What is the appeal of playing 1e or 2e D&D?
>>94850556Group InitiativeXP for gold/treasureTraining times and costs encouraging more than 1 PC / player, allowing you to experiment or even play gimmick characters if you so wishDifficulty progression beyond "more HP than before"More powerful and limited spellcastingNot too many meme-classes encroaching on the Fighters' niche and if they exist they are basically prestige classes or have actual gameplay limitationsEncouraged 1:1 timekeeping, giving the setting "time to breathe" in between character actionsGreater emphasis on hirelings/henchmen play
>>94850556I think it's primarily for people who want a system that is naturally more challenging. The threat of dying is always imminent and that makes surviving a lot more meaningful. In a game with no overall win condition, feeling a sense of accomplishment from surviving is really important.Also what really appeals to me, is that the classes are all clearly delineated and have their own strengths and weaknesses. They aren't just a grey goo of meaningless titles. The later editions stripped down classes and made them all too similar for the sake of fairness and "balance"Lastly, the overall aesthetic and philosophy that lies at the heart of the game, was much more pure than the overly corporatized nonsense that WotC puts out these days
>>94850556It's just that bit freakier and more fantastical than later editions. Back then they were based on different times and cultures, but now they quite literally are artifacts of another time and culture from before the majority of players were born, or at the very least able to read.
>>94850556The quaintness of the adventures, settings, art and style of writing. And none of >>94850662.
>>94850556- Less to no builds minigame, your "success" is more a factor of roleplay and gear rather than what is strictly written in the character sheet;- more clearly defined procedures for out-of-combat scenarios;- combat as a de facto fail state rather than the objective (more potentially lethal, morale rules, more lasting consequences since healing takes time);- better defined game framework (at low levels you're an adventurer dealing with small scale problems and interests, at high levels you're a local power with your own agenda); - better defined, more powerful and yet limited magic (hard vancian, with high level wizards needing weeks or months to fully memorize their complete spells repertoire, clerics being highly constricted by their credo, etc...);- better niche protection with less heterogeneous character options, if there's overlap it's dealt with increasing specialization and higher requirements (example: to be a fighter you only need at least a STR of 9, a ranger instead requires STR 13, INT 13, WIS 13 and CON 14);- more focused themes, for example humans are both the point of views and the default key of reference to which measuring the world, which means that demihumans on monstrous races are measured on this default assumption (level ranges and caps);- lean more on pulp rather than heroics, which currently is a grat palate cleanser from the usual expectations....there are probably even more reasons but these are the firsts i can think of.
>>94850923>adventures, Name 5>settingsName 3 >art Post 3>style of writingGive 2 examples
You say based things like "I walk up to the orc, flick his nose and attack him with my dagger" instead of cringe things like "I use my full action/bonus action to X" like you're playing a video game.
>>94851801>"I use my full action/bonus action to X" like you're playing a video game.People don't typically tell their video games what they want to do in them, unless they're activated with voice commands, and such commands are even more brief than the example you provided.
>>94851394Nta, but fuck off.The question was "why do you like X", the reply gave reasons, everything is easily searchable with hundreds of blogs and articles on the topic. This isn't an exam, and if it were you wouldn't be the examiner.
