D&D 2E Let's Read the AD&D 2nd Edition PHB+DMG!

[Staffan]

Charisma – The Charisma bonus table is exactly the same as 1st Edition: Maximum Number of Henchmen, Loyalty Base, and Reaction Adjustment.

One of my hangups with 2e was always that there were two different stat-based Reaction Adjustments. You had the Dexterity-based one which affected surprise and representing your reaction speed, and the Charisma-based one which affects how others react to you.

 

[Iosue]

This is interesting to me because I'm pretty sure that the 1e DMG's example of play had a lot more of the DM asking for dice rolls, even bend bars/lift gates, so maybe it was more representative of actual table play. If memory serves me right, I'm pretty sure the location is the same between 1e and 2e, but I could be wrong.

The 1st Edition DMG example of play is one of the most lengthiest and extensive in the game, running two and a half pages of the DMG's tiny, tiny print. So there were certainly many more opportunities for both procedural roles and the talking it out kind of play seen in 2nd Edition. The locations are very different, but I think you are remembering that both involve a secret door elevated off the ground. In 2nd Ed., it's in the ceiling of a dead end tunnel. In 1st Ed., it's 10 feet off the ground in a wall. I like much of the 1st Ed. example of play, but the ending is probably the worst example of DMing I've seen in an official product.

One of my hangups with 2e was always that there were two different stat-based Reaction Adjustments. You had the Dexterity-based one which affected surprise and representing your reaction speed, and the Charisma-based one which affects how others react to you.

Good catch. I didn't notice that! Of course, this goes back to 1st Edition.

 

[James Gasik]

And let's not forget the overuse of the term "level", which is a classic D&D-ism.

 

[Staffan]

And let's not forget the overuse of the term "level", which is a classic D&D-ism.

You forgot the link.

 

[Mannahnin]

A big issue with all the DMGs. They all fail spectacularly in doing any amount of guiding.

I don't think that's really true. The 1E DMG is replete with opinionated advice; not all of it is good, and the editing is terrible, but if you're a motivated reader you can get some good direction there. And the example of play is long and detailed, which helps. The 4E DMG is also generally well regarded and gives lots of advice and instruction. It's been a while since I reviewed the 3rd and 3.5 ones. I have a vague recollection that they're more collections of rules and tools and stats. I also first encountered the DM's book in 1983 Mentzer Basic, which is pretty solid but perhaps not comprehensive enough.

This is interesting to me because I'm pretty sure that the 1e DMG's example of play had a lot more of the DM asking for dice rolls, even bend bars/lift gates, so maybe it was more representative of actual table play. If memory serves me right, I'm pretty sure the location is the same between 1e and 2e, but I could be wrong.

Agreed on the first part. You're misremembering on the location, as Iosue detailed.

The section ends by recommending that players not give up on characters who have one or two low scores, but to see them as an opportunity for role-playing. "Too often," it says, "players become obsessed with 'good' stats. These players immediately give up on a character if he doesn't have a majority of above-average scores. There are even those who feel a character is hopeless if he doesn't have at least one ability of 17 or higher! Needless to say, these players would never consider playing a character with an ability score of 6 or 7."

I get it. It's not all about good scores, there's fun to be had even in low scores. It is an admirable sentiment, very suitable to the D&D of that time, but I fear always a little undercut by the AD&D bonuses and the ability requirements for certain races and classes. I suppose it was intentional to teach by example, but Rath has no bonuses from even his highest stat, and a fair number of penalties. This section says "Rath's survivability has a lot less to do with his ability scores than with your desire to play him." Yeah, but you're asking Rath's player to play on hard mode compared to his compatriots who have rolled comparatively more averagely.

It seems a strange hill to plant one's flag on, when the game you're revising explicitly said characters should be created to have higher scores, and you haven't changed the math at all. (And I must note again that D&D was right there!)

All of this. Yup.

 

[Voadam]

I don't think that's really true. The 1E DMG is replete with opinionated advice; not all of it is good, and the editing is terrible, but if you're a motivated reader you can get some good direction there. And the example of play is long and detailed, which helps. The 4E DMG is also generally well regarded and gives lots of advice and instruction. It's been a while since I reviewed the 3rd and 3.5 ones. I have a vague recollection that they're more collections of rules and tools and stats. I also first encountered the DM's book in 1983 Mentzer Basic, which is pretty solid but perhaps not comprehensive enough.

That's pretty much my take as well. Except it was Moldvay 81 Basic for me and I felt it was a solid basis when I started. The 1e DMG was a mix of the great and terrible.

I never got the 2e DMG or the 3e or 3.5 DMGs when running those editions. I copied over some new stuff from a friend's 2e copy (mostly xp stuff) into a notebook and used my 1e DMG when running 2e. In 3e and 3.5 I used the free online SRDs for rules and didn't sweat missing the advice on DMing, having already been DMing for two decades.

4e and 5e I read the books as I was then in a read D&D books cover to cover kick at the time I got them.

 

[Stormonu]

I was an early adopter of 2E, getting the books as soon as they came out. I mourned the loss of Half-Orcs and the Assassin & Monk classes, but overall was happy for the switch from 1E. I really appreciated the rules cleanup and reorganization from the previous edition (of course, I'm also one of those who would never play 1E again without UA). I always felt that the original 2E PHB cover was weak and did nothing to say "this is D&D!" and sorta prefer the revised PHB cover. Best PHB cover ever, in my opinion was the Ringlerun cover (1E new cover).

One of the odd things is that my copy of the 2E PHB, which was a 1st printing had the picture of the mage in the potter's smithy picture on page 59. All subsequent copies I've run across has the picture on page 60. I never could figure out why it changed pages.

