D&D 2E On AD&D 2E

I think whether you think 2e or 3e had the larger optimized to non-optimized span depends on what you experienced and what you consider outliers to be excluded from the lines of best fit, etc.

• If your 2e experience was group 1 playing with a swashbuckler or savage fighter kit and a PosM from Complete Priests and group 2 playing double-longsword-wielding Myrmidon (or 18/00 strength TWF dart-specialist in a no-magic-requiring-enemies campaign) and Priest of Faerun PosM, you would say that the 2e might have had the bigger span (and if you include spellfire wielders or some of the alternate magic systems from the PO series, well then all bets are off).
• If your 3e experience was group 1 with 1-20 fighters using all their many feats to pick up weapon focus and specialization in both longsword and bow alongside rangers, bards, and maybe a (decadent-feeling) mystic theurge and then group 2 has hulking hurlers and early-entry double-caster PrCs (double-9th level spells by 20th level) and so on, you might consider 3e the more expansive (with pun-pun obviously being the data point which wrecks the analysis).

Regarding social climate, I don't think it works specifically in one way. The 2e era there was certainly less online activity where people could pick up someone else's ideas, but it also meant that there were fewer instances where you would post your idea and someone else would point out the flaws, lambast it as Cheeze, or whatnot.

Voadam said:

I think you are generalizing your 3d6 in order Ravenloft experience social to be closer to a baseline AD&D social climate than high power and optimization models of AD&D and I think that is a personal experience bias.

Click to expand...

It was the default method in the 2e PHB though. Definitely that could vary by setting for things like Darksun, but it wasn't limited to Ravenloft

Voadam said:

D&D was a huge variety of playstyles that varied a lot between groups and products.

Click to expand...

This I 100% agree with. I am not saying every group played the same. But I am saying my experience in the 90s generally, and with 2E in particular, was leaning more into characterization (and optimization still being more widely frowned upon than it was in the 2000s).

Voadam said:

2e Dark Sun by the book could have starting humans with 20s in ability scores and everyone having a psionic wild talent guaranteed. Look at 1e Unearthed Arcana Human rolls stat generation method. Unearthed Arcana double specialization, cavaliers who improved their physical stats every level, underdark racial options with lots of powers and defenses.

Click to expand...

Sure, I am not talking about AD&D in general (though I would still say it's harder to min max AD&D than 3E). I am talking about the 2E era, which has some crucial differences.

Voadam said:

Dragon magazine classes. I know my brother and I looked through the 2e Legends and Lore and Forgotten Realms adventures specifically scanning the potentials of the different specialty priests. I didn't own Complete Elves but I heard about Bladesinging. I mostly avoided playing thieves in B/X, 1e, and 2e because of their mechanical and combat crappiness (I played a few but not many).

Click to expand...

Again though these were all optional. If you open up all the options from Dragon magazine, of course you are going to find wonky combos. The difference is, during 3E the default assumption was much friendlier to players selection what ever options they wanted. In 2E, there were options but the expectation was they would be heavily vetted by the GM. And 2E had a much, much more restrictive multiclassing system. 3E opened up class dipping, had prestige classes, added in things like feats and it had a more potent skill system. These all allowed for a much more robust level of optimization. And if the GM couldn't keep up with the optimization, it made it very difficult to throw anything challenging at them. That wasn't nearly the same issue in 2E.

Voadam said:

I think there are plenty of groups who would have been into collaborating on power optimization and builds if forums had been as accessible a thing at the time.

Click to expand...

Sure, and especially if you throw in later books like skills and powers, you can get some crazy stuff. But the overall mood of that time was different. You didn't have wish lists, you didn't have the crazy builds you can get in 3E.

Voadam said:

Certainly enough for a bustling community to have developed.

Click to expand...

I think you could have built a community around it. But I also think it would have been more work, it wouldn't have been as effective, and you would have had to contend more with the GM not allowing options.

Bedrockgames said:

It was the default method in the 2e PHB though. Definitely that could vary by setting for things like Darksun, but it wasn't limited to Ravenloft

Click to expand...

It was also only one of six core methods printed in the Player's Handbook.

Page 18 of the revised PH:

Let’s first see how to generate ability scores for your character, after which definitions of each ability will be given.
The six ability scores are determined randomly by rolling six-sided dice to obtain a score from 3 to 18. There are several methods for rolling up these scores.

Alternative Dice-Rolling Methods
Method I creates characters whose ability scores are usually between 9 and 12. If you would rather play a character of truly heroic proportions, ask your DM if he allows players to use optional methods for rolling up characters. These optional methods are designed to produce above-average characters.

