One of the high-level characters in my game, a magic-user, has expressed an interest in recharging one of her wands. According to the AD&D Dungeon Master's Guide, this wand CAN be recharged, but nowhere in the rules does it say HOW this is accomplished! The only reference to recharging magic items was found in the Rules Cyclopedia, a D&D product, the rules of which were adapted from GAZ 3: The Principalities of Glantri. The systems are sufficiently different enough to warrant concern that the two cannot be intermingled. So what am I to do?
It is fairly obvious that in 1st edition AD&D, use of the Enchant an Item spell is required to make most magic items. Thus, any item (except potions or scrolls) requires a 12th level magic-user to manufacture. Recharging the wand cannot possibly be as difficult as putting full charges in at the beginning. However, after reading the spell, it seems that enchant an item prepares an object to receive an enchantment; in this case, to receive additional charges.
The method from D&D is to locate the spells that match the item's abilities and use those as the basis. Well, I already know that the wand (a wand of fire) has 4 spell abilities in it: burning hands, pyrotechnics, fireball, and wall of fire. These range in level from 1st to 4th respectively. Adding these all up gives us 10 spell levels. Multiplying this by 1,000 gp gives us 10,000 gp for the "initial enchantment cost." According to the rules, add in 10% of the initial enchantment per charge; thus 1 charge = 1,000 gp and 50 charges = 50,000 gp. Wands can hold a maximum of 81-100 charges; that's some expense! Then again, a fully charged wand of fire is potentially unbalancing, especially in the hands of an 11th level magic-user.
My problem comes with the GP sale value of a wand of fire in the DMG; only listed at 25,000 gp at full charges. So the above model does not work with AD&D prices. Note that D&D does not generally list prices (or XP values) for magic items since owning and using one IS the reward. Also of interest, a magic-user only has to be name level (9th) to make magic items in D&D and there is no spell to memorize in order to accomplish this - it is an inherent class ability!
Looking at the initial enchantment cost of 10,000 gp and subtracting that from the total value of 25,000 gp yields 100 charges = 15,000 gp, or 150 gp/charge. This seems a bit low to me, but if we require the use of enchant an item, and the spell caster must be level 12, then I suppose it's okay. The problem I have now is how many charges can she install in the wand? The casting time for enchant an item is 3-10 days, then the caster has a certain amount of time to infuse the spells into the item. In this case, only charges are being added. The magic-user only knows burning hands and fireball, so I think she can only install charges of 1 or 2 per spell memorized. Problem is, how many spells (and thus charges) can she infuse? Assuming that she can only cast 6 1st and 3 3rd level spells per day, I estimate that she can infuse 12 charges with a single casting. However, if she has a rest period in between, we're talking 12 charges per day of memorization. I'll have to do more research before finalizing, but I believe this method may be appropriate or at least adaptable to a House Rule.
When creating (not recharging) a magic item, one has to roll for success. I assume that the roll is not necessary if recharging the wand, and it's obvious that the wand cannot hold more charges than its maximum number (determined randomly by the DM). Should the magic-user now know the exact number of charges on the wand? Granted, this is still theory craft since the wizard in question has only JUST made 11th level and is currently training. She'll have to earn a bucket-load of XP before even seeing 12th level and it's not likely she will select "enchant an item" as her one and only 6th level spell....
Thursday, October 31, 2013
Tuesday, September 24, 2013
Contrasting Editions of D&D
I cut my teeth on Basic/Expert D&D back in 1982/83 in the
Moldvay/Cook sets. This introduction had me immediately looking for more
rules in the Advanced D&D hardcovers of 1st edition. This ruleset
was used for several years until 2nd edition hit the stands in 1989 and
we were hooked completely. 2EAD&D served me very well for many years
to come.... until 2000. With the release of D&D 3E I felt that the
game had changed a little too dramatically - some rules were better than
anything I had seen before, and others.....well, let's just say that
progress is not always beneficial. I jumped off the wagon when D&D
4.0 came along - it just wasn't D&D anymore.
My emphasis on 1E and 3E came about in 2000. This is when I started my long running AD&D 1E Mystara based campaign and my D&D 3.0/3.5 Greyhawk campaign. Of the two, the latter imploded and the former is still going strong after 13 years despite several health issues in the group. We tried to make these games work, but the input required by the DM for 3E became overwhelming for me and I had to quit one of the campaigns to save the other. So the 1E game continues.
I actually LIKE D&D 3.5. I find it to be a well-balanced ruleset with answers to most of the frequently asked questions. It's downfall is the same as it's strengths - it answers too many questions and tries to make everything integrated. Magic does not work well in a shoe-horned system of checks and balances. Some characters become insanely powerful too quickly and providing a challenge for them while maintaining a meaningful campaign becomes a nightmare. However, low-level adventuring is very enjoyable and I could see myself running adventures for a new campaign again.
AD&D, by contrast, is a dense work with rules scattered throughout the books, some contradictory and others inferred. I've spent about 25 years analyzing the rules in the DMG only to discover that they really don't make a whole lot of sense as written. The perils of a single author writing a volume of this size over a long period of time I suppose.
Things I like about 1st Edition AD&D:
- limited choices make the players think
- so many rules for so many circumstances that it's a challenge to use them all
- unlimited play styles accommodated in one set of rules
- can mix and match or house rule with impunity
- success depends upon the experience of the player or the character
Things I like about 3rd Edition D&D:
- same rules apply to all creatures in the game, PC, NPC, or Monster
- standardized rules for certain "skills" modified by abilities and race
- standardized ability scores and application to more circumstances (ability scores matter)
- easier multi-classing rules
2E AD&D suffered from "rule bloat" where more books were published than were needed to run a campaign and fewer adventures were published as a result. Players need to have options open to them and DMs need a break, so publishing quality adventures should be the FOCUS of any edition. DMs have enough to do - they don't need to assemble a campaign from scratch or prepare adventures on the fly to suit the whims of the players. 1st edition was fine for adlibbing adventures; 3E D&D was not. No edition produced so far has yet worked successfully with a "random dungeon" design. 3E D&D in the end suffered not only from "rule bloat" but also from reprint madness. In evolving the game to 3.5 D&D many of the books were reprinted with the amended rules causing people to re-buy all the material they already purchased. That's a sure sign that the end is near, and it happened with 4.0 D&D.
I am most comfortable running AD&D 1E. The feel is dark and dangerous, as opposed to the clinical and predictable combat of D&D 3.5. Combats in both editions can take a long time - in AD&D 1E the combat length depends on the number of participants (and party size is much larger) while in D&D 3.5 the combat options and rules require longer to get through with multiple steps. Large combats in both editions can be a tracking nightmare. Magic items and treasure in general are much more important in 1E while balancing encounters to the characters is more important in 3E. Training drains much of the wealth away in 1E while magic item creation drains only a minor amount from 3E characters. There seems to be an endgame in place in 1E where the characters eventually retire to become leaders of the land. The endgame in 3E is established by the DM with a soft cap of level 20 before moving on to Epic level adventures (which are ridiculously powerful in my opinion). High-level characters are very powerful in both editions for different reasons. In 1E the characters benefit from a multitude of magic items and spells against creatures written for an earlier version of the game (Monster Manual was written with 0E D&D in mind). In 3E the power creep syndrome keeps monsters and characters on an even keel for a while but eventually the players outnumber or outclass the creatures in some respect and mow them down. Spellcasters are much more powerful in 1E than in 3E despite the increase in number of spells, simply because most spells in 3E have a saving throw and there are limits placed on the power of the spells in 3E that are not there in 1E (e.g. magic missile, fireball, lightning bolt, haste, slow, turning undead, etc.). Survivability is much better in 3E, but the fear of death makes for a more exciting game in 1E. Characters creation in 1E takes a while but the choices presented in 3E make character creation a week-long endeavor!
Ideally, merging the two editions seems to be the way to go. By giving the creatures in AD&D 1E an update as they did in 3E would only enhance that edition. Providing limited choices for 3E characters and providing an established path to follow seems to be the route to enhance the 3E experience. I am still a proponent of making D&D fast and simple, but "Advanced" D&D implies complication. I actually prefer to be limited and make the character work despite the limitations. It makes for a more satisfying adventure - overcoming hardship in the face of impossible odds!
My emphasis on 1E and 3E came about in 2000. This is when I started my long running AD&D 1E Mystara based campaign and my D&D 3.0/3.5 Greyhawk campaign. Of the two, the latter imploded and the former is still going strong after 13 years despite several health issues in the group. We tried to make these games work, but the input required by the DM for 3E became overwhelming for me and I had to quit one of the campaigns to save the other. So the 1E game continues.
I actually LIKE D&D 3.5. I find it to be a well-balanced ruleset with answers to most of the frequently asked questions. It's downfall is the same as it's strengths - it answers too many questions and tries to make everything integrated. Magic does not work well in a shoe-horned system of checks and balances. Some characters become insanely powerful too quickly and providing a challenge for them while maintaining a meaningful campaign becomes a nightmare. However, low-level adventuring is very enjoyable and I could see myself running adventures for a new campaign again.
AD&D, by contrast, is a dense work with rules scattered throughout the books, some contradictory and others inferred. I've spent about 25 years analyzing the rules in the DMG only to discover that they really don't make a whole lot of sense as written. The perils of a single author writing a volume of this size over a long period of time I suppose.
Things I like about 1st Edition AD&D:
- limited choices make the players think
- so many rules for so many circumstances that it's a challenge to use them all
- unlimited play styles accommodated in one set of rules
- can mix and match or house rule with impunity
- success depends upon the experience of the player or the character
Things I like about 3rd Edition D&D:
- same rules apply to all creatures in the game, PC, NPC, or Monster
- standardized rules for certain "skills" modified by abilities and race
- standardized ability scores and application to more circumstances (ability scores matter)
- easier multi-classing rules
2E AD&D suffered from "rule bloat" where more books were published than were needed to run a campaign and fewer adventures were published as a result. Players need to have options open to them and DMs need a break, so publishing quality adventures should be the FOCUS of any edition. DMs have enough to do - they don't need to assemble a campaign from scratch or prepare adventures on the fly to suit the whims of the players. 1st edition was fine for adlibbing adventures; 3E D&D was not. No edition produced so far has yet worked successfully with a "random dungeon" design. 3E D&D in the end suffered not only from "rule bloat" but also from reprint madness. In evolving the game to 3.5 D&D many of the books were reprinted with the amended rules causing people to re-buy all the material they already purchased. That's a sure sign that the end is near, and it happened with 4.0 D&D.
I am most comfortable running AD&D 1E. The feel is dark and dangerous, as opposed to the clinical and predictable combat of D&D 3.5. Combats in both editions can take a long time - in AD&D 1E the combat length depends on the number of participants (and party size is much larger) while in D&D 3.5 the combat options and rules require longer to get through with multiple steps. Large combats in both editions can be a tracking nightmare. Magic items and treasure in general are much more important in 1E while balancing encounters to the characters is more important in 3E. Training drains much of the wealth away in 1E while magic item creation drains only a minor amount from 3E characters. There seems to be an endgame in place in 1E where the characters eventually retire to become leaders of the land. The endgame in 3E is established by the DM with a soft cap of level 20 before moving on to Epic level adventures (which are ridiculously powerful in my opinion). High-level characters are very powerful in both editions for different reasons. In 1E the characters benefit from a multitude of magic items and spells against creatures written for an earlier version of the game (Monster Manual was written with 0E D&D in mind). In 3E the power creep syndrome keeps monsters and characters on an even keel for a while but eventually the players outnumber or outclass the creatures in some respect and mow them down. Spellcasters are much more powerful in 1E than in 3E despite the increase in number of spells, simply because most spells in 3E have a saving throw and there are limits placed on the power of the spells in 3E that are not there in 1E (e.g. magic missile, fireball, lightning bolt, haste, slow, turning undead, etc.). Survivability is much better in 3E, but the fear of death makes for a more exciting game in 1E. Characters creation in 1E takes a while but the choices presented in 3E make character creation a week-long endeavor!
Ideally, merging the two editions seems to be the way to go. By giving the creatures in AD&D 1E an update as they did in 3E would only enhance that edition. Providing limited choices for 3E characters and providing an established path to follow seems to be the route to enhance the 3E experience. I am still a proponent of making D&D fast and simple, but "Advanced" D&D implies complication. I actually prefer to be limited and make the character work despite the limitations. It makes for a more satisfying adventure - overcoming hardship in the face of impossible odds!
Friday, September 13, 2013
Greyhawk Timekeeping and Published Modules
I stumbled upon an interesting finding while trying to establish a timeline for the Hommlet/Temple of Elemental Evil backstory. Apparently, the timeline for Greyhawk back in the Folio days was set at 576 CY - this being the starting point for any campaigns set in the Flanaess. However, I take this point to reference the year 1976 A.D. when Gary Gygax ran his D&D campaigns in the world of Greyhawk. Further references in the module T1 seem to indicate that the year was now 579 CY, which coincides with the module's publication date of 1979 A.D. Future product releases in the Greyhawk campaign in 2nd edition and 3rd edition apparently kept this timeline advancement, so that the year in the "real world" advanced with the year in the fantasy world.
By this estimation, the timeline in Greyhawk should be 613 CY and Hommlet should have advanced by 34 years. A lot can happen in 30 years. In our lifetime we've gone from the invention of the personal computer to the ubiquitous social media devices. We've advanced travel and technology to undreamt levels. Look how far we advanced between the 1940s and the 1970s. In a world of magic, however, this may not be the case. Surely, the castle fortifications begun by Burne and Rufus in the module are completed by this time and the population of Hommlet has likely increased. The fate of this community is tied to the existence of the Temple of Elemental Evil and its growth is likely dependent upon when and if the place was finally shut down by adventurers.
Assuming that the Temple and its forces were wiped out the second time then the community is no doubt returning to a time of happiness and prosperity, growing stronger each day. If the adventure was never played through or the adventurers sent to deal with the demoness were unsuccessful, then a resurgence of evil in the region would likely cause delays and troubles and the village may have suffered worse attacks or been destroyed by the rise of evil. Assuming that the players moved on and did not return, then Hommlet might be an empty ghost town or worse, a suburb of evil Nulb - a hideout of villainy on the edge of a noble holding between several powers of Good in Greyhawk. Allowing such a blasphemy to continue unchecked may occur since the forces of Veluna and Furyondy have to deal with threats on multiple fronts, and a distraction such as the Temple may have to go unanswered for years. At some point, though, the cancerous evil needs to be addressed.
This got me thinking about other adventures in Greyhawk. Obviously the G and D modules occurred BEFORE Hommlet, in 578 (according to publishing dates), and they are referred to in the T1 Background section as the "sharp check dealt to Lolth." It has been established in conversations with Mr. Gygax that the ToEE was supposed to be organized around Lolth being the demon summoned in the Battle of Emridy Meadows, not Tzuggtmoy, who was later used since Q1 was already in production by another author as a sequel to the G and D Series (a project approved by Gary).
In my opinion, Q1 needs to be rewritten to better emulate the chaos and evil of the Abyss and demonkind. T2 needs to be reworked as well to better fit the paradigm of Elemental Evil. In my conversions, I've been reworking some of the creatures and encounters added to the Temple to showcase the new Monster Manual II, and removing some of the influence of other authors to the glory of Gygaxian Greyhawk. Not that these adventures are bad, but the writing style is very different.
I might be interested in starting another Greyhawk 3rd edition adventure set in a much different, 40 years older Flanaess, taking into account all the backstory that has affected the campaign world since the beginning. Its important to keep these modules as historical references, but the adventures of the modern age need to be more akin to the rules of the modern age. Progress is inevitable and nothing remains the same.
By this estimation, the timeline in Greyhawk should be 613 CY and Hommlet should have advanced by 34 years. A lot can happen in 30 years. In our lifetime we've gone from the invention of the personal computer to the ubiquitous social media devices. We've advanced travel and technology to undreamt levels. Look how far we advanced between the 1940s and the 1970s. In a world of magic, however, this may not be the case. Surely, the castle fortifications begun by Burne and Rufus in the module are completed by this time and the population of Hommlet has likely increased. The fate of this community is tied to the existence of the Temple of Elemental Evil and its growth is likely dependent upon when and if the place was finally shut down by adventurers.
Assuming that the Temple and its forces were wiped out the second time then the community is no doubt returning to a time of happiness and prosperity, growing stronger each day. If the adventure was never played through or the adventurers sent to deal with the demoness were unsuccessful, then a resurgence of evil in the region would likely cause delays and troubles and the village may have suffered worse attacks or been destroyed by the rise of evil. Assuming that the players moved on and did not return, then Hommlet might be an empty ghost town or worse, a suburb of evil Nulb - a hideout of villainy on the edge of a noble holding between several powers of Good in Greyhawk. Allowing such a blasphemy to continue unchecked may occur since the forces of Veluna and Furyondy have to deal with threats on multiple fronts, and a distraction such as the Temple may have to go unanswered for years. At some point, though, the cancerous evil needs to be addressed.
This got me thinking about other adventures in Greyhawk. Obviously the G and D modules occurred BEFORE Hommlet, in 578 (according to publishing dates), and they are referred to in the T1 Background section as the "sharp check dealt to Lolth." It has been established in conversations with Mr. Gygax that the ToEE was supposed to be organized around Lolth being the demon summoned in the Battle of Emridy Meadows, not Tzuggtmoy, who was later used since Q1 was already in production by another author as a sequel to the G and D Series (a project approved by Gary).
In my opinion, Q1 needs to be rewritten to better emulate the chaos and evil of the Abyss and demonkind. T2 needs to be reworked as well to better fit the paradigm of Elemental Evil. In my conversions, I've been reworking some of the creatures and encounters added to the Temple to showcase the new Monster Manual II, and removing some of the influence of other authors to the glory of Gygaxian Greyhawk. Not that these adventures are bad, but the writing style is very different.
I might be interested in starting another Greyhawk 3rd edition adventure set in a much different, 40 years older Flanaess, taking into account all the backstory that has affected the campaign world since the beginning. Its important to keep these modules as historical references, but the adventures of the modern age need to be more akin to the rules of the modern age. Progress is inevitable and nothing remains the same.
