Which AD&D/D&D Edition Do You Prefer?

Mortianna

I didn't see any previous polls on this, so I thought I'd start one. Everyone loves a good poll. I included the ".5" increments since they are significant transitions in these editions' rules.

Mortianna

I'm old school - I like a combination of the 1st, 1.5, and 2nd editions.

Kamigoroshi

My favourite D&D experience is the 3.5 edition rules mixed with the good ol' AD&D campaigns.
Though, replacing 3.5 edition rules with Pathfinder might be interesting as well.

Kaxon

I like 2, 3, and 3.5. Those are all fun and feel like D&D to me. I never really played 1e, although we did incorporate a few things from the 1e books we had into our 2e campaign when I was a kid, and played some of the 1e modules (Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh!). I don't like 4 at all, it doesn't seem like D&D to me.

LadyRhian

1 and 2, though I play more in 2e.

actionjezus6

This does need Pathfinder as an option. It's something like... D&D 3.75 ;p

GoodSteve

Pathfinder. I've even taken a large number of FR specific races and converted them from 3.5 to be in line with those from Pathfinder aswell as converting domains that weren't represented in the pathfinder rule set. I'm currently running The City of the Spider Queen for my gaming group which I have heavily converted to pathfinder rules. Why? Because pathfinder rules.

Son_of_Imoen

Pure nostalgia I admit - started playing when AD&D 1st edition was the current edition and while playing Unearthed Arcana and The Wilderness Survival Guide were published and were top of the bill.

Though I like BG's 2nd Edition as well. Secondary school days are too long past too remember in what way they differed from BG. When I discovered BG 5 years ago, I lived in the illusion for a few years, if was exactly the same edition. Only when searching for online copies of the rulebooks, did I discover it was an earlier edition back then (which shouldn't be surprising, as I played AD&D 12-14 years before BG's release).

Of course from this post it can be deducted I'm too lazy to go through those handbooks to start looking for what the differences are. I like playing the game, I don't like digging for rules, I'll leave it to modders. If they say something is 'more aligned to PnP' I buy it and install that tweak ('buy' in the non-monetary sense of the word).

rexreg

the group i play w/ has met for the past 17+ yrs; there has been member-turnover, but the core-group has remained the same...
part of our cadillac-of-games is bringing anything from any edition into play...
from OD&D we have, in the past, used the rule stating a character must pay 1% of his/her xp in gold every month for upkeep...
from 1st ed. we use Comeliness
we still have a 2/2.5 campaign we come back to (Planescape!!!)...the characters in this campaign have levels in the low-mid 20's...
we usually play 3.5-ish, but liberally sprinkle it w/ Feats/Skills from PF & other d20 games & use loads of 3rd-party stuff...the Feats book by AEG rocks!!
we have, in the past, used the 4th ed. (yuck, overall) race bonuses, as well as ability advancement...
when d&d Next comes out, i will probably buy & read the core 3 books, but may never play it, given how wretched 4th was...BUT, i'd wager something from the rules will creep into our play...

sandmanCCL

Always enjoyed 3 and 3.5 editions. I feel they are the best gameplay experience when you sit down with friends.

AD&D is needlessly restrictive and to be honest, I still calculate Thac0 wrong.

Mortianna

actionjezus6 said:

This does need Pathfinder as an option. It's something like... D&D 3.75 ;p

3.75 sounds about right from what I've seen of Pathfinder.

The polls are limited to 10 categories, so that's why I threw in the "other" category.

Jigawatts

For the 2E lovers (like me) who possibly want a updated version of that game (ala Pathfinder for 3.5), check out Myth & Magic. Here is the kickstarter link.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/705393141/myth-and-magic-game-masters-guide-and-collectors-c

That is for the second core book (basically the combined DMG and MM), they already finished the kickstarter for the players guide, however there are backers levels for this one that also include a players guide.

TheCoffeeGod

http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/3163/which-dd-system-do-you-prefer/p1

Mortianna

TheCoffeeGod said:

http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/3163/which-dd-system-do-you-prefer/p1

Drat. It probably didn't show up in my initial search because I entered "edition" in the search terms and not "system." Ah well, this poll is broader in scope, anyway.

Myval

Pathfinder is one of my favorites to play. Never got to play much P&P 2e and did play a lot of 3.5

FaerieFire68

I prefer 2nd edition second place goes to 1st edition . I always found the 1.5 additions interesting but never used them in my campaigns preferring the core 1st and 2nd , which I can pretty much recite in their entirety off the top of my head ..lol

agris

I would have said 2.5ed because it was the only one I knew, until a guy in my lab told me about Hackmaster 4e. Yea, it's out of print and yea the rules are insanely complicated but we're lucky that we have a GM who played it a lot in school and knows it well.

It's refreshingly similar to BG's 2.5e rules but much, much deeper while not just a game only for diehards. 3 other people who have never played a RPG other than maybe Zelda are enjoying it with us (and their ridiculously gimped characters somehow still survive... while me, having played BG1+2 more times than I can count, just died).

