Treasure and leveling comparisons: AD&D1, B/ED&D, and D&D3 - updated 11-17-08 (Q1)

[Quasqueton]

You felt such a parenthetical note and confirmation was a necessary addition to a completely inoffensive post? Just say'n...

That conversation and controversy is 6 months old. Can we move past it?

Quasqueton

 

[molonel]

I, for one, want to echo the "This thread is really interesting" sentiment expressed already, and encourage people to lay their swords down and not derail the thread.

 

[Quasqueton]

One more difference that the treasure analysis makes me wonder about: how closely distributed is the treasure in published modules to the "treasure standard" as reflected by the treasure tables in the DMGs?

Here's a thread related to this question: http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=182808

Quasqueton

 

[Naidim]

Please continue WITH xp calculations. I'm looking forward to the D3 and Q1 results.

 

[Jer]

Please continue WITH xp calculations. I'm looking forward to the D3 and Q1 results.

I agree with this sentiment. Some folks may be less interested in the XP comparisons, but I find them fascinating. I never handed out XP for treasure, and I always thought tripling the XP for combat would be enough, but these comparisons and the discussion that they have brought out are fascinating. Speaking for myself, I really appreciate the amount of work you've put into this to give this set of insights.

 

[thedungeondelver]

Quas am I understanding you correctly that you do not use any magic item XP awards in your calculations?

 

[zoroaster100]

I think that one powerful factor affecting XP earned in 1st edition is that in 1st edition modules much of the best treasure was so ridiculously well hidden in all sorts of arbitrary ways in the dungeon that it really would be unfair to assume any party would be getting all or even most of the treasure.

 

[Slife]

I think that one powerful factor affecting XP earned in 1st edition is that in 1st edition modules much of the best treasure was so ridiculously well hidden in all sorts of arbitrary ways in the dungeon that it really would be unfair to assume any party would be getting all or even most of the treasure.

Of course, the best treasure is magical, and since, IIRC, Quas isn't including magical treasure in XP calculations, it evens out.

 

[Quasqueton]

I think that one powerful factor affecting XP earned in 1st edition is that in 1st edition modules much of the best treasure was so ridiculously well hidden in all sorts of arbitrary ways in the dungeon that it really would be unfair to assume any party would be getting all or even most of the treasure.

I’ve read this assertion before, but I haven’t seen this in the adventure modules I’ve gone through. The vast majority of treasure is not hidden. And that treasure that is hidden, is not much, and only rarely “ridiculously” or “devilishly” (as someone else said) well hidden.

The Moathouse's "hidden" treasure:

1- in the belly of a giant frog = a 100gp gem

2- "the brigands have buried a chest. . . Three turns of digging" = 265gp value, +1 arrows (x4)

3- "in the litter of its nesting" = 850gp value

4- In a lone wall cresset, a "nondescript torch stub is a silver baton" = 30gp value

5- "[The giant lizard] has previously swallowed a shield +1, easily found if appropriate actions are taken after the battle." = +1 shield

6- "hidden behind a loose stone" = 500gp value

7- "intermixed with the old carpeting and rags of [the ogre's] bedding" = elven cloak

8- in a pool of water, under a skull = a pin worth a total of 2,000gp

9- in the "mess" of a ghoul nest = 40gp value, 1 potion, 1 scroll

10- "hidden in a cabinet" in the BBEG's chamber = 15,000gp piece of jewelry [Is this actually "hidden", in the context of this discussion? Just in a cabinet.]

Total of 3,785 gp value (out of 30,938gp) not immediately or obviously discoverable. Plus a 15,000gp piece of jewelry "hidden in a cabinet" in the BBEG's chamber, which "If seriously threatened, Lareth will offer all his non-magical treasures---jewelry, coins, and all else---as ransom for his life."

Quasqueton

 

[molonel]

I think that one powerful factor affecting XP earned in 1st edition is that in 1st edition modules much of the best treasure was so ridiculously well hidden in all sorts of arbitrary ways in the dungeon that it really would be unfair to assume any party would be getting all or even most of the treasure.

Quas already addressed this, but I'll add my two coppers. Whenever we played a module in my 1st Edition campaigns, our party would stay for a few weeks afterward and search every room top to bottom. Just in case.

And since the DM would usually pitch the module afterward, or let us read it, I can definitely say that we rarely missed a thing.

This is a very good thread, Quas, and very timely. I think it factually dispells some of the claims we've been seeing lately about earlier editions of the game.