Monday, August 26, 2013
Autumn Nostalgia Returns
The beginning of the school year always gets me nostalgic for my old D&D days - playing for hours and having the time of my life. I've been looking back at past campaigns and binders full of gaming materials just sitting there on shelves, hopeful but neglected. I don't know why I keep all this stuff; it's fairly obvious that I'm probably not going to run any of it again. My current campaign in AD&D has been running for about 13 years now and has generated two full binders of material with a third in development.
Should I scrap the lot of it or try to preserve it for some possible future return?
Most of the binders hold reworked versions of rules or modules converted from one edition to another. My Harn campaign from back in the 1990s hasn't been touched in decades - literally! All the materials I bought for that game sit in binders on my shelves. All the 3rd edition D&D books (which take up an entire small bookcase) sit idle and stare at me while I play World of Warcraft or work on my AD&D material. I'm not really sure what will happen when AD&D ends - will I simply give up on human interaction altogether? Computer games are grabbing my attention more and more now and keeping me from all the things I have to get done. But these are a poor substitute for a game that allows you to do anything you want. Scripted adventures are OK the first go around, but there is very little fun in repeating the same quests over and over. And I suck at pvp games.
So I keep looking back at all the stuff I have and wondering what the hell to do with it and the rest of my existence. I still have no permanent home to call my own, no family to raise, nothing to look forward to each morning, and a soul-sucking job. I need to get the hell off Long Island and soon!
Should I scrap the lot of it or try to preserve it for some possible future return?
Most of the binders hold reworked versions of rules or modules converted from one edition to another. My Harn campaign from back in the 1990s hasn't been touched in decades - literally! All the materials I bought for that game sit in binders on my shelves. All the 3rd edition D&D books (which take up an entire small bookcase) sit idle and stare at me while I play World of Warcraft or work on my AD&D material. I'm not really sure what will happen when AD&D ends - will I simply give up on human interaction altogether? Computer games are grabbing my attention more and more now and keeping me from all the things I have to get done. But these are a poor substitute for a game that allows you to do anything you want. Scripted adventures are OK the first go around, but there is very little fun in repeating the same quests over and over. And I suck at pvp games.
So I keep looking back at all the stuff I have and wondering what the hell to do with it and the rest of my existence. I still have no permanent home to call my own, no family to raise, nothing to look forward to each morning, and a soul-sucking job. I need to get the hell off Long Island and soon!
Friday, August 9, 2013
Creature Catalog and Cosmology in B/X D&D
In a nostalgic mood last night, I decided to pick through the new monster listings in the few B/X modules published before TSR moved to Mentzer BECMI. I found a quite a few gems, although I was disappointed in the lack of modules from this version of the game. In essence, my only sources were B3: Palace of the Silver Princess, B4: the Lost City, X1: the Isle of Dread, and X2: Castle Amber. All the other modules were published in 1983 with the new Mentzer rules (and horribly produced I might add).
This got me reignited for another go at what Companion D&D would have included. Obviously, the Creature Catalog produced for D&D in the 1980s was exactly the same as what I worked on but also included creatures from ALL the BECMI material published at the time. Keeping with the mindset that later products were too whimsical for my tastes, I wanted to see how I could interpret the rest of the modules in terms of Moldvay/Cook rules. Modules B5 through B12 are much too involved with the Easley-illustrated Mentzer sets. Some of these modules are quite boring or seem to be too far reaching. The worst of the bunch is B8 which seems to be totally disconnected from anything in the D&D multiverse and introduces almost completely different game mechanics, including so many monsters that do not appear in the original rules. A few new monsters are ok, but replacing ALL the monsters is like making it a new game.
The Expert series (X3 through X13) are somewhat tied to the Known World setting, although many of these explore areas beyond those mapped on the original, as if the design team for the GAZ series chased all plotlines outside of their boundaries. Amusingly enough, it's very hard to place an adventure in a setting where EVERYTHING is developed and explained. Therefore, by filling in all the empty hexes, these products practically eliminated any possibility of setting adventures in their borders (except maybe for internecine warfare)! The modules X4 and X5 are the exceptions as they build up a new enemy from beyond the deserts in the west (The Master) in a way that works well, if a little too loosely defined.
I'm tempted to add in all the material from the original D&D rulebooks and supplements to increase the monster and magic item lists. However, I want the simplistic feel and uncomplicated nature of the game to shine through - so all the elegant D&D elements without any of the Advanced nonsense present in AD&D. I prefer a three-phase afterlife featuring Lawful Heavens, Neutral Spirit Realms, and Chaotic Hells. I dislike the Spheres concept of BECMI, although some of their definitions are kinda cool for the ethereal and astral realms. I see the Ethereal Plane as a transition plane for the Inner Planes enclosed by the Material Plane. Beyond the Material Plane is a the Astral Plane, a vast void of stars (essentially outer space) where travel is performed using the mind and the other planes are actually planets orbiting distant stars, with layers being planets in the same star system. Various gates bring the players to and from these planes (planets). Some planes may be little more than collections of matter, liquids, or gases. In fact, this works very well for defining the inner planes. A large gaseous cloud would represent Air, a vast sphere of ocean defines Water, a rocky desolate planetoid with numerous cracks, crevices, tunnels and caves represents Earth, and the interior of a sun or molten core of a planet could represent Fire. A pulsar could represent Positive Energy and a black hole represents Negative Energy.
Alternately, the Spirit Realms of Eastern Mythology and religions featuring mutable creatures that exist by will alone could represent the mutable elements of the Inner Planes. The Ethereal Plane becomes a misty barrier between the land of the Material and the land of the Immaterial, between realms of Souls and realms of Spirits. The Heavens become those planets in the Astral plane that are considered enlightened and paradises, while the Hells become those planets barely able to support life or are dangerous places to exist. Souls would be ejected from the Material Plane and sent to a corresponding Afterlife in the Astral Plane where they are reincarnated in a new form based on how they lived their lives. The oldest and most powerful inhabitants of the outer planes are the Immortals who use soul energy to power their activities. They foster others on the Material Plane to gather more worship and thus more soul energy.
This version of the game can work but I need to define lots of terms, determine what happens at the upper levels of the class structures, and how this all links together.
This got me reignited for another go at what Companion D&D would have included. Obviously, the Creature Catalog produced for D&D in the 1980s was exactly the same as what I worked on but also included creatures from ALL the BECMI material published at the time. Keeping with the mindset that later products were too whimsical for my tastes, I wanted to see how I could interpret the rest of the modules in terms of Moldvay/Cook rules. Modules B5 through B12 are much too involved with the Easley-illustrated Mentzer sets. Some of these modules are quite boring or seem to be too far reaching. The worst of the bunch is B8 which seems to be totally disconnected from anything in the D&D multiverse and introduces almost completely different game mechanics, including so many monsters that do not appear in the original rules. A few new monsters are ok, but replacing ALL the monsters is like making it a new game.
The Expert series (X3 through X13) are somewhat tied to the Known World setting, although many of these explore areas beyond those mapped on the original, as if the design team for the GAZ series chased all plotlines outside of their boundaries. Amusingly enough, it's very hard to place an adventure in a setting where EVERYTHING is developed and explained. Therefore, by filling in all the empty hexes, these products practically eliminated any possibility of setting adventures in their borders (except maybe for internecine warfare)! The modules X4 and X5 are the exceptions as they build up a new enemy from beyond the deserts in the west (The Master) in a way that works well, if a little too loosely defined.
I'm tempted to add in all the material from the original D&D rulebooks and supplements to increase the monster and magic item lists. However, I want the simplistic feel and uncomplicated nature of the game to shine through - so all the elegant D&D elements without any of the Advanced nonsense present in AD&D. I prefer a three-phase afterlife featuring Lawful Heavens, Neutral Spirit Realms, and Chaotic Hells. I dislike the Spheres concept of BECMI, although some of their definitions are kinda cool for the ethereal and astral realms. I see the Ethereal Plane as a transition plane for the Inner Planes enclosed by the Material Plane. Beyond the Material Plane is a the Astral Plane, a vast void of stars (essentially outer space) where travel is performed using the mind and the other planes are actually planets orbiting distant stars, with layers being planets in the same star system. Various gates bring the players to and from these planes (planets). Some planes may be little more than collections of matter, liquids, or gases. In fact, this works very well for defining the inner planes. A large gaseous cloud would represent Air, a vast sphere of ocean defines Water, a rocky desolate planetoid with numerous cracks, crevices, tunnels and caves represents Earth, and the interior of a sun or molten core of a planet could represent Fire. A pulsar could represent Positive Energy and a black hole represents Negative Energy.
Alternately, the Spirit Realms of Eastern Mythology and religions featuring mutable creatures that exist by will alone could represent the mutable elements of the Inner Planes. The Ethereal Plane becomes a misty barrier between the land of the Material and the land of the Immaterial, between realms of Souls and realms of Spirits. The Heavens become those planets in the Astral plane that are considered enlightened and paradises, while the Hells become those planets barely able to support life or are dangerous places to exist. Souls would be ejected from the Material Plane and sent to a corresponding Afterlife in the Astral Plane where they are reincarnated in a new form based on how they lived their lives. The oldest and most powerful inhabitants of the outer planes are the Immortals who use soul energy to power their activities. They foster others on the Material Plane to gather more worship and thus more soul energy.
This version of the game can work but I need to define lots of terms, determine what happens at the upper levels of the class structures, and how this all links together.
Tuesday, July 23, 2013
Problems with Campaign Conversion
I've reached that time in my gaming career when I've pretty much explored all I wanted to explore and used enough game systems to find all the flaws they contain. There is no one perfect version of the game I love (D&D) although there are a few that come close. Although it is human nature to dwell on details, I find that the best games are the ones that gloss over the details and exist with their own set of rules which are meant to be immutable regardless of reality.
I'm mainly having a problem resolving issues with my conversion of Thuin/Sturmgard to Basic/Expert D&D. The alignment thing and several other sticking issues have me thinking that it's not worth the effort to convert if I have to compromise too much. That and all the backstory of the campaigns I've run leads me to just say "screw it."
So if I don't keep anything I've done in the past, how should I proceed? I've tried to run campaign-generic settings in the past and they require little effort to set up, but inevitably questions arise as to deities, leaders of kingdoms, important NPCs in the area, etc. Now I could cop out and allow anything the players desire in the world, making it a mish-mash of various settings (dragonlances, Norse deities, greyhawk-style clerical orders, Forgotten Realms variety moon elves, etc.) but I think that cheapens the experience. Basic/Expert rules are run more generically and allow the player to come up with their own details about their character.
So, I've been thinking about a completely new campaign. The problem here is that I have 30 years of previous campaign materials covering roughly a dozen binders or so (for D&D alone) and several computer files. Surely something must exist someplace for me to start from and work with. My problem is that I tend to snatch info from one source and then expand greatly upon it, essentially making a campaign out of a one-shot. I did this with Greyhawk I campaign, Greyhawk II campaign, and my current Mystara campaign. My Thuin campaign emerged from a desire to return to original AD&D and mutated into a 2nd edition mess. Nothing I've done in D&D 3.5 has amounted to very much and I eventually gave up trying and reverted to using pre-published adventures loosely woven together into a patchwork campaign which imploded in the end.
I've been enamored of the brutal "dogma D&D" style of late. One of the forums I read has had a campaign thread listing the adventures of the "Companions of the Bling," a sort of Tolkienesque tribute campaign where low-level characters try to survive the random starter dungeons generated by a computer program while attempting to make name level and start their real quest (the destruction of the One Ring). The characters are all modeled after Lord of the Rings characters, but the rules as written are obeyed to the letter - no house rules, no holds barred, and no mercy. Hit points are rolled as is. Ability scores are generated using 3d6 in order rolled, no re-rolls. Characters have to qualify for race and class as usual. They are all generally poor but the lack of resources and danger has led to a surprising level of role-playing among the players, and the reports are amazing to read. Many characters don't survive their fist encounter and those that do become cherished members. When such members later perish, great pains are taken to either retrieve them with overpriced magic or else bury them with loving care. Almost all of these characters are cherished and supported by the other players as well. Even the NPCs are treated with more dignity, especially those that are particularly helpful to the party's survival!
I can really see this as a great way to play the game more casually and yet build details of a campaign world. I would keep religion more generic (Light vs. Dark) and stick obsessively to the rules as written without adding pages of house rules. Basically, if the action is not covered in the rules, don't even try it. Accept the rules as written and agree to abide by them at all times and in all circumstances. So what does this mean for a campaign setting?
Demi-humans are considered to be classes in Basic/Expert. They are also limited in the level they can attain. Most also require much more experience points than the other classes. Therefore, humans will more likely survive to see the higher levels. I think that having an endgame in place for the characters who reach level 14 is also necessary. It is my belief that the unpublished Companion Rules would have added in all the AD&D material to the mix - a direction that would have been unnecessary given the rules published at the time. Adding psionics, more classes, more races, and/or strange rules just serves to complicate an otherwise cohesive set of rules. Ending spells at 6th level of power actually makes some sense to me. Not complicating matters by adding in druids, paladins, assassins, rangers, or illusionists also makes sense. Simply play the base character the way you think they should be played. Granted, druids had abilities that made them vastly different, but you can't have everything.
I could see this as a fun exercise that can last a good long time. A long dungeon spanning the first three levels of play, followed by a series of wilderness/dungeon adventures, leading to name level adventures, and later land development for the characters really could be quite fun. I would need players that don't see the game as a progressive waste of time, but rather as an enjoyment of the journey. Many early characters would be lost, and probably a few later characters would also be lost, but each character would be kept and cherished throughout the campaign.
I'm mainly having a problem resolving issues with my conversion of Thuin/Sturmgard to Basic/Expert D&D. The alignment thing and several other sticking issues have me thinking that it's not worth the effort to convert if I have to compromise too much. That and all the backstory of the campaigns I've run leads me to just say "screw it."
So if I don't keep anything I've done in the past, how should I proceed? I've tried to run campaign-generic settings in the past and they require little effort to set up, but inevitably questions arise as to deities, leaders of kingdoms, important NPCs in the area, etc. Now I could cop out and allow anything the players desire in the world, making it a mish-mash of various settings (dragonlances, Norse deities, greyhawk-style clerical orders, Forgotten Realms variety moon elves, etc.) but I think that cheapens the experience. Basic/Expert rules are run more generically and allow the player to come up with their own details about their character.
So, I've been thinking about a completely new campaign. The problem here is that I have 30 years of previous campaign materials covering roughly a dozen binders or so (for D&D alone) and several computer files. Surely something must exist someplace for me to start from and work with. My problem is that I tend to snatch info from one source and then expand greatly upon it, essentially making a campaign out of a one-shot. I did this with Greyhawk I campaign, Greyhawk II campaign, and my current Mystara campaign. My Thuin campaign emerged from a desire to return to original AD&D and mutated into a 2nd edition mess. Nothing I've done in D&D 3.5 has amounted to very much and I eventually gave up trying and reverted to using pre-published adventures loosely woven together into a patchwork campaign which imploded in the end.
I've been enamored of the brutal "dogma D&D" style of late. One of the forums I read has had a campaign thread listing the adventures of the "Companions of the Bling," a sort of Tolkienesque tribute campaign where low-level characters try to survive the random starter dungeons generated by a computer program while attempting to make name level and start their real quest (the destruction of the One Ring). The characters are all modeled after Lord of the Rings characters, but the rules as written are obeyed to the letter - no house rules, no holds barred, and no mercy. Hit points are rolled as is. Ability scores are generated using 3d6 in order rolled, no re-rolls. Characters have to qualify for race and class as usual. They are all generally poor but the lack of resources and danger has led to a surprising level of role-playing among the players, and the reports are amazing to read. Many characters don't survive their fist encounter and those that do become cherished members. When such members later perish, great pains are taken to either retrieve them with overpriced magic or else bury them with loving care. Almost all of these characters are cherished and supported by the other players as well. Even the NPCs are treated with more dignity, especially those that are particularly helpful to the party's survival!
I can really see this as a great way to play the game more casually and yet build details of a campaign world. I would keep religion more generic (Light vs. Dark) and stick obsessively to the rules as written without adding pages of house rules. Basically, if the action is not covered in the rules, don't even try it. Accept the rules as written and agree to abide by them at all times and in all circumstances. So what does this mean for a campaign setting?
Demi-humans are considered to be classes in Basic/Expert. They are also limited in the level they can attain. Most also require much more experience points than the other classes. Therefore, humans will more likely survive to see the higher levels. I think that having an endgame in place for the characters who reach level 14 is also necessary. It is my belief that the unpublished Companion Rules would have added in all the AD&D material to the mix - a direction that would have been unnecessary given the rules published at the time. Adding psionics, more classes, more races, and/or strange rules just serves to complicate an otherwise cohesive set of rules. Ending spells at 6th level of power actually makes some sense to me. Not complicating matters by adding in druids, paladins, assassins, rangers, or illusionists also makes sense. Simply play the base character the way you think they should be played. Granted, druids had abilities that made them vastly different, but you can't have everything.
I could see this as a fun exercise that can last a good long time. A long dungeon spanning the first three levels of play, followed by a series of wilderness/dungeon adventures, leading to name level adventures, and later land development for the characters really could be quite fun. I would need players that don't see the game as a progressive waste of time, but rather as an enjoyment of the journey. Many early characters would be lost, and probably a few later characters would also be lost, but each character would be kept and cherished throughout the campaign.
Friday, July 5, 2013
Inventory Tracker: Character Object
I'm really new to object-oriented programming (OOP) but I'm trying to see how it could be accomplished in a programming language I know and understand a little, namely C. I've worked up a list of all the "objects" I would need for the program to work. The overhead on the memory side is going to be taken up by the graphical needs for all the icons and storage for important data. Ideally I would love to have ALL the info required to run a game attached to this program, but for now inventory is my main concern.
OBJECT 1: CHARACTER
This is the main object of the system, and each user should be able to store multiple instances of other objects on this unique object. All data will be saved with this unique object name (Character Name). This object will have some predefined (drop-box) entries, and some user-input data used to determine what other objects can be equipped in certain slots. Specifically these are:
More or less, the D&D game assumes that a character is man-sized (roughly 6'0") and weight (roughly 180 pounds for an average male). Those races shorter than this can only carry a fraction of the maximum allowance. Those whose strength is not typical for their race also have adjustments to what they can carry. All of this eventually affects movement rate so it is important to note.
We have established in our game that the encumbrance of a normal human of average strength is 500 coins of gear (roughly 50 lb) with no penalty to movement. Penalties from armor supersede this amount regardless of what is carried. Therefore, if the fighter is carrying nothing more than a few pounds of gear and his weapons, but is wearing chain mail armor, then his base move is 9" by default, regardless of strength. When the encumbrance penalty exceeds the movement penalty of the armor, then the movement rate decreases. So if the same fighter picks up enough loot to be down to 9", he is still only moving at 9" because his armor only allows him to move so fast.
Encumbrance drops by fourths. Therefore, an average strength adult male human carries up to 500 coins without penalty (12" movement), up to 1000 coins with reduced speed (9" movement), and up to 1500 coins with severely reduced speed (6" movement). Although it is not written in the game anywhere, I max out the load one can carry at their own body weight (3" movement). It seems silly that someone the size of Arnold Schwartzenegger could carry more than his own body weight for any length of time and still fight off attackers! This above value is adjusted for strength, which allows for someone to carry more than they normally could. The problem here is that SIZE of the character was never integrated into this formula. A smaller person (male or female) could not possibly carry the same amount as someone much larger than they are. Similarly, a halfling or gnome has no right carrying as much as a human could, seeing as they weigh less than half the weight to begin with. This is why I tend to limit maximum weight carried as body weight and adjust according. I would say that scaling the carrying capacity to the body weight of the character is the way to go. So an average character may only carry a percentage of his own weight and still move at full movement.
For example, an average human male, weighing 180 pounds and standing 6'0" could carry a maximum of 1800 coin encumbrance. Divide this into fourths, so normal movement (12" base) is up to 450 coins. This is fine so long as the character is of normal strength. At the upper level of strength, say 18/00%, this adds about 3,000 more coins to the weight allowance. Assuming that this stronger person also weighs significantly more (about 250 lbs. or so), their carrying capacity would be 5,500 coins or 550 lbs! WAYYYY too much for any mere mortal to carry. Therefore, perhaps the strength chart needs to be fixed to reflect a more curved increase, topping out at some maximum regardless of strength. Again, I have no definite answers here, but I'm certain that no character can carry 550 pounds of gear and loot and still move! Sure, I've seen the World's Strongest Man competitions but those are held under "near optimal" conditions and the feats of strength require a few minutes at most. We're talking about lugging treasure and gear though dangerous conditions that are less than sub-optimal.
So, do I base encumbrance on body weight alone or modified by strength? It would seem that running around with 50 lbs. on your back and body is encumbering enough for even the mighty men of the military. It can be done, but it backbreaking work. Then again, greed is a great motivator!
I could always go with the formula developed for Villains & Vigilantes which also takes Constitution into consideration. That formula was ((str/10)^3 + (con/10)) * (half body weight). This amount was how much a character could lift and remain standing. Using the above example of 180 lb. man and Str 11 with Con 10, would give us ((1.1)^3 + 1.0) * 90 = 210 lbs. A similar man weighing 250 lbs. with an 18/00% strength and 18 constitution would be able to lift ((1.8)^3 + 1.8) * 125 = 954 lbs! My God, that's a lot of weight, but 1/4 ton is MUCH heavier than the current world record (580 lb by gold medalist Hossein R. of Iran who weighs 340 lb at 6'1" himself). SO apparently that formula won't work.
My gut tells me that lifting and carrying on your person that much weight leads to exhaustion quickly. So what should be the maximum weight one can carry and still move relatively freely? My guess is that moving around with only 55% of one's maximum press should be more than sufficient as a maximum. For the 180 lb guy, this means that they can carry about 100 lbs. and move at a crawl (that's 1000 coins). Using the "fourths" rule, unencumbered weight is up to 250 coins, medium load, is up to 500 coins, heavy load is up to 750 coins and overloaded would be up to 1000 coins. Does this work for the upper bounds of human strength? Assuming that each point of Strength above 10 adds roughly 10 pounds to the person's frame (+10 pounds per bracket of percentile strength), a person with 18/00% strength would weigh roughly 300 lbs and could carry about 1650 coins of weight. Breaking this down, that's up to 412 coins at unencumbered, 825 coins at medium, 1237 coins at heavy, and 1650 at maximum. Remember, maximum encumbrance means carry and still move (even at 3" rate). Obviously, such a person should be able to lift their own body weight in bench press.
Does this translate to the smaller races? Well, dwarves are built similarly to humans, and even weigh about the same, so yeah, this could work just fine the same for dwarves. Halflings weigh on average about 60 lbs. This means that an average halfling male standing 3'0" tall can carry only 33 lbs. and is considered overloaded at that point. This breaks down as up to 83 coins for unencumbered, 165 coins for medium, 248 coins for heavy, and up to 330 coins for overloaded. A max strength halfling (17 Str) probably only gain 3 lbs per point over 10, so their body weight would be around 75 lb. and carrying capacity at 41 lb. Breakdown for this would be unencumbered up to 103 coins, medium at up to 205 coins, heavy at up to 307 coins, and overloaded up to 410 coins. The same thing would apply to gnomes. That's not very much, but more in line with the current method of calculating encumbrance!
At the risk of sounding sexist, I will not break this out for women. However, I would assume that Gygax would not have women as equal to men if only because they are less naturally muscular. There are exceptions to be sure, and I'm sure that dwarven or half-orc women are equal in this regard, but women are also smaller in stature so their frames are not as strong. Also, seeing a 18/75% strength woman weighing close to 300 lbs seems excessive. I would say that women pack on only +5 pounds of muscle per point of Strength over 12 and that once they get to the upper brackets they are simply trading fat deposits for muscle weight so no extra weight gain at percentile strength. Small female gnomes and halflings probably only add in 1 pound per strength point over 12.
This is exhausting just thinking about it! Now I have to revamp my views and maybe talk to the others in the group to see what they think. Having an established chart on each character will likely help me decide if this makes sense or not. It will also help determine if this app is worthwhile. More at a later time!
OBJECT 1: CHARACTER
This is the main object of the system, and each user should be able to store multiple instances of other objects on this unique object. All data will be saved with this unique object name (Character Name). This object will have some predefined (drop-box) entries, and some user-input data used to determine what other objects can be equipped in certain slots. Specifically these are:
- Race: determines size and type of character
- Height: determines maximum size of weapons that can be wielded.
- Weight: used in determining maximum weight allowance.
- Strength: main determinant for weight allowance.
More or less, the D&D game assumes that a character is man-sized (roughly 6'0") and weight (roughly 180 pounds for an average male). Those races shorter than this can only carry a fraction of the maximum allowance. Those whose strength is not typical for their race also have adjustments to what they can carry. All of this eventually affects movement rate so it is important to note.
We have established in our game that the encumbrance of a normal human of average strength is 500 coins of gear (roughly 50 lb) with no penalty to movement. Penalties from armor supersede this amount regardless of what is carried. Therefore, if the fighter is carrying nothing more than a few pounds of gear and his weapons, but is wearing chain mail armor, then his base move is 9" by default, regardless of strength. When the encumbrance penalty exceeds the movement penalty of the armor, then the movement rate decreases. So if the same fighter picks up enough loot to be down to 9", he is still only moving at 9" because his armor only allows him to move so fast.
Encumbrance drops by fourths. Therefore, an average strength adult male human carries up to 500 coins without penalty (12" movement), up to 1000 coins with reduced speed (9" movement), and up to 1500 coins with severely reduced speed (6" movement). Although it is not written in the game anywhere, I max out the load one can carry at their own body weight (3" movement). It seems silly that someone the size of Arnold Schwartzenegger could carry more than his own body weight for any length of time and still fight off attackers! This above value is adjusted for strength, which allows for someone to carry more than they normally could. The problem here is that SIZE of the character was never integrated into this formula. A smaller person (male or female) could not possibly carry the same amount as someone much larger than they are. Similarly, a halfling or gnome has no right carrying as much as a human could, seeing as they weigh less than half the weight to begin with. This is why I tend to limit maximum weight carried as body weight and adjust according. I would say that scaling the carrying capacity to the body weight of the character is the way to go. So an average character may only carry a percentage of his own weight and still move at full movement.
For example, an average human male, weighing 180 pounds and standing 6'0" could carry a maximum of 1800 coin encumbrance. Divide this into fourths, so normal movement (12" base) is up to 450 coins. This is fine so long as the character is of normal strength. At the upper level of strength, say 18/00%, this adds about 3,000 more coins to the weight allowance. Assuming that this stronger person also weighs significantly more (about 250 lbs. or so), their carrying capacity would be 5,500 coins or 550 lbs! WAYYYY too much for any mere mortal to carry. Therefore, perhaps the strength chart needs to be fixed to reflect a more curved increase, topping out at some maximum regardless of strength. Again, I have no definite answers here, but I'm certain that no character can carry 550 pounds of gear and loot and still move! Sure, I've seen the World's Strongest Man competitions but those are held under "near optimal" conditions and the feats of strength require a few minutes at most. We're talking about lugging treasure and gear though dangerous conditions that are less than sub-optimal.
So, do I base encumbrance on body weight alone or modified by strength? It would seem that running around with 50 lbs. on your back and body is encumbering enough for even the mighty men of the military. It can be done, but it backbreaking work. Then again, greed is a great motivator!
I could always go with the formula developed for Villains & Vigilantes which also takes Constitution into consideration. That formula was ((str/10)^3 + (con/10)) * (half body weight). This amount was how much a character could lift and remain standing. Using the above example of 180 lb. man and Str 11 with Con 10, would give us ((1.1)^3 + 1.0) * 90 = 210 lbs. A similar man weighing 250 lbs. with an 18/00% strength and 18 constitution would be able to lift ((1.8)^3 + 1.8) * 125 = 954 lbs! My God, that's a lot of weight, but 1/4 ton is MUCH heavier than the current world record (580 lb by gold medalist Hossein R. of Iran who weighs 340 lb at 6'1" himself). SO apparently that formula won't work.
My gut tells me that lifting and carrying on your person that much weight leads to exhaustion quickly. So what should be the maximum weight one can carry and still move relatively freely? My guess is that moving around with only 55% of one's maximum press should be more than sufficient as a maximum. For the 180 lb guy, this means that they can carry about 100 lbs. and move at a crawl (that's 1000 coins). Using the "fourths" rule, unencumbered weight is up to 250 coins, medium load, is up to 500 coins, heavy load is up to 750 coins and overloaded would be up to 1000 coins. Does this work for the upper bounds of human strength? Assuming that each point of Strength above 10 adds roughly 10 pounds to the person's frame (+10 pounds per bracket of percentile strength), a person with 18/00% strength would weigh roughly 300 lbs and could carry about 1650 coins of weight. Breaking this down, that's up to 412 coins at unencumbered, 825 coins at medium, 1237 coins at heavy, and 1650 at maximum. Remember, maximum encumbrance means carry and still move (even at 3" rate). Obviously, such a person should be able to lift their own body weight in bench press.
Does this translate to the smaller races? Well, dwarves are built similarly to humans, and even weigh about the same, so yeah, this could work just fine the same for dwarves. Halflings weigh on average about 60 lbs. This means that an average halfling male standing 3'0" tall can carry only 33 lbs. and is considered overloaded at that point. This breaks down as up to 83 coins for unencumbered, 165 coins for medium, 248 coins for heavy, and up to 330 coins for overloaded. A max strength halfling (17 Str) probably only gain 3 lbs per point over 10, so their body weight would be around 75 lb. and carrying capacity at 41 lb. Breakdown for this would be unencumbered up to 103 coins, medium at up to 205 coins, heavy at up to 307 coins, and overloaded up to 410 coins. The same thing would apply to gnomes. That's not very much, but more in line with the current method of calculating encumbrance!
At the risk of sounding sexist, I will not break this out for women. However, I would assume that Gygax would not have women as equal to men if only because they are less naturally muscular. There are exceptions to be sure, and I'm sure that dwarven or half-orc women are equal in this regard, but women are also smaller in stature so their frames are not as strong. Also, seeing a 18/75% strength woman weighing close to 300 lbs seems excessive. I would say that women pack on only +5 pounds of muscle per point of Strength over 12 and that once they get to the upper brackets they are simply trading fat deposits for muscle weight so no extra weight gain at percentile strength. Small female gnomes and halflings probably only add in 1 pound per strength point over 12.
This is exhausting just thinking about it! Now I have to revamp my views and maybe talk to the others in the group to see what they think. Having an established chart on each character will likely help me decide if this makes sense or not. It will also help determine if this app is worthwhile. More at a later time!
Tuesday, July 2, 2013
Inventory Tracker for AD&D Characters
We run into the same problem every session we play: where are you keeping all those items you keep pulling out of your bags? I myself have been guilty of "hoarding syndrome", which has only gotten worse with the advent of computer games and virtual bag space. Players dislike having to account for all their gear and loot, with the limitations placed on them from Strength and general physical limits of volume and material strength. However, when the players are attempting to remove hauls of epic proportions from giant lairs, they NEED to account for the placement of every copper piece and stowed dagger!
In the interests of coming up with a better way to track all of this inventory, I recommend the creation of an Inventory Tracker for AD&D characters. Using some graphic object-oriented language and small images of containers and standard items, the player can use a computer or tablet to track all inventory quickly and easily, as well as total weight allowances and movement rates. This way, when I ask where something is located I can get a straight answer and not look through about 30 pages of past notes to determine that the item they thought they were carrying was sold off 5 sessions ago...
What is needed:
I'm not exactly sure how this would be done. I have a smattering of experience with C scripting for Neverwinter Nights, but nothing of this magnitude. I would love to see the icons listed for World of Warcraft used in such an application since they have already made a myriad of multi-colored, generic icons for the thousands of objects in their game. Allowing the characters to select the icons they want may not be the way to go. Allowing the DM to predetermine all the standard objects in the Player's Handbook and some magic items, then import them to a waiting treasure cache on the player's side seems to be the more likely method, although I have no network programming experience and have no idea how to accomplish this.
In the interests of coming up with a better way to track all of this inventory, I recommend the creation of an Inventory Tracker for AD&D characters. Using some graphic object-oriented language and small images of containers and standard items, the player can use a computer or tablet to track all inventory quickly and easily, as well as total weight allowances and movement rates. This way, when I ask where something is located I can get a straight answer and not look through about 30 pages of past notes to determine that the item they thought they were carrying was sold off 5 sessions ago...
What is needed:
- A solid programming language that allows me to easily use drag-and-drop icons to move virtual items from one container to another, probably with stacking of similar items such as torches, coins, oil flasks, etc. with a means of adjusting quantities in a bundle.
- A library of established icons that are easy to identify as containers and items, including food items, bags, backpacks, pouches, saddle-bags, chests, coins, weapons, armor, gems, jewelry, etc.
- A paper-doll model of the character showing inventory slots and sub-slots, including spots for helms, rings, necklaces, armor, weapons, backpacks, pouches, bracers, belts, boots, gloves, eye-pieces, and even earrings. Opening a container would reveal a window with contents, total weight carried and remaining space options, etc.
- A mathematical model that allows all inventory equipped to subtract from available weight allowance, adjusted for current strength and fatigue levels.
- Addition of mount/mule storage for accounting of surplus party supplies, stowed treasures, and personal items such as spell books.
- The containers should have their own weight included in the total, and an adjustable amount of volume that can be used to fix each unique container's carrying capacity (once established this amount become fixed and immutable).
- Items held in place by other items have to be accounted for as well (i.e. a wand or scroll tucked securely under a wizard's belt, a quiver strapped to a backpack, a hood covering a helm, a sack covering a magic lantern, etc.)
- Ideally it would be great to have a player's version and a DM's version that monitors the player versions.
- Based on total weight carried, the character's current movement and burden penalties to combat would automatically be displayed. Allowances must be made for magic armor which has encumbrance but is not counted when determining movement.
- Weapon or item in hand should automatically display when any changes are made (i.e. dropped weapons, holding lanterns, material components, etc.)
I'm not exactly sure how this would be done. I have a smattering of experience with C scripting for Neverwinter Nights, but nothing of this magnitude. I would love to see the icons listed for World of Warcraft used in such an application since they have already made a myriad of multi-colored, generic icons for the thousands of objects in their game. Allowing the characters to select the icons they want may not be the way to go. Allowing the DM to predetermine all the standard objects in the Player's Handbook and some magic items, then import them to a waiting treasure cache on the player's side seems to be the more likely method, although I have no network programming experience and have no idea how to accomplish this.
Monday, June 24, 2013
Sturmgard Conversion: Deities in Basic/Expert
The original D&D settings usually used Earthly gods from Greek and Norse mythology - it wasn't until the Greyhawk Boxed Set and Forgotten Realms settings that original deities were developed for AD&D. Clerics were assumed to worship "the immortals" in B/X, a nebulous conglomeration of unnamed beings of supreme power. By keeping things ambiguous it allowed anyone to add their own flavor to the campaign.
I favor the more detailed approach of world-specific deities and used this model when I designed Thuin/Sturmgard. There are only a few Great Gods and a plethora of lesser gods and demi-gods. Some of the converted deities would resemble this:
LAWFUL
Talas (creator god, dragon lord of the skies and stars)
Aram (lord of paladins, god of righteous justice)
Arne (god of music, art, bards)
Bok (god of bravery)
Kara (goddess of healing and compassion)
Damon (god of the sun, light, and flame)
Dioclesis (Dolestrian principles of culture)
NEUTRAL
Chithara (earth mother)
Baranduin (beast lord)
Bathys (goddess of the seas)
Tomar (god of knowledge)
Kyndar (god of masculinity)
Nairn (goddess of femininity)
Rom (Romisarian principle of commerce)
Mollah (Algozin principle of freedom)
Xaal (goddess of secrets)
Riddlemaster (lord of balance and trials)
CHAOTIC
Spithre (god of chaos, magic)
Gorgus (lord of undeath)
Djun (god of war)
Vetch (god of insanity, jealousy, and criminal rage)
Nelvanna (Lady Ice, mistress of the frozen north)
Shuva (lady of the night, moon goddess)
There are more gods than this; these are only the few I can remember from the top of my head. The various cultures and demi-human races revere these deities under different names. The "principles" (Dioclesis, Rom, and Mollah) are forces empowered by one or more of the deities or by faith alone. I've always envisioned Mollah as a force empowered by a people's need to be free from oppression, a flaming ethereal giant that smites oppressors. This religion resembles early Christianity under the yoke of Imperial Roman rule. The Diocletian faith is representative of the Holy Roman Empire of Constantinople. The Romisarian faith probably resembles ancient Phoenician principles of commerce and the sacred Bond of the Business Deal.
The cosmology of Sturmgard is as a separate sphere in the multiverse, created by Talas for his own amusement. As such it is separate from the world cosmology of D&D and AD&D to some degree. There are accessways to the elemental planes, the positive material and negative material planes, as well as the Ethereal plane, but only Talas inhabits the border Astral Plane and protects his creations from the Chaos of the outer planes. Demons learned of this separate material plane long ago and tricked a mortal to invite them in. This resulted in the Demon Wars that very nearly ended the world. Since then the world's wizards are sworn to protect the planar boundaries and act as interdimensional border patrolmen, policing the use of magic to ensure that such mistakes never happen again.
Since Spithre ran amok in the early years and then after the Demon Wars, Talas has become more and more restrictive, to the point that magic is now failing. With the banishment of Spithre and the removal of the corruption of the demons the world's residual magical energy is being used up by the various magic-users across the globe. Only by releasing Spithre from his confinement can magic return to Sturmgard. However, doing so may unmake reality since it would prove the creator fallible. One of the main goals for high-level play is to convince Talas to reneg on his banishment of the Lord of Chaos, something that may spark new warfare across the world.
I favor the more detailed approach of world-specific deities and used this model when I designed Thuin/Sturmgard. There are only a few Great Gods and a plethora of lesser gods and demi-gods. Some of the converted deities would resemble this:
LAWFUL
Talas (creator god, dragon lord of the skies and stars)
Aram (lord of paladins, god of righteous justice)
Arne (god of music, art, bards)
Bok (god of bravery)
Kara (goddess of healing and compassion)
Damon (god of the sun, light, and flame)
Dioclesis (Dolestrian principles of culture)
NEUTRAL
Chithara (earth mother)
Baranduin (beast lord)
Bathys (goddess of the seas)
Tomar (god of knowledge)
Kyndar (god of masculinity)
Nairn (goddess of femininity)
Rom (Romisarian principle of commerce)
Mollah (Algozin principle of freedom)
Xaal (goddess of secrets)
Riddlemaster (lord of balance and trials)
CHAOTIC
Spithre (god of chaos, magic)
Gorgus (lord of undeath)
Djun (god of war)
Vetch (god of insanity, jealousy, and criminal rage)
Nelvanna (Lady Ice, mistress of the frozen north)
Shuva (lady of the night, moon goddess)
There are more gods than this; these are only the few I can remember from the top of my head. The various cultures and demi-human races revere these deities under different names. The "principles" (Dioclesis, Rom, and Mollah) are forces empowered by one or more of the deities or by faith alone. I've always envisioned Mollah as a force empowered by a people's need to be free from oppression, a flaming ethereal giant that smites oppressors. This religion resembles early Christianity under the yoke of Imperial Roman rule. The Diocletian faith is representative of the Holy Roman Empire of Constantinople. The Romisarian faith probably resembles ancient Phoenician principles of commerce and the sacred Bond of the Business Deal.
The cosmology of Sturmgard is as a separate sphere in the multiverse, created by Talas for his own amusement. As such it is separate from the world cosmology of D&D and AD&D to some degree. There are accessways to the elemental planes, the positive material and negative material planes, as well as the Ethereal plane, but only Talas inhabits the border Astral Plane and protects his creations from the Chaos of the outer planes. Demons learned of this separate material plane long ago and tricked a mortal to invite them in. This resulted in the Demon Wars that very nearly ended the world. Since then the world's wizards are sworn to protect the planar boundaries and act as interdimensional border patrolmen, policing the use of magic to ensure that such mistakes never happen again.
Since Spithre ran amok in the early years and then after the Demon Wars, Talas has become more and more restrictive, to the point that magic is now failing. With the banishment of Spithre and the removal of the corruption of the demons the world's residual magical energy is being used up by the various magic-users across the globe. Only by releasing Spithre from his confinement can magic return to Sturmgard. However, doing so may unmake reality since it would prove the creator fallible. One of the main goals for high-level play is to convince Talas to reneg on his banishment of the Lord of Chaos, something that may spark new warfare across the world.
Thursday, May 23, 2013
Sturmgard Conversion: Alignment and the Afterlife
The Sturmgard Conversion is coming along nicely. One sticking point I have is with alignment. The original version of the game used only 3 alignments: Lawful, Neutral, and Chaotic. Later versions of D&D adopted 9 alignments by adding in the Good-Evil axis. I'm not sure which I want to use for Sturmgard. I will be using Basic/Expert rules which are not tied terribly to alignment. However, using sub-classes with alignment restrictions poses a problem. Paladins, Rangers, Druids, and Assassins all have alignment requirements, something that seems rather difficult to pin in a 3-alignment system. After all, if the monsters are mostly Chaotic, that only leaves really 2 choices for PCs who are heroic (Lawful and Neutral). However, there are no "devils" in Basic/Expert, only demons. I've also complained frequently about the spells using Good/Evil as descriptors when alignments use Law/Chaos. They are similar but not the same. I was then thinking of using only Good-Neutral-Evil for alignments, but that seems a bit bland. I want to keep the simplicity of the system intact and not add in any unnecessary ingredients to confuse.
So what would a Sturmgard campaign with classic Basic/Expert alignments look like? Well, Druids are Neutral in any campaign, but Rangers and Paladins are Lawful only. Assassins in OD&D were listed as Neutral only (go figure) so that still works. Most of the "good" deities become Lawful, and Chithara remains Neutral. Spithre and Gorgus revert to Chaotic (but they were anyway). How do I convert the other alignments?
Well, it seems that if you take the nine-alignment chart with good alignments on top, neutral in the middle, and evil on the bottom, you come up with a 3x3 matrix. Separating them into three diagonal stripes from the upper right to the lower left gives you the zones of alignment conversion. Thus LAWFUL encompasses the alignments of LN, LG, NG; NEUTRAL encompasses the alignments of LE, TN, and CG; and CHAOTIC encompasses NE, CE, and CN. Having LE and CG in the same band as neutral can be explained in this way - LE is chaotic behavior with a lawful bent, thus equating to neutral; and CG is good behavior with a selfish bent, thus also balancing out to neutral.
What does this mean for the hosts of creatures in the Monster Manual? Well, devils and faeries become Neutral, as do elves. Dwarves become Lawful as do Halflings. All humanoids become Chaotic, including Orcs and Hobgoblins who would otherwise be considered Neutral since they are (erroneously in my opinion) listed as LE in the Monster Manual. Nothing says that humanoids can't be Neutral in alignment, it simply doesn't fit their modus operandi.
So, in a world without devils and high fay, what would the cosmos look like? Apparently there would be a heaven and an underworld, with some form of spirit plane more concerned with nature and the elements. In essence, the structure of the Inner Planes from Deities and Demi-gods fits this view. The Positive Material Plane identifies as Lawful Heaven, the Negative Material Plane as the Chaotic underworld, and the elemental and Ethereal Planes as the Neutral zones. What about Astral? I think that having the Inner Plane cosmos for Sturmgard works for the creation myth I've developed. Astral would equate to outer space, a transitive plane of vacuum that exists for the mind alone where Talas can be seen in the night sky. Using it may lead to other planes of existence separate from this cosmos - such as the D&D standard cosmology, the Forgotten Realms cosmology, Dark Sun or other campaign settings. In essence, the Astral plane separates universes from one another - it is the space in between the layers of reality.
So, when one dies and is Lawful, they go to the Heavens (positive material plane) where they join with the Light. Chaotic creatures descend to the Hells (negative material plane) where they become shadows. Neutral creatures merge with the spirit planes (ethereal and elemental planes) and this is why elementals sometimes form animal shapes or humanoid shapes. In other consequences, Elves are more attuned to this Neutral philosophy and thus cannot be raised from the dead, although they can be reincarnated. Perhaps the cycle of life already takes into account alignment in the D&D system. Assume the following - living Lawful creatures can be raised from the dead as normal; living Neutral creatures can be reincarnated into new forms; and Chaotic creatures once dead can only be reanimated as undead. A resurrection spell is able to bring anyone back to life in the form they inhabited regardless of alignment. This has interesting implications. First, the curse of undeath applied to a non-Chaotic creature means that their soul is not recoverable. Hence, once you are turned into a ghoul, wight, zombie, skeleton, wraith, mummy, vampire, etc. you cannot be brought back from that state (short of a wish, that is). Neutral creatures reincarnated into a form that is not viable for adventuring (animals, monsters, etc) effectively end that character's career, but the chance of coming back as someone usable remains. The problem is the loss of all Experience Points. There is no resurrection survival chance in Basic, so the chance of being able to bring someone back from the dead is 100%. Perhaps having the character make a Constitution check on d20 would be more appropriate, but would suck if their Constitution is too low.
One has to consider also the cost involved in bringing the dead back to life. Gygax originally set the Raise Dead spell at 5th level meaning a cleric needs to be a minimum of 9th level to cast it. Animate Dead I believe is a 5th level magic-user spell, later a 3rd level cleric spell. Resurrection is a 7th level cleric spell and probably only available at like 14th level or higher for clerics. Does this mean that any character below 9th level (Name Level) is not really viable for such magics? Should there be a level where using such magic is considered viable? It seems to me that 1st-3rd level characters are too fragile to even consider raising from the dead. Once a character breaks that boundary to 4th level then, and only then, are they considered to be viable for resurrection. The prohibitive cost of such a casting means that only the very successful would have enough ready cash to use. Without training costs, wealth tends to pile up in the base town without much use. Magic items are meant to be found, not bought. So all that loot can be used as an insurance policy against death. So what happens to the loot when low level characters die? One suggestion is to name a next of kin (the next character rolled as replacement). Another is to redistribute the treasure to the surviving party members. This could mean an increase in XP, but since there was no danger involved in its gain I don't think XP is appropriate to be awarded for someone else's redistributed hoard.
I'll have to contemplate these issues a bit more before finalizing the decision.
So what would a Sturmgard campaign with classic Basic/Expert alignments look like? Well, Druids are Neutral in any campaign, but Rangers and Paladins are Lawful only. Assassins in OD&D were listed as Neutral only (go figure) so that still works. Most of the "good" deities become Lawful, and Chithara remains Neutral. Spithre and Gorgus revert to Chaotic (but they were anyway). How do I convert the other alignments?
Well, it seems that if you take the nine-alignment chart with good alignments on top, neutral in the middle, and evil on the bottom, you come up with a 3x3 matrix. Separating them into three diagonal stripes from the upper right to the lower left gives you the zones of alignment conversion. Thus LAWFUL encompasses the alignments of LN, LG, NG; NEUTRAL encompasses the alignments of LE, TN, and CG; and CHAOTIC encompasses NE, CE, and CN. Having LE and CG in the same band as neutral can be explained in this way - LE is chaotic behavior with a lawful bent, thus equating to neutral; and CG is good behavior with a selfish bent, thus also balancing out to neutral.
What does this mean for the hosts of creatures in the Monster Manual? Well, devils and faeries become Neutral, as do elves. Dwarves become Lawful as do Halflings. All humanoids become Chaotic, including Orcs and Hobgoblins who would otherwise be considered Neutral since they are (erroneously in my opinion) listed as LE in the Monster Manual. Nothing says that humanoids can't be Neutral in alignment, it simply doesn't fit their modus operandi.
So, in a world without devils and high fay, what would the cosmos look like? Apparently there would be a heaven and an underworld, with some form of spirit plane more concerned with nature and the elements. In essence, the structure of the Inner Planes from Deities and Demi-gods fits this view. The Positive Material Plane identifies as Lawful Heaven, the Negative Material Plane as the Chaotic underworld, and the elemental and Ethereal Planes as the Neutral zones. What about Astral? I think that having the Inner Plane cosmos for Sturmgard works for the creation myth I've developed. Astral would equate to outer space, a transitive plane of vacuum that exists for the mind alone where Talas can be seen in the night sky. Using it may lead to other planes of existence separate from this cosmos - such as the D&D standard cosmology, the Forgotten Realms cosmology, Dark Sun or other campaign settings. In essence, the Astral plane separates universes from one another - it is the space in between the layers of reality.
So, when one dies and is Lawful, they go to the Heavens (positive material plane) where they join with the Light. Chaotic creatures descend to the Hells (negative material plane) where they become shadows. Neutral creatures merge with the spirit planes (ethereal and elemental planes) and this is why elementals sometimes form animal shapes or humanoid shapes. In other consequences, Elves are more attuned to this Neutral philosophy and thus cannot be raised from the dead, although they can be reincarnated. Perhaps the cycle of life already takes into account alignment in the D&D system. Assume the following - living Lawful creatures can be raised from the dead as normal; living Neutral creatures can be reincarnated into new forms; and Chaotic creatures once dead can only be reanimated as undead. A resurrection spell is able to bring anyone back to life in the form they inhabited regardless of alignment. This has interesting implications. First, the curse of undeath applied to a non-Chaotic creature means that their soul is not recoverable. Hence, once you are turned into a ghoul, wight, zombie, skeleton, wraith, mummy, vampire, etc. you cannot be brought back from that state (short of a wish, that is). Neutral creatures reincarnated into a form that is not viable for adventuring (animals, monsters, etc) effectively end that character's career, but the chance of coming back as someone usable remains. The problem is the loss of all Experience Points. There is no resurrection survival chance in Basic, so the chance of being able to bring someone back from the dead is 100%. Perhaps having the character make a Constitution check on d20 would be more appropriate, but would suck if their Constitution is too low.
One has to consider also the cost involved in bringing the dead back to life. Gygax originally set the Raise Dead spell at 5th level meaning a cleric needs to be a minimum of 9th level to cast it. Animate Dead I believe is a 5th level magic-user spell, later a 3rd level cleric spell. Resurrection is a 7th level cleric spell and probably only available at like 14th level or higher for clerics. Does this mean that any character below 9th level (Name Level) is not really viable for such magics? Should there be a level where using such magic is considered viable? It seems to me that 1st-3rd level characters are too fragile to even consider raising from the dead. Once a character breaks that boundary to 4th level then, and only then, are they considered to be viable for resurrection. The prohibitive cost of such a casting means that only the very successful would have enough ready cash to use. Without training costs, wealth tends to pile up in the base town without much use. Magic items are meant to be found, not bought. So all that loot can be used as an insurance policy against death. So what happens to the loot when low level characters die? One suggestion is to name a next of kin (the next character rolled as replacement). Another is to redistribute the treasure to the surviving party members. This could mean an increase in XP, but since there was no danger involved in its gain I don't think XP is appropriate to be awarded for someone else's redistributed hoard.
I'll have to contemplate these issues a bit more before finalizing the decision.
Wednesday, May 15, 2013
Sturmgard - Finalizing Plans for Basic
I'm in the beginning stages of the Thuin Conversion Project. I'm basically taking the skeleton of my old campaign and fleshing it out as a Basic/Expert Campaign module written in Old School fashion as a true dungeon adventure. The world is getting a facelift as well, being converted to a more old school format to function as both a Basic Dungeon and Expert Wilderness setting. I'm changing some names, adding in OD&D sub-classes, and separating race and class. In essence, all the changes that make D&D into AD&D without all the wacky and unnecessary rules of AD&D. Spells will be simple and quick, combat should run fast and easy, and the party can enjoy a good old-fashioned dungeon crawl without the need to worry about exterior plots, exorbitant training costs, or unnecessary restrictions to their enjoyment. I hope to get a full group to play test the dungeon soon. I've kept the 1st level map and changed some of the monsters to more closely fit the Basic rules, but I've completely reworked the lower levels as something different. The premise of the adventure remains intact and could have world repercussions if the party passes the "Test of the Riddlemaster" (adventure name).
I'm removing most of the names and references to Thuin, keeping the NPCs the same with some alterations (mostly cosmetic), and perhaps converting the PCs from the Thuin campaign into NPCs to interact with the PCs as trainers or healers. The campaign will NOT be sponsoring half-breed races of any sort (no half-elves or half-orcs allowed). Races allowed are Human, Dwarf, Elf, Hobbit, and possibly Gnome. Classes include Cleric, Druid, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, Magic-User, Illusionist, Thief, Assassin, and Bard. Monks have no place in this campaign. Multi-classing functions similar to the way Elves were made to function in D&D. In essence, you have ONE level to advance, but you need to add together the level requirements for all your classes to make a level. Therefore, if you were a Fighter/Magic-User you would need 4,500 XP to make 2nd level. I may or may not work with level limits, instead charging demi-humans a 10% penalty for their special abilities. Therefore, a single class dwarf Fighter would require 2,200 XP where a human Fighter requires only 2,000 XP for 2nd level. Multi-classed demi-humans have no 10% penalty to XP, since they will be slowed enough in their advancement. I was toying with allowing only humans to benefit from XP bonuses, but I decided not to go that route since I would be enforcing abilities rolled with 3d6 and assigned in the order rolled. This makes those sub-classes rare and valuable. In fact, I want to run the entire game as written in the Basic/Expert rules, with only the minor adjustments listed above. The setting of Sturmgard is meant to be "flavor" for the munch and crunch of the adventure itself - focus on the dungeon!
I'm removing most of the names and references to Thuin, keeping the NPCs the same with some alterations (mostly cosmetic), and perhaps converting the PCs from the Thuin campaign into NPCs to interact with the PCs as trainers or healers. The campaign will NOT be sponsoring half-breed races of any sort (no half-elves or half-orcs allowed). Races allowed are Human, Dwarf, Elf, Hobbit, and possibly Gnome. Classes include Cleric, Druid, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, Magic-User, Illusionist, Thief, Assassin, and Bard. Monks have no place in this campaign. Multi-classing functions similar to the way Elves were made to function in D&D. In essence, you have ONE level to advance, but you need to add together the level requirements for all your classes to make a level. Therefore, if you were a Fighter/Magic-User you would need 4,500 XP to make 2nd level. I may or may not work with level limits, instead charging demi-humans a 10% penalty for their special abilities. Therefore, a single class dwarf Fighter would require 2,200 XP where a human Fighter requires only 2,000 XP for 2nd level. Multi-classed demi-humans have no 10% penalty to XP, since they will be slowed enough in their advancement. I was toying with allowing only humans to benefit from XP bonuses, but I decided not to go that route since I would be enforcing abilities rolled with 3d6 and assigned in the order rolled. This makes those sub-classes rare and valuable. In fact, I want to run the entire game as written in the Basic/Expert rules, with only the minor adjustments listed above. The setting of Sturmgard is meant to be "flavor" for the munch and crunch of the adventure itself - focus on the dungeon!
