The History of D&D, Part VI: Second Edition 1989

[@craigbryant3191]

"Don't drop *all* the obscure polearms." If you want my Bec de corbin, COME AND TAKE IT.

[@humungus3]

Dude that 2e Arms and Equipment Guide was my jam.

[@iivin4233]

I had the same feeling, although I would rather use my own rules or house rules. Contemporary research and our players' opinion of what is fair would probably lead us to different rules than TSR originally imagined for these weapons.

[@cavalier973]

“Only humans get to play D&D.” That statement is literally true.

[@mcolville]

It's a fair point, well made. :D

[@iivin4233]

For now.

[@Reepicheep-1]

Do human-programmed AIs playing D&D count?

[@cavalier973]

@@Reepicheep-1 Artificial Intelligence is so fake.

[@hielispace]

Coming back to this video 5 years later, I am impressed that Matt successfully predicted that Critical Role was going to cause DnD to explode in popularity. He hit the nail on the head with that one.

[@frabjuosity]

Went into the comment section to say the exact same thing. Very prescient of Matt to predict Critical Role's contribution to the D&D renaissance when it looks like they were just at around episode 24 and hadn't yet achieved their huge popularity.

[@sheldoncarpenter6291]

For me Critical Role was the boost that got me back into D&D. although they started out playing sort-of Pathfinder, it really got rolling with 5th ed. I started DMing again and having a good time with newbs.

[@FlyingDominion]

40:40

[@GalvatronRodimus]

Seeing those old, low-budget bluescreen thumbnails as just, like...what Critical Role is, like that was *all* it was, is really funny.

[@wanderinghistorian]

Matt through the ages... 2016 7:56 "He would like to remove the concept of psionics from a medieval fantasy role-playing game, and I feel the same way." 2018 *Publishes Strongholds and Followers with Psionics rules* 2019 *Promises more Psionics rules in Kingdoms and Warfare* Matt truly is a DM's DM, constantly changing his view of the game. I love you Matt, never change! :D :D :D

[@kev_whatev]

You mean always change 😉

[@robertlawson503]

2022 MCDM begins testing its new psionics full custom class

[@MarkWomack11]

@@robertlawson503 it’s 2025. Matt has developed psionic powers. He tells people, but no one believes him.

[@GalvatronRodimus]

@@robertlawson503 2023 That class is released

[@mrazana6408]

"That video [3rd edition] should come much more quickly" - Matthew Colville Oct 2015

[@JoshuaDuaneClark]

This comment gets funnier the longer we wait

[@paulm3952]

Checking in during quarantine after just discovering these videos.

[@seileurt]

@@paulm3952 dndclassics updated to dmsguild.com and all the player's handbooks are available. So, I mean, it's possible. Roll the dice for the probability, though.

[@paulm3952]

@@seileurt Is this like divine intervention where I want something low?

[@seileurt]

@@paulm3952 Everyone else was rolling high, so I bet that's why there hasn't been one yet.

[@OtepRalloma]

After your 3rd edition upload, I've watched this entire series. This was great. Looking forward to 4e!

[@4204799]

i love going back and reading the 4e handbooks (all of them) and reminiscing to when i started playing in high school. i saw all of this for the first time and immediately fell in love with all this weird coolness. i made a shardmind warlock (star pact) and felt like i finally unlocked an outlet for all my creativity :)

[@man0fbronze79]

Loving this series. As a 41yr old who only started a couple years back on 5th ed, im finding it incredibly interesting to see how it all started and evolved. Looking forward to seeing the next versions of Duncan, and hopefully getting to see you use them in an encounter!

[@Vagabond820]

More! We need more

[@annec8127]

Probable reason for "no question" questions: they deleted a question during a draft and were not going to pay an intern to renumber them.

[@Seth9809]

Bingo.

[@VMSelvaggio]

Payroll Budgeting probably didn't allow for a re-hashing of multiple drafts.

[@theworstbird]

I know you've said this series was too unpopular to justify making more, and I understand, but these videos more than anything got me excited to actually play D&D. The way you weaved the context of the times in with the actual mechanics is just fascinating. I think I've watched this series four times now and dreamed each time I could convince my friends to try all of the old editions just to experience them for ourselves. So... thanks for all of that, I guess is what I'm saying.

[@JMesonT]

The next video in this series is out now!

[@theworstbird]

@@JMesonT You're a peach

[@SimonAshworthWood]

THAC0: if you're fighting an enemy, and the DM doesn't tell you their AC (armour class), then you roll the d20, and get, e.g. a 15. Then you add your bonuses and subtract your penalties, e.g. +1 for strength: that makes 16. Then you subtract your total adjusted roll from your THAC0, e.g. Duncan has a THAC0 of 20, so 20 - 16 = 4. So you hit AC 4, and you tell that to the DM. :)

[@andrewshewan4551]

It works but why not just add a simple modifier?

[@leshtricity]

@@andrewshewan4551 that's exactly how it functions, as THAC0 advances at different rates for different classes. it is a simple modifier.

[@jamesdolder4804]

THAC0 was easier if you told the DM what you hit. Over the battle you could start figuring out what the monsters AC was. Also if you keep track of THAC0 for each weapon it was easier. One forgotten rule was exchanging languages from Intelligence for Non weapon prof.

