An Examination of Differences between Editions

[an_idol_mind]

The easy fix, of course, is to (a) divide award XP by some value or (b) multiply required xp by some value. Either will slow the rate of progression if that's what you want.

This sort of brings up another difference between editions: variant rules. While rules options and house rules have always been available in the core books, 3rd edition formalized them a bit with the addition of variant rules sidebars -- not to mention the cornucopia of variant rules that is Unearthed Arcana. For example, in the case of experience, there are a number of sidebars in the DMG talking about faster advancement, slower advancement, and even fixed experience points per adventure/encounter. All with pros and cons discussed.

Previous editions also provided optional rules, such as morale, the original use of THAC0, and proficiencies. In my experience, these options were usually assumed to be standard by many groups (I don't know of any 2e groups that didn't use proficiencies, for example). 3rd edition, however, assumes that the core is standard, with variant rules being rarely used from group to group.

 

[RFisher]

With no bonus XP for roleplaying or the like, the PCs each got @ 2500 xp. That's half a level. From one encounter. In 1e or 2e, each PC would have gotten somewhere around 350 XP for the same exact encounter and would require about 2x as much to go up a level. Wow.

By-the-book, 1e is (mostly) about hunting for treasure; 3e, isn't. 3e is, by-the-book, more about overcoming challenges.

The thing about XP for gp is that it was a "story award". In 1e, you don't travel away from civilization & down into the dungeons below Castle Greyhawk just to fight monsters who aren't bothering anyone. You do it for the gold & magic items. You only fight the monsters to get to the gold. In fact, if you can take the treasure without fighting the monster, you usually will.

Barring the occasional zealous cleric or paladin whose player cares more about roleplaying than XP. Many modules did provide a "growing threat" motivation to broaden the appeal of going to the dungeon, though the XP awards were slow to reflect this shift. Actually, the sheer thrill of adventuring or the enjoyment of playing a role were often reward enough themselves.

Both games, however, encourage the DM to modify XP awards as he sees fit. (IIRC) It's only natural that if you're going to run a 1e campaign that's more about something else than treasure hunting that you should change the XP awards to fit. Likewise, if you want to go for more of a Dungeons Under Castle Greyhawk feel in a 3e game, you should give XP for treasure.

Even though it didn't make it into the rules, Gygax has said that from the start he gave XP for lots of things besides treasure or defeating monsters.

 

[Celebrim]

I understand that the 3rd Ed designers deliberately changed things so that people got to play the higher levels, but the increased rate of advancement is a complaint by some. I've really noticed it at mid-level onwards (about 8 up) where players don't really get much time to learn all the new things that their characters can do before they're saddled with more options (poor them!). It's no wonder you get complaints about all the modifiers in 3rd Ed.

This is one of the biggest changes for me, and my experience of this as a player is the reason that I only award half XP in the games I DM.

When I've been a player in 3rd edition, what I've noticed is that I level up really before I'm mentally ready to do so. I've just gotten these new spells or new abilities that I've been looking forward to having, and then often as not I level up again even before I've had a chance to use the abilities I've just gained. It was like being part of a lavish meal in which the plates got taken away before you could take a bite of everything on them. After 3 or 4 level ups, it got to be really annoying and instead of looking forward to leveling with great anticipation like I was used to I found myself hoping that things would slow down abit so I could enjoy what I had.

My experience of 1st edition is that you'd use everything you had several times before gaining a level. In 3rd edition, I feel I can barely expend a daily alotment of spells without gaining a level. In 1st edition, you hoarded your wand and staff charges against the time you'd really need them. In 3rd edition, you expend your wand and staff charges as fast as you can because by the time you run out, you'll have already gained 4 levels and your wand will be obselete anyway against the new foes you'll be facing. The rapid advancement experienced in 3rd edition feels to me as a player as if it is undermining my ability to engage in creative tactical play, because rather than having to use what I have in new ways I'm continually gaining new answers to the problems.

Halfing the standard XP and some judicious fudging of CR's when the system doesn't produce an answer I'm happy with hopefully solves the problem for my players, but I don't really know because I've never been a player with a 3rd edition DM that wanted to slow it down. Besides which, alot of new players seem to like the level up at the end of (at most) every other session. Levelling treadmills seem to have become an end unto themselves, as if the goal of the game is to obtain that idealized version of your character you envisioned when you started rather than to enjoy the ride even when (or maybe especially when) you aren't really sure where it is going.

 

[Hussar]

*snip*

With no bonus XP for roleplaying or the like, the PCs each got @ 2500 xp. That's half a level. From one encounter. In 1e or 2e, each PC would have gotten somewhere around 350 XP for the same exact encounter and would require about 2x as much to go up a level. Wow.

As has been mentioned, there was pretty much no reward for whacking critters in 1e. The xp you got was mostly from coin and flogging magic items. One of the biggest disconnects IME with talking about 1e is if you played a lot of modules (as I did) or did mostly homebrew. My 1e days were almost entirely modules, so, coin was very plentiful. And, because of that, advancement rates were extremely fast as well. We played in one campaign for about two years and hit about 15th or 16th level. My current 3e campaign just hit 80 sessions, and the PC's are 15th level. Pretty close. And, most of that advancement has been recently as I've been piling on the xp.

For 3e we divide XP by 2, giving advancement rate about 1/6 sessions.

