What is AD&D 2e?

[derv]

Can some one explain to me what AD&D 2e is exactly. I get the mechanical and philosophical design shifts between 3e, 4e, and 5e from 1e. But what exactly changed in 2e? Not looking to adopt anything there, just looking to understand how the system changed and why it was repackaged. I never played any of these systems post 1e except a minor foray into the Pathfinder Beginner Box with my kids.

[jeffb]

Simply put- It is a cleaning up and reorganization of 1st edition. It clears up rules and cleans up mechanics. Things that should be in one place, are. Many rules were made optional. Some additions from later 1E books (like proficiencies) were added. Some classes were expanded for more customization (Wizards/Priests). Thieves were improved. Fighters still suck without a bevy of magic items, unfortunately, even with the addition of weapon specialization- they are outgunned by Paladins, Rangers, and Spellcasters as the the lower levels are worked through.

Many old schoolers thumb their nose at it, because it lacks Gary's voice, came after his ouster, and TSR became very conscious of bad press and so "sanitized" it a bit. But IMO, taken at face value it is a far better presentation, and more playable version of the AD&D game rules. I think Zeb did a fine job given the limitations and circumstances under which he was tasked to do it.

In my old age, I have very little use for 1E other than adventure content, inspiration/ ideas. Without question if I was asked to run a game of AD&D, I would choose 2E.

[Finarvyn]

I think that most edition changes occurred when:
A) enough optional material was accumulated so that reorganization was desired, and
B) someone new took over and older author names got pushed to smaller fonts due to the revisions.

2E was, I think, when Gygax was forced from TSR and Zeb Cook got to do a rewrite. At this point there were quite a few of the orange-spine hardbacks and the hope was to bring certain things like skills into the game. Mechanically, I think this was the big push from combat charts to THAC0, which had been in some of the later 1E books but not as present back then.

There were two versions of 2E as I remember it. The first one seemed a lot like AD&D in its presentation, if I recall correctly, and the second one (the black hardbacks) seemed to be a major revision of text with "how to make your own tables" as its philosophy. The black book for high level campaigns is one of my all-time favorite books, as it discusses how to challenge high level characters without getting into the numbers. 2E also had the "player's options" hardbacks -- combat options, magic options, etc. When I think of 2E I think of all sorts of player "kits" where you could pick a special set of options. Those were similar to 3E prestige classes, I think. There were also options to build your class or race with character points. Also an option to take each stat and break it into sub-stats. Some neat things there, but my feeling was that it was setting up min-max choices for players and building a supercharacter became a thing in 2E more than any other edition to date.

From that perspective it's easy to see why WotC made their choices for 3E. Each edition of the game seemed to be moving in the direction of player choice, and 2E presented a lot more choices than 1E.

[doublejig2]

Kits++; in addition to those provided, with a little work, kits also provide templates for prestige or milieu relevance for created PCs and NPCs.

[derv]

Thanks for the explanations. In a nut shell, 2e was a rewrite by Cook, after Gygax was left go, that contained more options for characters. The game didn't otherwise play differently. The combat just moved away from charts to a focus on THAC0.

Maybe I missed something after I left the hobby. It sounds like jeffb is saying that many of these changes were already implemented with 1e. Were these changes after the publication of Unearthed Arcana? I guess we're talking about splat books and gazetteers?

[Zenopus]

THAC0, for example, appeared in the 1E DMG as a column in the monster charts but was otherwise not emphasized. It then appeared in some 1E modules stat blocks. 2E took this and made it a fundamental feature of the combat system.

[kaiqueo]

2e for me represents the explosion of story-driven campaigns, linear adventures and new campaing settings. It's also the first edition I played. I really like the ruleset, the books (have this old grimoire feel), some of the settings (like dark sun and planescape). The adventures not that much.

[Deleted]

For me, it was the "settings" edition. I played the BECMI line aside from a few early sessions with 2e but I remember the box sets in the stores and it seemed like 2e was the system of dozens of worlds and slight variants. Also a lot of splat books. That did NOT start with 3e.

[kaiqueo]

AD&D 2e was also the first edition to remove xp per gold as the standart and most common way to earn xp. It's an optional rule for thieves.

[derv]

Okay, well that's a significant change in my mind. How do characters gain experience in 2e?

[kaiqueo]

There are two categories:
- Group XP: Defeating monsters, helping the DM, reaching adventure goals, etc. I should correct myself: there is an optional rule (not only for thieves) to give 1xp per gp, but the GM is advised to not abuse that rule, so the characters don't end up with too much treasure.
- Indivual XP: Varies by class. Basically you get more xp if you do the expected job of your class.

[Deleted]

Feb 8, 2021 11:17:31 GMT -6 kaiqueo said:

There are two categories:
- Group XP: Defeating monsters, helping the DM, reaching adventure goals, etc. I should correct myself: there is an optional rule (not only for thieves) to give 1xp per gp, but the GM is advised to not abuse that rule, so the characters don't end up with too much treasure.
- Indivual XP: Varies by class. Basically you get more xp if you do the expected job of your class.

There's also Training xp if I recall. 

[hamurai]

An optional rule also grants individual XP for good ideas, good roleplaying, stuff like that. (It's in the DMG).

[howandwhy99]

2e trimmed down the mechanics of the game and made them easier to understand. It also change the fundamental design of the game, but imperceptibly too many newcomers.