Giants Proceeding Well
The "Against the Giants" campaign I started a few months ago is going well. We're into a few sessions and the party is running strong and finally making off with sufficient quantity of loot to progress at the level they should be. The ranger is kicking ass as predicted and the planning of the druid is paying off as they are systematically taking out the giants and ogres in hit-and-fade runs.
The first entry to the steading involved a lengthy reconnaissance of a couple days using spells and abilities to locate the major players in the steading and how best to attack. It seemed that the giant security was lax so the party took advantage of this and entered the place during early morning when most of the place was asleep. They entered the main door and began taking out sleeping giants. They found the sub-chief awake in his chamber and, using silence spells to mute the combat, took him out easily, polymorphing his concubine in the bed into a mule. They then explored the eastern half of the place, eliminating 10 sleeping giants in a barracks room with a well-thought out plan (none of the giants awakened, even though I rolled the 1 in 20 chance) and then maneuvered through the other rooms by guile and stealth. When they came to the chief's room they encountered his pet bear on guard at the door and this alerted the chief to danger. The chief managed to escape out the secret door and summon the wolves to attack the intruders. This large battle was amazing, ending in the death of one of the hired crossbowmen and all of the combatants except the chief's wife who retreated to the safety of her room. The chief himself went to rally the troops but there were few left to pose a threat.
After taking out the wolves the party went north to find the chief. They instead came to the outbuilding where the other sleeping giants were just starting to rise for late breakfast. The party stumbled into the place but managed to catch at least one barracks room unawares with a fireball before launching into a melee. Some spell mistakes were made (like casting hold monster on the giant in the doorway - preventing most attacks from both sides) but the party worked well together, displaying their new high-level abilities and spells.
Once both rooms were taken care of they decided to leave and replenish their strength. Stefan (one of the henchmen) actually leveled from the haul so he and the wounded returned to Threshold. On the trip back a freak random encounter had them meet a ki-rin who healed the wounded men to full health. Only Stefan is missing the current activity while training.
Some time was spent waiting for Falim and the other hirelings to return and more reconnaissance missions were performed. During one of these the party learned that the cloud giant emissary left in disgust over the inability of Nosnra to capture the intruders.
The second foray into the steading ended in the slaying of numerous ogre guards posted at the gates during another early morning run. They then went directly to the chief's chamber where he was found sleeping with a concubine. The party would have taken him out easily but the giantess woke and alerted the chief to danger as some wandering ogres on patrol came across the rest of the party in the hall outside. The chief was still slain by the druid and ranger, and the combat outside was silenced by the cleric. This giantess was also polymorphed into a mule to keep her from alerting the others.
The party took all the jewlery on the ogres and the chief's jewelry from his room. They also found some gems on the ogres and some potions in their room. They managed to kill off the remaining giant in the northern chamber and frightened the giantesses, keeping them from leaving the room. So far, they have not killed a single giantess - some form of chivalry keeping them from doing so! Or it could be that most of the females refuse to fight (so far). I had most of the rest of the giants retreat to the safety of the lower level, so they will be unpleasantly surprised to find them below!
They found the stairs down but refuse to leave unknown quantities in the upper level. So they spent some time investigating the other rooms to make sure that they were empty. They seem confused about the fact that the giants might be working with tactics (given to them by their masters), but that's how the module is supposed to be so it seems that it's working thus far. I'm not sure how I want this one to play out. I'm guessing I'll leave this up to the players how deep they wish to progress. I'm willing to run the whole series of G and D modules, but I would highly modify Q1 since I disagree with the tone of the module and the entire premise for the adventure is shaky at best. I much prefer to leave gods and goddesses alone in the outer planes and make the players deal with demons instead.
My take on Q1 would be to have the party end up captured by the drow priestesses and forced to eliminate the threat of the Elder Elemental Cult from the vault with help from the least of the drow houses. Success means that the party 'may' gain their freedom and one of the drow houses would be eliminated - thus creating more chaos as they war with each other to gain favor and higher position. In this way the Elder Elemental God becomes the enemy, not Lolth, and any extraplanar adventures happen in his realm, not the Abyss. Demons, evil elementals, and other nasty villains and high-level drow would still be encountered, just not Lolth.
The first entry to the steading involved a lengthy reconnaissance of a couple days using spells and abilities to locate the major players in the steading and how best to attack. It seemed that the giant security was lax so the party took advantage of this and entered the place during early morning when most of the place was asleep. They entered the main door and began taking out sleeping giants. They found the sub-chief awake in his chamber and, using silence spells to mute the combat, took him out easily, polymorphing his concubine in the bed into a mule. They then explored the eastern half of the place, eliminating 10 sleeping giants in a barracks room with a well-thought out plan (none of the giants awakened, even though I rolled the 1 in 20 chance) and then maneuvered through the other rooms by guile and stealth. When they came to the chief's room they encountered his pet bear on guard at the door and this alerted the chief to danger. The chief managed to escape out the secret door and summon the wolves to attack the intruders. This large battle was amazing, ending in the death of one of the hired crossbowmen and all of the combatants except the chief's wife who retreated to the safety of her room. The chief himself went to rally the troops but there were few left to pose a threat.
After taking out the wolves the party went north to find the chief. They instead came to the outbuilding where the other sleeping giants were just starting to rise for late breakfast. The party stumbled into the place but managed to catch at least one barracks room unawares with a fireball before launching into a melee. Some spell mistakes were made (like casting hold monster on the giant in the doorway - preventing most attacks from both sides) but the party worked well together, displaying their new high-level abilities and spells.
Once both rooms were taken care of they decided to leave and replenish their strength. Stefan (one of the henchmen) actually leveled from the haul so he and the wounded returned to Threshold. On the trip back a freak random encounter had them meet a ki-rin who healed the wounded men to full health. Only Stefan is missing the current activity while training.
Some time was spent waiting for Falim and the other hirelings to return and more reconnaissance missions were performed. During one of these the party learned that the cloud giant emissary left in disgust over the inability of Nosnra to capture the intruders.
The second foray into the steading ended in the slaying of numerous ogre guards posted at the gates during another early morning run. They then went directly to the chief's chamber where he was found sleeping with a concubine. The party would have taken him out easily but the giantess woke and alerted the chief to danger as some wandering ogres on patrol came across the rest of the party in the hall outside. The chief was still slain by the druid and ranger, and the combat outside was silenced by the cleric. This giantess was also polymorphed into a mule to keep her from alerting the others.
The party took all the jewlery on the ogres and the chief's jewelry from his room. They also found some gems on the ogres and some potions in their room. They managed to kill off the remaining giant in the northern chamber and frightened the giantesses, keeping them from leaving the room. So far, they have not killed a single giantess - some form of chivalry keeping them from doing so! Or it could be that most of the females refuse to fight (so far). I had most of the rest of the giants retreat to the safety of the lower level, so they will be unpleasantly surprised to find them below!
They found the stairs down but refuse to leave unknown quantities in the upper level. So they spent some time investigating the other rooms to make sure that they were empty. They seem confused about the fact that the giants might be working with tactics (given to them by their masters), but that's how the module is supposed to be so it seems that it's working thus far. I'm not sure how I want this one to play out. I'm guessing I'll leave this up to the players how deep they wish to progress. I'm willing to run the whole series of G and D modules, but I would highly modify Q1 since I disagree with the tone of the module and the entire premise for the adventure is shaky at best. I much prefer to leave gods and goddesses alone in the outer planes and make the players deal with demons instead.
My take on Q1 would be to have the party end up captured by the drow priestesses and forced to eliminate the threat of the Elder Elemental Cult from the vault with help from the least of the drow houses. Success means that the party 'may' gain their freedom and one of the drow houses would be eliminated - thus creating more chaos as they war with each other to gain favor and higher position. In this way the Elder Elemental God becomes the enemy, not Lolth, and any extraplanar adventures happen in his realm, not the Abyss. Demons, evil elementals, and other nasty villains and high-level drow would still be encountered, just not Lolth.
Monday, March 25, 2013
Against the Giants: Mystara Style!
After 13 years of waiting, I'm finally getting to play G1: Steading of the Hill Giant Chief in 1st edition AD&D with a group of people who have NEVER experienced this Gygaxian classic adventure! It took forever to get them to agree to do this, but once I explained the XP and treasure that accompanies high level adventuring, they decided to go for it. They planned for 2 whole weekends before setting out from Specularum north to the Black Peaks and the town of Threshold. I set the steading in the mountains south of the road between Threshold and Verge in the Known World setting of the Basic/Expert set.
The party is comprised of:
Eraergon "Eric" Patheney, 10th level half-elf druid
Chow-Lin, 10th level Ethengarian human magic-user
Falim ibn Abdul Akbar, 7th level Ylari human ranger
Myriam the Scholar, 8th level Ylari human cleric of the Eternal Truth
Katerina Katrina, 6th level Traladaran human Thief (henchman)
Hamlin Hoefurrow, 6th level halfling fighter (henchman)
Gustav Strata, 5th level dwarven fighter (henchman)
Stefan Defoe, 5th level Darokinian human fighter (henchman)
female lantern bearer hireling
10 light crossbowmen hirelings
1 crossbowman sergeant hireling
2 pack mules
Yep, that's a classic party of 20(!) individuals and 2 mules. I have NEVER had such a large group enter a module before, and this should be exciting.
I got them to the secret cave without much fuss. They spent two whole sessions setting up their cave, reconnoitering the steading using polymorph/shapechange, invisibility, and scrying, tracking ogres leaving the steading and counting up possible numbers of giants inside. I talked them out of waiting around outside to take out the giants, since that would have ended in disaster. They eventually agreed to enter the place in the pre-dawn hours and hopefully catch the giants unaware and asleep.
The 1st actual session of them entering the place occurred 2 weeks ago, near the end of the night. They entered the cloak room and took out the sleeping giants both downstairs and in the guard tower. They ended that session thinking this would be a cakewalk.
Last week's session saw them taking out the sub-chief in his own bedroom (somewhat short battle) and using tactics for like the first time ever. The giantess in the bed they polymorphed into a mule and left her in the bed. They moved on north down the corridor and found the giant's nursery, but they backed out and left the kids asleep. The next barracks room they entered contained 10 sleeping giants. They cast silence on them and then systematically killed them in their sleep (none woke up). They were making good progress, all the way to the trophy room on the east side, when they opened the chief's chamber door and pissed off his guardian cave bear! That woke up chief Nosnra who grabbed his weapon and headed for the secret door. While the others were dealing with the bear, the chief called out for help and ran to the wolf pen doors to get the dire wolves on the intruders. The party druid charmed the cave bear but the racket has roused the chief's wife who burst through the southern door with her pet cave bear.
We ended the session with the party in the trophy room + the charmed cave bear (which the druid spoke to). The chief was heading to the outbuilding to rouse the barracks and send them into the battle while the wolves were sent in to deal with the intruders. Several other giants may have heard the alarm. The chief's wife is pissed at being woken so early and she'll likely take it out on the party somehow. I intend on keeping the chief alive and safe through this whole ordeal, perhaps sending him down to the second level. I've learned my lesson with this group, not to give them an inch. They like "no save" spells and can eliminate most threats through ranged attacks. The magic-user is likely to use up her last charge on the Staff of Power she obtained last adventure so I won't need to worry about that item anymore. :)
This could be a TPK, or at least teach them not to try and circumvent the way the module is written. If they had simply entered the place when the feast was occurring they would have had a much easier time of killing the giants, in my humble opinion. They have wands of cold, fire, conjuration, paralysis, a staff of power, a djinni bottle, several 5th level spells among the spellcasters, and a host of healing abilities. I really think that entering the place with a dwarf and halfling fighter was also key since they have better AC against giants.
Can't wait to play this combat out!
The party is comprised of:
Eraergon "Eric" Patheney, 10th level half-elf druid
Chow-Lin, 10th level Ethengarian human magic-user
Falim ibn Abdul Akbar, 7th level Ylari human ranger
Myriam the Scholar, 8th level Ylari human cleric of the Eternal Truth
Katerina Katrina, 6th level Traladaran human Thief (henchman)
Hamlin Hoefurrow, 6th level halfling fighter (henchman)
Gustav Strata, 5th level dwarven fighter (henchman)
Stefan Defoe, 5th level Darokinian human fighter (henchman)
female lantern bearer hireling
10 light crossbowmen hirelings
1 crossbowman sergeant hireling
2 pack mules
Yep, that's a classic party of 20(!) individuals and 2 mules. I have NEVER had such a large group enter a module before, and this should be exciting.
I got them to the secret cave without much fuss. They spent two whole sessions setting up their cave, reconnoitering the steading using polymorph/shapechange, invisibility, and scrying, tracking ogres leaving the steading and counting up possible numbers of giants inside. I talked them out of waiting around outside to take out the giants, since that would have ended in disaster. They eventually agreed to enter the place in the pre-dawn hours and hopefully catch the giants unaware and asleep.
The 1st actual session of them entering the place occurred 2 weeks ago, near the end of the night. They entered the cloak room and took out the sleeping giants both downstairs and in the guard tower. They ended that session thinking this would be a cakewalk.
Last week's session saw them taking out the sub-chief in his own bedroom (somewhat short battle) and using tactics for like the first time ever. The giantess in the bed they polymorphed into a mule and left her in the bed. They moved on north down the corridor and found the giant's nursery, but they backed out and left the kids asleep. The next barracks room they entered contained 10 sleeping giants. They cast silence on them and then systematically killed them in their sleep (none woke up). They were making good progress, all the way to the trophy room on the east side, when they opened the chief's chamber door and pissed off his guardian cave bear! That woke up chief Nosnra who grabbed his weapon and headed for the secret door. While the others were dealing with the bear, the chief called out for help and ran to the wolf pen doors to get the dire wolves on the intruders. The party druid charmed the cave bear but the racket has roused the chief's wife who burst through the southern door with her pet cave bear.
We ended the session with the party in the trophy room + the charmed cave bear (which the druid spoke to). The chief was heading to the outbuilding to rouse the barracks and send them into the battle while the wolves were sent in to deal with the intruders. Several other giants may have heard the alarm. The chief's wife is pissed at being woken so early and she'll likely take it out on the party somehow. I intend on keeping the chief alive and safe through this whole ordeal, perhaps sending him down to the second level. I've learned my lesson with this group, not to give them an inch. They like "no save" spells and can eliminate most threats through ranged attacks. The magic-user is likely to use up her last charge on the Staff of Power she obtained last adventure so I won't need to worry about that item anymore. :)
This could be a TPK, or at least teach them not to try and circumvent the way the module is written. If they had simply entered the place when the feast was occurring they would have had a much easier time of killing the giants, in my humble opinion. They have wands of cold, fire, conjuration, paralysis, a staff of power, a djinni bottle, several 5th level spells among the spellcasters, and a host of healing abilities. I really think that entering the place with a dwarf and halfling fighter was also key since they have better AC against giants.
Can't wait to play this combat out!
Wednesday, March 13, 2013
Premise Behind Most D&D Modules
I've been gearing up for running G1: Steading of the Hill Giant Chief for about 13 years. My players are finally as close as I can get them. They established their base in the cave outside the Steading and are now using surveillance on the place to see what's going on and how they can approach this problem.
Here's the problem: They don't want to go in! They want to draw the giants out in the hope of taking them on in small groups and eliminating the steading by setting it aflame. Although this tactic is not unheard of, I could not stress enough how utterly wasteful such a tactic is. They think that eliminating the giants is more important than finding out who is the intelligence behind the attacks. How completely demoralizing for me. I was so psyched to play a good old fashioned dungeon crawl and they want to play siege warfare.
I suppose I may have led them on this path by allowing them all the gear and mercenary help they would require for free from the Duke. However, I envisioned them hiring henchmen, not soldiers. I kept asking them if they wanted to hire henchmen. They refused, instead taking up a 10 crossbowmen and 10 light hobilars with 2 sergeants. They thought they were approaching caves full of giants - they had no idea they would be finding a wooden fortress in the mountains. I allow the characters to make their own assumptions and plan their own attacks, only giving them warnings about how the system works in relation to their plans. If they attack the steading in the manner they are planning the party will be wiped from existence!
First off it is specifically stated that the steading will not burn. The timbers are so soaked with moisture that they will take enormous heat for extended periods to catch aflame. The druid's solution: wall of fire. We already house ruled the call lightning spell to be used once/round for 1 round/level with concentration maintained throughout the duration (still needs to be cast outdoors). I believe the druid is looking to cook the giants with lightning bolts as they emerge. With three gates, they can be surrounded and the dire wolves set upon them before they can get very many spells off. Even if the mage manages to get slow off in time, their deaths will simply be delayed, not prevented. If the entire steading is roused, the allies of the giants will likely participate in the attack - stone giants and a nasty cloud giant. These opponents are the deadliest. They are the most likely to make saving throws, the most likely to cause mortal damage, and the most likely to hit with boulders at range. The chief alone could eliminate all the henchmen with his ballista-crossbow. In the end it will end up being a rout at best and a total party wipe at worst. Either way my campaign will likely come to an end. I see no good that can come of this.
To step in and explain the situation to the party goes against my principles as a DM. Almost ALL modules written for D&D were DUNGEONS. They were meant to be areas to enter and loot, not eliminate at the front door and sift through ashes for surviving items. I'll give them kudos for coming up with a plan to take as few casualties as possible, but that's not the way the game is meant to be played. Wilderness is little more than a means of getting from a safe place TO the dungeon, encounters and all. Very few adventures are strictly wilderness based, and even then lairs are akin to dungeons so the concepts remain true. They'll have to accept this fact and run the scenario as it was meant to be run. I WILL have my fun, damn it!
Here's the problem: They don't want to go in! They want to draw the giants out in the hope of taking them on in small groups and eliminating the steading by setting it aflame. Although this tactic is not unheard of, I could not stress enough how utterly wasteful such a tactic is. They think that eliminating the giants is more important than finding out who is the intelligence behind the attacks. How completely demoralizing for me. I was so psyched to play a good old fashioned dungeon crawl and they want to play siege warfare.