Also, the amount of page space taken up talking about horse quality in the DMG is ... hilarious. I don't think since 3E I've had PCs who even use horses.

 

[MuhVerisimilitude]

The 1st Edition DMG example of play is one of the most lengthiest and extensive in the game, running two and a half pages of the DMG's tiny, tiny print. So there were certainly many more opportunities for both procedural roles and the talking it out kind of play seen in 2nd Edition. The locations are very different, but I think you are remembering that both involve a secret door elevated off the ground. In 2nd Ed., it's in the ceiling of a dead end tunnel. In 1st Ed., it's 10 feet off the ground in a wall. I like much of the 1st Ed. example of play, but the ending is probably the worst example of DMing I've seen in an official product.

Can't just leave us hanging. What happens? What does the example GM do?

 

[Voadam]

Can't just leave us hanging. What happens? What does the example GM do?

Description and player skill exploration. Description and player skill exploration. Dice whammy.

Spoiler: 1e DMG pages 99-100

DM: (Rolling a few dice behind the screen several times, knowing that tapping won’t show anything, as the secret door is 10’ above the floor) : “The entire wall sounds VERY solid. You spend a full 10 minutes thoroughly checking, even to the far east and west, and all 3 are convinced it is not hollow beyond. However, the gnome, whom you placed in the middle, noted some strange holes in the wall. These were square places cut into the natural stone, each about half a foot per side and a bit deeper. There were 2 at the 20’ and 2 at the 30’ line, 1 above the other, the lower at about 3’, and the higher at about 6’. He found some small splinters of wood in one.”
OC: “Does the smudged area give us any clue as to what the holes could be for? Let’s feel around inside them to see if there are levers or catches or something . . .”
LC: “Yes. Look at the map, and carefully check those holes with daggers first — we don’t want to lose fingers or hands!” (When all that comes to naught) : “Can anyone think of why there would be wood splinters in the holes? That must be some sort of a clue!”
OC: “The only thing I can think of is that the holes are sockets for some sort of wooden construction —“
LC: “Sure! How about a ramp or stairs? How high is the ceiling in this place?”
DM: “Oh, it must be at least 25’ or more.”
LC: “Let’s form a human pyramid and see if there’s a secret door higher up on the wall — right here in the center where the passage seems to go on southwards. I’ll form the base, and the rest of you help the gnome and the halfling up, and hold them there (use the pole!), while they tap. What do they discover?”
DM: “The halfling at the top of the stack has a 1 in 6 chance of slipping and
bringing you all down.” (A roll of 4 follows, so) : “But it doesn’t happen, and both the gnome and the halfling manage a few taps, and even that feeble work seems to indicate some sort of space beyond.”
LC: “Let’s change the plan a bit. The cleric and I will hoist the gnome up
and hold his legs firmly while he checks around for some way to open the secret door. Meanwhile, the halfling and the magic-user will guard the entrance so that we won’t be attacked by surprise by some monster while thus engaged.”
DM: “You accomplish the shuffle, and let’s see if anything comes —“ (A d6
roll for wandering monsters again gives a negative result.) “The guards see nothing, and what is the gnome doing now?”
OC: (The gnome) : “I’ll scan the stone first to see if there are marks or some operating device evident.”
DM: “Some stone projections seem rather smooth, as if worn by use. That’s all you are able to note.”
OC: “Then I’ll see if I can move any of the stone knobs and see if they operate a secret door! I’ll push, pull, twist, turn, slide, or otherwise attempt to trigger the thing if possible.”
DM: “The fist-sized projection moves inwards and there is a grinding sound,
and a 10’ × 10’ section of the wall, 10’ above the floor in the center part, swings inwards to the right.”
OC: (The gnome) : “I’ll pull myself up into the passage revealed, and then I’ll
see if I can drive in a spike and secure my rope to it, so I can throw the free end down to the others.”
DM: “You get up all right, and there is a crack where you can pound in a spike. As you’re doing it, you might be in for a nasty surprise, so I’ll let you roll a six-sider for me to see your status — make the roll! (Groans as a 1 comes up indicating surprise. The DM then rolls 3 attacks for the ghoul that grabbed at the busy gnome, and one claw attack does 2 hit points of damage and paralyzes the hapless character, whereupon the DM judges that the other 3 would rend him to bits. However, the DM does NOT tell the players what has happened, despite impassioned pleas and urgent demands. He simply relates) : “You see a sickly gray arm strike the gnome as he’s working on the spike, the gnome utters a muffled cry, and then a shadowy form drags him out of sight. What are you others going to do?”
LC: “Ready weapons and missiles, the magic-user her magic-missile spell, and watch the opening.”
DM: “You hear some nasty rending noises and gobbling sounds, but they end quickly. Now you see a group of gray-colored human-like creatures with long, dirt- and blood-encrusted nails, and teeth bloodied and bared, coming to the opening. As they come to the edge you detect a charnel smell coming from them — 4 of them, in fact.”

What will the party do? Will the cleric realize that they are ghouls and attempt to turn them? Will he succeed? If not, there may well be no survivors. If so, what treasure lies beyond? Possibly the great gem . . . but the thief still awaits the party’s return. Well, that is the stuff from which adventures are spun, and now you know how to spin your own.

 

[Mannahnin]

Can't just leave us hanging. What happens? What does the example GM do?

As far as I can tell it's a harsh resolution but not necessarily unfair. The DM gave a regular roll for surprise and made the attack rolls. The only mistake seems to be not allowing a save vs. paralysis, but that may be an error of transcription.