Search

Search only in certain items:

Classic, awesome, brilliant RPG system
Where can I start with 2nd Edition....

For about 10-15 years, 2nd edition D&D was THE game for role playing. For many thousands of people, it is still THE game for role playing.

Dont get me wrong, there are some elements which can seem counter-intuitive; the best armour class is a negative value (so, a normal person standing in normal clothes is AC 10. A fully plate-armoured knight, with a shield, is AC1, but may be 0 or a negative value). But, when you look at the wider picture, it starts to make sense - the main attack measure is THAC0 (To Hit Armour Class 0) and starts at 20, and drops at a varying rate depending on the class. So a level 1 fighter would need to roll a 10 to hit the person mentioned earlier (AC10). To hit the knight, at AC1, the fighter would need to roll a 19.

2nd Ed, for me, is the last D&D which doesnt have a computer game feel. The Proficiency system, which is optional, is one of my favourite bits - it acknowledges that people (even heroes) aren't going to be skilled at everything, and even something mundane like reading would not be necessarily be a common skill.

The plethora of resources available for 2nd Ed is amazing; from the jungles of Chult, to the sprawling Sword Coast, to the stars with Spelljammer, to a homebrew campaign - all you need are three books; the Players Handbook, the DM guide, and the Monstrous Manual, and even that is optional. It is totally possible to play an absence-of-magic settling, and have all players and enemies being humans, or all dwarves, or anything else.

I have heard people say that the latest edition (5th) is all the best bits from 2nd, 3.5, and 4th, but from what I have seen, it might shine a candle to 2nd ed, but it will not claim the crown.
  
40x40

Awix (3310 KP) rated Batman (1989) in Movies

Feb 25, 2018  
Batman (1989)
Batman (1989)
1989 | Action
Tim Burton's landmark superhero adaptation was an unavoidable media juggernaut on original release; has stood the test of time pretty well. Bruce Wayne begins his battle against crime as Batman, inadvertently creates psycho crime-lord the Joker; the two of them both take a shine to reporter Vicki Vale.


Enormously influenced by Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns, clearly, but then you could say the same about every single other Batman movie since. The real innovation at the time was to create a distinctive fantasy world around Batman so he appears less absurd: hence the gothic nightmare of Gotham City's architecture, and the combination of elements of 40s and 80s fashion in the costume design. Whole film is arguably unbalanced by Jack Nicholson's not-exactly-understated performance as the Joker, though Michael Keaton does his best. Is there really anything behind all the art direction and overacting? Possibly not, but that may be missing the point.