What details do you miss from older editions?

[Tarrasque Wrangler]

What are the rules and little tidbits from the pre-3.0 incarnations of D&D that make you nostalgic? Mind you, I don't mean something vague like "the sense of wonder" or "It was grittier!", but real details and rules that were changed. It doesn't even have to be something good or balanced; it just makes you pine for the good ol' days.

Here's my nostalgia list:

1. Demons were demons, devils were devils, and there was none of this baatezu/tanarii crap.

2. Titles that went with character levels. It was fun that my 8th level magic-user was a Warlock, and that 17th level monk was the Grand Master of Flowers.

3. The Spiritwrack spell. Don't ask me why.

4. The core assassin class.

5. The all-powerful and potentially campaign-ruining version of the Wish spell outta 1st Ed. "-3 STR for a week? Aw shucks. Die Zeus!!!" None of this "emulates another spell" crud.

 

[Mouseferatu]

1. I preferred it when there wasn't an assumed/default level of magic across the board, and when magic items weren't easily bought and sold as commodities. (Yes, I know that it's all flexible in 3E. But we're talking preferences here.)

2. The Illusionist core class. I like the notion of specialist mages being truly different from normal mages. The new specialist varients in UA are a nice step along that road, but I still miss this guy.

3. Art. I won't go into detail, for fear of reigniting this old argument, but I preferred an artistic style that was less comic-booky, more geared towards scenes/sequences than portraits, and portrayed people with armor and weaons that looked vaguely realistic.

4. Combat rules that weren't quite so heavily geared towards minis. It didn't matter in 1E/2E what "square" you were in; either you were close enough to hit or you weren't.

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

Hm...

I have to agree with you on #2. That was a sweet D&D feature...

As for other things... I miss the 1-monster-per-page Monstrous manuals. I miss DiTerlizzi. That's all I can think of at the moment...

 

[WayneLigon]

I've wracked my brain for a half hour and can't think of a single thing.

 

[Kormydigar]

What are the rules and little tidbits from the pre-3.0 incarnations of D&D that make you nostalgic? Mind you, I don't mean something vague like "the sense of wonder" or "It was grittier!", but real details and rules that were changed. It doesn't even have to be something good or balanced; it just makes you pine for the good ol' days.

Here's my nostalgia list:

1. Demons were demons, devils were devils, and there was none of this baatezu/tanarii crap.

2. Titles that went with character levels. It was fun that my 8th level magic-user was a Warlock, and that 17th level monk was the Grand Master of Flowers.

3. The Spiritwrack spell. Don't ask me why.

4. The core assassin class.

5. The all-powerful and potentially campaign-ruining version of the Wish spell outta 1st Ed. "-3 STR for a week? Aw shucks. Die Zeus!!!" None of this "emulates another spell" crud.

I hear you loud and clear. Many of the spells that dissappeared such as spiritwrack, airy water, glassteel, ect I have brought to my 3rd ed game. I have also brought in a core assassin class and, in my campaigns, demons and devils have never been anything but exactly that.

 

[Phineas Crow]

I took some time to think about it and all I got was a list of things I'm glad got changed/removed, THAC0, different class xp tables, the proficiency/skill system, etc.

My only real gripe with 3.x was the new halflings, which I promptly ignored.

 

[MerricB]

#1: The Illusionist class in 1E

#2: Gaining XP for treasure. Sure it doesn't make sense, but it sure it promotes the entire dungeon-crawling aspect of the game!

Umm... that's about it.

Cheers!

 

[francisca]

Thumb nail sketching an NPC in about 2 minutes.

I know a lot of you guys out there can do the same in 3E, but not me. I don't have the feat chains memorized, so I end up missing out on a lot of bonuses.

 

[Shemeska]

1) I miss Gehreleths. Demodands suck. (Well, Gehreleths suck too, but thats just the Yugoloth in me talking...)

2) I miss the Para and Quasielemental planes

3) I miss lightning mephits...

4) I will agree with the earlier idea about class level specific titles. I never played in the edition where that was a part of the game, but I've played with folks who did and it does strike me as a nifty little bit of flavor that 3e lacks.

5) a lack of flavor in comparison to simplified and largely streamlined rules. We've thrown the baby out with the bathwater in some ways...

6) I miss Yugoloths who had decent stats. An 18 int Ultroloth? *weep*

 

[Samothdm]

4) I will agree with the earlier idea about class level specific titles. I never played in the edition where that was a part of the game, but I've played with folks who did and it does strike me as a nifty little bit of flavor that 3e lacks.

Maybe in theory, but here's an example of the Cleric level titles from 1st Edition:

1. acolyte
2. adept
3. priest
4. curate
5. prefer
6. canon
7. lama
8. patriarch
9. high priest (9th level +)

So, apparently it was okay to just mix and match titles from all sorts of religions. I remember in Basic Edition D&D that one of the Cleric Titles was "Vicar", followed next level by "Lama".

Some of the class titles weren't so bad. There were also cases where they used the same title for two different classes, but for different levels, IIRC.