[@EAKugler]

And without THAC0, there would be no to hit mod. Looking back it seems bizarre, but THAC0 from the little chart was a great leap forward.

[@mcolville]

I apologize for the poor quality of the images. My original file was corrupted and I had to work around it and in the process make several copies of it. Six videos in, still figuring this out. :)

[@thorkhammer]

+Matthew Colville Just a comment regarding your bewilderment with the PHB cover. Not exciting enough? Go back and check out the 1st-3rd prints of the original game box. Is it just a coincidence, or were the designers of 2E sighing nostalgic?

[@bozzutoman]

The artwork of 2e was a large factor why I never upgraded 2nd edition. Jeff Easely's in particular put me off. There was something about his style and use of color that I found repellent. Maybe because it looked so much like the overly-oiled-body-builder-styling of Boris. Clyde Caldwell's stuff was a touch too Boris-esque as well, though he did try to blend in some elements of Michael Whelan. Didn't like Elmore's stuff either; it felt too staged... and most of his women had modernistic curly hair-styles. And egad, the vast majority of the interior 'art' was just rubbish filler. Now there were definitely some greats from that era, like Denis Beauvais, Keith Parkinson, Daniel Horne, Brom, Tony DiTerlizzi and Tim Truman, but they were either under-used or came too late to the party.

[@johnstephenalbert]

D&D 2nd Edition came out after Gary Gygax had been ousted from TSR and the company taken over by Lorraine Williams, who reportedly detested the wargaming culture and held a personal grudge against Gary. In his book Empire of the Imagination, Michael Witwer claims Lorraine tasked the 2e game designers with revising the rules in order to excise as much content as possible that was explicitly creditable to Gary, in the interest of minimizing his royalties from the new system. I have no idea how much of that was actually true, and how much was just Gary's personal opinion. An obvious difference in 2e was its aesthetics. Under Lorraine's management, TSR changed the art direction of the books to bowdlerize pulp elements like nudity, violence, and criminality, and make the game appear more colorful, and high fantasy oriented.

[@frontline989]

Finish these when you have the time please! I'm loving this series!

[@leolyre168]

When do we see the 7th incarnation of Duncan?

[@TheToobyoulator]

Waiting on your 3E, 3.5E, 4E and 5E analysis'. Do you plan on doing any?

[@mcolville]

Oh yeah, they're just much more time intensive than the DMing videos.

[@StarwalkerStudios]

+Matthew Colville I'm very much looking forward to them too! Although I'm not sure that doing a 3.0 AND 3.5 video would be worth your time. Maybe just do a 3.5 video and mention the few things that were different in 3.0. I'd also love to see you squeeze in Pathfinder (3.75?) between 3.5 and 5e. :)

[@wgwells]

+Matthew Colville This series has been phenomenal. I actually thought I knew a lot about the history of the game until watching these--wow. Fantastic work, and from a historian's point-of-view, I think these videos will be referenced a great deal for years to come.

[@godfreyhowatchin]

the differences between 3 and 3.5 are much more significant and worth covering than the differences between 3.5 and a fanfiction game

[@lukecarroll4052]

Matthew Colville just want to say that of the many videos I've watched related to the hobby, you give the clearest and in my opinion best DMing advice... So many people are either too vague for the advice to be all that applicable unless it seems, you're already an experienced DM and others give advice that is too weighed down personal preference or experience of what the game "should be" (hate to point fingers but as entertaining as spoony was, his dnd next review is anything but an objective argument for why it's bad). You give solid, clear, applicable advice even if it is not something you personally would do, and you explain it in a way that you can easily imagine applying, you walk away with the ability to at least implement it into your game without in-depth knowledge gained from countless sessions, with an idea of what to expect from most of your players if you do it.

[@sehrgut42]

The "no question" questions were pretty common in pre-digital survey instruments. It allowed for additional questions to be added to later editions of the instrument without changing the numerical identity of the old questions. While those seem silly to us now, it's a sign that they actually used a professional survey firm to create the survey.

[@shrpbluntobject]

58:13 "The videos after will come out much faster after this." I've been waiting for nearly 2 years Matt... Stop torturing me. Please

[@mcolville]

Unfortunately, these videos weren't popular.

[@shrpbluntobject]

Which is sad because I feel they are endlessly fascinating, and very enjoyable. But I do understand giving people what you know will be watched and enjoyed. Also A++ for fast reply.

[@annec8127]

Oh, this makes me sad! I found it fascinating. [cue sniffling and surreptitious wiping of the eyes.] Thanks for taking it this far at least!

[@Argo.nautica]

You have a larger audience now than two years ago, so they may well be more popular now. Regardless if you continue them or not, thanks for doing the ones you did, they are truly interesting.

[@wanderinghistorian]

I found and subscribed to your channel SOLELY based on these videos, which were recommended to me by a D&D forum. I realize however, I am only one person. However I've made sure to "LIKE" each one.

[@gregh5665]

Dude, they included all the polearms because they are awesome: same reason Gygax put em in there to begin with! Inspiring imagination is more important that fiddlin' with rules. As a DM from 1982-1991, I kept the rules which made sense and worked, and modified or ignored the others. THACO? Absruth? Yup, we liked it. Not perfect, but an improvement. I passed grade 4 math, so no problem doing the calculation, and great, less tables to consult. This is a great walk down memory lane. And I love the research you did to learn what the designers were thinking. Thanks!

