Dungeons & Dragons 5e, does anyone else?

[Matti]

Yes. It's all in The Complete Book of Elves. As are the rules for expanding level limits and certain Kits and abilities unique to Elves which are not available to Humans. Read the source material. :)

Is still available on Amazon and the likes. Is it of any use for newer editions as a source book and worth the cost?

[edit]
Also available on DriveThruRPG.com as PDF download. I haven't seen AD&D2 being played for a while, so what would be value of these books/PDFs for D&D5?

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Very little, unless you want to do a lot of work converting the stats over.

Yes. It's all in The Complete Book of Elves. As are the rules for expanding level limits and certain Kits and abilities unique to Elves which are not available to Humans. Read the source material. :)

For example, they detail that elves mature at a slower rate due to their culture and long lifespans. Living over centuries can bring "crushing boredom", so they've created ways to enjoy life through "relaxation and merriment." The average Elf isn't Legolas, running around with a bow and slaying Orcs; most of them don't bother to leave home.

The average human is a subsistence farmer, not a badass horse-riding Rohirrim warrior.  Player Characters are supposed to be exceptional.

Out of that 750-year lifespan, they really only show interest in adventuring during their adulthood (age 110+) and tend to "cease adventuring" around the age 170 (PHBR8, page 38), as they've traveled and gained as worldly a knowledge as they care to gain. They become susceptible to disease and don't wish to endanger themselves. It states that there are exceptions to this, but that they are not the norm, and instead are the stuff of legend.

Page 38-39

And that still gives them at least twice the actual amount of time they could be out adventuring and honing their skills as a human would have.

And that doesn't even touch on any of the other restrictions, like why dwarves (traditionally associated with magic in Norse mythology) can't be wizards or (traditionally Lawful Good and worshiping a Lawful Good god with a martial focus) paladins.

[Matti]

And that doesn't even touch on any of the other restrictions, like why dwarves (traditionally associated with magic in Norse mythology) can't be wizards or (traditionally Lawful Good and worshiping a Lawful Good god with a martial focus) paladins.

Maybe Mr. Gygax didn't read (enough of) the Norse mythology?

[Kit deSummersville]

Maybe Mr. Gygax didn't read (enough of) the Norse mythology?

Or a dwarf slept with his wife.

[iamfanboy]

Is still available on Amazon and the likes. Is it of any use for newer editions as a source book and worth the cost?

[edit]
Also available on DriveThruRPG.com as PDF download. I haven't seen AD&D2 being played for a while, so what would be value of these books/PDFs for D&D5?

Ehhh... not much? It's a lot of highly specific rules, the equivalent of the D&D3e Prestige Classes but in reverse (taken at first level rather than later on), with some lore but it's all the same lore that you'd already know from D&D stuff. Elves trance instead of sleeping. Elves live in grand cities sculpted to fit into nature rather than take it over. That sort of thing.

You want fun books, pick up the setting stuff. Planescape, Spelljammer, Dark Sun, Dragonlance...


Frankly, the thing I hate the MOST about the race/class restrictions is that it punishes role-players and enables power gamers. Pretty it up however you like, instead of making humans a valid choice he decided to nerf everyone else endgame, and the dual-class BS just means that the powergamer endplan (if the DM has banned psionics like he should have) is "Level 1 Fighter, then over to Wizard for 20 levels." It shows a lack of imagination, which is pretty lame for a game based in imagination.

Tigershark... you're a 2e grognard. I get that. But D&D2e is excessively complicated; the fact that you've adapted and internalized the rules doesn't change that. 

1) It has four different core mechanics that I can think of off the top of my head (THAC0, percentage rolls for thief skills, nonadjusted d20 rolls for saving throws/turn checks/other things I'm not remembering, nonweapon proficiencies roll under attribute) and makes no attempt to reconcile them.

2) It has a convoluted XP system that punishes people who WANT to play elves and dwarves and is open to abuse by power gamers. The fact that most of the rewards are based around killing and getting loot only adds to the problem.

3) It has flawed class balance, with early on casters being pathetically weak but by the endgame being exponentially stronger than everyone else. (no, 3e didn't fix that entirely, and 4e's attempt was more horrible, but 5e's got it right).


