Advanced DND Thread

Well, that's retarded

You can always mix the two (or more) class abilities freely. One simply earns no experience for the encounter should abilities be mixed prior to subsequent class level exceeding previous, and ¼ experience for the adventure.

This means that between adventures a W14/Psi5 or some such could create magical items with no penalty—the character would simply earn no XP for creating the items.

Well, I'm sure they've fix it when 3rd edition comes out.

sorry but that would not let people just be dead weights for the party?

Subhuman filth multi-classes.
• must be done at char gen
• no restrictions beyond those for the ethnicity
• xp is evenly divided between classes (they level separately)
• full abilities from each class
• fractional HD from each class (by number of classes)

Humanity (fuck yeah) dual-classes.
• can be done at any level up
• requires 15 in all your old class's important attributes
• requires 17 in all your new class's important attributes
• cannot retake an old class
• xp goes entirely to the new class
• full abilities of new class
• old classes abilities screw your xp gains (until you pass your old level)
• no new HD (until you pass your old level) (classing out of Wizard screws you)

It's very loosely based on the OD&D class change rules in Men & Magic.
• must be done between sessions
• requires 17 in all your new class's important attributes
• elves can switch to Fighting-Men or Magic-Users, attributes be damned
• can retake old classes (with good attributes) (note your old xp)
• xp goes entirely to the new class
• full abilities of new class
• lose all old abilities
• lose all old HD, too (note your old hp)

I'we played a fair amount of AD&D and I don't think I've ever seen a dual-classed character actually get used. The rules for dual-classing are so stupid that every group I've seen seems to have dropped them, like alignment languages and those to-hit adjustments for each weapon vs. each individual AC that are in the 1e PHB.

>Well, that's retarded
Pretty much.

>the OD&D class change rules in Men & Magic.
Oh. Also, former MUs could never become Clerics. (and vice-versa)

Then you've never run an adventure since millions of published NPCs are dual-classed.

My preference in Basic, but it really depends on what you're looking for. AD&D is more detailed. It has more classes, more spells, more races, more moving parts. I'm okay with most of that, but it also adds a bunch of needless fiddly stuff. It adds percentile strength. It adds separate system shock and resurrection survival scores (they're always just 5% points away from each other until they start scrunching up over 90%--why bother?). It adds race and gender minimum and maximum ability scores. The spells have more unnecessarily scaling parts and are generally more involved just for the sake of being more involved.

Simply put, I think that Basic is a much better product for what it covers. It's just a question of whether it covers enough for you. If you're looking for a short campaign, the more limited options Basic affords is probably less of a consideration, as you won't wear them out. Otherwise, Moldvay Basic (B/X) still gives you a nice, streamlined foundation on which to build, and the fact that it shares the same core system as AD&D makes it very easy to selectively lift material from the latter (making AD&D a good well of resources for Basic). The one big issue you might have with Basic is the race-as-class approach, where "elf" is a class just like "cleric" or "thief". I used to think that was dumb, but I've grown fond of the idea over the years. It makes demihumans more distinctive, and given the small number of classes in Basic, and the idea that the world is human-centric, it's about the right number of classes to devote to demihumans (3 out of 7 are demihuman race/classes). There are, however, retroclones of Moldvay Basic that split race and class, like Basic Fantasy, for instance, so you have options as far as that goes.

>Then you've never run an adventure since millions of published NPCs are dual-classed.
NPCs are different from PCs. The stupidest parts of dual-classing don't really affect them. Monsters don't usually even have information on ability scores and shit and they run just fine. Also, I think you're overestimating the number of dual-classed characters, and that only applies to modules in any case.

Go back to your containment thread.

> Monsters don't usually even have information on ability scores and shit and they run just fine.
Classified Trade Secret: If you do that with PCs, they still run just fine. :Do no steal!

>What were the good parts?
Playing it.
>What were the bad parts?
What fucking page are saving throws on, again? Let's just go to the local library and photo copy the tables out out of the seventeen different books that the ones I need are spread across.

hurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

That hole was made for you.