I suppose I may have led them on this path by allowing them all the gear and mercenary help they would require for free from the Duke. However, I envisioned them hiring henchmen, not soldiers. I kept asking them if they wanted to hire henchmen. They refused, instead taking up a 10 crossbowmen and 10 light hobilars with 2 sergeants. They thought they were approaching caves full of giants - they had no idea they would be finding a wooden fortress in the mountains. I allow the characters to make their own assumptions and plan their own attacks, only giving them warnings about how the system works in relation to their plans. If they attack the steading in the manner they are planning the party will be wiped from existence!
First off it is specifically stated that the steading will not burn. The timbers are so soaked with moisture that they will take enormous heat for extended periods to catch aflame. The druid's solution: wall of fire. We already house ruled the call lightning spell to be used once/round for 1 round/level with concentration maintained throughout the duration (still needs to be cast outdoors). I believe the druid is looking to cook the giants with lightning bolts as they emerge. With three gates, they can be surrounded and the dire wolves set upon them before they can get very many spells off. Even if the mage manages to get slow off in time, their deaths will simply be delayed, not prevented. If the entire steading is roused, the allies of the giants will likely participate in the attack - stone giants and a nasty cloud giant. These opponents are the deadliest. They are the most likely to make saving throws, the most likely to cause mortal damage, and the most likely to hit with boulders at range. The chief alone could eliminate all the henchmen with his ballista-crossbow. In the end it will end up being a rout at best and a total party wipe at worst. Either way my campaign will likely come to an end. I see no good that can come of this.
To step in and explain the situation to the party goes against my principles as a DM. Almost ALL modules written for D&D were DUNGEONS. They were meant to be areas to enter and loot, not eliminate at the front door and sift through ashes for surviving items. I'll give them kudos for coming up with a plan to take as few casualties as possible, but that's not the way the game is meant to be played. Wilderness is little more than a means of getting from a safe place TO the dungeon, encounters and all. Very few adventures are strictly wilderness based, and even then lairs are akin to dungeons so the concepts remain true. They'll have to accept this fact and run the scenario as it was meant to be run. I WILL have my fun, damn it!
Friday, March 8, 2013
1st Edition AD&D Initiative: Clarification
Another confusing issue in AD&D is the initiative roll, especially when some members of the party are not involved in melee with the monsters. The examples in the books are either flat out wrong according to the rules provided or so situation specific as to be practically useless.
At the core, initiative is pretty straightforward. A d6 is rolled for both sides of the combat (players and monsters), sometimes by the DM and sometimes by the players and the DM (depending on preference). I prefer to allow the party to roll their own initiative, but I keep track of it in the margins of my combat notes. If the combat is simply straight melee, then I don't worry about anything other than high roll goes first. It's the other actions that bog the game down.
When timing is important, actions during the melee round need to be broken down into segments. If a creature is only moving, then each segment they move 1/10 of their movement rate (so a 12" movement rate moves 12 feet each segment). A segment is 6 seconds long and there are 10 segments in a combat round (1 minute). The d6 works best since it can tell you when in that segment or round that you go.
Spells must be announced BEFORE the initiative is rolled. This is because casting begins on segment 0 of the round and proceeds for as many segments as the casting time. If a spell requires one segment to cast, it requires the entire segment to cast. This is important. Spells works outside the normal initiative roll; however, if two spellcasters are casting spells at the same time with the same casting time, the one with the winning initiative roll casts first (possibly disrupting the other's spell at the last possible second). Any successful attack or damage to a casting character or monster BEFORE the spell is complete disrupts the spell.
Many magic items have activation times. Potions need 1 segment to drink and 2-5 segments to take effect. Spell scrolls are cast as spells using the casting time (protection scrolls have a reading time listed). Some rings, wands, staves, and rods have multiple activation times depending on the power used. Some miscellaneous magic items have activation times as well. These are all treated as beginning on segment 0 and occurring at the end of the segment indicated.
Now, how do you determine when a person goes in the round? Easy, look at your opponent's die roll. If the party won initiative, they go on the segment of the monster's initiative roll. The monster's losing initiative goes on the party's higher initiative roll. Say the party won initiative with a 4 and the monster's got a 2, the party would generally attack on segment 2 and the monsters on segment 4. So in essence, the party is rolling to see when the monster's go and the DM rolls to see when the party goes!
Tied initiatives resort to using weapon speed factors for attacks. The die roll itself is still used for undefined abilities like turning undead and missile fire. We use the 2nd edition version of multiple attacks since it makes more sense: the first attack comes in initiative order, and subsequent attacks occur at the end of the round in initiative order. (The actual method of multiple attack routines per the DMG indiactes that when you have 2 attacks in the round, the attacker goes FIRST and LAST.) Hasted creatures always attack first, and slowed creatures (including zombies) always attack last. Tied attacks that fall on the same segment are simultaneous. Spells cast with the same casting time on a tied initiative both occur simultaneously.
Let's look at a few combat examples using characters from my home campaign....
PARTY
Chow-Lin, 10th level human magic-user with several spells remaining
Eraergon ("Eric"), 10th level half-elven druid with scimitar +1 and several spells remaining
Falim, 7th level human ranger with dancing falchion and jambiya
Myriam, 8th level human cleric with mace +1 and several spells remaining
Hamlin, 6th level halfling fighter henchman with short sword of speed +1 and bullet sling
MONSTERS
2 ogres wielding huge battle axes
1 hill giant wielding club
2 dire wolves
On round one, Chow-Lin declares to cast magic missile (casting time 1 segment) at the giant. Eric casts heat metal (casting time 4 segments?) on one of the ogres. Falim declares a charge at the other ogre, Hamlin is slinging at a dire wolf, and Myriam is casting spiritual hammer (casting time 5 segments?) at the other wolf. The ogres are charging to attack, as are the dire wolves, and the giant is picking up boulders for throwing. Initiative is rolled and the results are Party 3, Monsters 4. Since Falim and the Ogres are charging, these attacks occur at the end of movement. Falim moves at 12' per segment and the ogres are moving at 9' per segment. If the encounter occurred only 40' away then they will clash at segment 2 since charging ignores initiative and the longer weapon strikes first (in this case the ogres). One of the ogres intercepts Falim. The dire wolf attacking Hamlin also arrives on segment 2 due to 18' movement per segment. The other dire wolf is charging Eric. The other ogre charges on to Myriam. Since the ogres and wolves were charging they get to attack at the end of their move. Here is the breakdown, segment by segment.
ROUND ONE
1: Chow-Lin's magic missile spell hits the giant for 15 points of damage.
2: The ogres attack Falim (hitting for 10 points) and Myriam (missing). The dire wolves attack Hamlin (hitting for 6 points) and Eric (hitting for 4 points). As a result, Hamlin must now switch weapons and Eric loses his heat metal spell. Since Falim charged also he gets to go at the end of this segment (after the ogre) and swings for a hit causing 12 points of damage.
3: The giant hurls one boulder at Chow-Lin, hitting for 9 points of damage.
4: Hamlin switches weapons from sling to short sword. Eric can do nothing since he lost his spell.
5: Myriam spell comes off (since she was not interrupted) and her spiritual hammer now is cast upon the ogre attacking her. She misses this round.
6-10: Nothing else happens.
This round we have melee with Falim vs. Ogre 1, Myriam vs. Ogre 2, Hamlin vs. Wolf 1, Eric vs. Wolf 2, and missile/spell combat between the giant and Chow-Lin. Chow-Lin declares a slow spell (3 segment casting time) on the ogres and wolves (but the giant is just out of range) and Eric and Myriam are drawing weapons so they will automatically lose initiative. Hamlin has a hasted 1st attack and a normal sword attack, so he will go first. Initiative is rolled - Party gets a 5, Monsters get a 2.
ROUND TWO
FIRST: Hamlin attacks his wolf for 7 points of damage.
1:
2: Myriam's spiritual hammer attacks her ogre and hits for 4 damage. Falim strikes at his ogre hitting for 15 points of damage, killing it. Hamlin's normal strike hits for 5 points of damage.
3: Chow-Lin casts slow on the wolves and ogres, making them attack every other round and last from now on.
4:
5: The giant tosses a boulder at Chow-Lin who is separated from the melee but fails to hit. The boulder rolls harmlessly away behind the melee.
6:
7:
8:
9:
10:
LAST: Eric strikes with his scimitar at an ogre and hits for 4 points of damage. Myriam draws out her weapon but misses. The slowed ogre and wolves attack now: all miss their targets.
The 3rd round Falim has no target and must cross to the giant. He cannot charge again this turn. Hamlin is attacking Wolf 1, Eric is attacking the Wolf 2, Myriam is attacking Ogre 2, and Chow-Lin has decided to cast magic missile at the giant again. Combat continues at this point with the ogre and wolves attacking last and everyone else going on initiative.
As it states in the DMG, most attacks will come on segments 1-6. High level spells will usually go last, and low level spells will come early in the round. Spellcasting in combat is very tricky and it's good to have a backup plan when creatures come at you fast. The above example is rather complex but can be seen to work within the guidelines of the rules.
So initiative is not so scary after all and can be resolved fairly easily if the participants simply take their time. The rules as written make things overly complicated and should be reduced to this version in order to make the game run more smoothly. It may be ADVANCED D&D but that doesn't mean you should need a computer to figure out how to run combat!
At the core, initiative is pretty straightforward. A d6 is rolled for both sides of the combat (players and monsters), sometimes by the DM and sometimes by the players and the DM (depending on preference). I prefer to allow the party to roll their own initiative, but I keep track of it in the margins of my combat notes. If the combat is simply straight melee, then I don't worry about anything other than high roll goes first. It's the other actions that bog the game down.
When timing is important, actions during the melee round need to be broken down into segments. If a creature is only moving, then each segment they move 1/10 of their movement rate (so a 12" movement rate moves 12 feet each segment). A segment is 6 seconds long and there are 10 segments in a combat round (1 minute). The d6 works best since it can tell you when in that segment or round that you go.
Spells must be announced BEFORE the initiative is rolled. This is because casting begins on segment 0 of the round and proceeds for as many segments as the casting time. If a spell requires one segment to cast, it requires the entire segment to cast. This is important. Spells works outside the normal initiative roll; however, if two spellcasters are casting spells at the same time with the same casting time, the one with the winning initiative roll casts first (possibly disrupting the other's spell at the last possible second). Any successful attack or damage to a casting character or monster BEFORE the spell is complete disrupts the spell.
Many magic items have activation times. Potions need 1 segment to drink and 2-5 segments to take effect. Spell scrolls are cast as spells using the casting time (protection scrolls have a reading time listed). Some rings, wands, staves, and rods have multiple activation times depending on the power used. Some miscellaneous magic items have activation times as well. These are all treated as beginning on segment 0 and occurring at the end of the segment indicated.
Now, how do you determine when a person goes in the round? Easy, look at your opponent's die roll. If the party won initiative, they go on the segment of the monster's initiative roll. The monster's losing initiative goes on the party's higher initiative roll. Say the party won initiative with a 4 and the monster's got a 2, the party would generally attack on segment 2 and the monsters on segment 4. So in essence, the party is rolling to see when the monster's go and the DM rolls to see when the party goes!
Tied initiatives resort to using weapon speed factors for attacks. The die roll itself is still used for undefined abilities like turning undead and missile fire. We use the 2nd edition version of multiple attacks since it makes more sense: the first attack comes in initiative order, and subsequent attacks occur at the end of the round in initiative order. (The actual method of multiple attack routines per the DMG indiactes that when you have 2 attacks in the round, the attacker goes FIRST and LAST.) Hasted creatures always attack first, and slowed creatures (including zombies) always attack last. Tied attacks that fall on the same segment are simultaneous. Spells cast with the same casting time on a tied initiative both occur simultaneously.
Let's look at a few combat examples using characters from my home campaign....
PARTY
Chow-Lin, 10th level human magic-user with several spells remaining
Eraergon ("Eric"), 10th level half-elven druid with scimitar +1 and several spells remaining
Falim, 7th level human ranger with dancing falchion and jambiya
Myriam, 8th level human cleric with mace +1 and several spells remaining
Hamlin, 6th level halfling fighter henchman with short sword of speed +1 and bullet sling
MONSTERS
2 ogres wielding huge battle axes
1 hill giant wielding club
2 dire wolves
On round one, Chow-Lin declares to cast magic missile (casting time 1 segment) at the giant. Eric casts heat metal (casting time 4 segments?) on one of the ogres. Falim declares a charge at the other ogre, Hamlin is slinging at a dire wolf, and Myriam is casting spiritual hammer (casting time 5 segments?) at the other wolf. The ogres are charging to attack, as are the dire wolves, and the giant is picking up boulders for throwing. Initiative is rolled and the results are Party 3, Monsters 4. Since Falim and the Ogres are charging, these attacks occur at the end of movement. Falim moves at 12' per segment and the ogres are moving at 9' per segment. If the encounter occurred only 40' away then they will clash at segment 2 since charging ignores initiative and the longer weapon strikes first (in this case the ogres). One of the ogres intercepts Falim. The dire wolf attacking Hamlin also arrives on segment 2 due to 18' movement per segment. The other dire wolf is charging Eric. The other ogre charges on to Myriam. Since the ogres and wolves were charging they get to attack at the end of their move. Here is the breakdown, segment by segment.
ROUND ONE
1: Chow-Lin's magic missile spell hits the giant for 15 points of damage.
2: The ogres attack Falim (hitting for 10 points) and Myriam (missing). The dire wolves attack Hamlin (hitting for 6 points) and Eric (hitting for 4 points). As a result, Hamlin must now switch weapons and Eric loses his heat metal spell. Since Falim charged also he gets to go at the end of this segment (after the ogre) and swings for a hit causing 12 points of damage.
3: The giant hurls one boulder at Chow-Lin, hitting for 9 points of damage.
4: Hamlin switches weapons from sling to short sword. Eric can do nothing since he lost his spell.
5: Myriam spell comes off (since she was not interrupted) and her spiritual hammer now is cast upon the ogre attacking her. She misses this round.
6-10: Nothing else happens.
This round we have melee with Falim vs. Ogre 1, Myriam vs. Ogre 2, Hamlin vs. Wolf 1, Eric vs. Wolf 2, and missile/spell combat between the giant and Chow-Lin. Chow-Lin declares a slow spell (3 segment casting time) on the ogres and wolves (but the giant is just out of range) and Eric and Myriam are drawing weapons so they will automatically lose initiative. Hamlin has a hasted 1st attack and a normal sword attack, so he will go first. Initiative is rolled - Party gets a 5, Monsters get a 2.
ROUND TWO
FIRST: Hamlin attacks his wolf for 7 points of damage.
1:
2: Myriam's spiritual hammer attacks her ogre and hits for 4 damage. Falim strikes at his ogre hitting for 15 points of damage, killing it. Hamlin's normal strike hits for 5 points of damage.
3: Chow-Lin casts slow on the wolves and ogres, making them attack every other round and last from now on.
4:
5: The giant tosses a boulder at Chow-Lin who is separated from the melee but fails to hit. The boulder rolls harmlessly away behind the melee.
6:
7:
8:
9:
10:
LAST: Eric strikes with his scimitar at an ogre and hits for 4 points of damage. Myriam draws out her weapon but misses. The slowed ogre and wolves attack now: all miss their targets.
The 3rd round Falim has no target and must cross to the giant. He cannot charge again this turn. Hamlin is attacking Wolf 1, Eric is attacking the Wolf 2, Myriam is attacking Ogre 2, and Chow-Lin has decided to cast magic missile at the giant again. Combat continues at this point with the ogre and wolves attacking last and everyone else going on initiative.
As it states in the DMG, most attacks will come on segments 1-6. High level spells will usually go last, and low level spells will come early in the round. Spellcasting in combat is very tricky and it's good to have a backup plan when creatures come at you fast. The above example is rather complex but can be seen to work within the guidelines of the rules.
So initiative is not so scary after all and can be resolved fairly easily if the participants simply take their time. The rules as written make things overly complicated and should be reduced to this version in order to make the game run more smoothly. It may be ADVANCED D&D but that doesn't mean you should need a computer to figure out how to run combat!
Thursday, March 7, 2013
1st Edition AD&D Surprise: Not So Difficult
While learning AD&D at the tender age of 13, we made a lot of bad assumptions about the game and how the dice worked. Probability was new at the time and the elegance that Gygax used in creating a fast-paced and exciting game sometimes went over our heads. Surprise was one of those things. In retrospect, the concepts are not that hard to understand, just not explained as elegantly as the mechanic itself.
The Dungeon Master's Guide I feel makes a number of assumptions: 1) you've played wargames in the past; 2) specifically you've played original D&D with the Chainmail rules; 3) you've used the alternate rules in the Greyhawk Supplement before; and 4) you understand the convention of dice and probability as relates to most situations. Having never played miniature battles in my life, the conventions explained in the AD&D DMG were mysterious at times and assumptions made matter-of-factly made little or no sense to me. To make matters worse, the editing errors added another bit of confusion into the mix (the surprise segment table in the PHB or DMG is in error on one of the lines). My first gaming experience using surprise was non-standard at best (vs. drow in the underdark) so it's no wonder we got it all wrong.
The most important decision about surprise is if it exists. Obviously the chance for surprise is going to almost universally apply to the player characters since they are the invaders into the realm of the unknown. Creatures in the dungeon will almost never require light sources, are aware of the noises usual to their environment, and some can even sense intruders mentally or through special abilities. Magical wards being tripped , traps being set off, doors being broken down, etc. all lead to 0% chance for surprise for the monsters. On the off chance that the characters are able to mask their presence somehow (invisibility, all using infravision to see, demi-humans or thieves sneaking about, etc.), then the monsters MAY be surprised. Planned ambushes are another problem, however. A wandering monster is typically the only instance of surprise most commonly occurring in a play session. So step 1 is determining who is aware and who can be surprised. As stated, surprise is usually unilateral and almost always against the players.
Step 2 is rolling to see if surprise occurs. In essence, the elegance of the roll is that 1d6 is used for both the chance to be surprised AND the number of segments of surprise. It's my belief that this is only stated for STANDARD 2 in 6 surprise; non-standard surprise where the surprise is given as a percentage or on a different die type needs to be handled by the DM. It is my belief that there should never be more than 2 segments of surprise [EDITED], as supported by the existence of "complete surprise" (see later article on surprise segments). In any case, only roll for the party that can be surprised, modifying the roll based on whether the monsters or players have a better or worse chance of surprising. For example, a ranger is only surprise 1 in 6. A bugbear can surprise 3 in 6. Assuming that only the ranger can be surprised, the bugbear has 1 in 6 chance better than normal so the ranger is surprised 2 in 6.
