Evolution... 1E, 2E, 3E & 3.5E ??? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Evolution... 1E, 2E, 3E & 3.5E ??? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Magnathyr
07-29-06, 08:33 AM I don't know how many of you on this board have been playing through the various editions of D&D, but I thought this question might create an interesting discussion.

From 1E AD&D to 3.5E D&D, what did you like about each edition and why?

From 1E AD&D to 3.5E D&D, what changes did you not like and why?

I have been playing D&D for many years, beginning with 1E AD&D and the original campaign box sets, including FR. I have seen many, many changes over the years. I suppose my favorite will always be 1E AD&D because it was fairly straight forward. You didn't have to have an entire library of books to keep up to date with your players. Plus that's where I started and have some of my fondest playing memories.

I originally liked the concept of Class Kits when introduced for 2E, but the sheer weight of 2E supplimental publishing afterward was staggering. Soon it seemed that the system was getting flooded with rules for the most mundane of things and contridictory with previously published books.

When 3E was introduced, I was admittedly sceptical about it, but gave it a chance. I found that I liked the new D20 system and the effortless flow and speed of play compared to the older editions. I noticed that the book titles being released were the same as the old 1E AD&D titles and was hoping that they would keep the number of 'rules books' to a minimum while publishing more modules and accessories books. Alas my hopes were dashed and I find myself longing for the good ol' 1E AD&D days once more.

Please feel free to share your thoughts, even if you never experienced 1E.

:)
Faraer
07-29-06, 03:37 PM I don't think successive editions of D&D count as 'evolution' in any significant sense. That's more a way ('newest is best') of selling books.

It's meaningless to speak of one being better than another overall, only for specific purposes. For my tastes, and for the purpose of representing the Realms, they all have pros and cons which I don't have time to go into in detail. If I was to start a campaign tomorrow I'd use 1E for the World of Greyhawk and probably 2E for the Realms. I'd be happy to play in a 3E campaign, but am reluctant to take on the overheads of preparing 3E statblocks etc. again as DM.

If this thread is going to be Realms-relevant and on-topic, we'd better discuss the editions at least partly in terms of how they apply to the Realms, not just what we prefer.
Magnathyr
07-30-06, 07:12 AM I am in agreement with your statement on the use of the word 'Evolution'

as far as an edition best representing the realms, I would say 1E because from the Unearthed Arcana book your classes and races have a much closer match to the novels and many other written materials for the realms. For example, the Drow from UA are racially proned to ambidexterity, and their given stats, it states that they can use two weapons simultaneously without penalty (Drizzt). Also, the Barbarian class from the same book is a much closer match IMO. Also, Kara-Tur was very much 1E Oriental Adventures, which you needed according to the Box Set. I still feel that 1E OA is better than 3E OA hands down. 3E OA was released as a 5 Rings book instead of FR which upset me to begin with.

For me FR is, and probably always will be, 1E.

again, IMO
:cool:
jmsblntn
08-03-06, 07:42 PM I have been playing since 1977 and DM'ing since 1982 and I really prefer AD&D, but I have been trying to morph my 2E FR campaign to the 3E but its as difficult as trying to kill a angry Great Wyrm Red Dragon. I was loathed to purchase the 3E Core Books because it was set only in Grayhawk (Ekkkk!) but when the 3E FR campaign book came out I coughed up the money and have been trying to force myself not to go back! :banghead:

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Magnathyr 07-29-06, 08:33 AM	I don't know how many of you on this board have been playing through the various editions of D&D, but I thought this question might create an interesting discussion. From 1E AD&D to 3.5E D&D, what did you like about each edition and why? From 1E AD&D to 3.5E D&D, what changes did you not like and why? I have been playing D&D for many years, beginning with 1E AD&D and the original campaign box sets, including FR. I have seen many, many changes over the years. I suppose my favorite will always be 1E AD&D because it was fairly straight forward. You didn't have to have an entire library of books to keep up to date with your players. Plus that's where I started and have some of my fondest playing memories. I originally liked the concept of Class Kits when introduced for 2E, but the sheer weight of 2E supplimental publishing afterward was staggering. Soon it seemed that the system was getting flooded with rules for the most mundane of things and contridictory with previously published books. When 3E was introduced, I was admittedly sceptical about it, but gave it a chance. I found that I liked the new D20 system and the effortless flow and speed of play compared to the older editions. I noticed that the book titles being released were the same as the old 1E AD&D titles and was hoping that they would keep the number of 'rules books' to a minimum while publishing more modules and accessories books. Alas my hopes were dashed and I find myself longing for the good ol' 1E AD&D days once more. Please feel free to share your thoughts, even if you never experienced 1E. :)
Faraer 07-29-06, 03:37 PM	I don't think successive editions of D&D count as 'evolution' in any significant sense. That's more a way ('newest is best') of selling books. It's meaningless to speak of one being better than another overall, only for specific purposes. For my tastes, and for the purpose of representing the Realms, they all have pros and cons which I don't have time to go into in detail. If I was to start a campaign tomorrow I'd use 1E for the World of Greyhawk and probably 2E for the Realms. I'd be happy to play in a 3E campaign, but am reluctant to take on the overheads of preparing 3E statblocks etc. again as DM. If this thread is going to be Realms-relevant and on-topic, we'd better discuss the editions at least partly in terms of how they apply to the Realms, not just what we prefer.
Magnathyr 07-30-06, 07:12 AM	I am in agreement with your statement on the use of the word 'Evolution' as far as an edition best representing the realms, I would say 1E because from the Unearthed Arcana book your classes and races have a much closer match to the novels and many other written materials for the realms. For example, the Drow from UA are racially proned to ambidexterity, and their given stats, it states that they can use two weapons simultaneously without penalty (Drizzt). Also, the Barbarian class from the same book is a much closer match IMO. Also, Kara-Tur was very much 1E Oriental Adventures, which you needed according to the Box Set. I still feel that 1E OA is better than 3E OA hands down. 3E OA was released as a 5 Rings book instead of FR which upset me to begin with. For me FR is, and probably always will be, 1E. again, IMO :cool:
jmsblntn 08-03-06, 07:42 PM	I have been playing since 1977 and DM'ing since 1982 and I really prefer AD&D, but I have been trying to morph my 2E FR campaign to the 3E but its as difficult as trying to kill a angry Great Wyrm Red Dragon. I was loathed to purchase the 3E Core Books because it was set only in Grayhawk (Ekkkk!) but when the 3E FR campaign book came out I coughed up the money and have been trying to force myself not to go back! :banghead: