What details do you miss from older editions?
- Thread starter Tarrasque Wrangler
- Start date
John Q. Mayhem
Explorer
Swiftbrook said:
I know about the ranger followers thing, but you say the 3.0 ranger had no animal companion, and the bard did? I'm afraid you're misremembering this. In 3.0 animal friendship was a spell that gave you a permanent animal companion. Rangers got it when they got their spells (4th or 5th, IIRC), and bards didn't get it.
Pants
First Post
Awesome.schnee said:
You are my new hero.
Here's another thing I miss:
The Fluff - the mechanics of 2ed may have been utterly godawful, but the stories that the designers told were really cool. The settings were inventive and fresh and the characters were cool. Great stuff. Plus, the actual writing quality seemed a tad bit better, although many of the 2ed writers were still working with WotC when 3e came out... so who knows.
The_Gneech
Explorer
Belegbeth said:
I dunno, I always thought of Mordankienan, Bigby, Tenser, Emirikol, and the like as older edition iconics, they just weren't identified as such. Of course, they were generally just shadowy figures who'd be mentioned in passing most of the time...
The problem with Mialee, Lidda, et al., as far as I can tell, is that they're too generic -- they have no personality!
-The Gneech
Orius
Unrepentant DM Supremacist
Belegbeth said:
That was somewhat the point I was trying to make. Medieval arms and armor looked the way it did, not because the smiths were uncreative, but because the stuff worked. Modern fantasy artists can embellish stuff as much as they want, but there comes a point where it starts to look stupid. For example the asymetrical shields that 3e art likes to show. Some people may think, "Hey, cool fresh and original!" while I can't help but think, "Would that piece of crap actually work?" And the piecemeal armor that pictured as well kind of bothers me too, because it just looks bad.
spunky_mutters
First Post
Along with Trampier/Otus/Dee, Specialty Priests, and various others already mentioned, I have a few things I miss:
- XP progression tables that weren't based on 13.333333 encounters to gain a level. I liked the rapid early progression followed by a settling in as players focused on campaign activities rather than power-ups.
- Multi-function spells. 3.5 especially has broken up all of the spells that did different things.
- Character Death as game balance.
- All the little tables in the DMG. That was a book for someone trying to run a campaign. Instead of hand-holding through the basics you got information you could actually use to add flavour and substance to your game.
- Treasure type has already been mentioned, but I think it bears repeating. This is another area where simpler isn't always better. I think they oversimplified monster treasure allocation where they didn't need to. We may not have needed the same range of types, but we sure need more than we've got.
Overall I'm happier with this edition, but I definitely miss some stuff.
- XP progression tables that weren't based on 13.333333 encounters to gain a level. I liked the rapid early progression followed by a settling in as players focused on campaign activities rather than power-ups.
- Multi-function spells. 3.5 especially has broken up all of the spells that did different things.
- Character Death as game balance.
- All the little tables in the DMG. That was a book for someone trying to run a campaign. Instead of hand-holding through the basics you got information you could actually use to add flavour and substance to your game.
- Treasure type has already been mentioned, but I think it bears repeating. This is another area where simpler isn't always better. I think they oversimplified monster treasure allocation where they didn't need to. We may not have needed the same range of types, but we sure need more than we've got.
Overall I'm happier with this edition, but I definitely miss some stuff.
VirgilCaine
First Post
Ecology is important to me.
For some reason I like my monsters to make sense, so frequency and where it lives and what it eats are useful to me to know.
A trull is a type of lady of the night I believe.
Tell me how it was Taichara...the Plane of Shadow just seems extremely hard to use since it's constantly moving and changing.
A guy I know named a recent wildman barbarian character this.
For some reason I like my monsters to make sense, so frequency and where it lives and what it eats are useful to me to know.
The former two are cool. Helps you figure out what color and such to make the gem on a magic item.
A trull is a type of lady of the night I believe.
Tell me how it was Taichara...the Plane of Shadow just seems extremely hard to use since it's constantly moving and changing.
Who or what is this that you are talking about here?
A guy I know named a recent wildman barbarian character this.
Last edited:
VirgilCaine
First Post
I figured that. Of course, I could have just walked into the other room and got my 1e DMG...but I'm lazy.
Similar Threads