For C&C and B/X D&D I generally don't give treasure XP per se, but will give up to x5 or even x10 regular monster XP; x10 if there's a major goal achieved at the same time. This gives similar advancement to 3e at 1/2 XP (1/6 sessions) at low level, slower later.

How long are your sessions? IME, we've played 4 hour sessions (tabletop) and 3 hour sessions (OpenRPG) and leveled up about 1 ever 5 or 6 sessions. And that's with strict by the book xp.

 

[Celebrim]

As has been mentioned, there was pretty much no reward for whacking critters in 1e. The xp you got was mostly from coin and flogging magic items. One of the biggest disconnects IME with talking about 1e is if you played a lot of modules (as I did) or did mostly homebrew. My 1e days were almost entirely modules, so, coin was very plentiful. And, because of that, advancement rates were extremely fast as well.

That brings up again a point that is so important that it needs to be tacked to the beginning of every post on this subject.

There is very little like a universal experience of 1st edition AD&D because the games varied so completely depending on who was running them, and what rules they followed (or didn't), and how extensive the house rules were.

It should also be said that your experience of 1st edition modules could vary alot depending on what modules you where talking about and how you played them. When people want to say that magic and coin and rapid advancement where the norm back in the old days, they are often referring to modules like GDQ. But coin might not be so plentiful elsewhere even in published modules, or it might be in odd places. For example, I was looking through ToEE not long ago and noticed that most of the valuable treasure was actually owned by low level peasants (ten's of thousands of gp worth of jewelry and objects of art, magic armor and weapons galore) and that probably the best pure power gamer approach would be to kill off the townsfolk, and after gaining several levels and a horde of magic items, then go 'waste' your time with the much more dangerous but comparitively impoverished monsters. Needless to say though, I doubt most parties approached the module in that manner. If they didn't, then magic items and treasure were probably a good deal harder to come by.

And even ToEE is designed like GDQ as an adventure path in which leveling up is required to continue. If you look at modules with less of an adventure path design, I think you'll find even less emphasis on treasure.

 

[dcas]

And even ToEE is designed like GDQ as an adventure path in which leveling up is required to continue. If you look at modules with less of an adventure path design, I think you'll find even less emphasis on treasure.

There's quite a bit of treasure in B2 IIRC and that is certainly not an "adventure path" (it's totally site-based).

 

[Numion]

For example, I was looking through ToEE not long ago and noticed that most of the valuable treasure was actually owned by low level peasants (ten's of thousands of gp worth of jewelry and objects of art, magic armor and weapons galore) and that probably the best pure power gamer approach would be to kill off the townsfolk, and after gaining several levels and a horde of magic items, then go 'waste' your time with the much more dangerous but comparitively impoverished monsters. Needless to say though, I doubt most parties approached the module in that manner. If they didn't, then magic items and treasure were probably a good deal harder to come by.

There was a great analysis of ToEE by Quasqueton - the treasure amounts, XP amounts, etc..

The conclusion is that there's Monty Haulish amounts of coin just in the adventure itself, not hidden in peasants homes or in difficult places.

 

[Raven Crowking]

There was a great analysis of ToEE by Quasqueton - the treasure amounts, XP amounts, etc..

Yes, but that analysis just took raw numbers into account, and didn't examine (for instance) how easy it was to obtain/find areas of given modules, nor how easy it was to identify treasure for what it is. I ran the updated Keep on the Borderlands (3.X) a little less than a year ago, and I was amazed at how little of the treasure was recognized as such (and hence how little they received).

 

[Reynard]

It should also be said that your experience of 1st edition modules could vary alot depending on what modules you where talking about and how you played them. When people want to say that magic and coin and rapid advancement where the norm back in the old days, they are often referring to modules like GDQ. But coin might not be so plentiful elsewhere even in published modules, or it might be in odd places.

If I were to run 1E (and I am seriously considering it) I would hew pretty close to what Gygax wrote in the DMG (never having played *any* published 1E adventures, I don't know if the modules followed the DMG advice or not): treasure should be in forms and places that make the pcs work for it, above and beyond the fights and/or traps. A 1,000 gp gem is good, but a 1,000 gp rare and very fragile vase is better. Statues and paitning and inlaid gems. After all, if the goal is treasure -- which it seems to be, even moreso that combat -- then the goal should be the hardest thing to attain.

I was very surprised by a great deal of the suggestion in the 1E DMG regarding encounter design and treasure placement. It goes so against most of the stories I hear or read about peoples' "old skool" game experiences that I wonder if anyone -- designers included -- actually read the book "back in the day".

 

[Celebrim]

There's quite a bit of treasure in B2 IIRC and that is certainly not an "adventure path" (it's totally site-based).

About 30,000 gp plus magic items if I remember correctly. A good wagon load. And if you got all of that you were almost certainly cheating, and if you weren't, you deserved it. Like any good Gygaxian module, alot of the treasure was concealed and difficult to find, or was fragile and easily destroyed, or didn't look like treasure and/or was trapped.

Raven is quite right. A good fraction of that treasure will be missed. And much of it would be sold for less than its value.

Also remember that in 1st edition, if you had a vase (or potion!) in your backpack and fell into a pit, the DM was perfectly within the rules to call for a saving throw vs. fall from all the breakables you were carrying (and then roll on the potion misability table to see if anything nasty happened as a result!). Items tended to be not so durable as they are in third. They tended to exist in the game at a time other than they were being used.