AD&D vs. OD&D: Ability Score Adjustments

Lately I've been doing some character creation. No, I'm not currently playing in any games and have no immediate plans to do so. However, I have been creating parties of characters to perform solo campaigning for "research." I've noted some peculiarities regarding AD&D vs. Original (Basic/Expert) D&D that I think should be noted.

While creating characters, I've noticed that there are some interesting methods in place for creating starting characters (not applicable to characters necessarily created at higher level or for one-shot tournament adventures). Everyone knows that the original D&D method of character creation involved rolling 3d6 for each ability score, and placing them in order: Strength, Intelligence, Wisdom, Dexterity, Constitution, and Charisma. This basically meant that you would be forced to play whatever character classes your scores allowed you to choose. This is not to say that you couldn't choose a class for which you were ill-suited, but there might be a penalty to earned experience if the prime requisite was below the threshold of 9 minimum (for most classes). The demi-humans all needed minimum scores to be selected (Dwarves needed a Constitution of 9, Elves needed an Intelligence of 9, and Halflings needed a 9 in both Dexterity and Constitution). However, the prime requisites of the demi-human classes were Strength for Dwarves, Strength and Intelligence for Elves, and Strength and Dexterity for Halflings. Therefore, if you decided to play a dwarf, your Strength score could be below 9 and you could still play the character, but you would be losing experience points until you could bring that prime requisite up. Lowering one score to raise another was done away with in AD&D - most methods allowed one to arrange their scores however they wanted so this mechanic was no longer necessary.

In OD&D, beginning characters were able to adjust scores in their prime requisites in order to raise their ability scores for XP bonuses or to avoid penalties. The character had to choose their class first in order to determine what their prime requisite(s) would be. Then points could be taken from others stats on a 2 for 1 basis to raise their prime requisite. One could not, however, reduce a score below 9 in order to raise a prime requisite. And remember, this was only to raise a prime requisite, not get a bonus in an ability score outside one's prime requisite. Therefore, a halfling could not raise Wisdom by lowering Intelligence, since Wisdom is not a prime requisite for that class. However, an elf could raise Intelligence or Strength since these are both prime requisites for this class. Also, there were rules as to which classes could reduce certain abilities. Strength could be lowered by magic-users and clerics only. Intelligence could be lowered by any class except magic-user or elf. Wisdom could be lowered by any class except cleric. Dexterity could not be lowered, but could be raised if a prime requisite (thus only thieves and halflings could raise their Dex in this manner). Constitution and Charisma could not be raised or lowered - the roll stood for these stats. Most players would end up lowering a score they did not need in order to gain an XP bonus in their prime requisite.

The same could not be said for Advanced D&D. But the method of rolling ability scores varied from campaign to campaign, and there were other ability score adjustments that few considered or were even aware of in the DMG. Most DMs I know used Method I from the DMG - 4d6, drop the lowest, arrange as desired. This is the most popular method and still used in modern games of D&D. The extra die acted as a buffer against lower rolls and tended to get scores in the 13-15 range easier than the 3d6 method. This is beneficial to the PCs since most ability score bonuses started in the 15+ range. This is different in Basic/Expert D&D where bonuses start in the 13-15 range. However, penalties in Original D&D started at 8 or lower, while in AD&D penalties usually started in the 6 or lower range. Having a 7 Strength in OD&D was detrimental, but not as bad in AD&D.

