Location: Fl

Post Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2004 12:06 pm 
 

JonOakes wrote:
3E is an abomination of a game with much better art than 1 or 2e.

It's also a CRIME that 3.5 game out so soon after 3.0... what happened to 'years of play testing'?  How about a 'free' update rules WOTC instead of 100 bucks of new source books.

Anecdotally, I don't find people 'involved' with their game group or characters like I used to.  Perhaps it's because I'm older and don't have as much time to immerse myself in gaming as I used to.  Now, I find people who 'casually' run a 10th level wizard in a 'couple of different games' and they usually involve 'kicking the crap out of the DM'.  

Perhaps there needs to be better DM schooling but my early game days were exciting because every time we went into (B1,T1,G123,D12, s1, 2 and God Help Us S3!) we fought for our lives!  And it FELT like success if we made it back out alive much more if we actually beat the adventure.

I read the 3e modules now and they pretty much spoonfeed the victory ro the players.  Plus Challenge Ratings seem to be way too low.

Arggh.. Give me the OLD days.  Bring back D&D 'CLassic' Edition!


Ok, lets see..........
Art I agree with overall, I feel 3e has some of the best art hands down, an abomination, now that I do not agree with. people not involved in their PC as much, IMHO that has to do with MMORPG's more then the new edition.

3.5 coming out too soon, I agree but you can download the SRD free for 3.5 free and they did have some handouts for easy conversion at GenCon and through hobby stores.

There are some companies who are trying to get that 1e feel in their 3e stuff, Necromancer Games does a good job of that.

I am not a play 3e only guy, but showing "both sides of the coin", I like it, I play it and I would join a 1e game if it was available also.

I do agree that the mission completed feel like in the older modules does seem to be missing on most 3e modules, but people do bring that up on the 3e forums.

I have been playing since the early 80's and got revitalized with 3e and now work as an art director and designer on some 3e stuff, so any ideas would be cool!   8)


Hal Greenberg

Todd Lockwood art for sale on ebay at:

http://stores.ebay.com/Todd-Lockwood-Art

 WWW  


Prolific Collector
Valuation Board

Posts: 682
Joined: Oct 13, 2003
Last Visit: Sep 13, 2019
Location: Denver, CO

Post Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2004 12:54 pm 
 

D&D has been moving away from its wargaming roots ever since its inception.  The game has moved away from realistic battle, and into the glorification of the individual.  This results in power gaming, because when the focus is 100% on the PC (3.5), the PC is no longer allowed to die.  Consider the play experiences I've seen so far (1979-2004):

Chainmail:  Heroes are portrayed as leaders commanding hundreds of troops.  Only they have even the merest inkling of personality; everyone else is cannon fodder.  Theme:  Brutal medieval warfare, survival of the fittest.

OD&D:  Characters have levels, stats, even personalities if you want them to.  But just about anyone at 1st level can die in one hit.  So adventuring groups consist of PCs commanding a small cadre of men-at-arms from behind, only occasionally dodging into battle themselves; they slowly learn and become more powerful, and move to the forefront.  But men-at-arms are always important to have around; you even get your own little army later on.  Theme:  Normal people rise to heroic status, struggling up from meager beginnings.

AD&D:  Characters become complex enough that they're all individualized and interesting; but, to save the DM's headaches, the number of hirelings, henchmen, etc. is usually kept to a reasonable minimum.  Also, hirelings have tricky issues with morale, danger, demanding treasure and giving it up, etc.  I feel this is the most interesting balance -- the PCs no longer need to cower, but they can't treat everyone around them like crap, or they'll be dead.  Theme:  Heroes are born, but they must also be made.  And early on, they're only as good as their backup is.

AD&D 2nd Edition:  Kits appear.  Some of them are cute and colorful, others are horribly overpowered.  Players learn that with proper kit selection, they can drop those pesky followers entirely, and become a small army in and of themselves.  Those who don't like it, either conform, or leave the game.  Theme:  Rules over roleplay.  If you're not exploiting the system, you're being exploited.

D&D 3.0:  The focus is strictly on character-building, not on personality building or strategic thinking.  You can plan out a character's stats up to level 20 or even beyond before you begin playing.  You don't react to your environment, you select a career path and step on the measly monsters in your way.  Players get everything they want; DMs are left to shake their heads sadly and wonder when they lost control of the game.  Theme:  Gimme.  DM, if you try to control this situation, I'll rules-lawyer you into the ground.  Who do you think you are, anyway?

D&D 3.5:  Things get worse.  Prestige classes (read:  superhero costumes) were originally offered as an interesting little variant.  Now, there are hundreds of them, and if you don't select one, you're laughed into the corner.  Players spend their time comparing incompatible sourcebooks written by different authors who have no idea what other people are writing.  Once they find a game-breaking combination of "feats" or whatever else, they design a new character.  Encounters are specifically designed to offer the illusion of challenge without real danger.  Leveling now occurs once every few hours, where it used to take weeks or months.  Theme:  Superheroes annoyed that their pension checks haven't arrived yet.  What, do they actually have to play this game to earn levels?

For obvious reasons, I choose 1st Edition AD&D.  But I think that Moldvay Basic-Expert (1980-81) is the cleanest and most enjoyable edition of the game from a newcomer's standpoint, and that's what I teach new players with.

