Why should i try out 2e D&D?

...

Curiosity's sake? Nostalgia? I guess to see what it was like in the olden days?

I suppose you don't really need one.

Look at that fuckin cover

Look at it


That is your reason.

You shouldn't. If you're not already aware of the fact that it's the best edition? I feel no compunction to convince you. You don't deserve it.

but why is it the best?

i do admit its a bloody awesome cover.

To experience an important part of the history of D&D and the history of tabletop roleplaying games.

To learn what older editions did right, and to learn what older editions did wrong.

To learn why some people still haven't switched.

To learn why so many people wax nostalgic over older editions of D&D, especially if you've played 3e, 4e, and 5e.

To learn why older D&D players like 5e so much.

To see art that ranges from goddamn incredible to goddamn hilariously awful.

Mostly to have fun, though.

Also to learn why D&D -- and indeed, no tabletop game that I can think of -- uses THAC0 or anything like it anymore.

I can't think of any better summary of reasons than this.

Except OSR and every D&D game, pathfinder, all of D20...

I don't think you understood THAC0 if you're dumb enough to believe that.

>I don't think you understood THAC0
I think there's been a misunderstanding here. I know that those systems still effectively use the basic attack bonuses and AC systems that THAC0 was built on, but they don't use THAC0 itself anymore.

They use a different name for fundamentally the same system, and that's somehow not:
>THAC0 or anything like it
?

I'm talking about the inversion part of THAC0 where it does the work for you, figuring out what you have to roll to hit instead of telling you your bonus.

I'm not sure which of us is being more pedantic here.

>I'm not sure which of us is being more pedantic here.
I vote you.

AD&D2e PHB is the absolute worst place to learn about THAC0. It does a horrendous job of explaining it, to the point where you could come up with your own method and explanation and it would probably work better.

THAC0 = roll + AC

Roll the d20, add the target's AC, and compare it to THAC0. Equal or higher, and it is a hit. Lower, and it is a miss.

Level 1 Fighter has THAC0 20. They need to roll 10 in order to hit an AC 10 unarmored enemy. (10+10=20) They need to roll 18 in order to hit an AC 2 full plate enemy. (18+2=20)

This is also why attack bonuses can apply both to the roll and to the target's AC: a +3 to hit can give a bonus to the d20 roll, or can increase the AC or the target being attacked. A -2 AC bonus (from a shield, for example) can apply to the d20 roll to hit, or it can apply to the target's AC.

I have a few mixed books from 1e and 2e as a result of a lucky used book store find. How interchangeable are the rules between the two, besides thac0?

The 2e PHB says you subtract the target AC from your THAC0, then roll greater than or equal to. What's wrong with that explanation?

Pretty much identical. A bunch of default rules in 1e are optional in 2e, but you can mix and match all you want, to the point that some 2e supplements reference 1e ones (FR Adventures references Oriental Adventures, for example).

Use 2e's initiative.
1e initiative is...a clusterfuck, to say the least.

Thac0 is interchangeable. Thac0 is the to-hit quick-reference system that was in-use since 1979 at conventions and tournaments, as well as in groups from players who went to them. It was codified in 2e. It was in use since oD&D, because it is just a short-hand for figuring out the to-hit tables that were the exact same across all TSR editions.

Almost totally compatible

THAC0 isn't exactly the same as the tables in some spots, but only the really autistic care.

Because of reasons and tHAC0 and Moon Priests of Elude, duh

It does have some neat settings attached which haven't been updated very satisfactorily, if at all. In particular, Spelljammer is apparently quite broken, but I always thought it was cool.

It is. I'm not saying "it is the same as what oD&D used." I am saying that Thac0 was first-published in a fanzine for oD&D, as short-hand for the tables.

Because it involves unnecessary math (just subtract the negative number from the double digit number off the chart...) and it introduces confusion over how bonuses are handled. If an enemy gets a 2 point bonus from deflection or obscurement, how is it handled? Sure, you can probably respond easily, but the trouble is that everyone had a different method of handling it and if you tried mixing them - especially if you read from different sources - then the whole situation could become quite confusing.

The original explanation was probably the simplest.

>THAC0 vs. roll + AC
>more likely to hit = add number to roll + AC side
>less likely to hit = subtract number from roll + AC side
>If roll + AC is equal to or higher than THAC0, then attack connects.

