AD&D 1st Edition: Magic-users and Spellbooks

AD&D has a built-in complexity that derives from a desire to clarify a system to the nth degree. Gygax wanted there to be little uncertainty in how to run the game "by the book" since this was to become the ruleset by which convention tournaments were run. Unfortunately, his explanations were about as clear as mud to the uninitiated. It seems he spent too much time in the company of geniuses and not enough time trying to explain these concepts to the common man. So, in essence, the game is written with an air of superiority. I actually like his writing style, but his explanations leave some scratching their heads.

So it was with the Intelligence tables for use with magic-users. I've been going over many Sage Advice columns lately and it seems that even the authors were getting the rules wrong. It's really not all that difficult to understand once you know why this system was put into place. Obviously, magic-users were very popular back in the day. Then again, since there were only 3-4 classes to choose from originally, it's no wonder! Players being what they are, once they hit upon a winning combination of spells, that combination was copied by all other magic-users until each one becomes a carbon copy of the other. This stifles creativity, free thinking, and makes for a boring game environment. If all 1st level magic-users had sleep as their one and only spell, then opponents would soon come up with ways to defeat the use of that spell. An arms race then escalates as new methods are devised and countered.

In order to combat the "best-spell-selection" magic-user, Gygax implemented a rule in the Greyhawk Supplement that was carried into 1st edition AD&D that basically made each magic-user unique (and randomized the spells a bit more). Now, each magic-user received a random assortment of starting spells, knew a few others that he did not yet possess in a spellbook, and had some spells that could not be learned (until such time as their Intelligence score was permanently increased). So was born Intelligence Table II in the Players Handbook!

Let's take a look at how the process is done. The DM, after reading the section on spells for 1st level characters, sits down with his prospective M-U player and says that his master has taught him some magic and has graciously gifted him with a spellbook. Of the spells the character "knows" (was taught to use by 1st level), the master has prepared a spellbook containing one offensive, one defensive, and one utilitarian spell, along with read magic which is required for ALL magic-users to learn from the start. Therefore, all magic-users begin play with FOUR spells in their book (regardless of Intelligence score). This provides a selection from which they may choose their ONE spell they may cast for the day.

However, looking at the Intelligence table, one sees that there is a minimum and maximum number of spells that can be known per level. The magic-user rolls on the table to see if what other spells they already "know" and understand, up to the minimum number on the 1st level spell list. No "named spells" can be checked, since these must be found as treasure or during play. These "named spells" are also not on the tables for the spellbook contents of a 1st level magic-user in the DMG. Examples on the 1st level list include Tenser's floating disc and Nystul's magic aura. Since these spells were developed by other mage's for their own use, they can only be found on scrolls, in personal spellbooks, or used as trade between those wizard's and their students. The same applies to any spells developed by the player character magic-users. So, the unnamed spells represent the common spells used by all magic-users, the "basic syllabus" if you will.

So now, the magic-user must keep track of THREE lists when the character is created:

1. SPELLS IN SPELLBOOK: This list is generated at 1st level from random rolls on a table in the DMG with help from the DM. It represents knowledge provided by the master as part of training and includes read magic, one offensive spell, one defensive spell, and one utility spell. This is the list used to prepare spells for the day (of which the 1st level magic-user can cast only ONE). No chance to know these spells is necessary; it is assumed to have happened already during training to become 1st level.
2. SPELLS KNOWN: This list consists of spells that the character was exposed to during training and which he has an understanding of (i.e. succeeded on a Chance to Know percentage roll). These spells are understood by the magic-user although they are not written in his spellbook. However, if such spells can be found on scrolls, they can be written into the spellbook without any need to roll to know the spell. When the magic-user is created, the 1st level list is checked until the minimum number of spells is achieved. Then stop rolling on the list.
3. SPELLS THAT CANNOT BE LEARNED: Any spell checked on the list that the character fails to know (by rolling over the Chance to Know percentage) is placed on this list. This spell can never be learned by the character; however, it can be read off scrolls if found. It simply is too difficult for the character to grasp or understand, so they will never be able to write it into their spellbook.

The maximum number of spells per level represents the absolute number of spells of any given level that a character may know. Since the character stops checking the 1st level list once they hit the minimum, this maximum represents the remainder of spells a magic-user can learn when found during play.

For example, Marlin the Prestidigitator with 15 Intelligence has a spellbook containing 4 spells (read magic, charm person, shield, and identify), knows 3 more to bring his spells known to his minimum (7) (these being magic missile, sleep, and burning hands; all selected and rolled for by the character from the 1st level list), and can never learn feather fall or protection from evil (he failed his roll on these two spells). He then adventures and finds a scroll of 5 first level spells. One of these spells he already knows (magic missile) but the other four are unknown to him (comprehend languages, hold portal, message, and spider climb). He decides to keep the scroll for future scribing. If he succeeds in rolling his chance to know on all 4 of those spells, he can add them to his spellbook. However, these spells are now the ONLY 1st level spells he will EVER know (since he has now hit his maximum # of spells for his Intelligence). His first level list would thus have 11 spells listed, and the character should write the word (COMPLETE) above this level list's header. Once known, these spells can never be unlearned. A character never need check the Chance to Know until he or she is ready to scribe spells into their spellbook. If he later finds another scroll with different spells on it, he does not even bother to check his Chance to Know again since his limit has been reached.

If a character's Intelligence is permanently increased during the course of play, their minimum and maximum numbers of spells may increase. Conversely, if Intelligence is permanently lowered, they may lose the knowledge of one or more spells permanently. In the former case, the magic-user has more unused slots he can fill on his SPELLS KNOWN list if he locates new spells; in the latter case, the DM may make him randomly choose which spell(s) are lost from his SPELLS KNOWN list. A spell in his spellbook that is no longer known can no longer be memorized (although it is still listed in his spellbook).

