Post/Author/DateTime	Post
samusco 02-20-07, 06:52 PM	Well heres the big question I posted yesterday, but not many answers were giving because of flaming. What is better/ what do YOU like better; 3.5, or good ol 2.0? I used to play 2.0 a few years back when I was around 6 (I'm 17 now) and haven't played D&D sense. But I'm getting back into it, but I have forgotten just about everything about D&D. But I do remember 2.0 being very fun. So what do you think?:confused:
bonethug0108 02-20-07, 07:29 PM	I've only played 3.5. It seems like a good system, and you can have lots of fun depending on who you play with. But as with anything, it has its flaws. Nothing's perfect, but 3.5 is pretty solid.
fatal error 02-20-07, 08:26 PM	From what I have heard of 2.0, both from the nostalgic and the vehemently non-nostalgic, I think 3.5 is better. But I've never played 2.0, so.
moscatabaco76 02-20-07, 08:34 PM	Any RPG - heck, any game - is as fun as the players make it. There's a lot of people for which 2.0 is fun and consider "upgrading" a waste of time, brains and moey - and for them, that's right. I do have many good memories of 2.0, I played it for years with different groups. Now that I have 3.5 I wonder how the hell could I even play with that system. I won't start a flame war, so I won't say why I consider it so flawed. 3.5 is ain't certainly perfect, but is the best D&D system to date - by far.
bonethug0108 02-20-07, 08:46 PM	Any RPG - heck, any game - is as fun as the players make it. That is truth.
ElberethSilverleaf 02-20-07, 09:10 PM	I started with 1st ed, played 2nd and now am on 3.5. I prefer 3.5 as the rules towards the end of 2.0 were unwieldy at best. It was truly "roll play". My problem with 3.5 is the plethora of needless and stupid prestige classes. Also the kiddies with their dumb gish creations. I almost barf when I hear/read about someones 1/2dragon-1/2drow 10th lvl ninja/15th lvl wizard/9th lvl Spellsword who come from the noble house house of yada yada yada. What ever happened to starting at the bottom and working (earning) your way to the top?
samusco 02-20-07, 10:50 PM	Thats what I like to do... start from lv one. It does kinna suck now that I think about it that people can just skip levels and classes.
ElberethSilverleaf 02-20-07, 11:47 PM	Hey bonethug I just noticed you're in Avondale. Laissez Les Bon Temps Rouler! Native Louisianian here. Did you get to go to any good parades?
bonethug0108 02-20-07, 11:51 PM	Nah, I've been tired of parades for a while. I used to love them as a kid, but I only go like once every other year. Most of my family still goes, though. And yes, let the good times roll.;) Where are you located, in regards to a more known place. I live on the westbank, near marrero, gretna, etc. It's about 20 min. from N.O.
ElberethSilverleaf 02-20-07, 11:58 PM	I'm up here in Monroe. Part of my family is from the New Orleans & Baton Rouge areas with many cousins down in Buras south of Port Sulphur. We're spread all through the state now though.
Raptorial 02-21-07, 12:19 AM	*Gasp.* Other Louisianians! I'm not alone here!
bonethug0108 02-21-07, 12:21 AM	Maybe we should start our own thread.:D I'm suprised none of us are drunk and passed out from mardi gras.:P Or maybe there are many more of us, and they are just drunk and passed out.:D
CharlieRock 02-21-07, 12:26 AM	I went from 1ed (non-A)D&D to 3ed. 2ed looked like a massive reprinting to me so I didn't get any of them. Oops. I like the Classic D&D for the simplicity of it, and the D&D3.x for the complexity of it. And currently have a campaign going on in both. Having just typed that, I realize it sounds weird though.
RobbyPants 02-21-07, 09:54 AM	Any RPG - heck, any game - is as fun as the players make it. There's a lot of people for which 2.0 is fun and consider "upgrading" a waste of time, brains and moey - and for them, that's right. I do have many good memories of 2.0, I played it for years with different groups. Now that I have 3.5 I wonder how the hell could I even play with that system. I won't start a flame war, so I won't say why I consider it so flawed. 3.5 is ain't certainly perfect, but is the best D&D system to date - by far. I agree totally. I started back in 94 playing 2E. I quickly made my own house-rules for lots of things once I got the hang of it. When 3E came out, they had implemented a lot of the house-rules I made, or at least fixed the same things I was trying to fix. What I like better about 3.5 is that it's more standardized, and it's based off of about 15 years more gaming experience...
