D&D General Best edition for DnD lore

[Quickleaf]

AD&D, for sure. I really like Elminster's Ecologies for the way those books paint word pictures (and encounter tables) of both specific areas of the Realms, but those specific areas can also be extrapolated to similar terrain types in a homebrew setting. That sort of lush description and ecology is something I've seen diminished in modern D&D.

But it also depends on the topic.

For example, if you're delving into lore on Sahuagin, Illithids, or Beholders, then nothing compares to corresponding AD&D Monstrous Arcana books. And AD&D Giantcraft is a good one too.

If you're interested in ancient lore about proto-civilizations, the Sarrukh, Jhaamdath, the Tearfall... there are some great sources in 3rd edition. Serpent Kingdoms comes to mind.

Whereas, if you want more recent lore that gets into depth on Cormyr or Westgate, believe it or not 4th edition had some excellent online Dragon magazine articles (#365 and #407).

And even though there's revisionism happening in 5e, the dragon lore they've created in Fizban's Treasury of Dragons is really fascinating, and Volo's Guide to Monsters compares favorably to many AD&D sources (though certain AD&D books like the Illithiad and Eye Tyrant have deeper coverage of mind flayers and beholders).

Whereas if there's a specific monster you want more lore on, I recommend tracking down if it has an "Ecology of" article in Dragon magazine – those articles span AD&D, 3e, and 4e I believe. So if you want, for example, Ecology of the Annis Hag, you need to go to Dragon #345 (published during Paizo's 3e run).

 

[bloodtide]

2E. 2E has all the lore. Each edition afterwards just recycles that lore without adding much new.

The average 2E book was about 50/50 lore and crunch, and that lore number has dropped each edition.

 

[AK81]

Thanks guys. I have put some new books on my wishlist already

Especially the Monstrous Arcana books seems interesting. I really like deep dives into monster societies, how they function and how they live. I also love fantasy societies that are fantastical and weird

 

[GuyBoy]

Depends what you mean by D&D lore.
If you mean stuff by the “official” company (TSR or Wizards), I’d say there’s not a whole lot to choose in terms of amount of lore, or its richness.
However, if we are looking at what 3PP has brought to the lore, then 1st, 3rd and 5th win out to my mind. Wilderlands of High Fantasy, Rappan Athuk and Midgard are just a few examples.
For me, I’d go for 1st, particularly due to all the Jennell Jacquays stuff, which added to the classic Gygaxian lore, but I’m conscious that my age and grognardy tendencies push my decision.

 

[Ogre Mage]

2nd Edition probably wins on sheer quantity, if nothing else.

2E, hands down ...

Yes, I agree. While overall I look back on 2E less fondly than 3.X, 2E was superior in terms of lore. I kept a number of my 2E lore books. The only 3.X lore book I kept was the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting by Ed Greenwood, Sean K. Reynolds, Skip Williams and Rob Heinsoo.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

2nd Edition probably wins on sheer quantity, if nothing else.

It wins on quality as well.

 

[Ancalagon]

as much as I like 5e, I think we can all agree that it isn't 5e who has the best lore...

 

[Incenjucar]

While it's hardly the only reason, there is a bit of an understandable issue with lore constantly being provided between editions in that anyone who sticks around has the previous edition's lore, and may either be annoyed at having to pay for it twice or be annoyed at having to pay for it twice and for it to be worse than the first time. Keeping the crunch and fluff in the same books has consequences.

 

[Orius]

I don't think anything can really beat 2e. Yes, 1e had Greyhawk, and DL 1-14, and I6, and the Gray Box, but 2e took all those and built on them. Then add in Spelljammer, Dark Sun, Planescape and Birthright, and 2e tying them all into one huge multiverse. And if that wasn't enough, there were the HR splats, Lankhmar, Jakandor, and the Realms offshoots -- Kara-tur (technically 1e, but the OA stuff kind of straddled both editions), Maztica, and Zakhara. The classic D&D game had what would become Mystara but that got ported into 2e too, and even before that the Gazetteers and late D&D material had 2e conversions.

0e didn't have much lore of its own, DMs were expected to make their own stuff and like it that way. There's the Wilderlands and CSIO if you want to count that but it's technically third party. 3e followed up on 2e for a while, but some of its own stuff was bland by comparison. 4e had to blow up the flagship setting to make its rules work which is never a good sign. 5e started out rather bland but seems to be more interested in converting MtG stuff and ignoring all the classic material while introducing their own "problematic" material as time goes on.

 

[MGibster]

Given that 2nd edition was the Golden Age of Settings, I'm going to take a controversial stance and go with 2nd edition. You have the Complete Book of (Whatever) series which was full of good stuff. And they also had oddball products. I remember a supplement that had a bunch of maps and little mini-adventures which I thought was way cool. One of the maps was tattooed on the back of a dwarf. Not that ever bit of lore was good, The Complete Book of Elves is still one of my least favorite books ever published (my eye twitches whenever I hear someone say bladesinger), but tons of great stuff came out of AD&D 2nd edition that is still good today.