In the unlikely event that one pass through the 1st level list generates less than the minimum after checking all the possible spells, the magic-user may go back through the list and try once more to learn a spell that failed the first time until the minimum is achieved.

KNOWING a spell and having it in your spellbook are two separate things. Knowledge of a spell only means that you can write it into your spellbook without having to check the Chance to Know. It has no other bearing on the workings of the magic-user in play. A read magic spell is still required to read any spell scroll found, even if it contains a spell the character already knows. Scrolls are all written in a special cipher used by magic-users and the spell is required to decipher the symbols and script.Although the above magic-user (Marlin) knows magic missile, he cannot prepare it for use from his spellbook since it isn't written there. He may only prepare one spell from his choice of four spells in his spellbook.

Note that this produces unique magic-users with differing spell lists, instead of cookie-cutter mages that all cast the same spell over and over again. It also forces magic-users to "make do" with the spells that were provided by their master, come up with interesting ways in which to use these spells, and basically makes them think about what a magic-user truly is in a party - an Intelligent man respected more for his knowledge, not simply the spells he can cast. This, more than anything else, balances out the class with the fighter. Those who ignore these rules risk unbalancing the way the game is played, relegating fighters to little more than meat shields protecting the true firepower in the rear ranks - their wizards! It also makes wands and staves more useful to the magic-users who cannot personally cast the spells they contain. After all, why use a 6d6 fireball from a wand of fire if you're 10th level and can do 10d6? If fireball is not on your spell list (and/or you failed to know this spell) this still permits you to cast fireballs from the wand, although not with the same ability as a magic-user who learned and understood the spell.

Some players may consider these rules too random or unnecessarily restrictive. After all, most magic-users want to be the "star of the show," blasting large quantities of monsters with their uber-powerful area of effect spells and unerring magic missiles. Well, there's more to being a magic-user than that! If they think it's not their thing, suggest another class!

Remember that Illusionists, as a sub-class of magic-user, also abide by these rules and have their own spellbook tables in the DMG. The only difference being that they do not require a read magic spell to learn their spells since they write everything in a non-magical secret code (later changed in Unearthed Arcana). Otherwise, the rules for Intelligence remain the same.

One final tidbit -- each level of spells takes up its own spellbook. Thus, a 1st level magic-user has 1 spellbook, a 3rd level magic-user has 2 spellbooks (one of first level spells, and one of second level spells), a 5th level magic-user has 3 spellbooks (one each of first, second, and third level spells), etc. This gets to be a lot of weight and cost! This is why magic-users are NOT supposed to carry their spellbooks to the dungeon with them. Long trips into hostile territory also restrict the amount of weight a magic-user may take with them. This is why the travelling spellbook was developed in Unearthed Arcana. However, the limited space in these spellbooks forces the magic-user to only take those spells they will definitely need on their journey. I believe that the "one level of spells per book" rule was changed sometime after the Players Handbook was published, but I'm not sure when. It was rarely adhered to in the modules written for 1st edition and is just one more check to keep magic-users in line with the power of fighters.

Sage Advice in DRAGON Useless?

I spent last weekend reviewing my Dragon Magazine Archive looking to compile all the "Sage Advice" columns pertinent to 1st edition AD&D. In my quest for AD&D "Dogma" perfection, I'm trying to get a firm grip on ALL the little nuances of the game as seen from the perspective of the creators of the game, and Gygax's original vision in particular.

The first "Sage Advice" column I found was in DRAGON #31, authored by Jean Wells of B3: Palace of the Silver Princess fame. I have heard her name slandered in message boards more than once and thought nothing of it. In fact, I sort of like her writing style and could not see what was so bad about what she wrote. Then, a few articles along I detected a sort of "devil-may-care" attitude about responding to rules-specific questions (few and far between in the mess of munchkin whining and bizarre posts about female dwarf beards, pregnant paladins, and other bizarre questions). It seems she was merely giving her opinion on what to do in all circumstances, not following the new mantra of AD&D which was uniformity in the rules presented.

In the issues before her column ran, and in several "Up on a Soapbox" articles, Gygax spelled out with no uncertain wording that if the rules of the AD&D system were being ignored or changed willy-nilly, then you weren't playing AD&D, but some version of the game unrecognizable to the masses. Then, some issues later, Ms. Wells was spouting out personal solutions to rules-specific questions that contradicted the rules as written. In particular, Gygax felt the need to write an "Out on a Limb" letter calling her out on her decision of whether or not a magic-user could cast a spell while holding a dagger, wand or staff. Her response had been to say that it was permitted, while the rule in the PHB clearly states that BOTH hands must be empty to cast spells. Gygax seemed rather irate about her blatant disregard of the rules and misleading answers. In his usual column, "From the Sorcerer's Scroll" he then continued to point out other problems with the questions she had answered. Interestingly, her "Sage Advice" article, which had run regularly in DRAGON up to that point, failed to make an appearance that issue...

Later articles put forth a disclaimer that only rules-specific questions would be answered. All other matters which were the purview of the individual campaign DM would not be answered. They also changed their policy of answering each and every question sent by mail; from that point onward only pertinent rules questions would be answered, and only in the pages of The DRAGON. I had no idea Ms. Wells had stirred up so much controversy in the early days of The DRAGON. No wonder she's considered a pariah in discussions of rule authenticity. Later articles of "Sage Advice" are more sporadic and have different authors, including Ward, Niebling, and Ms. Wells again, with some reference to "The Sage" whom I believe is actually Gary Gygax.