I'm also a little annoyed at your trotting out of a complicated and hypothetical situation from an expansion and declaring that it somehow makes the core system of "Roll d20, add your bonus, subtract penalties, if the result equals the target number you succeed" worse than THAC0. The main benefit of the d20 system is that it uses the d20 for everything in exactly the same way: saving throws, skills, turning, hitting, everything. That simplicity allows for much more complicated ideas stacked on top of it.


So onto other things; I'm soliciting suggestions for this campaign idea.

The campaign is essentially post-apocalyptic: the bad guys have WON. Order, the evil god of unchanging eternity, has devoured the pantheon of old and established Itself as sole deity; his servants led hordes of undead, hobgoblins, yuan-ti, and more chaotic monsters that overran the civilized world, driving the elves, halflings, dwarves, and humans into isolated pockets hidden from their eyes.

However, there is an opportunity: As Order turned Its eyes to seeing which of his servants deserve to be the only beings on Its plane (setting them to war with one another), Chaos stole the shards of the old gods from It and scattered them across the land. Finding them, reuniting them with goodly mortals to worship them, and gradually bringing them back to power would let them challenge Order and allow the players to lead an army to throw back the darkness of tyranny and let freedom come again...

or some such nonsense.  ;D

Any thoughts?

[Matti]

or some such nonsense.  ;D

Any thoughts?

Leading an army? That goes to operational war game territory, like BattleForce.

[Kit deSummersville]

With the gods all eaten, how will that affect clerics?

[TigerShark]

I'm also a little annoyed at your trotting out of a complicated and hypothetical situation from an expansion and declaring that it somehow makes the core system of "Roll d20, add your bonus, subtract penalties, if the result equals the target number you succeed" worse than THAC0. The main benefit of the d20 system is that it uses the d20 for everything in exactly the same way: saving throws, skills, turning, hitting, everything. That simplicity allows for much more complicated ideas stacked on top of it.

Why? Are expansions not allowed in campaigns? Also, here is the core mechanic of 3E/Pathfinder for combat:

[Base Attack Bonus + Strength Mod + Size Mod + Weapon Mod + (Optional: Off-Hand Attack Mod) + Attack Roll Modifier + Armor Class Modifier of Target vs AC of Target]
Target has a 20 AC: BAB 1 (1st level Fighter) + 3 (Str 16) + 0 (Med Size) + 1 (masterwork) + 2 (Flanking) = +7 bonus.
20 - 7 is a target number of 13+.

None of that is "optional". That's the core mechanic of the game in the PHB. Is that not 'complex'? Not saying "too complex" to learn, but there is complexity. It makes sense to you, yes. But that doesn't mean it's "simple." Compare that to a 2nd edition Fighter. It's quite similar in complexity. Not more and not less. There's nothing clearly 'better'.

THAC0 20 (1st level fighter) - 5 (AC of target) - 0 (Str 16) - 1 (weapon specialist) - 2 (flanking target) = 12+ target number

The modifiers are similar, except 2E didn't have some of things 3E/Pathfinder did, like easy access to masterwork weapons or some of the 1st level bonuses. But either way, the complexity is still there. So I don't get all this talk about 2E being "unintuitive." If anything, having a single THAC0 felt easy. You could incorporate your Specialization into that number and just boil it down to one target vs AC + maybe 1 modifier. Combat was simple and you could even do it without miniatures. Hell, it was designed to be done on paper or in the imagination (says so right in the PHB).

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Remove the Attack of Opportunity mechanic and combat in 3rd Edition/Pathfinder is just as doable without minis.  But here's the kicker- in 2nd Edition, you need to find your THAC0, then compare it to the target's AC and figure out what you need to roll to hit it by consulting a chart.  In 3rd-5th Edition and Pathfinder, you just take your character's attack bonus, which is something that ought to be written on your character sheet before gameplay starts, add it to whatever you rolled on the die, and tell the GM the number.  If it's equal to or greater than the target's AC, congratulations, you hit.  That's decidedly faster.