[@electronkaleidoscope5860]

It was funny to me, when in the earlier videos you'd said how unlikely it was for a non DND player to be watching these, since I loved every second of this series, and I'm not much of a fan of the DnD system personally. It's largely because of what you pointed out in these videos. All of the noodily nonsense and patchwork design that the system holds on to, and has largely cursed itself with. So much of it standing in the way of the *actual game*. When me and my brother were kids, like about Nine or Ten, our folks picked up an old HeroQuest board from a yard sale. We recognized it immediately as "that thing! with the dice!" We were ecstatic to finally find out what that whole "Dungeons and Dragons" thing even was. We didn't realize that DND was actually a *specific* game, we'd thought it was more of an idea- just sort of a *thing* that you do. We didn't know how one could even get involved with something like that, but that old board was our first window into that world. When we cracked it open, though, we realized pretty quickly that this wasn't the *actual* "thing with the dice", but rather some odd board game mutant thingy that was *based on* whatever that DnD thing was. (What tipped us off is there was no tavern map. :P) Basically four pre-made heroes, a "DM" who was basically another player with rules to follow, and literally no gameplay outside of the *actual dungeon* . Oh and you roll to move. Everywhere. It was dumb! Or at least we thought so, But the minis, cards, and dice were quite cool- so we used them to come up with our own games. Made our own rules and worlds and taverns, huge setting wide maps drawn on old planning paper our dad brought home from his job in the Oil Field. Character stats built upon the SPECIAL system from Fallout 3, which I'd been playing recently. Magic artifacts hidden in puzzle filled elemental temples, much like in Zelda- but the boss of the temple was often the dragon of that element. Stuff like that. Before long we'd thought we figured it out- *this* was Dungeons and Dragons! It was about creating a world, and your friends walking into that world. We loved it. With age, though, comes understanding. By our High School years we realized the truth- DnD wasn't some grand tradition, it was an actual official product of an actual companyTM. There were official rules, editions, spells, and combat systems. There were these weird things called Character classes, which basically funneled you into one of many weirdly specific ideas of what your character was allowed to be, as opposed to letting your dude evolve naturally and organically to their needs, based upon their backstory and the world around them. There were charts upon charts of random BS and nothing seemed to have anything to do with anything else. Just this monstrous collage of stuff. The most insane of all to us- there were official setting details- Major stuff! Specific items, Monsters, locations, Dimensions, and Races! All that was left for *you* were, like, the mountains and S*#t. It was utterly and completely absurd to us. Wasn't that *all* up to the DM? Surely that's what actually made it cool, right? We'd thought making the game and its systems and its world was half the fun. Apparently, to the perception of 15 and 16 year old us, that kind of fun was against the rules of the actual game. There was that feeling again, the official stuff missed the point- but this time it was the actual, *real* Dungeons and Dragons. All these years we'd been playing something completely different. Or, of course, so it seemed at the time. After finding the official game, my brother had written the idea off altogether. I tried on and off to recapture the magic of those games over the years, I know the official system decently ok in the broad strokes, but I've never enjoyed using it beyond just being with friends for the sake of it. Me and my brother are in our early 20's now, and we recently discovered your channel. You video on "The map is not the territory" really spoke to me. Your attitude in general, though, re-awoke that love for that game we played way back in the day, whatever it would actually be called. We've actually made a little homebrew scifi wargame of our own since those days, it's called Battleforce, and it's inspired by Mobile Frame 0. Its built around the idea that that Lego MOCists can actually battle their little lego mech models. It's immensely fun. You can see Charles' work here if you're curious- www.flickr.com/photos/zantharan/ Last Halloween, I ran a little game for us all that was entirely story based- no actual systems whatsoever- just a map, and some dice for probability. for old times sake. It was an absurd success. Not only had My brother and I recaptured that feeling from when we were kids, but three of our other friends are hooked now too. I'd finally got it. Now we're working on a setting again, we have our own system again, and Charles miraculously found our old item cards. He's got something interesting planned with them, something to do with them being relics of a lost age. Our first game of the campaign will be this weekend. Heck man we've actually made a good game before now, we've got this. So like, basically, thanks! You're really doing something good here. I just realized while typing this- *these videos* are what we were looking for back when we were kids. DnD *is* a grand tradition, we just had to toss the rule book and look for the *people* . Things like this carry that tradition onto new generations. I'm so glad we found your work, and I'm so thankful you're making it. I'm really glad we can finally start playing DnD again.

[@cavalier973]

“Hero quest is the best game ever made; anyone who says otherwise is wrong.” ~the Bard

[@GeeBarone]

Hot damn, you summed my experience up with significant accuracy. After years of struggling with D&d and other official rules feeling like they "got in the way" my friends, my brother and I use a very simple system that uses a few d6 for probability and things, and the rest is just...creativity. Meanwhile I still buy D&D books for inspiration and rewatch Matt's videos on the regular.

