Quote from: Rhedyn;1108749Now I loved the computer game spin-off from 2e and the system itself does look interesting, but I've never played it and probably never will.

Good Old Games has the complete series of SSI D&D and Dragonlance PC games for sale at reasonable prices. Even better they have the Forgotten Realms Unlimited Adventures game maker for the series. The FRUA community is still active and the old Magic Mirror site still hosts an amazing array of modules for FRUA and it does not stop there. There have been mods made for it for MSH and Gamma World. And I did sprites for both of those. There are also tons of sprite packs.

So if you want to try them out you can.

Agree with most of the above.
I always considered 2e putting the game up to par with the DM. What I mean by this, is I always felt like the DM was lucky because they could "play" D&D by themselves by organizing their dungeon, studying up, etc. Whereas the players just showed up with a quick character roll-up. But with 2e, I felt as a player, that I could "play" by myself as I had to study up all the character kits, specialty priests, etc.

I didn't care for the Options books, but playing with 2e rules and 1e adventures was about perfect for our group.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1108749I cut my teeth on 3e. While 2e always looked neat, it was the edition the first D&D company died on. In terms of grand objective impact, 2e was worse for TSR than 4e was for WotC (I know a lot was going on, but the same can be said for 4e D&D). Even much of OSR cleaves to older or Basic versions of D&D with few reaching back towards 2e.

Now I loved the computer game spin-off from 2e and the system itself does look interesting, but I've never played it and probably never will. There are many OSR products that do lighter rules better and many RPGs that handle medium to heavy rules better. I don't have the nostalgia for the product and I don't see what it does better. Like sure some of the Rules Cyclopedia rules are dated (like to-hit tables), but it is a standout complete game and I take it with me when I run OSR games because I might reference some of it's extensive advice or rip monsters from it.

There sure was a lot of splat in 2E; but the core game has a nostalgia to it, whenever I dig into it.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1108760I can't agree with you on this. I don't care for much of what Pundit likes, and I've never encountered (randomly or otherwise) an OSR product that I felt warranted a dime of my money. I do tend to agree with him on some of his dislikes, particularly with regards to storytelling/narrative mechanics, but I rarely take it to the degree that he does.

I disagree with both of you on narrative mechanics even though I'm not huge of a fan of such mechanics. It just seems old or new it's the shits. Granted that it has become totally predictable at this point. Of all the rpgs I figured he would not dislike 2E.

It seems lately less informative videos and more ranting about everyone else playing rpgs differently than him.

Quote from: RandyB;1108756If you expect to be able to play BtB in any edition, you are wrong. Every edition is a toolkit.

I never expect to play BtB for any game. RPGs are nearly all written by people with way too much daydreaming DNA, and not enough war gaming experience (or maybe TOO much). That's what makes them good.

Quote from: Omega;1108737If it had ever seen enforced use. But inbstead it was, well, optional. No one at TSR ever used it at a con that I ever heard of. They hardly ever spoke of it even in Dragon. It essentially ceased to exist after hitting the shelves.

We just used them as "Build Your Own Kits" for 2E.

Quote from: Omega;1108737If it had ever seen enforced use. But inbstead it was, well, optional. No one at TSR ever used it at a con that I ever heard of. They hardly ever spoke of it even in Dragon. It essentially ceased to exist after hitting the shelves.

This is why I say that the closest thing to a 2.5 in the 'mandatory update for using future products' sense was the Tome of Magic, since other books assumed access to it. Similarly, Unearthed Arcana counts as '1.5'.

Quote from: Brad;1108817I never expect to play BtB for any game. RPGs are nearly all written by people with way too much daydreaming DNA, and not enough war gaming experience (or maybe TOO much). That's what makes them good.

I miscommunicated. I was agreeing with you and going one further.

And IMO, the farther that RPGs get from their wargaming roots, the worse they get.

Quote from: RandyB;1108869And IMO, the farther that RPGs get from their wargaming roots, the worse they get.

I'm starting to get tired of 45 minute combats every hour.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1108879I'm starting to get tired of 45 minute combats every hour.

That's because the entire notion of what a referee is supposed to do has become meaningless and irrelevant in more modern RPGs.

Quote from: Brad;1108898That's because the entire notion of what a referee is supposed to do has become meaningless and irrelevant in more modern RPGs.

Right, but I feel like while Wargame like combat can be pretty good for an RPG, I'd rather RPGs spend more time on strategic elements or RP rather than tactical combat.

Quote from: Brad;1108898That's because the entire notion of what a referee is supposed to do has become meaningless and irrelevant in more modern RPGs.

By design.

A good corollary to that is - has this phenomenon impacted the growth of GMing skill?

Quote from: tenbones;1108917A good corollary to that is - has this phenomenon impacted the growth of GMing skill?

I feel like OSR has taught me far more about GMing than any WotC D&D.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1108907Right, but I feel like while Wargame like combat can be pretty good for an RPG, I'd rather RPGs spend more time on strategic elements or RP rather than tactical combat.

Sure, but "tactical combat" with a good referee can be very quick if he knows wtf he's doing. A real ref also means you can do whatever you want and success is a possible outcome; contrast this with the utter rigidity of some systems that claim to be tactical and detailed, but don't allow a lot of stuff because there are no defined rules.

Quote from: tenbones;1108917By design.

A good corollary to that is - has this phenomenon impacted the growth of GMing skill?

Of course it's by design. And I'd say it's the opposite: people have gotten lazier and dumber (because they're lazy), so modern games need to cater to their lackluster GMing. "Look, man, I'm just applying the rules here!" I've heard that shit argument before whenever some idiotic result came about and the GM just wasn't willing to come up with a better solution. Modern games tend to assume laziness.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1108935I feel like OSR has taught me far more about GMing than any WotC D&D.

Well yeah, because you're actually responsible for running an OSR game. I probably made up more shit in 8th grade science class than most modern game designers have put into all their published works. I am *sure* there are other people on this who can claim the same thing.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1108935I feel like OSR has taught me far more about GMing than any WotC D&D.

Quote from: Brad;1108938Well yeah, because you're actually responsible for running an OSR game. I probably made up more shit in 8th grade science class than most modern game designers have put into all their published works. I am *sure* there are other people on this who can claim the same thing.

Completely concur with both. Additionally, reading about the wargaming antecedents of OD&D, especially Tony Bath, et. al., has broadened my horizons on RPGs as a whole.