I loved 2nd Edition D&D.  I played it a lot.  My name in this message forum is a reference to an ogre mercenary that I ran for a long time.  But it really was a lot faster and easier playing 3.5 Edition.

[TigerShark]

Remove the Attack of Opportunity mechanic and combat in 3rd Edition/Pathfinder is just as doable without minis.  But here's the kicker- in 2nd Edition, you need to find your THAC0, then compare it to the target's AC and figure out what you need to roll to hit it by consulting a chart.  In 3rd-5th Edition and Pathfinder, you just take your character's attack bonus, which is something that ought to be written on your character sheet before gameplay starts, add it to whatever you rolled on the die, and tell the GM the number.  If it's equal to or greater than the target's AC, congratulations, you hit.  That's decidedly faster.

I loved 2nd Edition D&D.  I played it a lot.  My name in this message forum is a reference to an ogre mercenary that I ran for a long time.  But it really was a lot faster and easier playing 3.5 Edition.

THAC0 chart is on the character sheets :-\ If a simple piece of subtractions tells you an entire edition is bad, then I don't know what to tell you lol. It's all good, though. We're playing D&D and that's the most important part!

My only point in those ramblings was that 5E is closer to 2E/1E/Basic in spirit. Which is a big thumbs up, IMO. Maybe not others, but I can certainly get on-board with that.

[monbvol]

Yeah the situational modifiers in Pathfinder can get a little out of hand and make it a little tough to have everything pre-calculated with how easy it is to change any/all of those situations.

[iamfanboy]

But situational modifiers also exist in AD&D2e, and while there's not a ton of them, how do you figure up the TN of a 3rd level cleric using a hand crossbow that he's non-proficient in at medium range with a back attack who happens to be an elven Undead Hunter against a wight wearing chain mail and a shield?

see? I can dream up complicated hypotheticals too.

With the gods all eaten, how will that affect clerics?

It's one of the two following options, which I'm going to tell the players are both possible (but I personally haven't decided which one is real yet):

1) Prayers to a given god are answered by the fragment, which fulfills them as normal

2) Until they revive a god, the prayers are answered by Order and they don't know it yet, who can twist the spells in favor of Its objectives.

I don't want to handicap clerics from the start by telling them, "Oh, your god doesn't exist, but you can revive him!" Game will be hard enough anyway with Gritty Realism and the Injury chart.

Speaking of Gritty Realism...

A couple of the classes are really long rest dependent, specifically Paladins, Sorcerers, and Clerics. I'm thinking about allowing sorcerers to recover 2-3 Sorcery Points on a short rest (which they can turn into spell slots if necessary), Paladins to recover Lay On Hands after a short rest, and Clerics (possibly Paladins too) to trade Divine Inspiration for spell slots just like the Sorcerer can.

[TigerShark]

But situational modifiers also exist in AD&D2e, and while there's not a ton of them, how do you figure up the TN of a 3rd level cleric using a hand crossbow that he's non-proficient in at medium range with a back attack who happens to be an elven Undead Hunter against a wight wearing chain mail and a shield?

see? I can dream up complicated hypotheticals too.

Well, let's see!

* Wights have an Armor Class of 5. Their armor is factored into that AC, since they are Humans or Humanoids who are now undead. Did the DM specifically armor his monsters? If so, I'm willing to bet he has a quick reference at the table. Like a sheet for his monsters..?  :)
* Clerics only use blunt weapons, if we're going by PHB rules. I think you mean "Priests." But if we're going by The Complete Book of Priests, you can make a Priest devoted to the Light which may arm himself with a crossbow.
* The kit is called Undead Slayer and is in The Complete Book of Elves.
* Undead Slayers only gain a bonus against one type of undead. Is it Wights?

Level 3 Cleric THAC0 is 20 on the chart.
The Wight has an AC of 5.
Rear attack gives a +2 bonus to the die roll.
Elves gain a +1 bonus with bows.
Undead Slayer gets +2 versus his chosen prey (Wights, we'll assume)
Missile combat at Medium Range is -2

20 - (5 + 2 + 1 + 2 - 2).
The Cleric needs a 12.