AD&D was stated to encourage at least 2 scores of 15 or greater for survival (PHB, page 9). Of course, this depended on class and which two scores were selected. Having a 15+ in Intelligence and Charisma is not really all that beneficial to characters, whereas a 15+ in Dexterity and Constitution is vital for survival, allowing reduced chances of being hit and surviving blows due to increased hit points. OD&D had degrees of bonus experience points for prime requisite scores. Generally speaking, a prime requisite of 13-15 gained +5% to earned experience, while a score of 16-18 gained +10% (Elves and Halflings tended to be different since they had 2 prime requisites). The increased number of experience points gained allowed the characters to increase in level faster, thus removing them from the delicate state of being low level with minimal hit points. AD&D did away with the +5% and only gave the XP bonus to those with scores of 16+ in their principal attribute. However, demi-humans were required to sometimes have higher scores and minimums in order to become certain classes. For example, human and multi-classed half-orc clerics only needed a 9 minimum in Wisdom, whereas multi-classed half-elves needed a 13 to be a cleric. AD&D was also the first time that minimums were required for the base classes of cleric, fighter, magic-user, and thief, and the first time that minimum scores in other abilities would dictate what class a character could be. For example, if a character was unlucky enough to have a score of 4 in Dexterity, that character could only be a cleric. If they did not qualify to be a cleric, then they would have to reroll the character (or assign scores differently) depending on the DM and what rolling methods were used.

Additionally, the section on character age in the AD&D DMG allowed for the adjustment of one's ability scores at the start of the game. A random roll allowed the DM to assign starting ages to the characters. Under the heading of AGING, it states, "When age category is established, modify ability scores accordingly, making each change progressively from young adulthood, all additions and subtractions being cumulative." What does this mean? Well, if your character is in the young adult category, you start the game with -1 Wisdom and +1 Constitution. This sucks for clerics, but is great for added survivability. If you rolled an age in the mature category, you would first subtract 1 from Wisdom and add 1 to Constitution, then add 1 point to Strength and 1 point to Wisdom. I believe that the oldest a human can be as a starting characters is 40 years old (magic-user with the highest roll), which is still considered mature. However, 1 game year later, that magic-user becomes middle-aged and has to subtract 1 point of Strength and Constitution, but adds 1 point of Intelligence and Wisdom. Human fighters begin the game at age 16-20 and are the youngest of the characters other than half-orc fighters who begin at age 14-17. Note that adjustments cannot raise abilities beyond racial maximums (or 18 for humans).

The other strange concept added to AD&D was ability score minimums and maximums for demi-humans and different genders of all races. In OD&D you could be a female dwarf with an 18 Str; in AD&D you could have no higher than a 17 Str. Halflings now had 4 ability score minimums that they had to be aware of (Str, Int, Dex, Con), other than the two listed in OD&D (Str and Dex). Some of these were quite demanding - 13 minimum Con to be a half-orc, for example. On the flip side, some character races allowed ability scores to raise above 18, something that never occurred in OD&D. Dwarves, halflings and half-orcs could achieve 19 in Constitution, and Elves could achieve 19 in Dexterity. So what if the character had a score lower than the minimum required based on race and gender? Then they could not be a demi-human character and had to select human. Racial adjustments could only modify the score after the minimums were met. And one cannot forget the racial adjustments for dwarves, elves, half-orcs and halflings on page 14 of the PHB.

So, although AD&D had more modifiers to the ability scores, and allowed greater choice when it came to arranging scores to be the class the player preferred, there were still other factors that contributed to limiting the choices one could play. OD&D was a bit more forgiving by giving out bonuses for lower scores and allowing classes to be played without many ability requirements, but there were only 4 human classes and 3 demi-humans to select from. AD&D mixed race and age into the ability score determination for a starting character. OD&D allowed for some adjustment of scores based on prime requisite and class, but rolls were based on 3d6 so scores were generally lower, with more in the single digit range that was detrimental to character survivability (especially with lower hit dice being used for the classes).

B2: Keep on the Borderlands - Time and Travel

 I do so love the older D&D modules. There's a sense that the entire game functions as a well-oiled machine when you find rules actually reiterated in the pages of the original adventures. I'm especially a fan of those adventures written by E. Gary Gygax himself! But there are a few reasons why this is so. First and foremost, the creator of one of the best games I have ever played was consistent (at least in the earlier days) when it came to instructing new DMs on how to run the game. He also tried to tie rules into the narrative, to give the adventure a verisimilitude in how a D&D campaign works. When a DM and his players are all on the same page, so to speak, and seem to all understand exactly how the game works, it's pure magic!