With all the authors, however, we still got a plethora of answers regarding the same subject. For instance, some authors state that rangers and paladins cast spells at their character level, instead of starting at 1st level and increasing with increasing level. Others make claims that bards receive bonus spells for high Wisdom, while later authors claim this is not the case. Mr. Ward actually answered a question about color spray (which I've touched upon in a previous article), in which he completely ignored the 1 HD per caster level line of the spell. Many questions were raised about trivial rules that could have been answered with simple research. The most important rules regarding initiative and surprise were almost NEVER covered in "Sage Advice" which leads me to believe that they all KNEW that the rules made no sense and could never truly be explained.

So, after compiling over 40 pages of questions and answers from roughly 50 issues of the magazine, I'm wondering if it's worth the effort to continue. The last few articles were spread thinly between a dozen issues of the magazine and dealt with articles covered in the Dragon (which are NOT considered "Official" AD&D rules, unless they received the blessing from Gygax himself). I'm not sure how useful such information will be if this continues. I remember the "Sage Advice" column being much more useful in the 2nd edition era that followed, but since my compilation only brought me up through early 1984, I have 4 more years of issues to slog through in search of golden information for 1st edition AD&D.

The Dice are Trying to Kill Them

We've been switching editions for over a year now, and in all this time one thing has become abundantly clear: No matter the game, the dice have it in for my players!

Now, as the title of my blog suggests, I've been a victim of Murphy's Law for as long as I can remember. It's been the one constant in my life. However, it now appears that when I DM adventures for other people, the dice become maliciously evil and decide to roll critical hits (natural 20s), and just screw with the players. I've switched out sets of dice with the same effect every week. The problem seems to have infected the player's dice as well. The other week one player rolled three consecutive 1's on different dice. Another player has trouble rolling anything in double digits. A third player fails every single saving throw ever rolled. And so it goes, week after week.

This downward spiral of bad luck has to end soon. The players are starting to get aggravated by the karmic suck affecting their dice. I wonder if there's a way to exorcise whatever imp is causing the problem...

AD&D: Problems with Color Spray

I have finally completed my project to convert the Players Handbook into a searchable, editable Word file on my computer, faithfully reproduced with the Twentieth Century font and scanned images. I've noticed quite a few typos and omissions in the text, mainly in the spells section. It also seems that near the end of the book, Gary ran out of space and had to cut short his excellent advice on dungeon (and wilderness) adventures.

However, the glaring errors occur in the spells section. Sloppy editing or just plain not bothering to re-read the spells as written, is probably to blame. But the illusionists seem to have gotten the worst of it. Besides the problems encountered in trying to DM illusions (which were poorly explained to begin with), some of the spells just don't work.

In this example, we will be looking at Color Spray:

COLOR SPRAY

Level: 1
Range: 1"/level
Duration: 1 segment
Area of Effect: ½" x 2" x 2" wedge
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 segment
Saving Throw: Special

Explanation/Description: Upon casting this spell, the illusionist causes a vivid fan-shaped spray of clashing colors to spring forth from his or her hand. From 1 to 6 creatures within the area of effect can be affected. The spell caster is able to affect 1 level or hit die of creatures for each of his or her levels of experience. Affected creatures are struck unconscious for 2 to 8 rounds if their level is less than or equal to that of the spell caster; they are blinded for 1 to 4 rounds if their level or number of hit dice is 1 or 2 greater than the illusionist; and they are stunned (cf. power word, stun, seventh level magic-user spell) for 2 to 8 segments if their level or number of hit dice is 3 or more greater than the spell caster. All creatures above the level of the spell caster and all creatures of 6th level or 6 hit dice are entitled to a saving throw versus the color spray spell. The material components of this spell are a pinch each of powder or sand colored red, yellow and blue.

The first line indicates that this spell creates a fan-shaped spray of colors from the caster's hands. Nothing special about that. It's like the fan of burning hands, but more technicolor. Then it states that 1 to 6 creatures within this area are affected. Is that supposed to be a random roll? or is it based on something? The next line states that the caster can affect 1 level/HD of creature per caster level. OK, so that limits the number of creatures to be affected I guess, sort of like the sleep spell. So long as the levels or HD are less than or equal to the caster, the affected creatures are struck unconscious for 2-8 rounds. Awesome! Sort of a burning hands effect that causes sleep!

Then the rest of the spell makes little or no sense. It seems that if the levels/HD of the affected creatures are 1 to 2 levels above the spell caster.... wait, HUH? How can that ever be? Remember that the caster can only affect a number of HD/levels equal to his caster level. So how can this EVER happen? It then goes on with another stipulation if the levels/HD affected are 3+ levels more than the caster, but this can never happen either! Something is screwy here...

As an example, lets take a look at some illusionists and creatures:

1st level illusionist  -- he can affect 1 HD of creature (1 orc or  normal man, or 2 kobolds)
2nd level illusionist -- he can affect 2 HD of creatures (1 gnoll, 2 orcs or men, or 4 kobolds)
3rd level illusionist -- he can affect 3 HD of creatures (1 bugbear, 3 orcs or men, or 6 kobolds)
4th level illusionist -- he can affect 4 HD of creatures (1 ogre, 2 gnolls, 4 orcs or men, or 6 kobolds*)
5th level illusionist -- he can affect 5 HD of creatures (2 gnolls + 1 man,
5 orcs or men, or 6 kobolds*)
6th level illusionist -- he can affect 6 HD of creatures (1 troll, 3 gnolls, 6 orcs or men, or 6 kobolds*)

*Remember, the number of creatures is only 1 to 6 in the area of effect, no matter their HD.

How will the illusionist ever be able to affect more HD than he has levels according to this description? Say he's a 1st level illusionist up against an ogre (mean, but it has happened). His caster level is only 1 vs. a 4 HD creature. There is only 1 ogre. But the illusionist doesn't have enough HD of effect to cause the spell to work against the ogre. So he CANNOT stun the target creature in the area of effect because he can only affect 1 HD of creatures at 1st level.