[@skywantsanacc]

my boys writing an autobiography

[@sovereignundead]

I, for one, am waiting for Duncan in 3rd, 3.5, 4th, and 5th edition. Complete with backgrounds, etc. PERHAPS, you can find a way to get insights from Chris Perkins and/or Mike Mearls, IF available. Perhaps a Pathfinder version of Duncan (one of Duncan's cousins, LOL), if warranted. The history & lore behind the game is JUICE, for me... :P

[@leshtricity]

i legit think that 2nd edition represents the best edition of the game. people often say it's complicated, but that's simply not true; 2E is actually one of the least-complex editions, especially compared to later editions. there aren't really "special abilities" or "combat actions" because this was when players were encouraged to be creative and to attempt different actions instead of just being given more "specials." aside from being pretty accessible, the core game offered myriad optional rules (from weapon type vs. armor AC adjustment to group initiative, speed ratings, and encumbrance) so groups could tailor it to their tastes - throw in the Player's Options series (especially Spells and Magic and Combat and Tactics) and the customization options remain unmatched to this day. and in addition to the elegance and flexibility of the mechanics, the campaign settings and box sets that TSR put out were amazing; i really missed the giant maps and box sets after WotC took over D&D.

[@thewyldness]

35:25 when seen in full color, that picture is fantastic. It put me "in" that tavern.

[@puckerings]

The reason they still weren't using the term skill instead of NWP is presumably because thieves did have skills. The thief's abilities were still referred to as thief skills IIRC.

[@TheSwartz]

I've watched a lot of "history of D&D" videos, and watching through all of these to this point has been fabulous; you have gone through a LOT of stuff I haven't seen before or presented it in a different way. Thanks!

[@theendicott2838]

I think a way to do the “monster compendium” idea affectively is to not have it be pages in a 3 ring binder, but instead have it be boxed sets of cards that are stat blocks. Then again maybe the idea is just a perfect “ideal” solution to the monster book idea that will just never work.

[@hipfan42]

I started in 83 with AD&D. Interesting to see how things changed. Love to see the rest of the editions. Learning lots. Thanks Matthew.

[@John_NJDM]

I'm watching at the end of 2020 after part VII for 3rd Edition comes out, and at 58:13 I hear, "I think the videos are going to come much faster after this,..." Glad you resumed these, Matt. They are really interesting!

[@Spectrulus]

If I'd known about these years ago, I would've watched. I'm in the same boat!

[@DaudAlzayer]

I just binged all of these videos. As a new 5e player interested in the history of the game this was quite a treat. I eagerly await the next installment when it comes to fruition!

[@Alex-tc4se]

Please continue this series. I have recently discovered you channel. I started playing in 1980 with advanced edition, played up to 2nd edition and then stopped. But I loved hearing about the history behind each.

[@jasonleblanc4976]

When will the 3e/3.5e History of D&D video come out? Really enjoyed this series so far!

[@abrown1301]

Same here.

[@Voldine2]

Now.

[@schoolmonkey13]

"The History of D&D, One Fighter at a Time" or "Matt rants about the rulebook of each edition for an hour"

[@brady3126]

@ 34:10 "[Third edition] video should come a lot more quickly" D:

[@joluoto]

Sounds legit.

[@rowanbadhwar877]

I'm so ready!

[@DanA-st2ed]

bump

[@jigurd]

@@DanA-st2ed _weeps, tears garments_

[@JMesonT]

It's out now!

[@GibusWearingMann]

I just found your channel and I want you to make more of these.

[@lucbouchard-pigeon1363]

I can't wait for this kind of videos for 3E, 3.5E, 4E and 5E.

[@elismadrigal6146]

Our shortcut for THAC0: 20-your THAC0 score became your overall bonus to attack (ie THAC0 of 18 gave you +2 to hit with all your attacks). I don't know why they made it so much more difficult than this 😛

[@stevenpeterson8582]

I am fairly convinced that we need to see a video of making Duncan the Fighter under the Skills & Powers updates to 2nd edition. A minor visit to the Complete handbooks patch to the 2nd edition might add a little more fluff to that video too. There were patches to 2nd edition. Starting with PHBR1 - The Complete Fighter's Handbook, and going through the full Complete series, we were given class Kits that modified the core classes... the Complete Fighter's introduced warrior kits to turn your fighter into an Amazon, a Barbarian, a Beast-Rider, etc.. That book also introduced new Weapon Proficiency and Non-Weapon Proficiency options, including bonus # of proficiencies based on Intelligence, weapon group proficiencies (so you could spend 2 proficiency slots and be proficient in long blades, or 3 proficiency slots to be proficient in all swords), ambidexterity as a weapon proficiency, fighting style specialization (to get bonuses with single weapon, two-handed weapon, sword-and-board, etc.). The subsequent Complete handbook series class kits are related to the 5e background options - they give some character background/cultural detail, some required proficiencies, some bonus proficiencies, some recommended equipment, and usually some minor special ability or trait unique to that character. The second patch, which at the time I thought was huge, was with the Skills & Powers breaking the 6 ability scores into 12. Strength is divided between Stamina (weight allowance, sprinting, fatigue) and Muscle (combat modifiers and opening doors), and the two sub-scores have to be within 4 points of each other. For the fighter, they can both be 18, with separate percentiles, or the 18 Strength fighter can have a 16 Stamina and 20 Muscle (per the example given in the book, even though that seems to violate the rule of 18 max that was described before Strength). There were new options for rolling stats, including a couple of point-buy options. There was a random background event table to determine why the character became an adventurer. Demihuman characters were given the option of a point-buy system for alternative racial traits. Classes were given the option of a point-buy system to gain alternative class features, so a Fighter could maybe give up his 9th level followers and instead move faster or gain d12 hit dice or resist magic at 1st level. Traits and Disadvantages exist, and having disadvantages gave more character points for the point-buy options. The Complete Fighter's option for weapon groups and fighting style specialization was expanded with Weapon Expertise (a limited form of Specialization for non-Fighters), Weapon Mastery (a return to the Double Specialization of the Unearthed Arcana), High Mastery and Grand Mastery to go beyond the double specialization. Skills & Powers is enough of a patch that it could have been a full new edition of the game.