From there, it is rather easy to manipulate things around into a method which is easier for you... just get things consistent and sensible, so that if something strange comes up, you understand how to change the formula.

I know this is going to make at least a few people angry and make a few more people call me a retard, but I'm glad THAC0 is gone.

It doesn't make me angry.

Thac0 is a clunky shorthand for an already clunky system.

What makes me angry is when it is wildly misrepresented by people who obviously never played any TSR edition of D&D.

That's a valid reason to get angry. It makes me roll my eyes when THAC0 gets described as being this incredibly complex thing when it's actually quite simple, but like you said, it's clunky.

Hey, that's fine. The fact that it caused such confusion is a good enough reason for it to go. Mathematically it isn't any different from BAB, so there is really no reason to keep it around.

But I think the biggest problem is just that everyone had their own method of solving it, and if you were a kid from the 90s, then you probably ran into a large number of them... which would confuse the heck out of anyone. Having one method of working with THAC0 (even if convoluted) would work out just fine. Having three different methods and not being clear on the difference is practically asking for disaster.

>everyone had their own method of solving it
Remember how everyone had their own way of pronouncing various fantasy names? Back when Dragonlance was hot shit, I knew kids who pronounced Sturm as Strum, and Raistlin as Rasslin, or even Rayshlin.

Cool beans. This simplifies stuff

How does 2e initiative work?

D10 plus modifiers, lowest goes first. Start of Chapter 9.

The biggest problem is that minor quibbles from people who used it are parroted by people who never played it, blown out of proportion, and repeated ad infinitum as though they made any fucking sense.

a nice feature of 2ed was that a lot of house rules for 1e were rolled in as optional. Things like "At Death's Door", allowing you to drop to -9 hp without dying, were optional rules that people really wanted.

One of the optional rules was the ability to create new character classes. This could be used to create characters that could handle multiple roles in a smaller party, at the cost of slower xp progression. You could even mix and match divine spells using the kit for Priests of Special Mythoi. The number of combinations you could come up with made character creation fun.

The PHB I got was the 1e. A got mostly supplements from 2e. But I'm sure google will help me as usual.

If you're interested, Forgotten Realms Adventures is the conversion book.

At Death's Door is actually the proper 1e method of dealing with 0 HP.

Unfortunately I can't post it here, it's too big. Hit up MageGuru's trove on 4+3 chan, in the pdf request thread.

>That subtle shilling for 5e as if it isn't the most boring edition

Fuck off dude

Thac0 can be taught even easier.

Thac0 is the number you need to hit, with their AC as your modifier.

>that political posturing on an image board

Get a fucking life.

>Implying "us old school guys like REAL DnD like 5e" isn't thinly veiled edition war bullshit

Nigger if I was shilling I wouldn't be subtle about it at all.

Sorry, I'm not here to reply to you as if you made a point worth responding to, I'm here to make you look sad and pathetic.

Stop doing my work for me.

No it's cool man he's entitled to his opinions

Frankly I don't really see why you would ever need to play 2e. Rules Cyclopedia's got more than enough rules without the dumb shit that AD&D added.

Because the entire Basic line is afflicted with the cancer that is Race-as-Class.

>Dark Sun
>Spelljammer
>Forgotten Realms
>Angstscape
I CAN'T THINK OF ANY REASON AT ALL

Those are setting books, not rulesets. You could run them in any system.

A halfling rogue with a sling, some enchanted stones, and the right build. Watch your GM cry.

OP, honest answer: because it's actually a pretty simple, smoothly functioning game that's easy to run. That said, I'd recommend a free retroclone over it these days, Basic Fantasy is a common suggestion.

Yeah, but it's got the dumb shit that the Rules Cyclopedia possesses. The 2nd ed AD&D core is actually a relative chaff-free iteration of D&D.

Sine Nomine publishing's RPGs (Stars Without Number, Other Dust, Scarlet Heroes, Silent Legions, Spears of the Dawn) use a modified thac0 that just has your thac0 always set at 20. I suspect it's just for the sake of maintaining compatibility with old-school modules.

1e and 2e are essentially really complicated drinking games. so you should try them out and drink with some tabletop buddies.