UNLESS.... the line about HD/Levels is WRONG!! perhaps it was supposed to read that the illusionist can affect 1 CREATURE per caster level in the area of effect, up to 6. That would allow the rest of the spell description to work properly. Because then the ogre in the example above would be 1 creature in the area of effect of 3+ HD above the level of the caster, and would be stunned for 2-8 segments by the spell.

Hmm, all creatures above the level of the caster and those of 6 levels or 6 HD are entitled to a save. That would never happen in the spell description as written until the caster himself is at least 6th level, because he could not ever affect more HD/Levels than his caster level, and would not be able to affect creatures of 6 HD/Levels until he is himself a 6th level caster.

There is another interpretation of the spell, but it is rather convoluted and is not really supported by the language. In this interpretation, the main effect of the spell (unconsciousness) only affects those creatures of equal to or less than the caster level of illusionist. However, if there are any creatures above and beyond this level in the area of effect, they will be either blinded or stunned, as appropriate, according to their HD/Level. No more than 6 creatures can be affected by the spell.

I'm not really sure which interpretation is correct, or if the spell is simply broken. It really makes no sense as written.Let's see some more hypothetical examples:

1) A 1st level illusionist and his party comes across a band of 7 goblins in a dungeon corridor. He casts color spray on the 1st round. What happens? Does he affect only 1 goblin? Does he affect up to 6 goblins?

2) A 5th level illusionist and his party encounters a pair of trolls in a dungeon chamber. He casts color spray on the two trolls. What happens? Does he fail to affect the trolls? Does he affect both trolls but only blinds them? Do they get saving throws?

3) A 7th level illusionist and her party encounters a mind flayer in the tunnels of the underworld. She casts color spray at the creature. What happens? Is the creature affected? If so, is it blinded if it fails it's save?

4) A 9th level illusionist and her party encounters a fire giant and a pair of large hell hounds. She casts color spray at them. Will she be able to affect more than one of the creatures? Does it affect the lower HD creatures first? Will it affect all the creatures with different results for each type? Will it affect the giant at all?

Let's go back to the original spell description in DRAGON Magazine #1:

Color Spray: A sheet of bright conflicting colors. They affect 1-6 levels of creatures, rendering them unconscious through confusion. (Note: for every 5 levels above Trickster the caster has obtained,
add one to the die roll for amount of levels, the number never to exceed 6.) The distribution of the effect if there are more target levels than spell levels is semi-random, first one creature is fully affected, then another, till all the levels are assigned, there being no more than one partially affected creature. There is no saving throw vs this spell if the creature is fully affected, if all but one level is affected, it gets a normal saving throw, for every level unaffected beyond the first, it gets an additional +2 on its saving throw, in any case, it will not affect any creature above the 6th level. Range 24”.

Well, at least that's a bit more concise. The range is ridiculous on this version of the spells, assuming that the effect begins at the caster. Then again, the range of the spell in 1st edition makes little sense, assuming that it springs from the caster's hands. How can it be 1"/level if the area of effect is a static 5' x 20' x 20' wedge? Someone didn't think this through very well.....

It appears that, as with the sleep spell, there is a hard limit of 6 HD/levels that can be affected by the spell. However, the saving throw makes more sense. Those affected FIRST by the spell are those of the least HD. Anyone of higher HD that is partially affected gets a save, otherwise, no save. For every level unaffected, the save is at a bonus of +2. Therefore, using this version of the spell, if the 1st level illusionist uses this spell on the ogre and rolls a 2 for the levels affected, the ogre gets a saving throw at +4 to avoid the effects, otherwise he is unconscious from the colors. There is no duration listed here so it's assumed that it lasts until the creature is revived somehow. There is a hard limited of 6 HD, meaning that this spell would be useless on giants, powerful dragons, etc. This makes more sense than the convoluted spell description for AD&D 1st edition. But still not very helpful.

OK, so perhaps the whole "higher HD than the illusionist" thing occurs only when an illusionist casts this on a creature not normally affected by the spell (i.e. higher than the spell's HD capacity). This would give the creature a saving throw against the effect AND only be able to blind or temporarily delay the actions of the creature. It's important to note that if the DM doesn't understand initiative, then the segments duration of the stun effect will probably be taken incorrectly or ignored. Ugh, such a confusing spell! But I can see how the original was twisted into the current AD&D version. It could have been much better explained in my opinion, since it obviously was meant to allow illusionists to keep using the spell beyond 6th level casting ability.

OD&D 1974 Character Creation

I was in a nostalgic mood today and decided after work that I would sit down and create a character "Old School" style. So I opened up my pdf version of Men & Magic, got out my d6 brick, and started rolling! Here's the result:

• Strength  11
• Intelligence 11
• Wisdom  12
• Constitution  8
• Dexterity  8
• Charisma  12

Not a bad set of rolls, but painfully average in most stats. Since the only high Prime Requisite I had was in Wisdom, I opted to go for Cleric. After reading (and re-reading) the section on ability scores, it seemed that I could reduce one of the other PRs in order to raise Wisdom to get that all coveted Experience bonus. I noticed that I was only 1 point away, so I lowered my intelligence 2 points to add 1 point in Wisdom. I then rolled a 12 for money, meaning that I now had 120 GP to buy equipment! Let me introduce to you....

DARNOK THE ACOLYTE (Lawful)
1st level Cleric (Man), Hit Points: 4   Exp. = 0

• Strength  11
• Intelligence 9
• Wisdom  13 (+5% earned Exp.)
• Constitution 8 (50% survival chance)
• Dexterity  8 (-1 missiles)
• Charisma  12  (4 henchmen max.)