[@cj719521]

New DM (literally have run a game once so far) and I’m loving seeing the history of the game in this way! I know 3e+ are gonna be tougher, but as a convert via Critical Role, seeing back before 5e is awesome and super enlightening! Hoping to see more “history” videos-whether “one fighter at a time” or otherwise-in future! Thanks MC!

[@AnthonyEmmel]

+Matthew Colville, Non-Weapon Proficencies first appeared in Oriental Adventures (1985); NWPs were expanded for AD&D in the Dungeoneer & Wilderness Survival Guides (both 1985).

[@southron_d1349]

Just a point about Mr David Cook. His nickname was taken from his signature which some actually read as "Zeb".

[@Trashloot]

How right you were with the prediction of dnd getting hyped after people see how its played. Speculating that critical role (and similar streams) will start a golden age of pen and paper was so on point. I think you should get a pat on the back for that. :3

[@scolpitts]

Dude, honest to god this has been one of if not the most compelling series of videos I’ve seen on KZbin. Well done! I understand you just hurt your shoulder, I sincerely hope you get well soon and happy holidays.

[@MatangaBoots]

Great videos. Just got into watching them. BIG question. :) What happened to the series on the history of D&D one fighter at a time? I want the very long and informative D&D 3x, Than 4ed. I started on 5th ed. So learning about the past as been a blast.:)

[@jkanady]

These history videos are fascinating. Loved them all. I didn't really get into D&D until 3.5, so I very much appreciate the lens into the past.

[@Cozbone43]

I really enjoy the D&D history you describe in the beginning. My favorite part of this series!

[@Steevels]

Hi! Really hoping that you pick this back up. My fiancee, who has played a total of three RPG sessions ever, was enthralled by this watching the evolution of the game. I picked up so much on terms that we use and that I had taken for granted

[@stonehorn4641]

THACO was simple. Subtract your roll from your thac0, thats the best armor class you hit. People just think it's complex

[@javan6982]

I'm such a fan of these videos! I would love to see the series finished AND another series done with 'magic-user' character builds :D Sadly, I think Matt was inspired by the release of 5e, and may not realize how much fascinating and important perspective he provides to all of us who share his past, present and future interest in D&D. My stumpy Dwarven fingers will be crossed.... Regarding the number of pole arms shown in 2nd ed. (1:10:20), having 1 page a picture of 14 different types is far less than DOZENS shown on the 6 PAGES of Appendix T at the end of AD&D Unearthed Arcana! I think they kept it in there as an homage and either they were die-hard fans of medieval pole arms, or they didn't want to incur wrath of fans who know a lot about bladed weapons. Check out Appendix T, you will be amazed...

[@trevorsklar]

I’m convinced that the NO QUESTION questions were questions that were written, but later deleted. Then they needed the responses to match their data collection system, so they needed placeholders. They may have even deleted some questions after having sent out earlier versions of this survey, further confirming the need for placeholders.

[@Welverin]

Non-weapon proficiencies were added in the Dungeoneer's Survival Guide in 1986.

[@F4R207]

The continued, double, specialization was in the class books if I remember correctly. I hope you eventually return to this series. It's been enlightening and informative and I'm sure people would like to hear about your years at WotC during the 3.x time.

[@ChrisSham]

I really hope you continue and complete this series. As the first couple videos pointed out, a lot of the earliest D&D history is only known because someone bothered to record the little-known oral histories. The same should be done for the later stuff, before it's forgotten.

[@Yora21]

Checked again to see if the series had been continued and not only did it, there's also a whole bunch of other videos now as well. Very happy to see this. Eagerly waiting for Duncan VII.

[@pantocyclus]

I know you’re busy, but I for one am still interested in watching the rest of this series.

[@EgonSupreme]

From my experience, the red box did a very good job of teaching D&D. My friends and I started playing in a kind of vacuum: we didn't know anyone who had ever had any contact with D&D. It was the late 90s, so we could look stuff up online but it was nothing like today. Our ideas of what the game was supposed to be came from Balgur's Gate and Dragonlance books. But the box did a really good job of teaching us how the game was supposed to be played, circa 1980. To the point where when I read or hear people talk about what the game was like back in the late 70's and 80's, it's very familiar - as if I had the same experience.

[@SimonAshworthWood]

3rd edition had sorcerers - they used charisma as their prime requisite.

[@jmvh59]

If you get the complete fighter's handbook, you can trick out Duncan with a kit, plus it opens up options for spending non weapon proficiencies on fighting styles. The rules in that supplement allow you to spend your bonus languages from intelligence on those fighting styles.

[@J.Rod_Drums]

Please finish this series. It's great and there's honestly nothing like it on KZbin.

