Interest Check : AD&D (2e)

💯

AD&D is, indeed, THE system called AD&D.

:D Agreed

While I respect THAC0's claim that ad&d is the system for him, the username gives it away. It is a system that rewards certant behavior and thus forcing the players to play as the designers intended.
But I don't want to highjack this interest tread by sidetracking it into a system discussion.
AD&D did spelljammer well, and the less said about 5e's botched attempt the better.
I would be interested in an AD&D game that was geared towards spelljammer from the start, but if its a possible option somewhere down the line, then I'll step back and make room for another

it was my only intent to see if anyone else wanted to play the OG system (not a clone) only because that's what I want to play. I was about to say - let's not make this into a 2e vs. other systems battle...

but maybe we should?

Are there enough 2e champions out there?

Maybe the 'bad guys' in this game will be a group of wizards, who live on the coast, and answer to a dark lord called Hasbro

I digress...

I am working on the game now, I intend to put up a recruitment thread mid-December and start the game in the New year. I'm hoping for a long lasting campaign (years?) that will become my digital hobby. (I have more than enough physical hobbies) I know players will drop out regularly, that seems to be unavoidable with PbP, but I have a plan for that too.

In the mean time, anyone wants to argue about 2e vs _______________________ I'm in!

We already have one vote for 2e Spelljammer being superior

2e - 1
5e - 0

This isn’t really the place for edition wars, but I’m guessing you’ll get more people advocating for older editions (OD&D, B/X) rather than 5e around here!

I’ll throw in my two cents, however. If I am forced to choose between the setting books for fifth edition and the setting books for second edition, second edition all day. None of the settings written for fifth edition have been as rich and interesting as those written for second edition. If we are talking about rules, however, or art, inclusivity, and almost any other metric, however, fifth edition destroys it.

OK, first - you're right. If we want to fight about editions, we should move it to a different forum.

rules? I think 5e has been streamlined and simplified after decades of experience. So I understand why people like it better. Much more user friendly. Much more beginner friendly. But better? I disagree. Sort of like standard cars vs. automatic. Automatic is the right choice for most, but those who truly love to drive will always pick the stick.

art? that's an argument about the books, not the game. I prefer the old books (even the art) but more importantly, many of my cheap printed in China 5e books are already falling apart. My decades old 2e books are all still in one piece. Even with all the post-it-notes and margin scribbles.

inclusivity? that's up to the players. I can't imagine any type of character that doesn't work with either system. I like the fact that the races in 2e are actually different from each other. It highlights the fact that humans are all the same race.

I'm partly with DrGwen and with ThAC0.

Inclusivity through the system/designers was non-existent.
The art was astounding for the time; fan of Elmore still.
Rules? Chaotic, to say the best. Just the difference between high and low throws alone...

The best to me regarding AD&D are the fond memories and the nostalgia. ;-)

In which way did it botch? So far, I know only the 2ed SJ...

I get that
like comfort food

not what a "chef" would make, but no chef is as good as my grandma

Well, I prefer 1e to 2e, although 2e is more of a mutated 1e whereas 3e is a bit of a different animal completely. AD&D 1e was my gateway, so there is nostalgia. Also, despite being a an applied mathematician, I'm fine with pre-calculated tables over on-the-fly THAC0 calculations. I am also irrationally emotionally enamored by the 1e bard. While 5es advantage/disadvantage is a paradigm-shifting mechanic, it does have a value in simplicity. Thoughts?

yeah advantage/disadvantage is pretty good

but I think most 5e advantages are in the simplicity. A fixed list of proficiencies is so much easier to remember and use, but the 2e proficiency system is so much deeper.

Honestly, 1e and 2e are kind of blurred together in my mind. 3e and 4e I skipped completely. 5e I really liked and played, for a while. But it lost me.

I think Hasbro is steering the game away from dwarves and elves and dragons because they can't trademark them. Tieflings and Githyanki and displacer beasts can be owned by them exclusively.

There is a Mindflayed in the Final Fantasy VII remake and I just want to know how much money Square had to shell out to use its likeness.

I think the proficiency/attribute mechanics in 2e make a game of their own. And that game is so good. Magic has always bored me. But supernatural stunts are the stuff of legend.

I always was a sucker for the classics

meh...you make the game what it is. Your table, your rules, your game. I'd rather not play with folks who don't want me there anyway. That's my take on the whole thing. Advantage is kind of weak if you ask me, look at the bell curve. So I don't use it. Just a preference. I think experience tells a good GM when to roll and when not to roll. Some things are just fine without a die roll, and I've seen many folks roll for the stupidest things. But whatever. 1E has it's limitations, so does every edition. Make the game work for you and it flows nice and easy. Just saying.

Well said