Sily

I'm a 3.5 e gal. Haven't played any other real d&d (okay, one session of 4th ed, which left me nauseous...) I do enjoy Pathfinder too, just have never played it. Read through the rules and all of course!

revaar

3.5/ Pathfinder have always made the most sense to me (I'm still not entirely sure i know how to calulate saves in 2ed, and 4ed doesn't feel like D&d anymore). That said, I am supremely excited for 13th age to come out. I did the playtest and it honestly feels like what 4ed was aiming for.

Demivrgvs

Pathfinder is the best one for me, followed by AD&D and 3.5 (there are things I think AD&D did better, while other things are better in 3E). I do love how Pathfinder class system actually is much closer to AD&D then one might think, with archetypes taking the place of kits.

I don't even consider 4E a D&D game, it's the bastard son of D&D with World of Warcraft, and roleplaying is the last thing that edition cares about.

Eidolon

3.5, though I currently host a 4e game. Then again I like all versions of D&D but if I'd be forced to choose at gun point it'd be 3.5

Hoebagger

I've played 3.5 every week for years.

Misz_B

I am great fan of Pathfinder.
But I like 3.5 also. My Planescape campaign goes currently on 3.5.

But for cRPG I prefer 2nd edition.

Duron

3.5 end of story. Best DnD experience for me with best rules and best storyline in Faerun world.

4th edition was biggest fail for me so yea... and before 3.5 there was always some things that bothered me.

3.5 also has some issues, but overall I felt it is most balanced of all versions.

agris

Can someone explain to me the difference between 2.5 e and 3.5 e? Mainly in terms of design philosophy. My only experience with 2.5 e is the IE games, and 3 (i think?) is IWD2 and I remember not liking the rules system as much.

Millardkillmoore

I chose 4th. I haven't played Essentials, although I hear it's very good. It's well-balanced, easy-to-learn, and fun to play. Most importantly, your wizards are fun and useful at low levels and your fighters are fun and useful at high levels.

My only real problem is that there are only 4 real classes: Striker, Defender, Controller, and Leader. The difference between classes of the same archetype is mostly flavor text. Your Cleric will play and feel very much like a Warlord. He'll just have different names for similar abilities.

Still, I'd take that over the extreme imbalance of every other edition.

knowwheretorun

I chose 4E becuase of the mechanics improvements that make gameplay more fun and smooth.

I don't take issue with the archtypes or the classes. I think that classes can be customized to be and feel unique with wise power and feat choices. Although, I agree that the game does rely on frequent flavor-texting in order to be intersting at times. But this CAN be good as it creates oportunity for players to become more engaged in role playing and/or story telling.

I think Essentials classes do a better job at making classes more unique but stumbles a bit at times. Oh and there is no shortage of imbalance in 4E - Divine Oracle (Cleric Paragon Path) anyone?

Next will be king once it is refined.

Millardkillmoore

knowwheretorun said:

I chose 4E becuase of the mechanics improvements that make gameplay more fun and smooth.

I don't take issue with the archtypes or the classes. I think that classes can be customized to be and feel unique with wise power and feat choices. Although, I agree that the game does rely on frequent flavor-texting in order to be intersting at times. But this CAN be good as it creates oportunity for players to become more engaged in role playing and/or story telling.

I think Essentials classes do a better job at making classes more unique but stumbles a bit at times. Oh and there is no shortage of imbalance in 4E - Divine Oracle (Cleric Paragon Path) anyone?

Next will be king once it is refined.

I've heard that Essentials is essentially the same ruleset, but with redesigned classes. Is that true? If it is, I'll have to check it out.

AndreaColombo

AD&D 2.5 (not just the manuals mentioned in the poll next to it—all of it. It's the edition with the black-covered manuals).

It did have its limits but man, did it have TONS of flavor ...

revaar

agris said:

Can someone explain to me the difference between 2.5 e and 3.5 e? Mainly in terms of design philosophy. My only experience with 2.5 e is the IE games, and 3 (i think?) is IWD2 and I remember not liking the rules system as much.

There are worlds of difference. Basically, the design philosophy of 3.5 was to make it accessible to a wide marker(ie, non gamers). In that interest, they made some of the weird "lower scores are better, but you want to roll high and pluses subtract but not all the time" stuff( THAC0, AC, saves) into a standard "higher is better, all the time" format. They also added more customization options through a point buy based skill system and feats, which are like Hla in TOB(in fact, many Hla for fighters draw on feats for inspiration) only you get feats starting at lv1, and they are much less powerful to start with.

Does that help?

BelgarathMTH

I really struggled with this question, and have been putting off posting an answer. There's a lot I really like about 3rd edition, and I enjoy the Neverwinter Nights games.

But I finally picked 2nd edition, because I think it handles multi-classing much better (except for the arbitrary racial restrictions), and because it's what I grew up with, so it has a nostalgic element.