  

User avatar

Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3593
Joined: Dec 20, 2003
Last Visit: Jul 27, 2021
Location: Canada

Post Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2004 1:32 pm 
 

3rd ed or 3.5 ed are not the only editions in which power gaming is an issue.  I recall way back in about 1980 a high level fighter defeated death in combat (he won initiative don't you know).  I think power gaming is always an issue with new gamers (and some old).  I run a very disiplined 3.5 ed game where feats and skills are earned, I limit the production and purchasing of magic items and if the players get cocky I set them up against a group of NPC's using similiar stats as they have.

I really enjoy the infinite number of player character combinations and feel of the new editions.  I personally believe that 3rd ed saved D&D.  I know of many people that got back into the game because of the new rules.

Remember that they are different games.  A tenth level character in 3.5 is not nearly as powerful as one in 1.0 or 2.0.  Characters level quicker and bring a more dynamic feel to the game.  Monsters can also easily gain levels.  Players can play anything and any combination of things and there are a bizillion game worlds published that the DM can explore.

Just my thoughts 8)


Games can get you through times of no money but money can not get you through times of no games!!

 WWW  


Prolific Collector

Posts: 350
Joined: Feb 19, 2003
Last Visit: Apr 03, 2018
Location: CA

Post Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2004 4:35 pm 
 

By the way.. please proceed all my above comments with  :D

I still have those opinions but also realize that I'm using hyperbole to keep the conversation lively.

If I had a chance to game with a group of good folks and all they played was 3.5e, I'd be there in a heartbeat...

:D


-------------------------------------------------

  


Prolific Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 413
Joined: Nov 05, 2002
Last Visit: Jul 29, 2021
Location: Sydney, Australia

Post Posted: Mon Mar 29, 2004 7:27 pm 
 

I haven't played 3e or 3.5e but doesn't it all come down to the DM?

Whenever I've DMed in the past I've always fudged the die rolls or power of monsters depending on the circumstances in order to make things more dramatic.

I generally don't like killing player's characters off but I certainly make them feel incredibly vulnerable.

Having an enjoyable time with friends overrules all other rules and all other rules should be open to modification and fudging to achieve that ultimate goal.

 WWW  

User avatar

Verbose Collector

Posts: 1882
Joined: Mar 26, 2004
Last Visit: Jul 29, 2021
Location: UK

Post Posted: Tue Mar 30, 2004 8:30 pm 
 

I got back into this stuff when 3E was released but only as an 'observer'(frankly I dont have the time to play, and lord knows where my nearest group would be in anycasse. I would have to say that 1st ed did it for me and 2nd kind of passed me by. As it goes I also dont understand all this stuff about power gaming etc - perhaps I was lucky that the guys I played with in my day were just not of this type - it just never really came up. I do remember ongoing letters in white dwarf about it where a couple of young lads were being royally screwed for saying i've got a 30th level this that or the other. I remember thinking that it really didnt matter and wondering why everone got so upset - lets face it, even after all these years it is just a game (isnt it!?) - If this kind of game floats thier boat well good luck - you dont have to like it or join in - live and let live I say.
Going back to the point - I kinda wish I'd have stayed with basic and gone through all the sets to 36th level , just for a laugh! - I think the rules were fairly sound, not overblown, and made for a smooth running, user friendly game.
((Does power gaming really matter anyway when we all fudge the dice in any case!!!(deny it at your peril - you know it's true!!))

all the best - Carl

  

User avatar

Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3861
Joined: Feb 21, 2004
Last Visit: Jul 20, 2021
Location: Milford, Michigan

Post Posted: Tue Mar 30, 2004 9:08 pm 
 

Seems there are quite of few of us favoring 1st Edition. But that said, many are reflecting very positively on Basic (pretty much any version). One version of basic does seem to be overlooked. The Rules Cyclopedia. I know it is kind of a collectable item - mainly because it was certainly not widely printed as its brethren. The rulebook is just plain awesome, no dare I say, perfect. If you have the book but never read it, do so. You'll wonder why you never played it!!!


And I could've bought these damn modules off the 1$ rack!!!

New modules for your Old School game http://pacesettergames.com/

Everything Pacesetter at http://pacesettergames.blog.com/

 WWW  


Active Collector

Posts: 25
Joined: Nov 20, 2002
Last Visit: Jan 09, 2019
Location: Louisiana

Post Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 4:09 pm 
 

I started playing towards the end of 1st edition, and converted to 2nd ed. as soon as it came out. I tried 3e for a while and just as I thought I had it figured out 3.5 came out. There are things I like and dislike about each of the versions. I really like the 1st ed. Players Handbook and DM Guide. The fowards are both excellent and the examples are great. I like the variety of 2nd ed., with all of the monsters and spells that were published, it makes creating adventures very enjoyable. The best I can say for 3.0/3.5 is that the rules make it eaiser for people to learn.

I never really played the original version but I have to agree that the Rules Cyclopedia is a masterful book.

I ended up voting for 2nd ed. because I always had a blast DMing adventures and its the one I'm most comfortable with.


In Pursuit of Better Worlds,
Bragi of erin

 WWW ICQ YIM  
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 1 of 1