Step 3 is determining how long surprise lasts. If normal 2 in 6 chance for surprise exists, simply use the die roll to determine the number of segments. If a 1 is rolled, the surprise lasts 1 segment. If a 2 is rolled the surprise lasts for 2 segments. During a surprise segment, a character or monster is allowed its normal number of attacks, missile fire at 3x rate (not used by this DM), and can cast fast spells requiring 1 or 2 segments as required. Activation of magic items requiring 1 or 2 segments may also be used. The side that is surprised cannot perform any actions so long as they are surprised. Dexterity reaction adjustments reduce or increase surprise for the individual only. If a person has a +1 reaction adj. and his party is surprised for 1 segment, then he is not surprised and rolls for initiative as usual. A person with a -1 reaction adj. would be surprised for 2 segments; note that a penalty can never create surprise, it only modifies existing surprise.
Now, the controversy has to do with the terms surprise and complete surprise. These terms were used in the DMG with no explanation given. It has always meant to me that surprise is 1 segment and complete surprise was 2 segments. But nothing in the books supported this definition....until I re-read module G3. In the adventure there are some wererats on the 2nd level that are stated as always attacking with surprise (6 in 6), then gives a range of segments based on a die roll (1-3 = surprise, 4-6 = complete surprise). Now, according to the examples given, normally that would indicate 6 segments of surprise since 100% surprise is the same as reading 6 on a d6. However, there are a lot of creatures in the G-D-Q series with better than normal chances of surprise and a reduced chance of being surprised. How many segments should they get? The answer is to use the convention written into G3. Assuming the roll of an additional d6 with each surprise check, one die would represent the chance for surprise, and the second would indicate the number of segments of surprise (1 or 2). This could apply to ALL surprise checks, including monks percentile chance and odd monsters with increased or decreased chances of surprise. It all makes sense.
For another example, refer to the module T1, a very low level module that is meant as an introduction to AD&D. Most of the monsters in the moathouse have an increased chance of surprise and almost no chance of being surprised. In particular, the spider in the tower has a 5 in 6 chance of surprise. Should that mean that the spider gets 5 attacks on a hapless victim if the party rolls a 5? I think not. No more than 1 or 2 segments of surprise should exist, modified by Dexterity for the individual. After all, a spider attacking a 1st level character would have a good chance of killing them in the 1st encounter - not a good way to introduce AD&D to a neophyte!
So, the concepts are not that difficult to understand once you know where it all comes from. Better examples and clarified steps would have helped immensely. I'm so glad that I now have a handle on this concept and feel confident to house rule it when necessary.
The Dungeon Master's Guide I feel makes a number of assumptions: 1) you've played wargames in the past; 2) specifically you've played original D&D with the Chainmail rules; 3) you've used the alternate rules in the Greyhawk Supplement before; and 4) you understand the convention of dice and probability as relates to most situations. Having never played miniature battles in my life, the conventions explained in the AD&D DMG were mysterious at times and assumptions made matter-of-factly made little or no sense to me. To make matters worse, the editing errors added another bit of confusion into the mix (the surprise segment table in the PHB or DMG is in error on one of the lines). My first gaming experience using surprise was non-standard at best (vs. drow in the underdark) so it's no wonder we got it all wrong.
The most important decision about surprise is if it exists. Obviously the chance for surprise is going to almost universally apply to the player characters since they are the invaders into the realm of the unknown. Creatures in the dungeon will almost never require light sources, are aware of the noises usual to their environment, and some can even sense intruders mentally or through special abilities. Magical wards being tripped , traps being set off, doors being broken down, etc. all lead to 0% chance for surprise for the monsters. On the off chance that the characters are able to mask their presence somehow (invisibility, all using infravision to see, demi-humans or thieves sneaking about, etc.), then the monsters MAY be surprised. Planned ambushes are another problem, however. A wandering monster is typically the only instance of surprise most commonly occurring in a play session. So step 1 is determining who is aware and who can be surprised. As stated, surprise is usually unilateral and almost always against the players.
Step 2 is rolling to see if surprise occurs. In essence, the elegance of the roll is that 1d6 is used for both the chance to be surprised AND the number of segments of surprise. It's my belief that this is only stated for STANDARD 2 in 6 surprise; non-standard surprise where the surprise is given as a percentage or on a different die type needs to be handled by the DM. It is my belief that there should never be more than 2 segments of surprise [EDITED], as supported by the existence of "complete surprise" (see later article on surprise segments). In any case, only roll for the party that can be surprised, modifying the roll based on whether the monsters or players have a better or worse chance of surprising. For example, a ranger is only surprise 1 in 6. A bugbear can surprise 3 in 6. Assuming that only the ranger can be surprised, the bugbear has 1 in 6 chance better than normal so the ranger is surprised 2 in 6.
Step 3 is determining how long surprise lasts. If normal 2 in 6 chance for surprise exists, simply use the die roll to determine the number of segments. If a 1 is rolled, the surprise lasts 1 segment. If a 2 is rolled the surprise lasts for 2 segments. During a surprise segment, a character or monster is allowed its normal number of attacks, missile fire at 3x rate (not used by this DM), and can cast fast spells requiring 1 or 2 segments as required. Activation of magic items requiring 1 or 2 segments may also be used. The side that is surprised cannot perform any actions so long as they are surprised. Dexterity reaction adjustments reduce or increase surprise for the individual only. If a person has a +1 reaction adj. and his party is surprised for 1 segment, then he is not surprised and rolls for initiative as usual. A person with a -1 reaction adj. would be surprised for 2 segments; note that a penalty can never create surprise, it only modifies existing surprise.
Now, the controversy has to do with the terms surprise and complete surprise. These terms were used in the DMG with no explanation given. It has always meant to me that surprise is 1 segment and complete surprise was 2 segments. But nothing in the books supported this definition....until I re-read module G3. In the adventure there are some wererats on the 2nd level that are stated as always attacking with surprise (6 in 6), then gives a range of segments based on a die roll (1-3 = surprise, 4-6 = complete surprise). Now, according to the examples given, normally that would indicate 6 segments of surprise since 100% surprise is the same as reading 6 on a d6. However, there are a lot of creatures in the G-D-Q series with better than normal chances of surprise and a reduced chance of being surprised. How many segments should they get? The answer is to use the convention written into G3. Assuming the roll of an additional d6 with each surprise check, one die would represent the chance for surprise, and the second would indicate the number of segments of surprise (1 or 2). This could apply to ALL surprise checks, including monks percentile chance and odd monsters with increased or decreased chances of surprise. It all makes sense.
For another example, refer to the module T1, a very low level module that is meant as an introduction to AD&D. Most of the monsters in the moathouse have an increased chance of surprise and almost no chance of being surprised. In particular, the spider in the tower has a 5 in 6 chance of surprise. Should that mean that the spider gets 5 attacks on a hapless victim if the party rolls a 5? I think not. No more than 1 or 2 segments of surprise should exist, modified by Dexterity for the individual. After all, a spider attacking a 1st level character would have a good chance of killing them in the 1st encounter - not a good way to introduce AD&D to a neophyte!
So, the concepts are not that difficult to understand once you know where it all comes from. Better examples and clarified steps would have helped immensely. I'm so glad that I now have a handle on this concept and feel confident to house rule it when necessary.
Wednesday, March 6, 2013
Players vs. DMs: Edition Pendulum
In over 30 years of played D&D in one form or another I have noticed that the game has slowly gone from being pro-Dungeon-Master to pro-Player in a steady swing from original D&D to D&D 4.0. However, with the failure of 4.0 to keep the populace entertained the designers have decided that D&D Next (or 5.0) will be more of a compromise in sharing the power. The pendulum begins it's slow and inexorable return towards power in the DM's hands.
The lack of formal rules to explain all actions and consequences of said actions in the original boxed set of D&D led many to create house rules to fill in the gaps. This eventually made D&D a personal experience that could not be shared easily at conventions or gatherings since the rules were being interpreted in various ways. Hence, everyone was playing a game that was called D&D but had no relation to any other game being played.
The Holmes Basic set was an attempt to consolidate and better explain the rules for beginners, but even this fell flat by introducing previously unseen rules that further complicated things. The Moldvay/Cook version was the best form of D&D ever published (in my opinion) but still had issues of its own (namely demi-human "classes" and oversimplified rules).
1st edition AD&D was an attempt by Gygax to firmly lay down the rules in a manner that would allow convention gaming to proceed regardless of location and DM style. In essence, it was to be the end-all be-all of the rules, the ultimate authority. In that regard it was very strict, gave DMs the power to restrict everything about their games, and was heavy-handed in how it meted out punishments for wrong actions or inattentiveness in the dungeon. In essence, it gave DMs the power in the game. All character classes were severely restricted, choices were kept to a minimum, and everything could be run right out of the book with little prep time. The onus was on the players to keep track of their character's abilities and items even if they had no idea what they did or how many charges they had, etc.
In 2nd edition (and the end of 1st edition) these original strictures were relaxed and more customization was added to give the players more control over their characters. The style of play went from being gamist (where the player is assuming a role but is still the mental force) to being novelist (where the player takes on the role completely, to the point of assuming what the character does and does not know as the rule). Dice rolling became the method of solving problems through the use of non-weapon proficiencies and spells became more user-friendly. Also many of the more divisive roles (evil characters, half-orcs, and assassins) were removed from the game along with some of the eastern flavor (namely monks, which I've always believed were more inspired by 1970's kung-fu movies anyway). Soon the options became so overwhelming that it was clear that none of the options were play-tested to see how they affected the game.
In the D&D 3.0 edition the entire game paradigm shifted. The game became more skill-oriented and all results were based on the dice roll. Whereas ability scores used to have little impact on the game, now they were the main focus (affecting everything from character abilities, to saves, to combat rolls, to skill checks). Suddenly, the "average" character meant very little as a choice for non-power gamers. The inherent power creep became even more obvious when magic items were REQUIRED to be possessed by a character in order to make them a match for the monsters. Numbers increased at an alarming rate to the point that modifiers were increasing to the point that by 10th level a character was a minor godling that could eliminate most threats. No longer did the DM have the option of running a quick game out of the book. Hours of preparation went into each encounter trying to balance and modify existing creatures. Groups were reduced in size from requiring 8-10 characters down to 4 characters, thus increasing character power even more.
In D&D 3.5 the rules were tweaked to try and bring balance back to the game. All spells and abilities were "standardized" and increased in power in a logical yet flawed manner. Spells no longer bent the rules but became part of the structure. In fact, the pigeon-holing of abilities and classes led them to add in even more customization to offset this. Of course, the bloat killed the game as it had with 2nd edition. What they didn't realize was that all you really needed to run the game were three core books. Everything else was fluff. You can't run a company on fluff. And so Wizards was bought out by Hasbro and the game took a turn for the worse.
D&D 4.0 was my exit point, the last straw so to speak. Up until that point I was a D&D zombie, buying up any and all product related to the game religiously whether I would use it or not. The game changed so drastically in form and function that the only recognizable feature was the name. I can't tell much about this version other than the fact that I saw very little of it on surviving book store shelves. The presence on the internet was also reduced, so far as I can tell. This version gave all the power into the hands of the players, even going so far as to reducing the threat posed by monster minions by only giving them 1 hp (thus one-shot kills), allowing spell casters an ungodly amount of spells and abilities to use each day, and granting healing abilities to all classes. Play balance was normalized and thrown out the window.
Loyal D&D 3.5 players jumped ship to Pathfinder (a D&D 3.5 clone) and I tried this as well. However, taking the essence of D&D away does little to remedy the situation. I wanted true Gygaxian D&D back. And so I returned to my roots in AD&D 1st edition. But even now I find myself tweaking and house-ruling the game. D&D 3.0 did much for explaining the really ambiguous rules and making sense out of some of the more broken spells in the original version and I find myself quoting these rules on occasion to my old players. Each edition has aspects I liked, rules that seemed to work, and insights that really showed how clever D&D was. Will it ever be perfect? probably not. But at least the power in 5.0 seems to be shifting back towards the DM (where it should be). However, anyone that tries to get rich off the game by NOT publishing adventures instead of splatbooks is just fooling themselves. DMs need adventures to entertain their players; players don't need more powers to befuddle and foil the DMs carefully laid plans.
The lack of formal rules to explain all actions and consequences of said actions in the original boxed set of D&D led many to create house rules to fill in the gaps. This eventually made D&D a personal experience that could not be shared easily at conventions or gatherings since the rules were being interpreted in various ways. Hence, everyone was playing a game that was called D&D but had no relation to any other game being played.
The Holmes Basic set was an attempt to consolidate and better explain the rules for beginners, but even this fell flat by introducing previously unseen rules that further complicated things. The Moldvay/Cook version was the best form of D&D ever published (in my opinion) but still had issues of its own (namely demi-human "classes" and oversimplified rules).
1st edition AD&D was an attempt by Gygax to firmly lay down the rules in a manner that would allow convention gaming to proceed regardless of location and DM style. In essence, it was to be the end-all be-all of the rules, the ultimate authority. In that regard it was very strict, gave DMs the power to restrict everything about their games, and was heavy-handed in how it meted out punishments for wrong actions or inattentiveness in the dungeon. In essence, it gave DMs the power in the game. All character classes were severely restricted, choices were kept to a minimum, and everything could be run right out of the book with little prep time. The onus was on the players to keep track of their character's abilities and items even if they had no idea what they did or how many charges they had, etc.
In 2nd edition (and the end of 1st edition) these original strictures were relaxed and more customization was added to give the players more control over their characters. The style of play went from being gamist (where the player is assuming a role but is still the mental force) to being novelist (where the player takes on the role completely, to the point of assuming what the character does and does not know as the rule). Dice rolling became the method of solving problems through the use of non-weapon proficiencies and spells became more user-friendly. Also many of the more divisive roles (evil characters, half-orcs, and assassins) were removed from the game along with some of the eastern flavor (namely monks, which I've always believed were more inspired by 1970's kung-fu movies anyway). Soon the options became so overwhelming that it was clear that none of the options were play-tested to see how they affected the game.
In the D&D 3.0 edition the entire game paradigm shifted. The game became more skill-oriented and all results were based on the dice roll. Whereas ability scores used to have little impact on the game, now they were the main focus (affecting everything from character abilities, to saves, to combat rolls, to skill checks). Suddenly, the "average" character meant very little as a choice for non-power gamers. The inherent power creep became even more obvious when magic items were REQUIRED to be possessed by a character in order to make them a match for the monsters. Numbers increased at an alarming rate to the point that modifiers were increasing to the point that by 10th level a character was a minor godling that could eliminate most threats. No longer did the DM have the option of running a quick game out of the book. Hours of preparation went into each encounter trying to balance and modify existing creatures. Groups were reduced in size from requiring 8-10 characters down to 4 characters, thus increasing character power even more.
In D&D 3.5 the rules were tweaked to try and bring balance back to the game. All spells and abilities were "standardized" and increased in power in a logical yet flawed manner. Spells no longer bent the rules but became part of the structure. In fact, the pigeon-holing of abilities and classes led them to add in even more customization to offset this. Of course, the bloat killed the game as it had with 2nd edition. What they didn't realize was that all you really needed to run the game were three core books. Everything else was fluff. You can't run a company on fluff. And so Wizards was bought out by Hasbro and the game took a turn for the worse.
D&D 4.0 was my exit point, the last straw so to speak. Up until that point I was a D&D zombie, buying up any and all product related to the game religiously whether I would use it or not. The game changed so drastically in form and function that the only recognizable feature was the name. I can't tell much about this version other than the fact that I saw very little of it on surviving book store shelves. The presence on the internet was also reduced, so far as I can tell. This version gave all the power into the hands of the players, even going so far as to reducing the threat posed by monster minions by only giving them 1 hp (thus one-shot kills), allowing spell casters an ungodly amount of spells and abilities to use each day, and granting healing abilities to all classes. Play balance was normalized and thrown out the window.
Loyal D&D 3.5 players jumped ship to Pathfinder (a D&D 3.5 clone) and I tried this as well. However, taking the essence of D&D away does little to remedy the situation. I wanted true Gygaxian D&D back. And so I returned to my roots in AD&D 1st edition. But even now I find myself tweaking and house-ruling the game. D&D 3.0 did much for explaining the really ambiguous rules and making sense out of some of the more broken spells in the original version and I find myself quoting these rules on occasion to my old players. Each edition has aspects I liked, rules that seemed to work, and insights that really showed how clever D&D was. Will it ever be perfect? probably not. But at least the power in 5.0 seems to be shifting back towards the DM (where it should be). However, anyone that tries to get rich off the game by NOT publishing adventures instead of splatbooks is just fooling themselves. DMs need adventures to entertain their players; players don't need more powers to befuddle and foil the DMs carefully laid plans.
Thursday, February 21, 2013
AD&D: Past Errors in Thuin
My original homebrew campaign, Thuin, was originally written in 1st edition AD&D rules, later converted to 2nd edition AD&D rules, and most recently converted to 3.5 edition D&D rules. The premise of the world was failing magic, rise in barbarism, and an encroaching ice age all in the backdrop of a World War between the Dolestrian Empire to the east and the Sorlonian Kingdoms to the west. Most of the action occurred in one area of the world (the Sturmgard land bridge) and most of the careers of the adventurers were spent in one dungeon (my so-called Test of the Dungeon Master, later re-named Dungeon of Mystery). I committed several errors in the dungeon design which I realize need to be corrected if I'm ever able to salvage the campaign.
The first mistake I made was accessibility. The dungeon was hidden under a kobold mound in the forest, taken over by orc invaders from the mountains. Once the characters entered, the stairs formed a trap keeping them there until they could solve the riddle of the dungeon (which they never did). From here it was a linear plot of find the clues to get to the next level, survive the traps and monsters placed to test the characters and gain them levels, until they got to the lowest level and solved the mystery of why the place existed in the first place. After a few years of running this adventure the party only got to level 3, started playing on the Corridors of Portals which transported them to lost world locations elsewhere on the globe, and then gave up and went into the wilderness after finding a way out of the dungeon. We had the largest group of people ever playing D&D at that time (I believe it was 6 of us), but that soon fractured and, in the end, we ended the campaign on a sour note because I was just tired of lugging a collection of minis and heavy books everywhere I went. I was also running 3 other games at that time and the work was not worth the effort.