CharlieRock 02-21-07, 10:00 AM	When 3E came out, they had implemented a lot of the house-rules I made, Like critical hits? :D
RobbyPants 02-21-07, 10:04 AM	Like critical hits? :D :rofl: I forgot that that was an optional system! Yeah, and I'd later changed the multi-classing to work much more like it does in 3.x.
johnkretzer 02-21-07, 12:54 PM	Thats what I like to do... start from lv one. It does kinna suck now that I think about it that people can just skip levels and classes. Really in all honestly you could skip levels in any D&D edition in the game. This isn't a 3.5 ism. Also how do you know that the 1/2dragon, 1/2drow, didn't work for that 24 levels. I mean 3.0 has been out long enough that it is possible that this character started at level 1. But in all honestly when I look at 2nd edition I pretty much quit the game. I played a in few 2nd edition game. Then 3rd came out I started to play it alot more.
CharlieRock 02-21-07, 01:05 PM	Really in all honestly you could skip levels in any D&D edition in the game. This isn't a 3.5 ism. Also how do you know that the 1/2dragon, 1/2drow, didn't work for that 24 levels. I mean 3.0 has been out long enough that it is possible that this character started at level 1. But in all honestly when I look at 2nd edition I pretty much quit the game. I played a in few 2nd edition game. Then 3rd came out I started to play it alot more. Classic D&D (not 2ed) had 36 levels. We hit that in three weeks of gaming one summer. One of the many benefits of being too young to work. :D
Kursk 02-21-07, 01:15 PM	I have played since '77. 3.5 is a superior rules set. That being said, once you get outside 3.5 Core it falls apart pretty quickly and isn't nearly as playable.
Escef 02-21-07, 01:23 PM	I've played 1e AD&D, 2e AD&D, 3e, and 3.5e. 2e was basically just a slightly cleaned up 1e with more options. 3e was a total re-engineering of the rules from the ground up. Of that batch, I prefer 3.Xe. 3e or 3.5, I don't really care. Either way, it is the best D&D rules set I've ever seen. Would I ever run a 2e game again? Probably not, though if I were invited to one I'd drop by for at least one session.
CharlieRock 02-21-07, 01:25 PM	I have played since '77. 3.5 is a superior rules set. That being said, once you get outside 3.5 Core it falls apart pretty quickly and isn't nearly as playable. Yeah, our Classic Campaign is mostly for goofing, and takes absolutely no time to prepare comparatively (using just some old modules and a fresh crew of 'insta-characters' every game.)
Tolby 02-21-07, 01:34 PM	I have played 1st, 2nd, 3.0 and 3.5 editions. I like 3.5 the most. 2.0 could be handled if you let some of the more obnoxious stuff out. THe skills and powers books for example. I prefer the simpler rules for calculating saving throws, AC, To hit numbers (THACO:confused: ) On a plus note the 2nd edition character generator/DM tool was vastly superior to the E-Tools of today.
aotrscommander 02-21-07, 01:50 PM	As I usually say in these discussions, I have no loyalty to any set of rules other than that which they earn from their mechanical merits. I don't have any nostalgia for 2nd Ed (which is the earliest I played - I think) since my first games were HeroQuest followed directly by Rolemaster. I have never noticed the style of gameplay or quality of roleplaying change whatever set of rules we're playing, so there's no difference there. (I'm also a wargamers that roleplays, rather than a roleplayer. Believe it or not, there is actually a difference.) I have played 2nd AD&D under several DMs, and nearly all of them used a lot of house rules and permutations. I know when I ran my one-and-only 2nd Ed campaign in anger (we tended to play Rolemaster mostly) I had a lot of house rules (many of them based of Baldur's Gate1). I didn't run much 2nd Ed, since I ran rolemaster when I did run a game on our Monday evening group, and the Thursday evening group didn't start up on a weekly basis until later. Then 3.0 came out, and I have never looked back. Even Rolemaster - until 3.0 our system of choice (almost completely because of the critical hits!) - has taken a back seat and almost all of our games are D&D 3.5 or some derivative. I simply find it's so much easier to run. Making everything standardised (i.e. full stats for the monsters, conditions qualified like in computer games rather than all different), skill DCs all nicely laid out etc etc make my job of adjudicating things so much easier and far less arbitary. And the varity of combat options is brilliant. I think Attacks of Opportunity were an invention of pure genious. They have handily solved almost all the areas I used to find problematic (as in Rolemaster - what happens when you fire a pistol in melee? AoO(ish)!) Plus, it gives PCs something to look foward to in terms of advancement; in most other systems I've seen (especially level-less systems), character advancements are limited and slow, more incremental. With D&D now more than ever, it feels like your actually getting somewhere. Though to be fair, that was true of the earlier editions to a slightly lesser extent. Yes, it does require more work to do the stat blocks, but the net results are so much better, I've even taking to approximating the same level of detail with Rolemaster now! Plus, making enemies, monsters or otherwise, is just like did on occasion sit down and just generate characters for the sheer heck of it. Did I enjoy playing 2nd ed? Yes, but I enjoyed playing HeroQuest as an RPG too. Doesn't mean I'd do it for choice when there's a mechanically superior option available. 1Though to be fair, no set of rules (RPG or wargame or otherwise) I have ever played ever have survived without at least one - and more often several or more - house rule.