It's based on your movement rate. Something like 1/4th I think? So 3 spaces for normal humans.
The indexing sucked dick, that's for sure. The profusion of save or die in monsters (though you can just not use those ones). Qualifying for classes was pretty damn tough for any but the basic 4, a bard, druid, or god help you a paladin required damn high stats. Specialist wizards, too. Dual classing is strong as fuck but almost impossible to qualify for. The profusion of 2.5e Player's Option dogshit was awful as well. Plenty to call the 'bad parts', but all easily ignored or fixed.

>Go back to your containment thread.
Yes, let's not hear from people with informed opinions.

Real Man books would always be catered to the True AD&D® system while only paying nominal "lip service" to the "Player's Option" system, advising one that the rules presented can easily be adapted to it. Real authors would write for Real Men in this way, refusing to bend the knee to Lorraine's demented protégé Skip (show us the birth certificate).

This is the True AD&D® thread. Hipsters who want to pretend that inferior rulesets are superior in some way are to be contained in their "OSR" general thread.

I like you, friend.

I'd fly a Spelljammer with you any day.

Settle for shotgun in my lifejammer?

Good: Actual class roles that the game is built around, it stays lethal throughout the entire game, magic items are more interesting, every class but Thief is 100% viable, monsters have plenty of noncombat descriptions, tons of good setting material, stat checks are way better than any later edition of D&D because each point matters, the game is built so that not having exactly X stats doesn't instantly disqualify you from being relevant.

Bad: Monster design is schizophrenic, it's too lethal at low levels, it's more complex than B/X and BECMI without much improvement, there are still monsters that exist solely as gotchas everywhere, Thieves are shit, multiclassing is overpowered and the main restriction against it will almost never come up ever, dual classing is overpowered once it comes together but is shit before then and is clunky anyways, the sweet spot of the game where mages and warriors are on par with each other doesn't last long enough so most of the time at least one party member is having a bad time, splats range from okay to horrible.

No thanks, being converted to fuel isn't my idea of a fun vacation. Tell you what though, my cousin has a Bardic Helm we can borrow!

>monsters that exist solely as gotchas everywhere

I want to hear about some of these.

The problem with Thac0 compared to AC is that there's simply more steps and a bit more convoluted ideas going on in the explaination of the rules than what AC offers.

In Thac0 you're trying to determine the number you actually need to roll. So calculation occurs before the rolling even begins which is tricky since players wanna be on that shit and so will often roll pre-emptively after they've decided on their action.

You then have to subtract the opponent's AC from your Thac0 which at first sounds easy but there's always a step people fuck up on and that's that negative numbers when subtracted are added... yea did that make sense to you by just me saying it? I thought so. It's one of those mathematical jargons that works only if you wrap your head around what a negative number is which is a bit of an abstract concept.

So already we have a system that tells a player they need to figure out the number they need to roll over, so rolling does them no good first, and they need to subtract from a number on their sheet to figure out what that is. Another issue here is that, and this is purely a psychological thing but, people find counting up more pleasant and easy than counting down.

Compared to AC which mathematically gets us the same result but is done with the rolling being a necessary and early step and only involves addition and comparing against a base number. It's a bit more straightforward and avoids the whole negative number debaucle.

lomion.de/cmm/rustmons.php
lomion.de/cmm/fungus.php
lomion.de/cmm/cloaker.php
lomion.de/cmm/mimic.php
lomion.de/cmm/parasite.php

>You then have to subtract the opponent's AC from your Thac0

>we have a system that tells a player they need to figure

Well, strictly speaking the DM does all the thac0 calculations so for players its actually simpler because they only have to roll and see what happens. It's good for absolute beginners.
And most DMs will be right on top of what you need to hit, knowing the player's thac0s and the AC of the targets.

I dunno, I like it.

>crossbows do less damage than regular bows.

Seems fine to me, Froggy.

>And most DMs will be right on top of what you need to hit, knowing the player's thac0s and the AC of the targets.

I mean except for the ones that don't.

And it's not like AC doesn't offer the exact merits that you're stating? It just asks the player to be involved with the mathing which is arguably GOOD since it lets them feel like they have some agency in the game.

"Hey Billy, roll this dice and add this number tell me what you got" and he just compares it to the AC.

And if you're gonna bring up the guy who's like "what do I roll again" lets be fair he was ALWAYS THERE even in AD&D.