God forbid that elves and dwarves be meaningfully distinct from humans.

Started with 3.5 5 years ago and did 5e up until about 6 months ago. I have recently started to run 2e and since December have acquired like 50 books(there cheeeap on ebay, pic related ) since they are so enjoyable to read on there own.

the fluff/settings / and stats. Its hard for me to write up op but ill try.

stats - Ill start with the MM, open to any monster even a hippo and they give you very interesting relevant information that would make super fun encounters. Instead of saying this is a common animal found in rivers. it takes the time to give you relevant some relevant information that would be fun for a encounter ( what would be found typically in a herd, how long they can stay underwater, they will try to tip over boats.etc)

fluff- I hope you like beautiful poster maps because almost every adventure book & box set has a bitchin one .look at planescapes .


Settings - Greyhawk , forgotten realms, ravenloft , planescape, dark sun , spelljammer etc. All bitchin , a lot of them our the root settings still used today.

Stats - I like stats & descriptions a lot of people dont like the tables & hordes of information but you don't have to use any of the hard numbers.The plethora of options they give you makes being a dm a lot easier. Now that its 2016 all the splatbooks our super cheap & the amount of information they put in them is ridiculous.

I know most of what i say doesn't sound to specific to ad&d but for me it got me excited again.

guys, I have a related question - I posess adnd2ed books in polish, but want to play basic, which never got translated here, without the hassle of using phb in english (its sounds awful when you insert english words into conversation in PL). Adnd is an evolution of basic, right? What shit from Adnd could I skip and cut to go from adnd to basic?

Same position here I'd recommend checking out for For Gold and Glory it essentially cleans and tidy ups AD&D 2e.

I'm not sure you can really excise things from 2E to make it into Basic. It's a pretty huge change. Races, classes, ability scores, proficiencies, equipment and spells, it's all different.

I used to think that race-as-class was really stupid, but as I've gotten older, I've come around on the issue. It makes a demihuman much more distinctive and not just another fighter/wizard/cleric/whatever with pointy ears, a small attribute adjustment, and the ability to see in the dark. The differences feel a lot less cosmetic.

Also consider that in Moldvay Basic, there are a total of 7 different classes, 4 human and 3 demihuman. In a human-centric campaign, where half the party is human, the demihuman races are getting a proportional amount of choice.

It's not a perfect system, as I find that dwarves and halflings are a little too close to just being fighters, but it's at least as good as the alternative. If you wanted to get fancy, you could give each demihuman race a couple of different exclusive classes to choose from (ACKS does something like this, though I don't have any real interest in that system because I don't care much for the domain management thing that's part of its main conceit). That's the sort of thing you'd probably want to do in a less human-centric world.

Also, I should add that there are a number of retroclones that take Basic and split race and class, Basic Fantasy, for instance.

All old school D&D uses the same core system, and you absolutely could play 2e like Basic. The problem is that one of the main advantages of Basic is that it doesn't have all the clutter, and even if you didn't play with it, you'd still be having to sift through it / read around it when referencing the rulebook. Still, you can simplify things and drop out the excess clutter, which is a step in that direction.

Honestly, I'd recommend that you just look over the Basic set of B/X to get an idea of the approach. The thing is only 64 pages long, and that includes shit like monsters and treasure, and how you play an RPG. The pic I posted here illustrates some of the difference between Basic and AD&D (though the tables here are from 1st edition).

AD&D spells tend to be more complicated and fiddly, with more complexity and more things that scale as you level. Here's sleep, for instance.

7 posts before the hate. Getting slow.

God. This. It is so much simpler than Cyclopedia/BECMI initiative. Just roll it and roll low. Want to spice things up? Add some weapon speed modifiers and casting times if you want. There you go. Advanced D&D it.

I'm in that. Or at least my name is.

I like the simplicity of group initiative, aside from the fact that there's a big power advantage to going first. So I like the have everybody on the team that goes first roll a d6, and on a 4-6, they don't get to act the first round. This means that, on average, whenever it is during the battle, the team that just acted has had 1/2 their number more attacks than the other team.

So, in order:
Team A: 1/2 act (advantage Team A by 1/2)
Team B: all act (advantage Team B by 1/2)
Team A: all act (for 1 1/2 total so far, advantage Team A by 1/2)
Team B: all act (for 2 total so far, advantage Team B by 1/2)
etc.

As far as who goes first, the DM normally just decides who makes sense, but otherwise rolls a d6 with 1-3 meaning the PCs and 4-6 meaning the monsters.

B/X Basic set. Standardized modifiers for attributes: 13-15 = +1, 16-17 = +2, 18 = +3 (so you don't get separately progressing hit probability, damage adjustment, and bend bars/open gates scores for strength, for instance). No system shock and resurrection survival scores. No bonus spells for high stats or maximum spell levels, or spell immunities, or chance of spell failure, or maximum number of spells per level.

No minimum or maximum attribute scores by race or gender. No minimum stats to qualify for a class. 7 total classes (fighter, magic-user, cleric, thief, elf, dwarf and halfling). No multiclassing (though an elf is in essence a fighter/magic-user and a halfling is a fighter with a bit of thief). So spell schools or material components for spells.

No weapon proficiencies or nonweapon proficiencies. 15 different weapons rather than 63+ (depending on whether you count something like "sling bullet" as a different weapon from "sling stone"). Weapons don't have different damages vs. large creatures. Ranged weapons don't have different rates of fire.

3 different types of armor (leather, chainmail, platemail) and 1 shield rather than 14 types of armor and 4 different shields. 3 different alignments (lawful neutral, chaotic) rather than 9.

Spells are simpler and don't change as much as you level. Etc. Basic is just much simpler all around.

Oh, and 128 pages for the whole game (64 for Basic Set, 64 for Expert Set) as opposed to more than 500 for just the PHB and DMG, which doesn't even give you any monsters to fight.

That was my first D&D.
Play it because it's pretty cool.
I wouldn't use it now that I know stuff like LotFP, but still, it was fun as fuck.

Another thing you might want to look at is Labyrinth Lord's Advanced Edition Companion. It's essentially a stripped down AD&D that is meant to be closer in line with Basic's streamlined core rules (and tries to be compatible with it, so that you can, for instance have a race-as-class elf in the same party with race-plus-class elf). I'd say it's only partially successful in that, as it's still a bit fiddly in places, but it's certainly a step in the right direction.

Kick ass settings for one. If you want the authentic Planescape experience then 2E is for you.

was it the one that also had spelljammers? because THATS the most kick ass of settings.

Planescape technically contains all of the other AD&D (and BD&D, but Mystara's an AD&D setting anyway) settings, so yes.

bump

>I guess to see what it was like in the olden days?

2e actually represents the shift towards what is usually expected in modern D&D - a focus on story-driven quest narratives and on fleshed-out fantasy world setting. The players create characters that fit into the world and are a part of it.

It also began the shift towards greater mechanical definition of class abilities and increasing complexity, with fighters gaining multiple attacks, the (optional) Nonweapon Proficiency system, and splatbooks containing hosts of kits.

Older systems like OD&D, B/X, Rules Cyclopedia have less in the way of rules and are more focused explicitly on dungeon-delving, often in mythic sorts of dungeons that didn't necessarily have to make a lot of coherent sense.

Mystara and Greyhawk are OD&D settings - gonzo with tons of wildly different stuff included (with the former originally focused around the megadungeon beneath Castle Greyhawk). Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance are products of 2e - the first a large and rich setting with tons of "not-historical country X" nations with detailed histories, and the second focused around a module series that send the players on an epic quest in the vein of Lord of the Rings.

There are of course exceptions to be found in both - some players were already using OD&D for LoTR-style adventure, but 2e definitely showed a major shift from a publishing standpoint.

Honestly? As someone who came from 3.pf I liked it.
Allot of it is a little more time intensive for DM's than those games, but it feels like you built something more organic.
The only hard part wasn't THAC0 but more the saves for everything, and some of the rules for like moral and turning, but it's pretty nice.
Plus it has some pretty nice fantasy settings for just about anything.

Not to say this isn't possible in other editions, but 2e was a nice compromise for our group. Like said, it represents a sort of middle ground between modern expectations of D&D and the previous dungeon-crawling fare.

I would want to add that 2e, should you feel like using its encounter tables and RAW, gives you lots of opportunities to be very unforgiving to the players. If--like our group--you understand that going in, it can be tons of fun going up against inexplicably difficult combat hurdles. The classes/races are actually very flexible if you use all the kits (and houserule a bit), and combined with then-new story-rich settings they offer lots of retro charm. Al-Qadim's Station rules and Zakharan laws were my personal favourite.

Combat and spell rules have surprising variety, as long as you aren't playing a Fighter. Things like a Berserker's 1-minute warmup, Samurai crits, auto-scaling spells, and optional features like Knockdown values and the like keep encounters engaging--especially if they're really hard and encourage ingenuity (2e also offers experience for 'completing' an encounter rather than killing it. Good for fostering player creativity).

We also greatly enjoyed THAC0, but part of it was because, after 3.5/4e, the numbers are mercifully restrained for the most part. Experience growth is slower, as well, making characters a tad more "realistic" in term of growth. Especially Wizards.

On that note, if your group struggles with Wizards being OP or some shit, 2e is a decent remedy when starting at low levels. One spell and a handful of HP makes one really weigh the risks compared to their more forgiving modern counterparts.

Because it's the best edition.

Most of what you're talking about came out in *1e* AD&D, though.
Even the focus on outside-of-dungeon worldbuilding and "Dungeon ecology" came out of Gygax's 1e fluff.

>To learn why older D&D players like 5e so much.
I have a weekly 2e group, and after trying out 5e, I've concluded that it's nearly impossible to die in that edition.
If you have no fear of death, like you would have in 2e, I posit that the roleplaying aspect is severely diminished.
It's difficult to be good if an easier and less deadly-to-yourself evil option presents itself.

Stop thinking of AC as the target number. Think of your Thac0 as the target number. No subtraction needed. It's just as easy as adding your d20 roll and the target's AC. If it meets or exceeds your Thac0, you hit. If not, you miss.

There, now everyone can stop being idiots.

Yeah, fair point. I'm thinking mostly here though of the influence of the big published settings like FR, Dragonlance, etc. which came out later during 2e.

I find it easy to write somewhere on the back of my character sheet the THAC0 chart, always helped.

For when you level up, sure. Otherwise that would be about as useful as having a chart that uses enemy AC as the target number. It uses the exact same math: adding two numbers. The only difference is the number you're looking to meet or exceed.

That should be, and usually is, handled quite well by the setting. You shouldn't need obtuse mechanical restrictions based on race.

Forgotten Realms was originally a 1e setting.
Dragonlance was originally a 1e setting, although the 1e hardback did introduce some class mechanics that would be carried over into 2e.
Oriental Adventures, which introduced nonweapon proficencies, was a 1e book. The DSG and WSG, which made proficeincies canon for non-oriental games, were 1e books.
Multiple attacks for Fighters existed in the original 1e PHB. They might even date back to OD&D. I'm including the "Attack a number of 0-level scrubs equal to your Fighter level here.
The original DMG monster stat list (Appendix E) included a column for THAC0, although it was mostly for the DM's convenience. In actual play you used the combat tables.

You could have suggested 2e was basically a cleanup and streamlining of 1e, because that's what it was. But you didn't.
You could have called anything after Unearthed Arcana "1.5e" and folded it into 2e. That's fair. But you didn't.

(I'll give you splat books, although UA did include a few pages of new classes, and options for some of the existing ones.)

>Forgotten Realms was originally a 1e setting.
Technically the setting predates D&D altogether.

I currently run 2e. I love kits and the flavor they add. I also kinda like thac0. I also just really love the art and style of everything.

Multiple levels of protection against spells, bonuses vs certain kinds of armor with certain weapons, weapon speeds factored into combat when seeing who rolls first, lots of reasons.

The only downside to it is that the way AC works isn't very intuitive, and the Monster Manual requires a few seconds to skim over enemies, so it's not as easy to just whip out a monster during a random encounter.

To figure out which mechanics to crib for other systems.

I'm jealous of this collection, but I'm getting there.

2nd edition is the most table/reference heavy edition, but that extra nuance is exactly what some people are looking for.

The 1 thing I don't like is that 90% of the weapons in 2nd edition are pointless. Most drops are longswords/shortswords, and most weapons have inferior stats to swords.

I play without weapon proficiency at all, so it doesn't matter.