Languages Known: Common, Lawful
Equipment: (Encumbrance = 830 GP WT., Move = 9"/turn)

• Chain Mail Armor (30 GP)
• Shield (10 GP)
• Helmet (10 GP)
• Mace (5 GP)
• 50' Rope (1 GP)
• 2 Small Sacks (2 GP)
• Silver Cross (25 GP)
• Holy Water (25 GP)
• 1 Week Std. Rations (5 GP)

My Armor Class is a 4.
I can use magic armor like a fighter, and non-edged magic weapons.
I have 7 GP left at the start of the game.
Although I can't cast spells yet, I can Turn Undead (Skeletons 7, Zombies 9, Ghouls 11) on a 2d6 roll.

So, not a bad character! He needs to be in a large party in order to survive. Those 4 Hit Points are not gonna do him much good I'm afraid. One good hit and he will drop like a sack of potatoes. Since his Con is slightly below average I'm giving him a hacking cough which he acquired after fasting and praying in nothing but a thin linen robe for a week in penance. Although he is pious and faithful, his studies have fallen to the wayside. He is competent enough to hold his own in weapons practice though, and he gets along well with his fellows at the monastery. Not sure about religion in OD&D though. It seems like the implied religion here is Christian-like -- no doubt because of the presence of holy crosses and other aspects. I would assume, however, that this character does NOT exist in an Earth-like world at all (since this is D&D and magic & monsters exist). Let's assume that this character actually exists in the old Greyhawk campaign -- and let's assume that he is a worshipper of  St. Cuthbert (a somewhat Christian-like deity). Beyond this, I don't think I need to go into any more detail than I already have. The character is complete!

I doubt 7 GP will be enough to hire many henchmen. Perhaps he should just try and get some men-at-arms to accompany him on his first adventure. For 4 GP he can hire two light foot men-at-arms for a month. I assume they are dressed in leather armor, with or without shield, and with light weapons like spears and short swords. If Darnok has to equip these men then he can't afford to hire them!

With my new guardsmen, Darnok is ready to find others willing to locate and enter a dungeon! Now if only I knew of a Dungeon Master who still ran OD&D....

Hopeless Characters

I've been looking over a few posts on other web sites in the past few weeks regarding characters with low ability scores, or "Hopeless" characters. This sentiment has been around for a while now, even appearing in the rules for AD&D and Basic/Expert D&D back in 1979/1980. The thing about it is that I don't think that a character is truly hopeless unless the PLAYER thinks it is.

The premise of the original D&D game appears to be that of a bunch of people who have apprenticed in a chosen profession (class) heading off to a dungeon to recover treasure and make a name for themselves. Along the way they face terrible monsters, deadly traps, and devious puzzles. Those that overcome these become rich and famous. Those that don't...? Well, they become dungeon dressing to be found by those who later enter said dungeon in search of their own glory.

But here's the thing... abilities are MEANT to be random. If they weren't, then why roll the dice at all? If you won't play a character with any score lower than 10, why even roll the dice? It's statistically possible to have a character with all 3's. The same probability exists to roll a character with all 18's. But it's more likely that your score will fall in the 9-12 range.

Let's face it. No one wants to play someone JUST LIKE THEM in real life. No one who plays D&D or AD&D wants to play the couch potato with the huge gut who can barely lift a sword, no less swing one. No one wants to be the bumbling klutz or the moron who can't remember where he left his glasses (which are on his head...). No one wants to be known as the guy who foolishly agreed to some plan suggested by an NPC, just because he wasn't savvy enough to realize he was being duped. No, everyone wants to be the god-like hero of myth, the mighty warrior who gets all the girls, the powerful magic-user able to routinely hold dozens of spells in his memory at once, or the wise cleric who can see through deceit and resist the most potent charms. Let's face it, no one wants to play themselves in their fantasy.

But, I have to tell you, playing the foibles of lackluster characters is sometimes fun. Our most memorable characters were not the ones with 18 percentile strength, but rather the weakling mage who can't even hold his own cat familiar without becoming tired; or the fighter whose wisdom was so low that she could be convinced of just about anything; or the charismatic fighter who really wanted to be a paladin but just could not cut it. These low scores that "prevent" us from enjoying a character really give the character personality and background. However, this is not for everyone.

One of my friends once put this in terms I could understand. Superman is invulnerable, he's the fastest hero around, he's the strongest hero around, he has a computer-like brain, and he's dashing and charismatic. However, the character is boring as hell. Even the writers couldn't figure out how to write good stories about him. However, his bumbling sidekick Jimmy Olsen, or not-so-wise love Lois Lane (always getting into trouble) were much more interesting to write about. And so, although Superman could be said to have 18s in all his stats, he was still just a ho-hum character. You always knew he would save the day. There was no doubt about it. And when something becomes an absolute, when there's no chance of failure, the action becomes routine and boring.

Some players yearn to be Superman from 1st level. They want to win all the time. They need to succeed and be the best. They hate losing. Low stats means they have lost or aren't good enough. There is a section in the beginning of the Players Handbook regarding such a thing. In fact, later versions of the game assume that the characters are a cut above the rank and file of humanity (or dwarf-, elf-, and halfling-kind). But this is not how swords & sorcery fantasy should be. Everyone has to start somewhere. The game assumes that you are beginning at the ground floor and working your way up to fame and fortune, power and prestige. If you START at the top, as the saying goes, there's nowhere to go but down.

The definition of "hopeless character" has changed over time. Original D&D had no such thing. But if you look at the way the game played, ability scores were not very important. Basic D&D, which is based on OD&D, stated that characters whose ability scores were all under 9 were unplayable, but this was the first time that minimum scores were stated in the rules for each class. Before this, you could be a fighter with a 7 strength, or a magic-user with a 5 intelligence. You wouldn't be very good, but you could still exist. By AD&D, all the major classes needed at least a 9 in their "prime requisite" to qualify for a class. It was recommended that you have at least two scores of 15 or higher and no more than one score in the very low range (3-6).