None of that is complex. All of it is either (a) on your character sheet, (b) on the DM's screen, or (c) in the Monster Manual being used by the DM. You just got upset that I used a supplemental book in my example (re.: Swashbuckler) lol. But fair play and all that, right? Anyhow, since we're having fun, why don't you show me what that calculation would be in Pathfinder/3rd Edition? :) Same situation with an "armored Wight" against a 3rd level Cleric toting his crossbow and firing into its rear. What is his to-hit number? Show your work. ;-)

[Bosefius]

Gentlemen, at this point no lines have been crossed but it seems to be getting a little heated. At this point everyone needs to step away from the hypothetical one upping of each other.

Thank you

[monbvol]

To circle around to the other cleric question on the table then.

It could be as huge or as small impact as you want really for this god of Order to have dominated an entire material plane so thoroughly.

As suggested Order could supply the spells, there might be a couple that would be problematic.

The aforementioned fragments could work too.

Or the power could come from another plane or being more devoted to an ideal than a particular god.

[iamfanboy]

I'll have to go with D&D5e, my 3e isn't current any more - I'm mostly defending it as a step up from 2e.

A wight has AC14. Lack of proficiency means the cleric does not add his Proficiency Bonus, and he's probably dumpstatted Dex because he has proficiency in armor (and more important stats), so no bonus there. At not-normal range with a ranged weapon, he has disadvantage.

His target number is 14, he has no bonuses, and he rolls 2d20 and picks the worst.

All I had to look at was the character sheet and the Wight sheet. No consulting the DM screen, no consulting a splatbook, and instead of trying to figure out both plusses and minuses to his rolls I simply had to say, "You don't get your plusses because you don't know how to use that weapon," and that was that.

Hell, only had to consult the book to see what a Wight's AC actually was.

Now let's get really complicated. War Domain Cleric (so proficiency), but heavy armor so still no Dex. The Wight has partial cover (+2AC), but the Cleric is sustaining Bless (+1d4).

The cleric rolls 2d20 and picks the worst of them, but adds 2+1d4 to the roll, and his target number is 16.

To circle around to the other cleric question on the table then.

It could be as huge or as small impact as you want really for this god of Order to have dominated an entire material plane so thoroughly.

As suggested Order could supply the spells, there might be a couple that would be problematic.

The aforementioned fragments could work too.

Or the power could come from another plane or being more devoted to an ideal than a particular god.

I want there to be a constant feeling of oppression hanging over the plane while they're in Order's territory, and messing with them about not knowing whether their cleric's spells are granted by Order or something else is interesting.

Whether or not anyone will PICK a cleric is actually up in the air. Unlike previous editions, healbots aren't necessary, and a lot of folks have picked up on that. Considering that bards aid short rest healing, druids get Shillelagh and Way of the Land lets them recharge spells faster... I may not even see a cleric.

Which means I'll have to bring deities into it some other way. Maybe each time they revive a god, he chooses a PC as a champion and imbues him with some bonus? Proficiency in a skill or saving throw?

[TigerShark]

Here's the Pathfinder calculations:

My first thought is to calculate it this way: BAB 2 (3rd Level Cleric)  + 3 (Dex 16) + 1 (weapon focus: crossbow) - 2 (Medium range penalty) = +4

Wight's AC is 15. So you'd need an 11 on a d20. But a "Flanking" bonus only exists if your ally is fighting the Wight point-blank. You'd get the +2 bonus, but you'd ALSO get a -4 penalty for having an ally within 10 feet. So...

Situation 1: BAB 2 (3rd Level Cleric)  + 3 (Dex 16) + 1 (weapon focus: crossbow) - 2 (Medium range penalty) = +4 if no one is near it

Situation 2: BAB 2 (3rd Level Cleric)  + 3 (Dex 16) + 1 (weapon focus: crossbow) + 2 (flanking) - 4 (ally near a ranged attack) - 2 (Medium range penalty) = +2 if your ally is fighting it AND is in a hex opposite of your firing arc

Situation 3: BAB 2 (3rd Level Cleric)  + 3 (Dex 16) + 1 (weapon focus: crossbow) - 4 (ally near a ranged attack) - 2 (Medium range penalty) = +0 if your ally is fighting it and standing closer than 10', but further than 1 square

So... how is this a 'step up' from 3E, in regards to complexity and simplifying combat? While 2E has the "unintuitive THAC0," it doesn't have the ridiculous abundance of situational modifiers. Nor does it have all of the litany of feats which may/may not apply to a given situation. As far as 'only having to consult the sheet for the Wight,' you only had to do that with 2E and 3E as well. In no case would there be an armored Wight with a different AC. So... not sure why that's an issue.