I have since amended my dungeon design so that the dungeon is more accessible. No longer will the players feel that need to move ever forward, complaining about how they have to find a way out soon. It might work well for television series, not so much for casual gaming. The setting has to remain robust despite the rules used. The new dungeon will have multiple entrances and exits, allowing more freedom of movement and make more sense for some larger creatures to exist in the lower levels.
I have a feeling that I want to expel the "drow" from the world. I added these creatures under pressure from one of the players so he could play the "one Good-aligned drow ranger." Damn Bob Salvatore and his evil ways! Anyway, they are being replaced by my intelligent spiders who are all spellcasters and resemble the aranea or perhaps the Nerubians from World of Warcraft. I was also thinking of using the chitines from DUNGEON adventures or some other races of spellcasting creatures like those wacky six-armed extra-planar spellweavers from later editions. They make more sense than importing those over-used elves into the world again. This requires some reworking of past characters, to be sure, but I'm sure Bruce wouldn't mind.... :)
The other big mistake I made affected the players more in later editions. The Council of Twilight was a group of mages tasked with making sure that magic is kept in the hands of those with the knowledge of how to use them properly and for the good of the world. The mages were persecuted when one of the Sykonian mages allowed demons into the world and started the Demon Wars. It has been centuries since the demons were expelled, but wizards are still mistrusted. They were supposed to gather up lost magic items and return to Sykon with them to be catalogued, examined, and possibly duplicated. This was problematic since the party would be required to hand over any magic items to the party mage who then would disappear with them. It never happened that way in the game, but then Joey was the resident mage who wanted to do nothing more than throw fireballs around and blow up the party. This was poor planning on my part. I've since amended this to only requiring mages to report artifacts left over from the Demon Wars and to report the presence of any surviving demons that escaped banishment. In essence, the wizards of the world become extraplanar border patrolmen.
The high level part of the campaign was supposed to introduce a few powerful artifacts into the campaign, the location of the last heir of Parthavia, and the release of magic back into the world. The players never stuck around long enough to get to that part of the campaign so I could never see if it would work.
The first mistake I made was accessibility. The dungeon was hidden under a kobold mound in the forest, taken over by orc invaders from the mountains. Once the characters entered, the stairs formed a trap keeping them there until they could solve the riddle of the dungeon (which they never did). From here it was a linear plot of find the clues to get to the next level, survive the traps and monsters placed to test the characters and gain them levels, until they got to the lowest level and solved the mystery of why the place existed in the first place. After a few years of running this adventure the party only got to level 3, started playing on the Corridors of Portals which transported them to lost world locations elsewhere on the globe, and then gave up and went into the wilderness after finding a way out of the dungeon. We had the largest group of people ever playing D&D at that time (I believe it was 6 of us), but that soon fractured and, in the end, we ended the campaign on a sour note because I was just tired of lugging a collection of minis and heavy books everywhere I went. I was also running 3 other games at that time and the work was not worth the effort.
I have since amended my dungeon design so that the dungeon is more accessible. No longer will the players feel that need to move ever forward, complaining about how they have to find a way out soon. It might work well for television series, not so much for casual gaming. The setting has to remain robust despite the rules used. The new dungeon will have multiple entrances and exits, allowing more freedom of movement and make more sense for some larger creatures to exist in the lower levels.
I have a feeling that I want to expel the "drow" from the world. I added these creatures under pressure from one of the players so he could play the "one Good-aligned drow ranger." Damn Bob Salvatore and his evil ways! Anyway, they are being replaced by my intelligent spiders who are all spellcasters and resemble the aranea or perhaps the Nerubians from World of Warcraft. I was also thinking of using the chitines from DUNGEON adventures or some other races of spellcasting creatures like those wacky six-armed extra-planar spellweavers from later editions. They make more sense than importing those over-used elves into the world again. This requires some reworking of past characters, to be sure, but I'm sure Bruce wouldn't mind.... :)
The other big mistake I made affected the players more in later editions. The Council of Twilight was a group of mages tasked with making sure that magic is kept in the hands of those with the knowledge of how to use them properly and for the good of the world. The mages were persecuted when one of the Sykonian mages allowed demons into the world and started the Demon Wars. It has been centuries since the demons were expelled, but wizards are still mistrusted. They were supposed to gather up lost magic items and return to Sykon with them to be catalogued, examined, and possibly duplicated. This was problematic since the party would be required to hand over any magic items to the party mage who then would disappear with them. It never happened that way in the game, but then Joey was the resident mage who wanted to do nothing more than throw fireballs around and blow up the party. This was poor planning on my part. I've since amended this to only requiring mages to report artifacts left over from the Demon Wars and to report the presence of any surviving demons that escaped banishment. In essence, the wizards of the world become extraplanar border patrolmen.
The high level part of the campaign was supposed to introduce a few powerful artifacts into the campaign, the location of the last heir of Parthavia, and the release of magic back into the world. The players never stuck around long enough to get to that part of the campaign so I could never see if it would work.
Friday, February 1, 2013
Further Musing on Basic Greyhawk
Since I decided to use Basic/Expert rules as the basis for my next Greyhawk campaign in Castle Greyhawk I've been trying to decide all the options I would allow in the game. So far I've come up with the following:
- Stats will follow the BASIC/EXPERT rules exactly, so no minimums for the base classes. There will be no XP granted based on ability score adjustments (however, see below).
- No such thing as percentile strength (which I did not like anyway) and no change in weapon damage based on defender size (however I am working on modifying damage based on weapon size used by the attacker, by changing the die type up or down).
- Races permitted are Human (sub-races of Oeridian, Suloise, Baklunish, and Flan), Dwur (sub-races of Hill Dwarf and Mountain Dwarf), Olve (sub-races of Sylvan, Grey, and High), and Hobniz (sub-races of Hairfoot, Stout, and Tallfellow). Gnomes are not permitted as PCs, and Half-Elves and Half-Orcs are not viable races. Also Rhennee humans are only permitted as NPCs.
- Classess available for play include: Cleric, Druid, Monk, Magic-User, Fighter, Paladin, Thief, Assassin. I see no need to include rangers although I could as NPCs. Also, the Illusionist is really unnecessary since the spell selection of the magic-user class precludes the need for a separate class. I'm also thinking of merging assassin and thief or breaking thieves down by alignment (N = thief, E = assassin) but that seems too restricting. Clerics must be Good or Evil; Druids must be Neutral.
- Level limits may or may not be used depending on the way humans are played. Perhaps allowing the demi-humans to advance unlimited in one class only (i.e. Fighter for dwarf, Magic-User for elf, and Thief for Halfling) and limit the others to mid-level (say 6th to 8th) depending on aptitude. A halfling, unsuited for fighting, may only advance to 6th level fighter, while an elf could go to 8th level. The only benefit humans get is a 10% bonus to XP earned across the board, regardless of ability score. This represents human tenacity and adaptability.
- Multi-classing will be an option for demi-humans only, but functions differently. They only have ONE level to deal with and both classes advance together by adding XP requirements. Advancing one level beyond one that has reached it's level limit requires DOUBLE the necessary XP. This is the price for multiclassing, slower advancement. Example, an elven fighter/magic-user of 1st level needs enough XP to make both his classes 2nd level in order to advance (add together Fighter XP for 2nd level and Magic-User XP for 2nd level). When he reaches the level limit for fighter, double his required Magic-User XP to advance to next level.
- Alignment is changed from Lawful, Neutral, Chaotic to Good, Neutral, Evil. This makes more sense since all the spell names deal with good or evil, not law or chaos.
- Equipment will remain as listed in the Basic/Expert rules with possibly some additions from AD&D lists as required. All containers will be listed with encumbrance capacities.
- The coin weight system will remain at 10 coins/pound of weight. Assume this: if 40 quarters = 1 lb, and D&D coins are roughly the size of half dollars, and these are double the weight of a quarter, then 20 coins = 1 lb. Now, assuming that a gold coin (the weight standard) is double the weight of a half-dollar coin, then 10 coins = 1 pound as already established in D&D. Weights will add up quickly so size of sacks and capacities of chests need to be worked out.
- Spells will remain as presented in the Basic/Expert rules, but the spells added for higher levels will also be used. Clerics cannot cast spells at 1st level in Basic/Expert rules. They also receive no bonus spells for high Wisdom.
- Combat rules will remain fast and ambiguous; combat maneuvers add too much difficulty to the system and will be used sparingly.
- Monsters from AD&D, Fiend Folio and the Monster Manual II will be adapted for use in Basic Greyhawk.
- Treasures may also be included from AD&D but made for Basic/Expert Rules.
- Maximum level of the Campaign will be 14th level unless the players agree to progress further.
Wednesday, January 23, 2013
Classic D&D Version of Greyhawk
Recently I've been wondering what a published Gygax campaign would have looked like if he actually took his original campaign and committed it to paper. Obviously the map produced by Darlene is close, but not actual to what was described in the text of all the things I have ever read. The scale of the hexes is a bit weird too, since it seems that AD&D influenced the size of the hexes to match the distance an unburdened human could travel in a single day (30 miles). Most hex maps produced for older campaigns seemed to base everything on a world hex of 24 miles across, broken into smaller bits as convenient. Using 30 mile hexes is difficult to reduce very far without hexes being broken into fractional miles.
Rumor has it that the original campaign took place on a slightly exaggerated map of North America. Florida would have been the Tilvanot Peninsula (home of the Scarlet Brotherhood), New England the Great Kingdom (and presumably Rauxes = New York City or perhaps Washington D.C.), Nyrond would be the Midwest, the Nyr Dyv would be Lake Superior (almost identical in shape on all maps of Greyhawk), and the Rocky Mountains would be the Hellfurnaces and Crystlamist Mountains. This would make California and Nevada the Sea of Dust, and the northeast portion of maritime Canada as the Thillonrian Peninsula, home of the Suloise barbarian nations. Blackmoor was on this map as well, located somewhere near Hudson Bay and the northern islands of Canada. I know that the original campaign was vastly different in layout since the introduction given in T1: The Village of Hommlet does not match the geographical layout of the Velverdyva River and the hills of southern Verbobonc on the main map. The distances given on the map are too large to match what was stated. The map in T1-4 shows the Temple of Elemental Evil so far from the village of Hommlet that it would take days to a week for any threat to make it there, unlike the "so close and dangerous" description of T1.
I think that the Greyhawk depicted in the Gord the Rogue novels penned by Gygax himself is true to his original vision of Greyhawk. The details he provides on the city could only have come from a mind that determined their properties long ago and had become familiar over time revisiting the same locations over and over again in the game. To be sure, some things probably changed over the years in his own campaign as he adapted new players and new play styles, tinkered with rules and substituted house rules or tried out suggestions from other Dungeon Masters. I myself have done this and developed a form of AD&D that is close, but in no way follows the rules as written all the time.
My current project involves creating a new City of Greyhawk Supplement to the Classic D&D line of products, using the details provided from the Gord the Rogue novels. I know that these were written in the age of AD&D, but I prefer Basic/Expert D&D with some modifications. For example, separating race and class is more useful to me. Also, better defining the roles and spells of the campaign world and allowing monsters to have classes if humanoid. For example, I like the concept of orcs and goblins being able to advance as fighters, thieves, witchdoctors and shamans. Each would have their own level limits of course. Using the deities of the Greyhawk World adds more depth to the clerics. Changing alignments to Good, Neutral, and Evil also better defines the use of some spells (like Dispel Evil, Detect Good, and Protection from Evil). There really is no need for sub-classes in my opinion - but the Paladin, Druid, Monk, and Assassin are actually part of the Greyhawk world. A druid is nothing more than a Neutral cleric with restrictions and some magic-user abilities thrown into the mix. The paladin is little more than a Fighter/Cleric. The Monk is a Cleric/Thief. And the assassin is a Thief who uses poison to effect, can assassinate as well as backstab, and is considered a master of subterfuge and disguise. Now the Bard is another matter entirely, sort of a Druid/Fighter/Thief on steroids with its own abilities. Original D&D did a poor job of explaining these sub-classes; AD&D nailed them in their roles. Assuming one uses paladins, they must remain of Good alignment and follow a code of ethics. They may get some clerical abilities (protection from evil aura, immunity to disease, ability to cure by touch, etc.), but should not themselves be better than a Fighter or a Cleric. I liked the idea that they do not turn undead, but instead Dispel Evil (perhaps once per day) beginning at 9th level or so. Also the fact that they can call a warhorse of divine powers is a cool notion. Druids would give up the ability of turning undead to gain power over animals similar to turning/controlling and based off Hit Dice. Spells would have to be somewhat modified for this to happen. Perhaps three separate lists for a Cleric, Druid, and Anti-Cleric (Good, Neutral, and Evil clerics). Spells would substitute for those not needed by the Druid - for example, Faerie Fire could replace Detect Evil. Maybe a more generic version of the spells could be developed to better represent all three types of clerics (i.e. Detect Alignment, Protection from Harm, etc.). A Monk could be represented by a cleric that has abandoned the use of weapons and armor to perfect the Self, thus relying more on internal abilities than external powers. Such a character would use faith and will to heal himself, remain healthy and immune to some magical effects, and strike with hands and feet as a person would strike with a weapon. I think such a person would rely heavily on Wisdom, using the Wisdom modifier in place of Strength for unarmed strikes. Also Dexterity should still apply unless a minimum is required to apply for the class. Again, I'm simply trying to produce an alternative to the same Cleric class - not sure though that this one could be easily reproducible without reverting to AD&D stats and abilities. The Mystic in later version of D&D was close, but drew too heavily on Asian themes for me.
So there you have it. I'm also hashing out something for the Rhennee bargefolk and for gnomes as well, although I don't think either of those races will be available for PCs.
Rumor has it that the original campaign took place on a slightly exaggerated map of North America. Florida would have been the Tilvanot Peninsula (home of the Scarlet Brotherhood), New England the Great Kingdom (and presumably Rauxes = New York City or perhaps Washington D.C.), Nyrond would be the Midwest, the Nyr Dyv would be Lake Superior (almost identical in shape on all maps of Greyhawk), and the Rocky Mountains would be the Hellfurnaces and Crystlamist Mountains. This would make California and Nevada the Sea of Dust, and the northeast portion of maritime Canada as the Thillonrian Peninsula, home of the Suloise barbarian nations. Blackmoor was on this map as well, located somewhere near Hudson Bay and the northern islands of Canada. I know that the original campaign was vastly different in layout since the introduction given in T1: The Village of Hommlet does not match the geographical layout of the Velverdyva River and the hills of southern Verbobonc on the main map. The distances given on the map are too large to match what was stated. The map in T1-4 shows the Temple of Elemental Evil so far from the village of Hommlet that it would take days to a week for any threat to make it there, unlike the "so close and dangerous" description of T1.
I think that the Greyhawk depicted in the Gord the Rogue novels penned by Gygax himself is true to his original vision of Greyhawk. The details he provides on the city could only have come from a mind that determined their properties long ago and had become familiar over time revisiting the same locations over and over again in the game. To be sure, some things probably changed over the years in his own campaign as he adapted new players and new play styles, tinkered with rules and substituted house rules or tried out suggestions from other Dungeon Masters. I myself have done this and developed a form of AD&D that is close, but in no way follows the rules as written all the time.
My current project involves creating a new City of Greyhawk Supplement to the Classic D&D line of products, using the details provided from the Gord the Rogue novels. I know that these were written in the age of AD&D, but I prefer Basic/Expert D&D with some modifications. For example, separating race and class is more useful to me. Also, better defining the roles and spells of the campaign world and allowing monsters to have classes if humanoid. For example, I like the concept of orcs and goblins being able to advance as fighters, thieves, witchdoctors and shamans. Each would have their own level limits of course. Using the deities of the Greyhawk World adds more depth to the clerics. Changing alignments to Good, Neutral, and Evil also better defines the use of some spells (like Dispel Evil, Detect Good, and Protection from Evil). There really is no need for sub-classes in my opinion - but the Paladin, Druid, Monk, and Assassin are actually part of the Greyhawk world. A druid is nothing more than a Neutral cleric with restrictions and some magic-user abilities thrown into the mix. The paladin is little more than a Fighter/Cleric. The Monk is a Cleric/Thief. And the assassin is a Thief who uses poison to effect, can assassinate as well as backstab, and is considered a master of subterfuge and disguise. Now the Bard is another matter entirely, sort of a Druid/Fighter/Thief on steroids with its own abilities. Original D&D did a poor job of explaining these sub-classes; AD&D nailed them in their roles. Assuming one uses paladins, they must remain of Good alignment and follow a code of ethics. They may get some clerical abilities (protection from evil aura, immunity to disease, ability to cure by touch, etc.), but should not themselves be better than a Fighter or a Cleric. I liked the idea that they do not turn undead, but instead Dispel Evil (perhaps once per day) beginning at 9th level or so. Also the fact that they can call a warhorse of divine powers is a cool notion. Druids would give up the ability of turning undead to gain power over animals similar to turning/controlling and based off Hit Dice. Spells would have to be somewhat modified for this to happen. Perhaps three separate lists for a Cleric, Druid, and Anti-Cleric (Good, Neutral, and Evil clerics). Spells would substitute for those not needed by the Druid - for example, Faerie Fire could replace Detect Evil. Maybe a more generic version of the spells could be developed to better represent all three types of clerics (i.e. Detect Alignment, Protection from Harm, etc.). A Monk could be represented by a cleric that has abandoned the use of weapons and armor to perfect the Self, thus relying more on internal abilities than external powers. Such a character would use faith and will to heal himself, remain healthy and immune to some magical effects, and strike with hands and feet as a person would strike with a weapon. I think such a person would rely heavily on Wisdom, using the Wisdom modifier in place of Strength for unarmed strikes. Also Dexterity should still apply unless a minimum is required to apply for the class. Again, I'm simply trying to produce an alternative to the same Cleric class - not sure though that this one could be easily reproducible without reverting to AD&D stats and abilities. The Mystic in later version of D&D was close, but drew too heavily on Asian themes for me.
So there you have it. I'm also hashing out something for the Rhennee bargefolk and for gnomes as well, although I don't think either of those races will be available for PCs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)