Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 5056340" data-attributes="member: 18280">The OP is forked from a discussion of how treasure division worked in pre-WotC D&D.  Specifically, the idea that simply because a monster might have Treasure Type X, it doesn't mean that defeating the monster entitles you to the treasure.  Defeating the monster may be only part of the challenge of getting the treasure.This is in contrast with the 3e method, which many people have taken to mean that your level entitles you to the treasure, or the 4e method, where defeating the monster explicitly means that you are entitled to the treasure.  If you miss it, you keep getting chances to locate it until you do so.  Because the balance inherent in WotC-D&D requires a certain wealth-by-level, WotC-D&D requires that finding treasure is not in-and-of-itself a rewarded skill as it is in Gygaxian D&D.It has been claimed on this board, repeatedly, whenever anyone has expressed any dissatisfaction with WotC-D&D (3e or 4e), that it is still "the same".  Any claim anyone might make that X has changed, unless that claim includes the caveat "and for the better" will bring the same folks out of the wall over and over again to claim that "X has always been like it is now".Hence, in response to an OP discussing the differences between then and now, a post which posits, essentially, that the "difference" is illusory.  No different than Q's thread about treasure in modules that worked under the assumption that all treasure would be found.  When the levelling expectations of Mr. Gygax and Mr. Cook were examined, from their own descriptions, they were not in keeping with the claim Q was making.  If you want to examine that thread, it is -- unsurprisingly -- linked in Bullgrit's .sig.EDIT:  Sorry, just checked.  That link in Bullgrit's .sig is just the data Q collected without the problems with the data -- including the quotes from Mr. Gygax and Mr. Cook -- that demonstrated that the data was misleading as presented.  Not sure why that would be left out?  The actual thread is located here:  <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/167628-treasure-leveling-comparisons-ad-d1-b-ed-d-d-d3-updated-11-17-08-q1.html" target="_blank">http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/167628-treasure-leveling-comparisons-ad-d1-b-ed-d-d-d3-updated-11-17-08-q1.html</a>RC</blockquote>

Verification