EDIT: Re-calculated

[TigerShark]

Oh you said non-proficient. That's an entirely different story :) But the calculations remain as complex or not complex as before. Just another mod.

[Scotty]

Who brought up Pathfinder? ???  iamfanboy was using an example from 5e, where what he listed was basically the most complicated that determining attack rolls gets.  Usually it's d20 + Proficiency (which is based on total level only, not on class) + the relevant attribute modifier.

A 1st level character's proficiency bonus is +2, and if you're a martial class the attribute modifier is fairly easy to start with at +3 (16 in that stat).  So they'd roll at +5 basically all the time.  Things like flanking don't grant bonuses to the to-hit, just the opportunity to roll twice and pick the better result.  Easy.

[Arkansas Warrior]

Here's the Pathfinder calculations:

My first thought is to calculate it this way: BAB 3 (3rd Level Cleric)  + 3 (Dex 16) + 1 (Elven battle training) + 1 (weapon focus: crossbow) + 2 (flanking) - 2 (Medium range penalty) = +10

Wight's AC is 15. So you'd need a 5 on a d20. Not much of a challenge. But that "Flanking" bonus only exists if your ally is fighting the Wight point-blank. You'd get the +2 bonus, but you'd ALSO get a -4 penalty for having an ally within 10 feet. So...

Situation 1: BAB 3 (3rd Level Cleric)  + 3 (Dex 16) + 1 (Elven battle training) + 1 (weapon focus: crossbow) - 2 (Medium range penalty) = +8 if no one is near it

Situation 2: BAB 3 (3rd Level Cleric)  + 3 (Dex 16) + 1 (Elven battle training) + 1 (weapon focus: crossbow) + 2 (flanking) - 4 (ally near a ranged attack) - 2 (Medium range penalty) = +6 if your ally is fighting it AND is in a hex opposite of your firing arc

Situation 3: BAB 3 (3rd Level Cleric)  + 3 (Dex 16) + 1 (Elven battle training) + 1 (weapon focus: crossbow) - 4 (ally near a ranged attack) - 2 (Medium range penalty) = +4 if your ally is fighting it and standing closer than 10', but further than 1 square

So... how is this a 'step up' from 3E, in regards to complexity and simplifying combat? While 2E has the "unintuitive THAC0," it doesn't have the ridiculous abundance of situational modifiers. Nor does it have all of the litany of feats which may/may not apply to a given situation. As far as 'only having to consult the sheet for the Wight,' you only had to do that with 2E and 3E as well. In no case would there be an armored Wight with a different AC. So... not sure why that's an issue.

A Pathfinder Cleric 3 has BAB 2.  Also, what is this Elven Battle Training?  The only thing I know of by that name is a feat that grants some minor bonuses (none of them to attack bonus) with Elven racial weapons: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/racial-feats/elven-battle-training-combat-elf/

[TigerShark]

Who brought up Pathfinder? ???  iamfanboy was using an example from 5e, where what he listed was basically the most complicated that determining attack rolls gets.  Usually it's d20 + Proficiency (which is based on total level only, not on class) + the relevant attribute modifier.

A 1st level character's proficiency bonus is +2, and if you're a martial class the attribute modifier is fairly easy to start with at +3 (16 in that stat).  So they'd roll at +5 basically all the time.  Things like flanking don't grant bonuses to the to-hit, just the opportunity to roll twice and pick the better result.  Easy.

I'd been discussing 3E v 2E over the course of several posts. Did you not read the last few pages?  ??? Here's the post I was responding to, which started that line of conversation. iamfanboy switched to 5E at the end of it, showing the calc for a Cleric firing a crossbow.

It's HARD to calculate THAC0 with its "AC goes from 10 to 0, with 0 best, and some ACs are negative numbers, which are better than that, and your character has a number to hit Armor Class 0 (called THAC0), and if the number is positive you subtract it from your THAC0 to see what you need to hit, and if it's negative you add it to your THAC0 to see what you need to hit..." Compared to 3rd version and beyond's "Roll the dice and add your bonus to it, if it's equal or over the AC you hit," there's no contest. 3e is just better. Quicker in combat scenarios, easier to use, and even an average 10 year old can understand it.

[TigerShark]

A Pathfinder Cleric 3 has BAB 2.  Also, what is this Elven Battle Training?  The only thing I know of by that name is a feat that grants some minor bonuses (none of them to attack bonus) with Elven racial weapons: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/racial-feats/elven-battle-training-combat-elf/

Fixed. Was going off of a 2-year-old memory. :) My bad.

[iamfanboy]

You're dodging the two main problems with THAC0:

1) It's counterintuitive. "For the positive numbers I subtract it from my THAC0, for the negative numbers I add it to my THAC0?" Add in the multiple positive and negative modifiers that could apply, and confusion is a quick and easy result. Not for you, because you've spent what, 25 years immersed in it? But for a player choosing between 3e and 2e it's much easier to go 3e.

2) It's a different system in a game plagued by different systems, whereas 3e just has the one: Roll d20, add your bonuses, subtract your penalties, if you hit the TN you succeed. Not like 2e where you have to roll percentiles for thief skills and try to get low, or roll d20s for saving throws and try to score high, or roll d20s for nonweapon proficiencies and try to score low... and a system I'm forgetting.


As far as the massive stack of bonuses and penalties that can apply in Pathfinder or 3.5 making it harder to actually play the game, that's one of the main reasons I'm playing 5e right now. A lot of the same things you say are bad about 3e I perfectly agree with you on, and it's the reason my fiance's Pathfinder book hasn't been cracked in years.

But at least the core of 3e is intuitive and complex, which makes it head, shoulders, AND waist above 2e.

It's that same core that's used in 5e, come to think of it, just refined down to its basics.

[Kit deSummersville]

And the talk about THACO vs. 3rd/3.5/PF/5th doesn't touch on how the mechanism for attacking in 3rd/3.5/PF/5th is the same for skill checks, saving throws, etc.

[TigerShark]

Yes, THAC0 is SLIGHTLY different than ascending AC. And I agree: Ascending AC is 'better' in the sense that it's simpler to explain to someone who's never touched an RPG in their life. But that's not the only change that was made. If it were, 3rd would be a good game. As it is, it's not, IMO.

Not unless you heavily restrict players to "Core rule book only." Anything beyond core and the entire thing breaks down, as the system quickly escalates player abilities to god-like proportions. Even in this discussion, you thought it unfair to bring up the supplemental work to 3E in a discussion, while I'm happy to include the "Complete.." series in a 2E discussion. Until Player's Option, the game was very well written. And since that book is optional (explicitly stated as such), it still doesn't factor in.

Crafting: Now you can hand-make your own weapons and totally break the system. If your GM didn't gift you that +3 sword, now you can just make it.

Skills: Instead of basic proficiencies, which can be extrapolated, you now have a complex system of what your character can/cannot do. That's VERY difficult for a DM to manage, as a critical plot point may rely on a single skill. (You need to sneak past the guards. Nobody has Stealth? Darn...) Also, many Skills are worthless or niche, where Perception and Crafting are completely overpowered and just about staple.

Multi-Classing: Why would anyone single class? Ever? They can take "level dips", gain all of the benefits, then continue min/maxing their way to a perfect character. Fighter + Wizard = spellcasting in armor and full access to all basic and martial weapons. Why would you ever be a Fighter from levels 1-20? Now you can just add a class, acquire their base skills, and move on with life.

These are just a few gripes. So yes, it's nice to only have a d20 for everything. And if that were the only change, I'd say a "2.75E" would be the most-perfect iteration ever. Unfortunately, that ain't what we got... And it was so bad that a 3.5E had to be published 2 years after 3E hit the shelves in 2001.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

The Craft skill does not allow you to build magical equipment.  If you want to make a +3 sword in 3.5 Edition, you need to be a spellcaster with the Craft Magic Arms and Armor feat and be something like 11th level, it takes a month of time in-game, and costs you in both gold and XP.  Crafting determines how much money you can make weaving baskets or the like.  It's a worthless skill unless you need it for a prestige class.

And if a GM is running a game where the group's ability to win or not comes down to a single Move Silent check then frankly they're not doing their job correctly.

[Kit deSummersville]

Skills: Instead of basic proficiencies, which can be extrapolated, you now have a complex system of what your character can/cannot do. That's VERY difficult for a DM to manage, as a critical plot point may rely on a single skill. (You need to sneak past the guards. Nobody has Stealth? Darn...)

Please tell me how that's any different than a 1st or 2nd Edition party without a Thief.

[Arkansas Warrior]

Yes, THAC0 is SLIGHTLY different than ascending AC. And I agree: Ascending AC is 'better' in the sense that it's simpler to explain to someone who's never touched an RPG in their life. But that's not the only change that was made. If it were, 3rd would be a good game. As it is, it's not, IMO.

Not unless you heavily restrict players to "Core rule book only." Anything beyond core and the entire thing breaks down, as the system quickly escalates player abilities to god-like proportions. Even in this discussion, you thought it unfair to bring up the supplemental work to 3E in a discussion, while I'm happy to include the "Complete.." series in a 2E discussion. Until Player's Option, the game was very well written. And since that book is optional (explicitly stated as such), it still doesn't factor in.

Crafting: Now you can hand-make your own weapons and totally break the system. If your GM didn't gift you that +3 sword, now you can just make it.

Skills: Instead of basic proficiencies, which can be extrapolated, you now have a complex system of what your character can/cannot do. That's VERY difficult for a DM to manage, as a critical plot point may rely on a single skill. (You need to sneak past the guards. Nobody has Stealth? Darn...) Also, many Skills are worthless or niche, where Perception and Crafting are completely overpowered and just about staple.

Multi-Classing: Why would anyone single class? Ever? They can take "level dips", gain all of the benefits, then continue min/maxing their way to a perfect character. Fighter + Wizard = spellcasting in armor and full access to all basic and martial weapons. Why would you ever be a Fighter from levels 1-20? Now you can just add a class, acquire their base skills, and move on with life.

These are just a few gripes. So yes, it's nice to only have a d20 for everything. And if that were the only change, I'd say a "2.75E" would be the most-perfect iteration ever. Unfortunately, that ain't what we got... And it was so bad that a 3.5E had to be published 2 years after 3E hit the shelves in 2001.

Part of what I like about Pathfinder is that it partially mitigates these issues.  Skills are consolidated from 3.5, and it's less painful to take non-class skills.  The base classes are better built to offer rewards for sticking with them instead of dipping in and out (though I do dislike that it makes most Prestige Classes, especially those ported from 3.5, subpar compared to just single-classing.).

[TigerShark]

Well, I don't want to create ill-will between BT players so I'll bow out. We all have our preferences :) Heck, this happens in BT as well ("This era/tech level only!"). So no sense in porting that over. Enjoy and game on!!

[Øystein]

I find it amazing how we managed to play AD&D 1st and 2nd edition for years with it's horrendous complex attack system.

That I had such huge problems adding the AC to the THACO number - say my THACO was 12, if the AC was 4, 16, if the AC -2, 10. Basic math.

of course, I don't have a huge problem with D&D 5th, where I have to do math again. The AC is 12, my bonuses are +6, so I this time need to add it to the dice instead.. Or subtract it from the AC. So 2ED had you doing additions, 5ED have you doing subtractions.
But 5ED also makes you do lots of other stuff. Oh you're on a horse - add an advantage. Wait there are two of them - add a disadvantage. Wait I use a skill which gives me advantage. But someone cast darkness so I have a disadvantage again, but my cleric blessed me so I have an advantage again....

Now if someone would invent a system which gave you a real math challenge - like third degree equations for attack rolls...