Like I dunno man. I can't think of any benefit Thac0 brings to the table that AC doesn't unless you're just really invested in the idea that it's the NUMBER ON THE DICE THAT MATTERS MAN.

>I mean except for the ones that don't.
They're supposed to write that shit down.

The hell are you prioritizing over that on your screen?

>I mean except for the ones that don't.

I dunno man. I'm not going to tell you what you like is wrong, but I can't account for DMs not using the system properly.

Personally, when I play I don;t really get much enjoyment from engaging to the game on a mechanical level. So fighting in modern systems dosen't do it for me, i guess. I'm not a fan of rolling, then adding bonuses/modifiers etc and reporting a total. It clinicises the excitement for me. I get that some folk like it, that's fine.

On occasions when I do add a number to my roll its something special and probably due to magic or exceptional skill of my character not just some expected bonuses. I like that.

I like describing how I fight an orc, rolling, and hearing how my efforts worked out. I think its neat. For all the piles of rules in 2e and what-not, when thac0 is properly used its really smooth and my imagination dosen't have to take time off to recall numbers or mechanisms very much. It's nice.

I think having monsters that take levels away was one of the meanest things in AD&D. In one of the ravenloft modules one of the boss vampires can steal five levels with their attack.

Levels are much more easily recovered than CON points, though.

It was really only full-bastard level if it was sprung on you unavoidably without warning. Its pretty neat if its built to and the characters know about how dangerous it is and they choose to confront the vampire anyway. It's heroic and they get to make a plan and execute it knowing what can happen if the worst occurs.

I like how it encouraged players to fight vampires properly. That is, staking them in their lair during the day. Bastard DMs always want to force some kind of fight so they can use all the neat powers and stuff but really that's a failure state against a vampire or wight or whatever it is.

It is a weird power though. Life energy levels? But of an imaginative stretch.

I don't remember any five-level draining vampires, but I don't doubt you at all. That's gotta be some vampire.

>This is the True AD&D® thread.
From OP: "ITT we talk about AD&D and how it compares to other editions."

It's kind of hard to compare AD&D to other editions if you can't talk about other editions. Also, I'm not sure many people outside of /osr/ are gonna understand the significance of True AD&D®.

>I think having monsters that take levels away was one of the meanest things in AD&D.
On one hand, I agree that it really sucks if it happens to you. On the other, I have to say that very effectively puts the fear of god into your players, which is a fitting reaction to the undead.

You die from loss of levels much faster than loss of CON, man.

Not to mention every level lost means you have that much less everything.

*casts lesser restoration*

Is there anyway to apply Thac0 in a later edition for the purpose of an antediluvian eldritch abomination as a mechanic, or any other older ruleset?

Vampires had age categories in Ravenloft, and the extension of the larger expanse of D&D. By Age 1000, which they could cheat using aging mathods anyhow if they didn't gain a salient weakness, they could effectively become Castlevania's Dracula as a Great Old One, capable of widespread undead control, absurd spawn creation, mental domination by awareness and voice, tap into their owned lands leylines, drain more levels than ever, drain in mist form and pop out quickly for a last scare as they lay inert in a coffin.

It was fucking great. To note Orcus's average servitor vampire is around the age 500 mark.

I don't know what lesser restoration is, but restoration is a 7th level cleric spell (which means you have to be 14th level and have an 18 wisdom to cast it), and it has to be cast within one day per caster level of the time when the level drain occurred.

Neat!

>In Thac0 you're trying to determine the number you actually need to roll. So calculation occurs before the rolling even begins which is tricky since players wanna be on that shit and so will often roll pre-emptively after they've decided on their action.
Just subtract the roll from your THAC0, you get the AC you can hit

>THAC0 - AC = Roll
>THACO - Roll = AC

>Is there anyway to apply Thac0 in a later edition?
there is this homebrew

I agree that THAC0 isn't as intuitive, but it's really just a different way of solving the same equation, and when it comes right down to it, it's very easy enough to convert between the systems:

>Ascending AC = 20 - Descending AC
>Attack Bonus = 20 - THAC0

So if you've got a guy with a 17 THAC0 striking at a guy in chainmail armor (AC 5), that becomes a guy with a +3 Attack Bonus striking at a guy with a 15 AC.