[@ballelort87]

That cover on the PHB is nostalgia porn for me! That shit blew my mind as a kid, my first D&D experience. 2e AD&D and the Dragonlance novels are basically my childhood🥰

[@mikepeterson3899]

Great video, Matt. Been reacquainting myself with 2e lately and stumbled upon this series of videos which are fantastic. I have always had a fascination with the history of the game (Jon Peterson's book was enthralling to me). After all these years I still find it funny, though, how much trouble people has with THACO. We always found it very easy ... subtract the AC from your THACO and that is what you needed to hit (or conversely subtract your modified die roll from your THACO to discover what AC you hit). But that was just us. Love to see a similar video and insight into further evolution of our favorite hobby!

[@Simon39759]

Man, I really enjoy the videos! They are such a cool way to explore the history and design of the game! Thanks very much for these! It saddens me that the series seems interrupted, especially after te suggestion of juicy insider knowledge...

[@RobertCharlesW]

I do love all of the morn death to descriptions that second showing offers however the in-depth gameplay percentiles is more confusing than beneficial. I loved and appreciated this video it was a very informative and I learned something. Thank you.

[@Ybbop]

Excited to see that you are continuing these, almost forget about that series.

[@EAKugler]

As someone who had to hide his dnd stuff from moral panic parents getting rid of devils and demons was key.

[@darkness_visible7227]

Watching through all of these and seeing matt's enthusiasm for becoming a Lord is really pleasing now Strongholds and Followers is out

[@chipguy5135]

Hey Matt, great vid! I played the hell out of 1st & 2nd back in the day, great times. Just regarding starting HP, I'd always just let all the players start off with the max at 1st level. We found their survival rate greatly increased, which was more challenging with these editions.

[@thorgen_ironside5279]

Same, every group I played with ran max hp 1st level. Start rolling HP at 2nd level and above.

[@FearsEdge]

These videos are fun. I really hope you get back to them soon.

[@IndyMotoRider]

THAC0, while not as intuitive as ascending AC (because we are a more-is-better society) is still quite simple math that does NOT require that the player knows the target's Armor Class. Player: "I run the goblin through with my spear!" DM: Roll! Player: Knowing his THAC0 is 18 he rolls d20 and gets a 14. He adds +1 to hit from Strength and let's say he's specialized with a spear so another +1 to hit for a total attack of 16. Sixteen is 2 less than his THAC0 so he knows he hit an Armor Class of 2 and he tells the DM "I hit AC2!" DM: Your spear pierces his flimsy leather armor, roll damage. It's really not that deep or mind bending.

[@Microdot2003]

"Third edition, holy crap. That video should come much more quickly..." Where is it maaaaan? I just binge watched this series and I need more content pleeeeaase :) Great videos Mr. Colville, please continue the series when you have time!

[@kendrajade6688]

CUZ IT'S HERE IN THE FLESH FINALYYYYYY

[@lyrainealei7848]

I'm a *very* late arrival to the channel, but watching the Make A Fighter Series is an extremely interesting way of going through the history of the game

[@rae.azrael]

I care about how the elemental planes are organized!

[@sehrgut42]

I thought the same thing when i heard that! My campaigns are very cosmologically-driven, so even if my players never come into direct contact with the cosmology, it's a huge part of how I tell stories, and how I'm able to improv consistent types of conflict without manually inventing every single cult and BBEG ahead of time.

[@SteveBonario]

THAC0 was a DM's short cut. Nothing more. "Subtract your d20 attack roll from the THAC0 and that's the AC you hit." This replaced 1.5 panels on a 1st edition DM's screen (class and monster attack matrices). It allowed a DM to calculate a hit more easily than looking up every roll on a chart on the DM screen and it could be included in a monster stat block. It removed the need for players to have to have a hit chart on their character sheet. The wonky bit was inherent in D&D's illogical numbering system of "armor class" descending from 10. It meant everyone had to "noodle" to know what AC they hit. But it was a bit screwy. As in, "Hmmm, my THAC0 is 17, I rolled a 13 so I hit AC 4, but I get +2 for my strength and +2 for the magic weapon, which means my roll went up to a 17. And 17-17 = 0. So I hit AC 0". I honestly think Gary and the early designers almost loved math and probability for its own sake -- I love Gary's explanation of probability and relation to D&D's dice in the 1979 DMG. So yeah, THAC0 isn't the greatest idea, but it boiled a ton of charts down to one number, which felt highly useful at the time. To the best of my knowledge, the THAC0 idea came from Frank Mentzer -- or he popularized it through the RPGA and his modules and GenCon tournaments in 1983 and 84. That was the first place I saw THACO, anyway.

[@quarthinos]

One thing you kinda missed from THAC0 is, yes, it's just the old chart in a different format, but because it _is_ the old chart you could use it the way we used to which is: THAC0 - my adjusted roll is the AC I hit. I could then tell the DM I hit AC x and he didn't have to tell me the AC of the beast, or even if I hit or miss....

[@thorgen_ironside5279]

THAC0 for the win ;) it seemed so normal as a player back then

[@talmatoi3950]

Really enjoying this series; looking forward to more in the future. I have not played D&D and your videos are helping to clarify a lot odd stuff that gets mentioned. I did recognize many of the pole arms though, they pop up in games like Diablo II.

[@NotTheWheel]

Dear Matt. Please more of these. Thank you.

[@MrSonicJuan]

I just watched all of these in a day... I sure hope you plan on making more. These are fantastic.

