A thing about d20 D&D I didn't like, and still don't know why it was done...

[Mark CMG]

Vbulletin 3 totally makes edition wars easier. You'd never see that with Vbulletin 1. And it totally nerfed Haste!

Oh, I think there has always been a limit on how rapidly one can post.

 

[solkan_uk]

What I loves was that levels got so divergent, yet modules still said "for 4-6 characters of 9th level" (or whatever).

Can you imagine it with a party of thieves and Clerics?

 

[Desdichado]

Yes. Yes there was. It was what allowed DMs to randomly determine the all-important question of whether the hooker the PCs met on the city street was a "vulgar trollop", a "haughty courtesan" or a "forlorn doxy" (or whatever the exact entries were). Make the determination was pretty critical stuff in the game too.

From page 192:
01-10 Slovenly trull
11-25 Brazen strumpet
26-35 Cheap trollop
36-50 Typical streetwalker
51-65 Saucy tart
66-75 Wanton wench
76-85 Expensive doxy
86-90 Haughty courtesan
91-92 Aged madam
93-94 Wealthy procuress
95-98 Sly pimp
99-00 Rich panderer

Exactly what the difference between some of those are is still unclear to me--as a DM I'd roleplay a Brazen strumpet and a Saucy tart and a Wanton wench pretty much the same. Hell, I'd roleplay all of them more or less the same if they ever came up.

I was just looking over the 1e DMG and I'm amazed and how disorganized, useless and needlessly baroque it is. I didn't remember that.

Not that I'm a huge fan of the 3.5 DMG either; the DMG is just a tough and tedious book to use no matter how you cut it, IMO.

 

[buzz]

What I loves was that levels got so divergent, yet modules still said "for 4-6 characters of 9th level" (or whatever).

To be fair, 1e modules generally said "an adventure for characters level X-Y," where the spread was usually 3-4 levels, typically 1-4, 5-7, 8-10, etc.

 

[Storm Raven]

To be fair, 1e modules generally said "an adventure for characters level X-Y," where the spread was usually 3-4 levels, typically 1-4, 5-7, 8-10, etc.

Which, in many ways, would be accurately translated into something, like "an adventure for 4-6 characters with 60,000 experience points each."

 

[AFGNCAAP]

Regarding the OP:

I personally prefer the new XP progression chart rather than the vastly diverse XP charts per class of the earlier editions. I'd hate to see the current version of D&D, with the base classes, prestige classes, monsters, & the like, all have their own XP progression table. It would be, IMHO, a nightmare to manage (esp. in regards to multiclassing). Also, how would Level Adjustments work? How would templates work? These two parts of the new system are a big boon to the game as well, & they're built upon the current XP mechanic.

IMHO, the new XP method (& multiclassing system) allows & accounts for something that the older system couldn't do (without DM fiat, IMHO): build diverse characters, esp. ones based off of characters from books (who didn't alwas stay the course as a warrior or rogue or the like). I couldn't see a character like Conan progress as a fighter and a thief as he did (as he was statted out in the AD&D Conan modules) along the same lines as any other dual-classed fighter/thief would in AD&D. Or, for an earlier example, I couldn't see Conan progress at all like Gygax statted him up as in an early issue of the Dragon (where he advanced both as a fighter and thief) in the earlier editions (then again, there was level regression, but that's another discussion point).

Well, that's just MHO.

 

[painandgreed]

There was never a shiny, happy ENWorld. That's nostolgia talking.

You're wrong. The old ENworld had character and told stories, the new ENworld is nothing but overuse of stock iconic characters.

 

[Psion]

Which, in many ways, would be accurately translated into something, like "an adventure for 4-6 characters with 60,000 experience points each."

If you were running it as part of a campaign, that's the way it would normally play out.

But, that's not always the way it happen. Sometimes, someone brought his shiny new module, and showed up at the game club at lunch as says:
Prospective DM: "hey guys... I have this new module for 9th-12th level characters... wanna play?
Player 1: Sure... I have m 12th level magic-user.
Player 2: Lesee... the highest level character I have is my 9th level thief.

Even the narratives in front of 1e and BECM adventures tend to talk in terms of levels. The front might have a range, but the little intro section would talk about either an average party level or a total levels of all party levels appropriate for the adventure. These sections assume that a level has a relatively inflexible meaning in terms of character power.

Making it so different classes had different levels with the same XP gave the lie to this otherwise straightforward and sensible way of measuring party power. AFAIAC, going to a unified chart was a logical step.

 

[Crothian]

There was never a shiny, happy ENWorld. That's nostolgia talking.

Say's the guy who joined in 04!! EN World was a lot different back then!!

 

[Raven Crowking]

Say's the guy who joined in 04!! EN World was a lot different back then!!

I joined in '04....but I lurked in '02!