• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Your basic all things AD&D chat

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,568
I only recently dug out some of my AD&D books and made a purchase (as it had come down to a reasonable price) of a 2nd edition bard book (my favourite editions are the first and second editions, I absolutely hate the later ones, I've read them and I have two fifth edition books Monk and Paladin, Cleric and Druid).

If you are into AD&D or similar scenes and mythos what were your expectations and how they did they match realities and what surprises were there?

I have to say that I didnt think the Bards would be what they are at all, they are an interesting and attractive character class, I didnt expect that at all. In fact in the earlier editions they are sort of prestigious and you need to do a lot of playing and character development in order to "unlock" the bard class, so to speak, its much more like "The Bard", ie Shakespeare or Homer, than travelling guitarist type I had thought they were.

In fact it now makes sense to me how and why the Bard got a series of video games on PC and then consoles and then android and tablet.

The other thing was the Priest or Cleric class, I definitely didnt realise that the first and second editions of AD&D were so influenced by or set within a sort of medieval european landscape or ren fest kind of thing (the books on vikings, romans, greek heroes/athenians were something I hadnt known about). I had also figured that the clerics were just some sort of auxiliary, like a medic, who fix up the barbarians or warriors after each encounter but they are more interesting than that and the second edition has loads of information in it about hypothetical religions and their obligations, they even recommended a couple of good books on the greek pantheon, kabbalah and mystery religions if you want to decide your own for play.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,312
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
D&D started in the early 70's based on medieval table wargames, where people would actually control armies. Gygax and a friend kept developing rules that transmog'ed into players having characters instead of armies, and the other things we recognize now as typical RPG features got layered in, until oD&D came out in 1974. A few years later D&D (the box sets) and AD&D (the hardbacks) came out. Yes, the first ed stuff is cookie-cutter medieval and if you read Deities & Demigods, every basic pantheon people know about was spec'ed in there. (If you're lucky enough to get the first edition that was recalled/ditched because it violated copyrights, you can also find Cthulhu and Melnibonéan mythos in there, which unfortunately Chaosium had trademarked or something at the time....)

I started with Basic/Expert boxed sets in 1980 or so, then got all the hardcover books and a lot of early modules (of the various colors). When I was in college, which was the location of my first real "campaign," 2nd edition hadn't come out yet.

I did buy a lot of the 2nd edition stuff through the 90's but left gaming for a good decade or more when i had kids simply due to time factors. I missed 3rd edition entirely (and the open source of 3.5, so that third-party publishers could create modules based on the game to cross-market), then heard about 4th ed coming out and getting panned because they tried to change the game too much to play off MMO/console computer game elements, to win new audience.

Around that time is where Pathfinder grew (which is like the AD&D 3.5 taken to 3.75)... it was an opening, and Pathfinder has gotten pretty popular in the last number of years.

I got back into gaming around 2011-2012, first with Pathfinder but then White Wolf stuff and eventually back into 5e which came out in 2014. My opinion of 5e is extremely favorable; it simplifies a lot of the number crunching and complication of AD&D 3.5 and Pathfinder in sensible ways, to make the game much quicker in play while still providing a lot of options for diversity.

I own a lot of 1st and 2nd ed stuff, including all the softcover "redbooks" (aka Complete Guide to <whatever>). 2nd edition was a welcome revision and expansion to first edition, which was cool but also pretty cutthroat and had a lot of evolutionary badness in it... i.e., stuff that was complicated, crazy, messy, or unbalanced due to the game just getting more and more stuff layered. It needed a fresh build, in other words... start over.

I'm not really sure why you hate 5e in regards to Bard stuff. 2e and 5e actually have a lot of differentiation for Bards -- they are kind of jack of all trades, performance-based casters, and each offers kits/schools whereby you can do a particular "flavor" of Bard based on your playstyle so you can have quite a variety of bards even in the same campaign. They're a useful class. I think 1st edition was the "rough" bard -- the game made you serial-multiclass... take a few levels of one class, then another, then another, and be a bard then or something. They were still hammering out the concept. I think 2e might have had more prestige classes, where again you start as one class and then switch over to another; 5e more has self-contained classes and you can dip into another class for a level to add particular abilities (splicing classes a bit). Some classes have more synergy than others.

Pathfinder and 5e are both pretty intensive on the Priest classes. There are books of all the mythos out there for every "featured world" with the pantheons, followers, histories, etc. Priests are not just "healers," there are quite a variety of options for priests although they CAN heal if you want to play that flavor. They can be good warriors, good buffers/utility, good spell damage, and/or mobile medics. In my ongoing game, we have one cleric and he's a Tempest cleric... in early levels, people would ask him for heals, and he'd say "he wasn't that type of cleric." He didn't really have any heal spells. So that become the running joke if an NPC would ask -- "Sorry, he's not that type of cleric." But it's very spectacular when he summons up a thundercloud and starts AoE'ing nasties with repeated bolts of lightning.
 
Top