Or you could just reference a pre-made table, like the one in the pic here.

It depends, Characters are still pretty effective even on lower levels and the most common Multiclass is usually something like a Fighter -> Mage or Cleric

Even though you become a low level spell caster you still have the Hit points of a high level fighter and there are a few low level spells that let you remain useful, even moreso if you have some decent gear.

>Multiclass
Although it's implied, I meant to type DualClass

I remember the other way round showing up in one of the Maztica Trilogy novels. Halloran's like a Mage 1/Fighter 3-4 or something, and his dinky magic skills actually come in handy a couple of times.

THAC0 was the natural transition from the combat tables to a mathematical formulae while keeping descending AC.
Base Attack Bonus was the natural evolution of that, with the cost of ascending AC.

There's no need for THAC0 in any new retroclone. It is a relic of the past that did its job the best it could do until a better way was created.

In Birthright they changed crossbows to not only do more, but have an armor piercing property as well.
Ravenloft added so much cool stuff. It's a shame it's been shitcanned for so long.

Aye, There's a number of low level spells that remain potent even at higher level play.

Even lower level martial characters can be relevant due to modifiers not creeping nearly as hard in ADND compared to modern versions.
As an example a stone giant has 0 AC which is the equivalent of ANYONE wearing Fullplate + shield and monsters with negative armor class are relatively rare

Faggots are innately aware of meme magic

>one day per caster level
Oh no! You have to be within 2 weeks of a Clerical stronghold! That ~never~ happens.
If your party is a bunch of assholes, you can also cut deals with clerics you meet in the dungeon.

It's still technically canon by 3.5 too, Monsters of Faerun showed the Lich salient abilities from Vr's guide to the lich and now the World serprent Inn let's you visit (and escape) Ravenloft, much to the dark powers chargrin, and there was an adventure visiting Lord Soth's Domain after he'd left it, many of the abilities for vampires were unfortunately shafted into the Orcus owned Vampire Lord template, which later pretty much erased all of this hierachy and structure in 4e-5e. To also note, Kanchelsis, the god of vampires was also in 3.5 but they accidentally rewrote him twice before publishing him correctly in a Dragon magazine issue, and they Made Vlad Tolenkov all the way from 1e's Demon Web pits Lolth's private consort, mentioned in hordes of the Abyss, next to detailing his layer of the Abyss in the web enhancement for that book.

They even gave 2 statblocks for classic 2e Strahd in the Dragon Magazine. Expedition to Castle Ravenloft, luckily was non-canon and a remake of the original adventure, applicable to multiple campaign settings.

While I think AD&D is rather an archaic and bloated system that is mostly fondly remembered through the tunnel vision of nostalgia and house rules it did have some absolutely fantastic DM and game running advice that it's a real shame don't seem to have survived into the modern era of gaming.

Take the advice on page 21 of the DMG pictured here which succinctly explains why your group of catkin, gnolls and half fox's make for a pretty shitty game. (Iong story short there's nothing to relate to in the narrative). I've yet to see this put so we'll anywhere else as modern game design seems to think being able to play a psychic, half-day, fairy vampire is a sign of good design or 'player freedom.

Likewise the specific campaign guide book for AD&D linked below

>>google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://dnd.rem.uz/Advanced%20D%26D%20(unsorted)/Dungeon%20Masters%20Guide%20V.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwjxssSVoKfVAhUHKcAKHcjmCqAQFghdMAw&usg=AFQjCNF2ClxAStcfLj8T9k-ppm--bcT5pw

Has some fantastic no nonsense advice on the social contract, getting players to clean up after themselves and a great piece on fudging that strikes a balance between maintaing the fair nature of the game but not dicking everyone over due to a bad dice roll. It also stresses the the role of the dungeon master takes actual work, dedication and effort and turning up unprepared to a session is always poor show. This seems to contrast with the modern philosophy in many games where the rules are treated as a shit show for hilarious antics where the DM is often encouraged to turn up having prepared nothing.

So I wish we had more advice like that in our games these days and I wish the AD&D rules were written as succinctly as the advice given as I might still play it today.