Instead of being a game to score points and go up in level, it became a plot following game to vicariously enjoy as a character in a story. The early DND was a strategy game more akin to the computer RPGs of the time. See the vast variance between this DMG and the previous.

The rules were all put in front of the players as was the game world the players were ostensibly gaming. This led to rules lawyers and canon lawyers, something not possible in a game where the players never have access to these.

[Deleted]

Feb 9, 2021 1:04:15 GMT -6 hamurai said:

An optional rule also grants individual XP for good ideas, good roleplaying, stuff like that. (It's in the DMG).

Interesting. Seems like one area BECMI and AD&D had in common. There's half a dozen things Mentzer suggests you could give xp for with the caveat that each engenders a slightly different form of play. 

[jeffb]

I experienced plenty of rules lawyers before AD&D 1E It is not a 2E thing. The whole RPG industry grew out of rules and canon lawyers in the 1970s. It's a people issue, not an edition issue.

I know the DMG was seen as off limits in theory during 1E, but in my experience, it was not the case. During our early OD&D games our group shared some materials because it was impossible to find locally at first- but as AD&D plowed on, everyone in my home group as well as the after school clubs, game store clubs, library clubs, etc., was buying the DMG & MM as well: DM or not. Gygax failed here with his "thou shall not read the DM bible" prose as game author- it was actually a great sales tactic, and I often wonder if that was not his intention. AD&D is the beginnings of business guy Gary. It wasn't a good look for him, and ultimately we know how that all went down.

Barring all that, it makes sense to have all the rules the players need to interact with, in the player's handbook. Spells for example. Gary's split up of this info in AD&D was stupid. The Combat tables, saving throw tables also. Thus why they felt the need to publish them in The Dragon before the book was out. Sure the book took awhile to be published, but if it was truly off limits info for players, then they should have told us to pound sand. Nope, It was a bad design and business decision and many of us EXPECTED that info to be present in a player's book. We3 had access to this info in OD&D, Holmes, MCM- There was no split of DM vs Player info in those (barring chapters). It wasn't needed, and in OD&D the opposite was encouraged (see the "introduction" in Men & Magic").

[Falconer]

What can I say? One man’s meat is another man’s poison. The AD&D 1e Players Handbook is my platonic ideal of a player RPG book, and to this day it amazes me that few if any other RPGs imitate the AD&D 1e division of info.

[asaki]

Feb 12, 2021 7:24:16 GMT -6 jeffb said:

I experienced plenty of rules lawyers before AD&D 1E It is not a 2E thing.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure I read an article or two (or ten) from early Dragon Magazine, where Gary specifically used the term.

[tkdco2]

I agree. Every edition of the game has had its share of rules lawyers. The 1E DMG even has an passage stating that the DM has the final say, regardless of what the rules lawyers point out in the text.

As for having access to the DMG, it was never an issue in my group, as we all had our turn as DM.

2E remains my favorite edition. I don't agree with all the design choices, but I like the way it was presented for the most part. Unfortunately, most of my group decided to stick with 1E for a long time, so I got to experience the edition wars long before the term was coined.

[ricks]

It might sound overly simplistic, but 2e is the transition between 1e and 3e. Early 2e was mostly a reorganization of the rules and the incorporation of all the little extras from 1r (like Unearthed Arcana). Late 2e is the addition of all the splat books permitting wild character customizations.

2e also marks the transition of modules to railroad-like stories instead of just frameworks.

[Deleted]

Feb 16, 2021 20:19:30 GMT -6 ricks said:

2e also marks the transition of modules to railroad-like stories instead of just frameworks.

Ah...Dragonlance. Yes. 

[jeffb]

Feb 25, 2021 6:38:33 GMT -6 @ampleframework said:

Feb 16, 2021 20:19:30 GMT -6 ricks said:

2e also marks the transition of modules to railroad-like stories instead of just frameworks.

Ah...Dragonlance. Yes. 

Lol. I see what you did there.

2E gets so much flack , but thjs was an issue, again, long before 2E came about. I think 1E'ers rose colored glasses lose focus about 1982, and cannot see that high percentage of garbage that was produced from 83'ish into 89. Plenty of railroads in 1E (and BECMI)

[Deleted]

Feb 25, 2021 11:55:04 GMT -6 jeffb said:

Feb 25, 2021 6:38:33 GMT -6 @ampleframework said:

Ah...Dragonlance. Yes. 

Lol. I see what you did there.

2E gets so much flack , but thjs was an issue, again, long before 2E came about. I think 1E'ers rose colored glasses lose focus about 1982, and cannot see that high percentage of garbage that was produced from 83'ish into 89. Plenty of railroads in 1E (and BECMI)

True. Had to get the "cheap pop" as they say in the pro wrestling business. Dragonlance was everyone's favorite punching bag back in the day but the problems were well-established long before it came along. 

[Falconer]

Perhaps not surprisingly, 2e is the evergreen favorite edition among Dragonlance fans.

[tkdco2]

Dragonlance actually started in 1E. It was an AD&D setting even before the Forgotten Realms. I have the setting book and a couple of the modules.

[Desparil]

Feb 13, 2021 12:50:59 GMT -6 Falconer said:

One man’s meat is another man’s poison.

Emphatically agreed, considering I find the organization of information in the 1E books to be among the worst ever put into print in an official D&D product. The only reason I can locate anything in them is because I have them in PDF format with bookmarks.