Now, I know it's very hard to remain consistent all the time; and good editors keep most of the glaring mistakes out of the text. But eventually, every writer and game designer fails to keep his or her facts straight or misreads a rule somewhere. And I can't fault anyone for their mistakes - they happen to us all at some time or another. However, that being said, I find module B2: Keep on the Borderlands to be one of the best written modules of its time. It is clear and concise, instructional and informative, and has remained a powerful DMing tool for hundreds, if not thousands, of DMs, from neophytes to grizzled veterans. Just reading through the pages inspires me to run something in Basic D&D once more!

My only quibble with the module, and it is very minor, is that there is so much happening in a mere 3 by 2 mile area. The map scale for the Wilderness Map is strange, set at 100 yards per square. First off, we were taught that wilderness was usually mapped in hexes, not squares. It says so in the Expert D&D rulebook! Of course, it says that wilderness could be mapped using graph paper, but that hexes make it easier to figure movement (ah, those pesky diagonals). Gygax's use of graph paper for his Wilderness Map is peculiar. Also, his scale used is even more curious, but makes more sense when you realize that he is trying to explain how outdoor adventures work without making reference to the Expert set rules! As long time fans of Basic/Expert D&D know, distance outdoors is measured in yards, not feet. Therefore, a character who moves 90'/turn indoors will move 90 yards/turn outdoors. Since each square is 100 yards, that's almost equivalent to what a Man can move in 1 turn if wearing light armor or is lightly encumbered. Why he didn't simply make 1 square = 90 yards is unknown. In any case, the scale is strange because 17.6 squares is 1 mile (1760 yards/mile), and if you are going by normal outdoor movement (and assuming that the party contains slow/moving members at 60' movement rate), then they can cover a distance of (60/5 = ) 12 miles per day (see page X19 in the Cook version of the D&D Expert rulebook). If that's the case, and there are roughly 50 squares of travel along the road from the keep to the Caves of Chaos, then the distance traveled by the characters is only about 5000 yards or 2.84 miles. So, the time it takes to get to and from the Caves of Chaos is roughly 1/4 of a day's travel. Assuming that one must travel there and back to the Keep, that's half a day blown on travel.

But that's not the same rate as listed in the B2 module! In this case, Gygax states that normal movement rate is 1 square per HOUR searching, or 3 squares per HOUR walking. Walking in the fens is equivalent to searching (1 square/hour). Walking in the forest is 2 squares per HOUR. He then states parenthetically that wilderness adventures are more completely explained in the D&D Expert set rulebook. Hmm, so according to the D&D Expert Set, the total distance from the Keep to the Caves should take no more than 1/4 day (assuming a 10 hour travel period, that would be about 2½ hours). Yet according to Gygax's bizarre scale movement, 2½ hours would only get me about 8 squares from the Keep! Something here doesn't add up.

I wonder if the map was originally to a different scale? Assuming a 60' movement rate for armored and/or encumbered characters who will not likely be able to afford horses for a while, they should be able to move at 60 yards per turn or 360 yards per hour. I think I see some disconnect here. The miles per day rate is assumed to be on a road, not mapping just traveling, and definitely not expecting to be attacked or being on alert for danger. Given that rate, the party could travel 3 miles in 2½ hours or 1.2 mph. Given the map scale of 2.25 miles east to west and just under 3 miles north to south, the party would be long gone off the map before they had to make camp. It states on page X19 that ten minute turns are rarely used in outdoor play - one either uses rounds during combats, or uses miles/day to determine how far they progress.

The hourly movement proposed by Gygax would have the characters traveling for almost 17 hours to reach the Caves of Chaos using walking movement speed (and that's actually if they have already located the place and know where they are going). The sandbox nature of the module, however, does not give hints on where the Caves are located on the map - the characters have to adventure and explore the area in order to locate them. Although this is great for a campaign setting, it's not so great for a one-shot adventure (not that the module should or could be finished in a single play session, unless the players are in for one marathon session lasting through the night and into the next day). Also, given the numbers of creatures involved in the Caves, attrition is likely to kill off the party long before they complete it. Using the hourly rate for movement doesn't make much sense. The calculation for daily movement in D&D Expert is movement rate divided by 5 equals the number of miles traveled per day. Therefore, an unencumbered Man moving at 120'/turn can travel (120/5 =) 24 miles per day. This would be the equivalent of moving 10.6 map widths in a day (since the map is only 2.25 miles wide! So something is very wrong with the scale of movement here!

