Since its original publication in 1974, Dungeons & Dragons has seen the release of somewhere around eight different editions in which it can be played, depending on whether or not one considers certain revisions (such as 3.5) to be their own releases.
As years have passed and the attitudes towards D&D have changed, so have the releases. The original few rulesets, namely Original Dungeon & Dragons and Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, were based largely around dungeon-crawling and combat, bolstered by the publication of numerous adventure modules such as the Keep on the Borderlands and the Temple of Elemental Evil.
In comparison, with the advent of programs such as Critical Role, which have served to introduce D&D to a new generation and spearhead a resurgence in the game as the third millennium has marched on, Fifth Edition D&D is very much based around character creation (and development) and storytelling.
Rules from one ruleset to another are hardly comparable, as mechanics are both introduced and removed, classes and races are added and restrictions, which were incredibly prevalent in early editions, are slowly stripped away in favor of greater player expression.
Recently, a commenter over at my YouTube channel asked about whether or not I had considered making a video discussing my opinions about each ruleset, stemming from a quote in one of my videos (found below) where I proclaim Second Edition Advanced Dungeons & Dragons as the “greatest ruleset of all time”.
My answer to that question was mostly no (though I didn’t shut the door completely), primarily due to the fact that I have no interest in opening the can of worms of player opinion that it would ultimately lead to. The question did, however, get me thinking about the differences between the various rulesets and what makes them unique.
For instance, I believe that Second Edition Advanced Dungeons and Dragons is D&D’s crown jewel because of the way that it threads the needle between restriction and liberty. Many of the races suffer from class restrictions and there are a multitude of weapon restrictions depending on class, but those restrictions (and many more) serve to create what might be the most well-balanced D&D experience.
I will stand firm in my belief that restriction is not intrinsically a bad thing. I certainly understand the appeal of current-day D&D, where anyone can do or be just about anything, but, more often than not, decreeing what players can’t do is more effective in terms of balancing different aspects of any game.
To my knowledge, there really isn’t any sort of “world ender” build found in tabletop Second Edition AD&D that can be created. Not to mention, classes are much more valuable in their own right. Thieves (they weren’t known as Rogues until Third Edition) are the only class that can manipulate traps and locks, as opposed to the skill-system of later editions that can grant the ability to any character that’s invested points into them.
That doesn’t mean that I hate the other editions, not in the slightest. While I’m likely less of a fan of Third Edition (and 3.5) than most, I quite enjoy Fifth Edition and, while I’m not running to play them myself, find a great bit of charm in looking back on the Basic Set revisions, especially when considering what D&D would eventually turn into.
Fourth Edition is probably the only ruleset that I actively dislike. I cannot stand the way in which the combat systems were “overhauled”. Far as I’m concerned, they made the correct choice in moving off of it as quickly as they reasonably could.
And, after thinking about all of that in my spare time over the past two weeks, I came to one, ever-present conclusion: the edition doesn’t matter.
Dungeons & Dragons, no matter what form it takes, is still the greatest tabletop experience of all time. No matter what, a game of D&D means friends, memories and, most importantly, fun!
To try and breakdown which edition might be the best in comparison to the others is to forget the core purpose of D&D: to act as a framework.
How often does a rulebook say something along the lines of “at the discretion of the dungeon master” when presenting a particular issue or situation? The rules are whatever the dungeon master and group playing them agrees that they should be.
Less important is how the editions stack up against each other and much more important is how whoever is playing feels about them. I love THAC0 (To-Hit-Armor-Class-Zero), but I’m also acutely aware of why so many people disliked it and why it was removed.
Each edition of Dungeons & Dragons is special in its own way and, for better or worse, integral towards making it the greatest role-playing experience of all time. There are undoubtedly pros and cons of every ruleset (mainly cons in the case of Fourth Edition) that are inevitably viewed differently depending on the player.
But, that’s all right. Dungeons and Dragons is, ultimately, what its players make of it.
And that’s exactly how it should be.