CharlieRock 02-21-07, 01:55 PM	I prefer the simpler rules for calculating saving throws, AC, To hit numbers (THACO:confused: ) huh, those were easier then in this edition. Not that D&D3.x makes it really hard (unless you count the 100s of situational modifiers that partially might sort of stack) but those were all printed out on a chart. Cleric 4th Level (checks chart) my save vs poison is xx (writes on character sheet). Your done! No modification by abilities or whatever ("oh, wait. Cats's Grace DOES modify my REF :rolleyes: ) AC worked the same, just opposite direction. Starts at ten and goes down. Then it even had a chart that gave you the thac0. You just looked it up on your character sheet and rolled. No need to figure out if you were flanked or flatfooted or day dreaming or wearing hotpants on a sunday. Why is looking up something on a chart so hard? :confused:
CharlieRock 02-21-07, 02:02 PM	Then 3.0 came out, and I have never looked back. Even Rolemaster - until 3.0 our system of choice (almost completely because of the critical hits!) - has taken a back seat and almost all of our games are D&D 3.5 or some derivative. They got a book for you, dude. It's called Torn Asunder! (http://www.pen-paper.net/rpgdb.php?op=showbook&bookid=3465) It's d20 3.x compatible and written by a few of the guys from Rolemaster backgrounds.
Bard-of-all-trades 02-21-07, 02:22 PM	As far as the original post goes, 2nd Ed. was fun. Where I think it started to fall apart was ... rats, I forget the name of them. It was a series of books that broke down the 6 stats into sub-stats that could be used differently by different classes and another one had skills and the precursor to feats, I think. It was a little wierd that there was only a range from 10 to -10 for AC and the lower was better. The saving throws made no sense whatsoever. Was fun to play with the "core" books. We had house-ruled a crit chart for hits as well as misses (those sucked). 3E is fun. AC goes up and keeps going. You just need to beat the AC with your to-hit or attack roll. They beefed the THAC0 or BAB for rogues and wizards. If you use the math for THAC0, the BAB for a rogue in 2nd Ed. is the same as what they use for a wizard now. A wizard's THAC0 in today's BAB would look like a poor save progression and max out at +6. I like how they stream-lined the saves from 5 to 3. They are both fun to play. I would say 3E is easier to pick up from scratch to learn and play, but they are both great games. I started back with the red box set Basic: D&D 26 years ago. We worked up to the blue box set Expert: D&D, then moved to Advanced D&D, First Edition. Then as TSR was changing, we got into the 2nd Ed. books and all the different worlds and setting they made (i.e. Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms, Spelljammer, Planescape, etc.) It's all a game and we had fun with it. We didn't complain about how one class wasn't balanced with the rest; how wizards were tough to play at low levels, on a par at mid levels and surpassed the rest at higher levels (we looked at it as paying your dues); or how "unrealistic" spells are determined or advanced at each level for each of the spellcasting classes. We had grand adventures long ago that we talk about today when we play. Several of us have even updated older edition characters to the current setting. We play to have fun and are doing that with 3E just like all the rest. So as far as which is better, can't really say. It's as comparable as apples and pears. I like them both.