[@fratguide9835]

You can tell this was 2015 Matt Colville because in the description he wrote TRS (Turtle Rock Studios) when he meant TSR. That's how you can tell it's a passion project and that's still true today. It's awesome.

[@stevenpeterson8582]

We played 2nd edition for years. In our 2nd edition game, we still kept the Barbarian and Thief-Acrobat classes, double specialization in weapons, and some of the extra spells from the Unearthed Arcana, and still used Dungeoneers Survival Guide and Wilderness Survival Guide.

[@GrinningAries]

3:38 I remember this cover striking me as odd. There was no barbarian class in that edition's core rules iirc, and there wasn't any incentive to go armourless as a fighter, even if only light armour, which was affordable from the start. It's a nitpick, but I remember wanting to play a guy just like that and seeing no great option to do so.

[@expressionamidstcacophony390]

"No question" entries in that long survey are probably a data fidelity thing. If you start bubbling things randomly out of boredom or malice, your answers to "no question" will show it and they'll dump your survey. If you lose count, the blank bubbles you've left for "no question" will be off by one, and they'll dump the segment of your data where it started.

[@jasonp9508]

Easy enough to take your THAC0 and derive your combat matrix from it. That’s what we put on our 2E character sheets.

[@AvatarofBragi]

This was my edition of AD&D and my PHB... I understand what you're saying, but that cover is great.

[@Wishram321]

The fighter riding down the valley is by far my most favorite D&D cover

[@davidlavallee4118]

The "no question" questions are there to keep the answers clearly separated by categories. They make it easier for the guys who have to read through all the answers, who can easily find where one category ends and the next begins.

[@christopherdecator9742]

"There just will never be a point system where you just spend points on skills and abilities..." Then may I introduce the Skills and Powers book for 2e, where they do just that? :D

[@dougsundseth6904]

"No question" was almost certainly a result of the expense of typesetting. If you decide to remove questions entirely , that would require renumbering, which would have meant a complete re-setting of the page. If you just remove the question without comment, then you have gaps and your numbering starts with 2, which would be at least confusing. Replacing the existing text with "No question" is simple. Desktop publishing is much more recent than AD&D 2.

[@klausgaming7365]

The nostalgia is real. This is the edition I was introduced to D&D. Although it was the dawn of 3.5E, people were still playing 2E and it took me some time to catch up.

[@WizardOfTheHills]

Regarding your choice of nonweapon proficiencies, you would always choose swimming, otherwise you could not swim. You would also choose rope use, because if your character was tied up, it could wiggle its way out of the bonds. You would also choose riding, land, based because it would let you do cool stuff. And finally, you would have to choose all your cross group nonweapon proficiencies (lip reading, disguise and spellcraft) at level 1, because they cost double, and you only earn the slots one at a time, and you have to apply them immediately.

[@xezazase]

These were informative, entertaining, and they dealt with a subject I love. You've done a great job of describing what the experience was actually like for the player. Keep up the good work! PS- I don't care what they say, the glaive is whirling, flying blades controlled by the mind. It was once a great and powerful weapon, and it can be so again.

[@brotherdominus61]

I have to say I don't comment on KZbin much other than my own vids, but I really love your vids, some outstanding stuff would love to play d&d with you! keep em coming.

[@PluckyPecan]

Loving the content; it's a trip down memory lane I didn't even know I needed. When can we expect an update to this series?

[@Arvaniz]

I know, late to the party. But still... It's funny the analogy you make with Gary Gygax being fired from his own company, the same as Steve Jobs. Particularly because a lot of the creativity that made them both famous... came from someone else, that was pushed out of the limelight. Steve Wozniak for Steve Jobs, and Dave Arneson for Gary Gygax. Many of the basic principles of RPGs were first thought of by Dave Arneson. How much, is open to debate, as there're differing accounts from the time.

[@Runegrace]

These are such a fascinating dig though the design history. I hope you can find the time to finish this series.

[@EisenKreutzer]

Super late to this particular party, but the black border edition of this book was my very first rpg experience! I’ve recently gotten into the OSR to try and recapture some of that early teenage magic.

[@thankukorea]

awesome video. BTW AD&D 2e 1st printing had the best art of all the editions even though the cover didnt inspire your imagination in such a great way as 1e. I agree the 1e cover was fantastic cover, Id say the best cover of all editions. I never liked psionics either though mind flayers are cool. AD&D 2e was great cause it was modular. Also, you said there never would be a point based character creation but I think the DMs guide 1st printing had something similar except you used experience points per level as the point value used for making your character. Also, in one of the Optional rule books had some kind of point buy system. Thanks for creating the video it was very interesting.

[@AnthonyReyes89]

very interested to know if there will be more videos, i know you're busy with the kick-starter, but these are very educational. and have given me a lot of inspiration as i write my own campaign for my players.

[@purpleboye_]

Guess we're still waiting on that third ed Duncan.

[@brutusthecat6044]

I'm not sure realize how long to takes to make a 3e character, but hey, he finally got around to it.

[@purpleboye_]

@@brutusthecat6044 Lol

[@Voldine2]

@@brutusthecat6044 I know, right? I have a player who made a kobold bard and it took until the 12th session to realize he still hadn't picked his first feat, or filled out his weapon info, or noted his class abilities down.