Since this should be common sense, anyone can read and rewrite that same advice in their respective DMG, right?

Anyone ever make a SRD of game mastering?

>Take the advice on page 21 of the DMG pictured here which succinctly explains why your group of catkin, gnolls and half fox's make for a pretty shitty game

All it does is describe that human emotions and understanding/culture should be at the center of your adventure... which yea is obvious but I don't see how things like cat-people are worse than elves or dwarves in that respect???

Like sure if your party are all sentient clouds, xenomorphs, talking trees, etc I could understand the issue he's bringing up but as long as everyone involved has some level of anthromorphism and sapience that is undeniably human or relatable on some level then the issue isn't really an issue.

Now with that said if your characters ONLY DEFINING FEATURE is that they're a fox anthro and you just wanna describe their knot then yea go fuck yourself but I think outright forbading the entire concept in fantasy is a bit much.

Not that user, but try taking off your Furry-colored glasses and pretending that "catkin, gnolls and half foxes" are monsters.
Now reread the whole page.

Although, you do have a point about how elves and dwarves should be alien too. But at leat they are accepted in many fantasy human cultures.

I'm sure a bunch of people shit on this opinion, but humano-centric worlds really are the best.

Monster characters either ends up bland or as "humans, but better"

Agreed.
And I'm saying that as a lover of multiple non-human race options.
Non-human PCs should be odd exceptions to their race, to be adventuring in the human world.

Can half elves use the Book of Elves classes? I know Bladesinger was explicitly said to be a no go but it didn't say for the others

The books are guidelines, just do what you think it's fun (with the DM's approval)

>every class but Thief is 100% viable
How would you fix them?
I'd give them a d8 hit die and let them basically take the Cleric's THAC0 whilst also maybe letting them spec in daggers, shortswords, or shortbows

Backstab can be used more easily. The increased damage potential is diminished because of worse THAC0, reducing damage per round to be close to Fighter.

You forgot the weirdest thing about dual classing: until your new class retakes your old one, you are not allowed to use any of the features from your old class except the HD. You have to limp along pretending that you're not already an experienced adventurer. If you dual class out of fighter into a class with worse attacks, you have to swing your sword worse than you already know how to swing it until your new class retakes your old one. Same thing with saving throws - you have to let the breath weapon hit you or you don't get any XP. Don't ask me how this works if you have to save vs. something you're not aware of, like if someone poisons your wine.

Yes, they can. In fact, at least one can ONLY be a half elf because it's a triple class.
Just give them back Assassinate and they'll be great again ;)
For real though, as a multiclass option it's great to have thief as a second. On it's own, it feels more like a henchman class.

Been a while since I played AD&D but don't bows have a draw strength, and if you don't have a good enough Strength score, you can't use the bow, whereas pretty much everybody can use a crossbow?

And aren't swords are good until you have to fight undead and then you're better using a mace or other blunt weapon?

You can use a bow, but if you have really low strength you do less damage. However, high strength adds to damage so it's better for most warriors than a crossbow. Fires faster, can do a lot more damage, and has longer range.

Yeah, I seemed to recall bows being better for fighters, but crossbows being better for those with low strength scores. Also, weren't darts good, too, because you could throw a bunch on your turn?

Crossbows got upgraded in Combat & Tactics (the part of it written by L. Richard Baker III as an update for actual AD&D and not the part written by demon-spawn of Lorraine Skip Williams).

• Light crossbow does 1d6+1 S/M 1d8+1 L
• Heavy crossbow does 1d8+1 S/M 1d10+1 L

Both got increased rates of fire for specialists. Also bonus to hit and damage at point-blank range.

Darts are pretty good, but like any weapon with multiple attacks you only make half of the attacks on your first go around for initiative normally, the second half at the end of the initiative round. For short range thrown weapons like darts the enemies will probably have engaged you or your allies in melee. Firing into melee is, as always, a really bad idea.
A dart specialist fighter with high strength can, in theory, shred shit but in practice it won't come up much.

Darts are super good in both ADnD and Baldur's Gate for this reason.