The reason I'm bringing this up is that I'm trying to figure out why people hate 3d6 rolled in order as a method of generating characters. To me it makes little difference. But there are some people who adamantly despise this method of rolling. It seems that it boils down to two real ideologies here:

1. The camp that believe that all characters should be a "cut above" and be heroic in all ways. They believe that such characters should have no flaws, because weakness is no fun to play (for them). These people already know exactly what character they want to play.
2. The other camp seems to like organic character creation. These folks have no idea what they want to play and allow the dice to tell them what they can play. They don't go into the game needing to play a certain type of character, but rather learn about what character they just rolled.

I fall into this latter camp. I never make a character knowing what I want before I begin. I prefer to roll and see what I can be based on the rolls. I realize that I can't control the roll of the dice - it's random. Plus, it might allow me to run a character class or race that I don't get the chance to play all too often. Others have preferences and don't want to even try another class or race. For example, one of my friends would only play fighters or magic-users, and always human. He would not even consider demi-humans. His favorite character type was a fighter with extremely high strength who could swing a sword multiple times per round and decimate all his enemies without getting hurt himself. Is it any wonder that he loved Conan the Barbarian? But the game is supposed to fun, and this is a valid view. Just as valid is the player who rolls 3d6 in order to see what they can be. I guess the problem comes when a DM enforces his views of character creation on players who do not share the same view. This is why there are so many different methods of rolling characters in the AD&D Dungeon Masters Guide and Unearthed Arcana. In essence, the DM is supposed to know the likes and dislikes of his players before rolling characters. This is not always possible. However, allowing one person to roll with one method and letting others roll with another is not really fair and goes against the spirit of the game.

Call me a grognard, but I think that everyone should try and play a 3d6-straight rolled character at least once. Old style gaming can be a real fun time if everyone is on the same page. Just for kicks, I rolled up three characters using 3d6 rolled in order. These are my stats

1. Str 7, Int 7, Wis 9, Dex 12, Con 14, Cha 8 (possible thief)
2. Str 10, Int 11, Wis 12, Dex 9, Con 11, Cha 14 (any base class, leaning towards cleric)
3. Str 15, Int 18(!), Wis 9, Dex 11, Con 13, Cha 5 (likely fighter/magic-user, or MU at least)

As you can see, the stats tend to cluster in the middle range. This is due to probability with rolling multiple dice - you get the bell-curve. Obviously, most of your scores are going to be in the 9-12 range. This is average. Some people don't want to be average. Low scores and high scores are supposed to be rare, but they can and do happen. Look above. I managed to roll an 18 on one of those scores; I also managed to roll a 5 on the same character. Some ability scores are known to be "dump" stats. For example, if you're playing a fighter, Int and Cha become dump stats. If you're a thief, Int, Wis, and Cha become dump stats. Typically, Charisma is seen as useless to the base classes. Not so with sub-classes (mainly an AD&D thing). Suddenly Charisma becomes very important to druids and paladins. It SHOULD be considered for clerics as well, since they must preach to the masses and project the will of their god(s). Charisma is still a useful stat - it just depends on the style of play.

For example: It was assumed that players would seek out NPCs to assist them in their adventures. The concept of hirelings and henchmen has been around since the beginning. Of course, the terms "meat shield" or "red-shirts" have also, unfortunately, been around for that long as well. Let's face it - adventuring is risky business; you're going to get hurt and will most likely die unless you are very careful. The more targets there are, the less likely a casualty will be a player character. It's not a very heroic concept, sacrificing others so that you can survive. Then again, the premise of the game is not very heroic either - entering dank dungeons and stealing away with treasure that belonged to someone else (or guarded/protected by magic and traps). These are things that THIEVES are meant to do. They sneak into bad places and steal away with treasure, hopefully without any harm coming to themselves. So, in essence, ALL characters are really thieves (or "murder-hobos" as some refer to them). And the typical depiction of a thief is a rough-and-tumble scrawny guy who lies, cheats, and wheedles his way through life, avoiding combat when possible, and making out with as much treasure as he can carry. THIS is the way the game was envisioned by the creator(s). It didn't matter much what your strength, intelligence, wisdom, or dexterity were. What mattered is that you lived - by any means possible!

But back to "hopeless characters." We can now see that "heroic" characters were made to cater to individual desires. They were not meant to be adventurers in the original D&D sense. But let's face it, when you think medieval society, you assume knights, dragons, and damsels in distress. Enter the paladin. I believe that this sub-class was created to cater to those who needed to be the superhero. They needed high stats and a moral code. Strangely enough, no one I knew back in the day wanted to play a paladin as Lawful and Good. All they really wanted were the stats. And who wants to play a lowly fighter when you can play a demi-god of holy prowess? Eventually, sub-classes came to rule the D&D landscape. Since they needed higher scores to qualify, people started seeing 3d6 as "not good enough." So alternate methods were devised. Looking at the characters I generated above, I don't think any of them qualifies to be a sub-class (perhaps #3 could be an assassin?). And if your only goal in the game is to "be the best" or, more disturbingly, "be better than everyone else playing the game," then 3d6 isn't going to cut it. The added character classes and races in Unearthed Arcana continued this disturbing trend with barbarians, cavaliers, dark elves, duergar, etc. The new method of rolling characters (Method V) had players rolling multiple dice for certain key stats and taking the best 3 rolls. If you wanted to play a human fighter, you got to roll 9d6 and take the highest 3 rolls. Soon, if you were a fighter without percentile strength you were "doing it wrong."