[@jeffreygeorge8884]

Really enjoying the nostalgic journey of binge-watching your history series, Matt. I started in the fall of 1978, playing a Chainmail-less version of D&D using the white box and first basic edition. The booklet inside the red box had a blue monochrome cover, as I recall, but it doesn't seem to appear in the .pdfs available today. I recall the red box coming with some really bad dice made from very brittle plastic that chipped easily, and the dice we bought separately were "uninked", which meant you had to fill in the numbers with crayon, china marker, or fine-line permanent markers (did we have Sharpies in 1978?). I believe we had the Monster Manual and PHB pretty quickly, but I remember waiting for the DMG to drop, and rushing to the hobby shop to lay out $35 for it, which was a huge amount of money back then. We stopped playing D&D (or AD&D, more accurately) before 2e, shifting mostly to Champions and Fantasy Hero for several years before life crowded out the hobby. I completely missed out on 2e, 3e, Pathfinder, and 4e, and am just now rediscovering the hobby with 5e. I hope you'll get back to this series, so I can get an idea of what happened in the 20 years I wasn't playing. Keep up all the great content.

[@paulcoy9060]

I still have those dice. Yellow d4, orange d6, green d8, blue d12, and white d20. You had to color in the d20 with two different colors, to get 1-10, and then 11-20, mine are blue and red ink. I guess they were also used as a regular d10, because I don't remember a separate d10 in the box. A little scuffed, but still in good condition.

[@christopherdecator9742]

"People wanted a spell point system... well you're not going to get one." May I interest you in Spells and Magic for 2e, where they do just that?

[@ChrisMoneymakerDHRG]

I keep running across people making videos who complain, " Thac0 is too hard". you didn't put it quite that way, but what you said helped me to understand why people might have a problem with 2 digit subtraction. When you talked about the players trying to work out their to hit number with out knowing their opponents AC that was your and I guess many others problem with it, you had a bad DM. The players shouldn't know or even be concerned with their opponents EXACT AC. The DM should have each PC, NPC, and monster's ; AC, hit points and calculated Thac0 written down. When a player attacks on his turn with the weapon they, in my experience, use around 97.5% of the time; the player calls out the number they actually rolled. The DM, before this battle started, already subtracted the opponent's AC from the PC's calculated Thac0, so when he hears what the player called out he knows if it is a hit or not. The DM then tells the player if they hit, not the other way around. Thac0 might have worked better for you if you had used this method. Other than the above issue, I think you did a good job on this video, keep up the good work.

[@mcolville]

Oh thank god! I had a bad DM! I will make sure to call my friend up and let them know what you thought. They've been asking. Every time I see Brad or John, they say "Was I a good DM? What does Chris Moneymaker think!?" You know, I thought we had fun? It seemed fun at the time. But now I realize we were NOT having fun! Also, *I* was apparently a bad DM! Because I also thought THAC0 was silly. And all the folks working on 3E were apparently terrible as well, because they killed THACO0 dead and it *seemed* like millions of people played that game and had fun? Are still playing it and having fun? Man I wonder...are you the only good DM? Are you the chosen one?

[@ChrisMoneymakerDHRG]

Hay, Its not my fault you guys couldn't pick up on the on how it works. I am not the only good DM, I don't consider myself a great DM. I have things that I am working on improving all the time. I'm just saying, you admitted you didn't understand how Thac0 worked. You said something to the effect of; how are the players supposed to know what their to hit number is if they don't know their opponent's AC. The answer is simple, they are not supposed to know. The players shouldn't know anything about what happening to their PCs, that those PC's 5 scenes and what ever special powers they might have, can't tell them. First and for most D&D is a game of imagination. The more the players have to think about numbers, rules, and stats, the harder it is for them to suspend their disbelief. As a DM you should be setting the stage for the collective fantasy of the group. They should be seeing the campaign world through their minds eye, not scanning their character sheets for the stats that the DM should be managing. Dungeon masters, are called that because they have the skill and imagination to come up with a great plot, and keep the game running smoothly, while the players through them curve balls. Once again I remind you that yourself said that not understand how Thac0 worked distracted from your enjoyment of the game. As for the bad DM thing I may have over simplified that for expediences sake. I was not trying to insult anyone. I just get tired of seeing people say Thac0 is hard or doesn't work; when the problem is not the rule, but the people's understanding of it. I have DMed 2nd edition for 23 years, and have never had trouble with Thac0 or the proficiency system. The Dual class rules needed a little tweaking, but that was minor. There's just a lot of misplaced enmity for 2 edition, and I feel I have to set it straight sometimes to help turn the tide of undeserved ill will.

[@DanishDingo]

I admittedly have never played with THAC0, but from what I've gathered couldn't you just subtract your roll from your THAC0 and that would give you the minimum AC you would hit? So if your THAC0 is 20 and you roll 16 you announce that you hit an AC of 4 or higher. This way the DM wouldn't have to specify the monsters' AC or keep track of every player's THAC0

[@piece1309]

Just binge watched these. Please make more!

[@intevolver]

I'd love to see the continuation of this series!

[@willh1655]

I'm looking in my old ad&d 2nd books now and I see an optional rule to start at max hit points at lv1.

[@ninthshade7375]

What am I going to listen to now, Mr. Colville? There isn't a 3E or beyond video! Guess I'll migrate back to the DMing series now. :)

[@sgoodr]

I am wishing there was a 3rd and 4th edition video as well