>Mage is out of spell points.
>Tosses 7 darts a round with stacking poison effects.
>suddenly the boss is taking 1d2x7piercing and 1d6x7 poison one just round one.
>the mage doesn't even cast a spell and the boss just DoTs to death within 2-3 rounds of poison.
>not to mention enchanted darts with cold/stunning/sleep spells on them

Holy shit darts are good. So cheap to enchant or even straight up buy.

That's how I've always played it myself

>there's always a step people fuck up on and that's that negative numbers when subtracted are added... yea did that make sense to you by just me saying it? I thought so.

Come the fuck on, two negatives making a positive is like grade-school algebra. I still find Thac0 unintuitive, but don't pretend this is some high math.

I don't see lots of comments about "AD&D broken builds"

Is it just darts and the bladesinger from complete elf that get hate?

>But at leat they are accepted in many fantasy human cultures.

.... noooo

they're accepted in many northern european/gaelic cultures sure but

by and large animal people/shapeshifters are MUCH more prevalent.

And the specific KIND of elf/dwarf in D&D is some kind of bastardized version of Tolkein's.

There's plenty of broken shit espeically if you take into a lot of the later supplements that were pushed out to make ridiculous shit for short-term gain.

It's just that the internet didn't really exist when AD&D was big.

plenty of broken builds laid out there if you look at the old AD&D videogames, but they use altered rulesets for the most part, many taking from 3.5e and AD&D, at least in terms of spells.

It doesn't get used in every-day circumstances so it's still something your average person can pause on.

The question isn't whether or not the math is complicated it's whether or not the math is intuitive and asking people to remember that subtracting negative numbers to add them simply isn't an intuitive expression of mathematical language.

Its from Thoughts of Darkness which is a kind of silly module involving vampire mindflayers. The vampire who does it is Strahd's grandniece.

Picked up the DMG for twelve bucks
How'd I do? Sadly no one nearby carried anything else aside from some handbooks on classes and elves

Yeah, she also makes it canon that VAMPIRES ARE NOT ACTUALLY IMMUNE TO AGING because they stack age effects due to their age category system, so she kills her husband (Typical CE behavior) to piss off his ghost to age her. In effect, a Vampire's appearance is locked as they were when they died, but underneath they're pretty much the age the actually are. VR mentioned it in his guide, and It was even mentioned in an even vaguer sense in 3.5, and with Ravenloft still being canon there, AND the Vampire Ilithid somehow ending up statted for 3.5 with unknown origins, It's safe to say that hilarious exploit is still a thing.

Even funnier? Under a more roleplay oriented ruleset, Vampires energy drain actually take years off a person's lifespan, sthey slap you into becoming a pensioneer if you're unlucky enough to encounter one.

Thanks to this exploit, it means that a PC with knowledge of this, can become a vampire, use wish to ensure their original personality is not overwritten, take over a barony, and proceed to stack the aging effects with wishes, creatures that can age them, staffs of either until they Become Caine from World of Darkness, and can probably Energy Drain the Divine Rank out of a god or strangle them to death with their silly Ability scores.

Of course, it's also a way to fuck a vampire over if you take in consideration their bloodthirst needs, except it doesn't. At all. Even though Lyssa was a Ravenloft Nosferatu Vampire WHICH RUNS ON BLOOD AS A NECESSITY TO SURVIVE (Base MM Vampires are negative energy subservient, preying on blood as an inescapable craving) she got aged some 300 years by her Husband's agiing touch. So the way it screws them over is that the Vampire missed out on any abilities they would gain as a Lord of Land. This does not however prevent them from becoming Elder Evil or a Demon Lord, however.

Actually wait, I nearly forgot to mention, due to how Vampires work, age 1000 Patriarchs can effectively serve as either a Demon lord, Archdevil, or whatever the equivalent is, based on what they chose their extra Polymorph form to be and how their lord of the Land abilities work. Notably though, there was no coverage on the concept of variant vampire Dhampirs, despite them being a thing.

Ravenloft also had Vorlogs, which were ex-vampire victims tainted with their "lovers embrace" to the degree where the reenact the "tradegy" that saved them as partially vampiric creatures in their own right.

Couple this next to the vampire bride ritual and the fact that Ravenloft did cover the concept of diablerie and 3.5 has VTMB tier ghouls, D&D vampires are fucking broken as shit.