To me, no character is truly hopeless. The lack of a stat does not mean that the character is worthless. In a truly randomly-rolled game, there is just as much chance of your 18/00% Strength fighter dying as there is my 10 Strength fighter. That 9 Intelligence magic-user may not know as many spells as your 18 Intelligence magic-user, but the game plays the same regardless. What needs to be addressed BEFORE THE GAME BEGINS is which type of characters the players prefer. Once a consensus is achieved, the Method of rolling can be established and the game can proceed. The DM also should establish guidelines for when a character may be scrapped because scores are not high enough for survivability; but even this can be waived if the player really wants to play such a character. They can be just as much fun, and usually more memorable, than those with god-like stats. Remember that magic items typically enhance abilities, and once the characters are beyond 1st level ability scores take a back seat to class mechanics.

My rule of thumb for "Hopeless Characters" is if you have more penalties than bonuses, you probably should rethink your character's chance to survive or even perform adequately in the chosen class. In the above examples, character #1 has 4 scores below 10. In Basic D&D one of these (strength) would result in a -1 penalty to hit and damage. But this is balanced by the +1 bonus gained from Constitution. In AD&D Strength of 7 would only cause a -1 to hit. This is a perfectly valid character, although some people see the lack of bonuses as a problem. After all, thieves don't really NEED strength to perform as thieves. Character #2 is dead average - he could qualify for any of the base classes (fighter, magic-user, cleric, or thief). Again, this is a valid character. However, the lack of bonuses seems to turn some people off. Character #3 is an amazing example of the randomness of rolling 3d6. This character would make a powerful magic-user.... or would it? What benefit does a Basic D&D magic-user gain from such high Intelligence? They can still only cast a limited number of spells, same as a 9 Int M-U. Sure, they can speak 3 extra languages, but this doesn't affect their survivability all that much. In AD&D, that magic-user has a better chance of knowing more spells, and has more spells in their spellbook, and will likely level faster thus getting the character out of danger of dying too soon. However, they can still only cast ONE of those spells for the day, regardless of Intelligence. So you see, a high score is only desirable in the mind of the player. The game doesn't care WHAT your score is. The only classes that really suffer from low scores are fighters and clerics. Fighters with lackluster Strength can't kill things very fast, and may miss more often than one with high Strength. Low Wisdom clerics in Basic D&D have no real penalties; however, those with low wisdom (9-12) in AD&D have a chance of miscasting their spells! Thieves in D&D are not terribly impacted by average or high Dexterity in their class abilities; however, it provides a penalty or bonus to thief abilities in AD&D and high Dex may improve the chances of survival in combat by lowering AC in either system.

Comparing the ability bonuses in Basic D&D and AD&D, one can see that in Basic D&D, bonuses and penalties occur immediately beyond the average 9-12 range. In AD&D it depends on the ability score; some gain penalties/bonuses at very low/high numbers and some give benefits a bit above average. But generally speaking, in AD&D you want scores of 15+ to gain the bonuses provided on the charts. And this is the reason why Gygax made that statement of wanting at least two scores in the 15+ range. Also, if you peruse the charts in the Players Handbook, you will see that if an ability score is lower than a 6, it locks you into a particular class. For instance, a character with a 5 or lower strength can ONLY be a magic-user. It doesn't matter what your intelligence is (so long as it is 9 or higher). If you had scores of Str 5 and Int 8, then that would truly be a hopeless character. In the examples above, the only character with a score of 5 or lower is #3. That character has a Charisma of 5. Sure enough, consulting the PHB states that this character can ONLY be an assassin! However, the character has an 11 Dex and needs a 12 to qualify for assassin. Interestingly enough, this character is considered HOPELESS according to the rules since he cannot qualify for ANY class based on those stats. The DM would require the player to reroll, despite having rolled an 18 in Intelligence!! If the player wanted to still run the character, the DM would likely enforce the need to be an assassin and have the player run an elf to get the Dexterity up one point. However, elves must have a minimum Charisma of 8 so this character is unplayable!! The only way this character could work is if the DM made an exception to the rules, something the other players may not agree with as it seems as if the DM is playing favorites (especially if they are settling for a character they didn't really want to play based on their stats). The same does not apply to Basic D&D characters. Character #3 could be an intelligent fighter, a strong magic-user, or an elf character with no problems. It could also be a thief character (with good strength and great intelligence). The charisma in Basic D&D really has no effect on character choice at all.

So, as you can see, "hopeless" characters are really dependent on the version of the game you are playing, the rules/guidelines being used by the DM, and the desires/needs of the players. A 3d6-straight character is no more or less valid than any other method of rolling. The only way to get a character you truly want to play with the stats desired is pretty much selecting from a given array or selecting the class and rolling ranges between the minimums and maximums. For example, monks are one of the hardest classes to qualify for in AD&D. They require 15 Str, 15 Wis, 15 Dex and 11 Con. Rolling that with 3d6 is really hard - it's even pretty tough with 4d6 drop the lowest. Some DMs allow a player to choose their class before rolling dice, then roll ability scores. For example, a DM might allow a player to choose monk, then have them roll 1d4+14 for Str, Wis, and Dex, and 1d8+10 for Con while all other stats are rolled using the normal method. Again, it is the DMs prerogative and the player's desires which drive this. The rules used are not "lame", "broken," or antiquated, they simply have evolved over time to suit different needs.

AD&D Initiative Examples

I will admit right now that I do not use the initiative rules as written in my own campaign. However I do understand these rules and how they function, and I have used them in my AD&D dogma trial adventure (when I remembered that they applied).

As written, the rules for armed opponents vs. spellcasters is somewhat confusing and doesn't follow the normal flow of initiative as presented in the book. Many of us have taken that to mean that the rules are broken or don't make sense as written. This may be the case, or they were left overly simplistic to make the game run smoother. You decide which is right.