So how does one rectify the glaring discrepancy in the travel rates in B2? Remember that the characters should not have to travel all day to reach the Caves once they are located! In fact, according to the movement rates in the Expert Set, they should be able to reach their destination by mid-morning. If however, you do use the hourly movement rate, you should take something into consideration: Is that movement rate for someone moving at normal (unencumbered) speed, or it is assumed that everyone will be moving at the metal-armored (encumbered) speed? To say that 300 yards per hour is slow is really understating things. It's even slower than breaking speed down to turn movement! However, it is somewhat accurate. Assuming the movement rate really IS 360 yards per hour for a slow moving party, then that would be 3.6 squares per hour. How many hours of travel are there in a day? That's not stated anywhere. It could be 8 hours, 10 hours, or 12 hours depending on the time of year. I typically use 10 hours for travel. Assuming a party rises at dawn (roughly 6 am discounting seasonal variation), spend 1 hour in the morning preparing for travel, then spend 5 hours traveling, stop at noon for lunch (1 hour break), and then continue walking until 1 hour before dinner, then eat dinner at 6 pm and make plans and set camp, feed and care for horse, etc. By the time they bed down it would be close to 8 pm losing the light fast. Assuming then that watches begin at 8 pm and continue to 6 am, that's 10 hours of watch time or thereabouts. This is really a bit more in depth than typical D&D adventures get, but one has to know total times for most activities.

Assuming a 10 hour travel day, the party moving at hourly speed will be able to cover 36 squares in a day's travel. That means that the party will have traveled 3600 yards in total, or a little over 2 miles distance for the day. I used to walk 1.5 miles to school every morning with a heavy backpack filled with books and it only took me 1 hour to do that. If the 10 hour day is used, and the Expert Set movement rates per day are used, then we end up with a 1.2 miles/hour speed (2112 yds/hour), almost 6 times faster than the hourly movement rate, but jives better with real life movement!

So what factors could exist to justify this slow movement rate? Again, I think the map scale was changed at some point, or maybe someone made a conversion mistake when trying to figure out how far the Caves should be from the Keep. Note that terrain factors have not really been taken into consideration yet. However, the bulk of the journey from the Keep to the Caves is on the road and, according to page X20 in the Expert Rulebook, movement along a road is at 1.5 times the normal rate! With that assumption in place (but never mentioned in B2), travel along the road should be at 5.4 squares per hour. With this movement rate, the party should be able to make it to the Caves of Chaos by nightfall. This is still much slower than the daily rate of movement, however, and I wonder why that should be so. If the daily movement rate of 12 miles/day is modified by the 1.5 x movement rate, then the party can travel 18 miles/day on the road and it should only take about 1/6 day (about 1½ hours) to reach the Caves once they have been located. Keep in mind that forest movement is at 2/3 normal rate, and swamp (fen) movement is 1/2 normal rate. The fen is not all that large and it shouldn't take several days to slog through it to locate the lair located therein. Using the 1.2 miles per hour rate, the characters would travel 21 squares per hour walking in clear terrain, 31.5 squares per hour on the road, 14 squares per hour in the forest, and 10.5 squares per hour while searching or moving through the fen.

Daily movement and turn movement are not the same and should not be equated. How these values are determined are two completely different methods that have no mathematical equivalency. Also, the hourly rates in the B2 module should be ignored and the Expert Set movement rules used instead, unless the DM decides to make module B2 into a much longer campaign. It's hard to justify moving at the listed search speed of 1 square per hour. That would be the equivalent of taking an hour to cross a football field - preposterous to say the least! Given the size of a typical D&D party, unless they were all looking for a lost copper piece in heavy brush and light forest, there's no way they would have to move that slowly to search an area of wilderness.