Liches get Salient abilities, Lich Power rituals, Lich Artefacts and Lich Spells/Dweomers and Planar Management abilities and variant abilites as demilichs, but the Vampire? Fuck man, the only reason they're not a bigger threat is that they all die in droves like Buffy vampires because they're all uncontrollable CE fucks.

Any vampire past 500 is the shit you don't want to fight, even at epic level.

Depends on condition, but that pic makes it seem pretty decent (still glossy as fuck) so 12 bucks isn't bad.
Beware of ebay... it's all shit or overpriced. Garage sales are amazing to find game shit at

Yeah its in really good condition
One corner is a little worn on the back but all the pages are perfect as is the binding
Funny enough they all, local stores that is, had most of the AD&D 1e reprints for Gary's funeral

Infact, to list how broken things can get going with 2e-3.5's
>Human Greater Vampire (Patriarch)
>3 Levels in Vampire Master
>9 Levels in Lifedrinker (doesn't need the 10th, sunlight immune already, but can take if he wants to use his base powers in sunlight)
>Necrotic Reserve feat, because fuck dying
>Enhanced Undead Template for extra anti-fun
>Took up the Demonomicon of Iggwilv Demon Lord Template, or polymorphs into an existing Demon Lord found in published Dragon Magazine coverage
>Takes Swarmshifter, so now it's got it's bat form, in regular and swarm mode wolf form, mist form, and final Castlevania Dracula tier final form)
>Never got a single Salient weakness in it's 1000 years due to aging exploit cheat
>Has the Sign of the Smoking Eye template, so he can cast all aligned spells without error, is also Demon Lord of said layer of the Abyss this template pertains to
>This also lets him never ping properly under check
>Can once per day heal completely when shapeshifting (Best applied with BEHOLD MY TRUE FORM AND DESPAIR)
>Can make Blood Ghouls, those he does me makes into Vampire Brides, or has them take Death's Chosen levels
>Probably has both Katane and Dhampir offspring with a bloodline they have with the Vampire Bloodline class thing.
>Doesn't make spawn, because they're effectively deployable disposable demipowers at this point, and he could flood the multiverse to death with them if he wished.

Hell, according to VR's guide, aging for Vampires is how they gain XP, because they're too lazy so you literally can end up with an infinite XP pool because of the aging exploit, I love how VR basically interviewd a Patriarch (How in the fuck) and confirmed most patriarchs are so old they're no longer CE vampires because they've hit Dead Apostle Ancestors levels of Jyhad boredom because of all the luck and trial and error involved in reaching such a state of supreme power.

From how I understand it, the power level creep goes like this

>Kanchelsis, Immediate Vampire deity that does fuck all because he's basically the defective offspring of divine race-mixing, benefits of a Immediate deity and Patriarch vampire with no salient weaknesses, levels in Rogue and Wizard
>Vlad Tolenkov from 1e, who by 3.5 is the Consort of Lloth and head of the Union of Eclipses, the old peoples club who barely get together to give their sire the faith he needs to do fuck all in his layer of the Abyss because he wants to Camarilla, but his sire won't let him. Is also the reason Drow like vampires the way they do.
>Union of Eclipses (Multiversal gathering of the oldest vampires who trace their lineage to Kanchelsis)
>Unnamed Patriarch Van Richten Interviewed
And somewhere at the lowest, Strahd.

D&D vampire lore is pretty neato. Shame it got shafted for Orcus, just like Liches.

Which Monsterous Manual do I want? A local store has II, but I'd be willing to buy 1 online if it's the better choice

Strahd is extremely powerful, dude, but not due to vampirism really. He's a high level necromancer, a Dark Lord, and extremely intelligent. He's probably the most dangerous Dark Lord in the setting, to be honest. Some others are deadlier in combat, some are sneakier and plot better, but Strahd is a big thinker and long term planner. He'll let people go into his keep, mess up his stuff and steal from him all as a prelude to them using all that junk to fuck with his rivals.
The Monstrous Compendium is better, I think. That, and there's always Lomion for whatever else you might need.

thanks
Now I'm debating on which PHB to get...for an extra twenty bucks I can get the premium or the black of a as of yet unknown quality though