What do you miss from the good ol' days?

[Raven Crowking]

Something caused me to switch to 3rd edition. If my actual experiences were as fond as my memories, I'd still be playing second.

I guess what I mean is, why are you better off without, specifically,

A set XP for monsters, none of this CR stuff

The feel. Wizards were old and wore funny hats. Thiefs were named "slinker" or something else and wore black.

The dungeons didn't have to make sense. With 3.5, I simply cannot put a couple of barrels in a room and fill one with acid and the others with water.

Magic items. I don't like how it's a form of math now.

I would think that you would be better off with the base mechanics of 3.X while keeping the advantages of earlier systems.

 

[jdrakeh]

Open Campaign Settings

Way back when, in the days when D&D was a lone box set and Runequest was a single rulebook, settings were nebulously defined, at best. The expectation of adherance to canon didn't exist because there wasn't much of it -- Bob's world of Greyhawk might be entirely different than Bill's, save for the minor details disclosed in the original Gazetteer and the three D&D core rule books. The first look at Glorantha came via Apple Valley and Snakepipe Hollow -- there was no all-encompassing body of setting material and, again, Jill's Glorantha was almost certanly nothing like the world that Greg Stafford would reveal in the years to come. Even the FR 1e material was painted in extremely broad strokes, with plenty of map left to fill in as one saw fit. No two persons versions of a given campaign setting were ever remotely identical, which meant that there were always surprises.

Called Shots

I still don't see a good reason for losing these in the current edition of the game. They were a lot of fun, and I like them. Not so heavy as the above missing element, though I lament its removal none the less.

 

[Treebore]

Everything I missed about earlier editions I simply houseruled in; everything I like about 3.0 and 3.5 I kept. For example, I kept cover and concealment and weapon size from 3.0 (weapon size modified ala AE). I made classes more iconic, and added class restrictions based on race (including human subtype). I added a simplified weapon speed system, and spell research rules modified from 2e. I used Priest-Thrall prestige classes instead of specialty priests, and gave the potential of racial classes to everyone.

In essence, I refuse to simply "miss" things about previous editions. I made substantive changes to the rules, replacing the core rules with my houserule book (over 600 pages) that includes all of the SRD which is used in the campaign world. Players need carry no other book to the game.


RC

I essentially have done the same thing as you, just I used C&C to accomplish it. Plus I use a much simpler "feat" system, where the players earn them by how they play the character as well. No AoO rules or feats. Simpler skill system. I plan on making it even simpler. Etc...

Its nice to play a game and hardly ever open the books to verify the wording of rules.

 

[GrayLinnorm]

XP per hit point, which took into account that a monster with 40 hp is obviously tougher than one with 5 hp.

 

[Ghendar]

What do I miss?

My sense of wonder. Haven't seen that since 1st ED.
High level NPCs that don't take a whole day to create.
Short stat blocks.
Good ol fashioned 1st ED dungeon crawls.
A D&D game that doesn't allow you to level so quickly as if I'm playing a video game.
Erol Otus
Dave Trampier

 

[vongarr]

I guess what I mean is, why are you better off without, specifically,

A set XP for monsters, none of this CR stuff

The feel. Wizards were old and wore funny hats. Thiefs were named "slinker" or something else and wore black.

The dungeons didn't have to make sense. With 3.5, I simply cannot put a couple of barrels in a room and fill one with acid and the others with water.

Magic items. I don't like how it's a form of math now.

I would think that you would be better off with the base mechanics of 3.X while keeping the advantages of earlier systems.

You know, you're probably right. THAC0 and all of the loopy bit's of the rules is what I disliked the most. For my next fantasy campaign, I migt give C&C or something like that a try.

 

[Mythmere1]

Mojo.

 

[der_kluge]

I miss folks playing fighters, wizards, rogues and clerics.

Now we get knights, warlocks, ninjas and favored souls.

 

[Scribble]

Wait... humancentric?

Maybe my games were weird... most of my group you had to almost beg to get them to be a human... humans dun used to stunk!

I miss just not having to worry about everyone scheduling a game... We just gamed on game nights, and when we had free time we gamed some more.

 

[Numion]

Oh, I guess I also miss characters rarely dying. I accept that adventuring should be difficult, dying is too easy in 3E sometimes compared to 1E (or compared to value of photocopied sheets).