Voadam said:

It was also only one of six core methods printed in the Player's Handbook.

Page 18 of the revised PH:

Let’s first see how to generate ability scores for your character, after which definitions of each ability will be given.
The six ability scores are determined randomly by rolling six-sided dice to obtain a score from 3 to 18. There are several methods for rolling up these scores.

Alternative Dice-Rolling Methods
Method I creates characters whose ability scores are usually between 9 and 12. If you would rather play a character of truly heroic proportions, ask your DM if he allows players to use optional methods for rolling up characters. These optional methods are designed to produce above-average characters.

Click to expand...

I realize that but importantly those are labeled "Alternative Dice-Rolling Methods" and 3d6 in order is presented as the first and default method:



One of the great things about 2E was all the options. So I am not saying people didn't use the other methods. But I think it is significant that this was the default

Bedrockgames said:

One of the great things about 2E was all the options. So I am not saying people didn't use the other methods. But I think it is significant that this was the default

Click to expand...

Why? What do you think that changes?

Willie the Duck said:

Why? What do you think that changes?

Click to expand...

I think it is important because people are more likely to use the default method, and it is an indication from the designers that this is the expected way to generate ability scores. Again, people clearly used other methods. But this was certainly the one I encountered the most (I know a lot of 2E players for example who were surprised when they went back to 1E that it didn't use that method).

I don't know. I mean, 5e's default method is rolling, and most people seem to prefer point-buy. I don't think it's possible to find a consensus on how many people used Method I, but given the high stats most characters I saw had, I'm pretty sure it wasn't all that popular, lol.

One thing you keep saying about 2e is all these books were optional, thus preventing a CharOp mindset from coming into play. But so were all the 3e books! No DM was forced to use Magic of Arcanum, Tome of Battle, or Complete Adventurer, just as no DM was forced to use The Complete Sha'ir's Handbook or any Dragon Magazine content.

The main difference, as I see it, between the community that built up around the two editions was not only the internet, but the mindset of the role of the player and the DM.

In 2e, the DM was still considered the absolute authority, who no doubt had reams of house rules, and their own curated list of what was "kosher" for their tables.

In the year 2000, you had a lot of new players and a lot of old players who now had a forum to share their stories of DM power gone horribly wrong, and this mindset of "trust the rules, not the DM" began to appear, where in the TSR era, you couldn't trust the rules because there was simply too much vagueness that required a DM to sort out.

Random Example: The Complete Book of Humanoids doesn't allow Centaurs to be Priests, but Monster Mythology has a writeup for specialty Priests of Skerrit, the God of Centaurs. Paging the DM!

With all the effort put into balancing the game, surely what WotC was giving us could be trusted! Nothing is wrong with any of their player options! Surely if you gave players assumed wealth and magic items and used the CR system, nothing could go wrong!

Ah, how innocent we were. But it was an attractive illusion, since you could aim the rulebooks at stingy, recalcitrant DM's and tell them they were doing it wrong, a far cry from Gary's rants that if you were to give players a fair shake, they would utterly destroy your game world!

And of course, by the time we knew better, we were invested in the system, and, thanks to the OGL, the system was everywhere even if you wanted to change games, lol!

Sure, WotC eventually fessed up, but their solution to that was to sell us more books! Who didn't love getting errata to Polymorph in Complete Arcane or rebalanced magic items in the Magic Item Compendium? And of course, things like the Tome of Battle broke the community in half "wut, you mean martials are supposed to be good? Blasphemy!".

But I digress. Optimization was certainly there (anyone who has played Pool of Radiance or Baldur's Gate I knows), but there was a limit on what the DM would put up with, and it wasn't like most people had a plethora of other groups they could play with. Plus, people who scoured rulebooks for cool new options were NERDS, amirite?

James Gasik said:

I honestly never played at a table in 2e that even considered Method I, it's something I always associated with Basic D&D (and I'm not even sure how prevalent it was in that version of the game).

Click to expand...

4d6k3 and arrange as you like was my 2e group's preferred method (no idea which of the many methods this was). When we played BECMI it was 3d6 in order, but that game had a system where you could reduce some stats to raise your prerequisite which helped a bit.

Bedrockgames said:

I think it is important because people are more likely to use the default method, and it is an indication from the designers that this is the expected way to generate ability scores. Again, people clearly used other methods. But this was certainly the one I encountered the most (I know a lot of 2E players for example who were surprised when they went back to 1E that it didn't use that method).

Click to expand...

I've always felt that the reason 4d6k3 became the default for 3e was due to how many people were using it. I believe there was a playtest for 3e, maybe that was a question asked.