CharlieRock 02-21-07, 04:20 PM	To me , classic D&D is not 2ed. It's only partly 1ed, AD&D is the other part. I'm not the only one that refers to Classic D&D as the 1ed (non-A)D&D either. That's what it is currently being marketed as (yes, they are still selling them). So ,for the above posts, if I just used classic D&D ,I meant the Classic (non-A)D&D of 1ed. In case I confused anyone there.
aotrscommander 02-21-07, 06:04 PM	They got a book for you, dude. It's called Torn Asunder! (http://www.pen-paper.net/rpgdb.php?op=showbook&bookid=3465) It's d20 3.x compatible and written by a few of the guys from Rolemaster backgrounds. Truth be known, they only Rolemaster parties we play these days are the major one (which contains everybodies' favourite characters and has been in existance for oh, about 12-15 years), which if I was to try to modify would result in my lynching (for a Lich that's a pretty mean fet too!) And one I started for the Monday group because I could re-use some of the old quests I'd written for eariler parties. (And I've just about finished 'upgrading' to the 'new' set of attack and crit tables.) Besides, each game lends itself to slightly different sorts of combat. The great thing about Rolemaster critical hits is they extremely funny. The downside is that BBEG fights are pointless since someone always - and I mean always - rolls a killer crit in the first round. So I just stopped having them, and make do with lots of mid-level opponents. On the other hand, some of the Rolemaster fights have been the most memorable - the infamous Battle of the Fumbles or the time the mage blasted the BBEG with a waterbolt and knocked him 5' backwards off the top of an 80' cliff into rocks... D&D - in either 2nd or 3.x - is much better for having a longer, dramatic BBEG fights, since not every single attack is a potential killer (just, you know, a fair number of spells/powers/maneouvers!) Plus you can be much more tactically 'clever' in D&D 3.x, since the rules are better set up for it.
Stormonu 02-21-07, 11:38 PM	I started out with basic, reluctantly moved to 1E, switched to 2E and reluctantly went to 3E and eventually 3.5E. However, I don't ever think I'd go back to play any of the previous incarnations of the game, though I certainly like to look back through the old books for ideas, nostalgia of old campaigns played and whatnot. I'm a casual roleplayer myself, not an optimizer. It's one thing that disturbs me about 3E (but then again optimization has always been in the game). However, I don't remember it being as rampant as it is these days - though I have to admit, we also didn't have the internet community that exists these days that lets everybody get together to do all this heavy game analysis I see. Overall, I'd say this edition of the game is the best that's out now, at its core. Now, some of the splatbooks I don't like, but overall, I wouldn't want to roll my game back to a previous edition, though I wouldn't necessarily mind bringing some stuff of the previous editions into the current game (like spells, monsters and the like).
CharlieRock 02-22-07, 09:48 AM	One thing I'm thinking of rolling back is the time spent for casting. All of a sudden it occurs to me (all the threads about CoDzilla and the UberMages); their spells effect the same round it is cast. That's new :eek: (it occured to me before, but I figured AoO would balance this out). This keeps fighter's viable for higher levels of play.
Kursk 02-22-07, 10:53 AM	One thing I'm thinking of rolling back is the time spent for casting. All of a sudden it occurs to me (all the threads about CoDzilla and the UberMages); their spells effect the same round it is cast. That's new :eek: (it occured to me before, but I figured AoO would balance this out). This keeps fighter's viable for higher levels of play. I just modified some of the rules for wizards to bring them back under control (closer to 2E & 1E). Casting time could do that also.
samusco 02-22-07, 07:54 PM	Ya know.... I should get that old mana system back... enhance it then post how to do it online so other DM's can do it... that way people can use their extra mana for low level spells if they don't want to do any high level spells, or bust out 4 super spells rather than 2 or something like that.
Escef 02-23-07, 01:27 AM	Ya know.... I should get that old mana system back... enhance it then post how to do it online so other DM's can do it... that way people can use their extra mana for low level spells if they don't want to do any high level spells, or bust out 4 super spells rather than 2 or something like that. Actually, there is an official varient in Unearthed Arcana, which is open source. Which means anyone who wants a spell point based varient can have one. Edit: You can find it HERE. (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/unearthedSpellPoints.html)
cash010 02-24-07, 05:48 PM	I'm a rpg junky D&D, white wolf, & a lot of crazy one (hey i got this new system lets play.A friend with more money than you know).What system you matter little. A good group of friend get to hang out, & havig fun Role playing is what matters.