Here are some examples I just whipped up. I will attempt to explain each in as much detail as possible:

EXAMPLE 1
A melee between party A and party B has erupted in a dungeon chamber. The combatants had all engaged their opponents when a fighter from party B saw an opening and headed off to take on the magic-user in party A. They begin within melee range. Before initiative the magic-user declares he is casting a magic missile spell (casting time: 1 segment) at the offending fighter. The fighter is armed with a short sword (Speed Factor 3). Initiative is rolled and party A gets a 2, while party B gets a 1. According to the rules as written, we compare the casting time (1 segment) with the speed factor of the weapon minus the losing die roll (3-1 = 2) to get the segment when the attack occurs. Proceed from lowest number to highest. Thus the spell would come off first!

EXAMPLE 2
A magic-user is casting a slow spell (casting time: 3 segments) upon an evil cleric and his undead minions. The cleric is within melee distance of the magic-user (less than 10') and will strike at him using a footman's mace (Speed Factor 7). Initiative is rolled and the magic-user's party gets a 3 while the cleric's side gets a 5. Comparing the casting time (3 segments) to the weapon speed factor minus the losing die (7-3 = 4) we can see that the slow spell will indeed occur first.

EXAMPLE 3
An evil cleric player character is casting bestow curse (casting time: 6 segments) upon a fighter attacking him with a battle axe (Speed Factor 7). The initiative roll for the cleric's party is 1; the fighter's party rolls a 2. Comparing the casting time (6 segments) to the weapon speed factor minus the losing die roll (7-1 = 6) shows that the action is simultaneous. Thus the spell will occur at the same time as the weapon strike. Both attacks will take effect and neither will be disrupted.

EXAMPLE 4
A druid encounters a small group of goblins in the forest chopping down trees in a sacred grove. The druid engages the goblins and is able to dispatch all but one which is armed with a hand axe (Speed Factor 4). The druid begins casting his heat metal spell on the goblin (casting time: 4 segments). They roll for initiative and the druid gets a 5 while the goblin rolls a 2. Comparing the casting time (4 segments) with the weapon speed factor minus the losing die (4-2 = 2) indicates that the goblin will strike the druid BEFORE his spell comes off, despite having lost initiative. If the goblin hits, he can disrupt and spoil the spell.

EXAMPLE 5
An illusionist is casting color spray (casting time: 1 segment) at a hobgoblin armed with a longsword (Speed Factor 5). Initiative rolled results in a 3 for the illusionist and 4 for the hobgoblin. Comparing casting time (1 segment) to the weapon speed factor minus the losing die roll (5-3 = 2) indicates that the spell will go off before the hobgoblin can strike despite the hobgoblin winning the initiative.

EXAMPLE 6
A magic-user casts hold monster (casting time: 5 segments) at a frost giant wielding a huge battle axe (Speed Factor 7). Initiative is rolled with the magic-user scoring a 3 and the giant scoring a 3. Since initiative is tied, attacks are resolved in order of speed factors/casting times without adjustment by the losing die roll. In this case the spell occurs first (CT 5) and the axe after (SF 7).

Interestingly enough, this works also with activated magic items in melee, like potions, wands, scrolls, rods, staves, some rings and some miscellaneous magic items. Basically anything that lists how many segments it takes to use or activate. It doesn't work well with missile weapons or clerical turning, however, since no speed factor is listed. In such a case, use the general rule "you go on your opponent's die roll" to determine when the attack occurs. Remember though that, by the rules as written, weapons with multiple attacks in a round go FIRST and LAST. Thus, if the missile were a bow (Fire Rate 2), it would go before a spell caster and after the spell caster. This must be why magic-users cower behind their party (to gain a cover bonus, or at least concealment). It also explains the existence of spells like shield (which is better against missile weapons) and protection from normal missiles. If darts are being used, the thrower goes FIRST, on initiative, and LAST. If more than one combatant goes FIRST and LAST, use initiative to see which gets the jump on the other.

The next example showcases increased number of attacks based on speed factor. Note that this ONLY occurs on a TIED initiative, when both combatants are using weapons in melee, and only after having closed/charged; so this rule will only come up on rare occasions.

EXAMPLE 7
A thief armed with a dagger (SF 2) has been caught infiltrating an orc lair ahead of her party. She was discovered by an orc guard armed with a bastard sword (SF 6). They have traded a few blows and now find themselves tied for initiative. Since the orc's weapon is more than twice the speed factor of the thief's dagger, the thief will get two dagger strikes BEFORE the orc gets to swing his blade. This only occurred because of the tied initiative (or whenever speed factor becomes a determinant in who strikes first).

This next example indicates the use of Dex bonuses when engaged in missile fire.

EXAMPLE 8
A party of adventurers comes across a band of gnolls in the wilderness. The elf fighter/magic-user has his short bow at the ready and wants to fire at the gnolls before they close. His Dexterity score is 16, granting him a Reaction bonus of +1. Some of the gnolls are also firing arrows from long bows at the party. The gnolls have no Reaction adjustment (the DM decides they all have average scores). When initiative is rolled, the elf gets to adjust the party's roll by +1 for himself only. The party rolls a 4 and the gnolls roll a 5, so the elf also goes on 5. The elf and gnolls fire their first arrows simultaneously before he rest of the party and/or gnolls get to do anything.

Now, let's look at an example that defies rolled initiative -- charging. When charging, weapon length dictates who strikes first.

EXAMPLE 9
Assume a warrior with a spear is being charged by an angry giant boar (DM declares the charge before initiative). The warrior states he is setting his spear for the charge. Initiative is rolled with the boar scoring a 6 and the warrior a 5. Regardless, the warrior strikes first since his weapon is much longer. If the warrior hits, the boar will impale itself on the spear for double damage; otherwise the boar strikes the warrior at +2 to hit. If the warrior had only a dagger in hand, the boar would have struck first since it had an equally long weapon (tusks), but won the initiative roll.