J is for Jewlery

The Hope Diamond, 45.52 carat deep-blue diamond.

"Just see how it glints and sparkles. Of course it is a nucleus and focus of crime. Every good stone is. They are the devil's pet baits. In larger and older jewels every facet may stand for a bloody deed...." 

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, British author. Sherlock Holmes, in "The Adventure of the Blue Carbuncle," The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes (1891).

 

Jewelry, the settings for gems. This is another area that Gary obviously put a lot of thought into for AD&D.  He devotes about two pages, give or take (DMG, pp. 25-27), at the beginning of the book, not in the back with the magic items. That does highlight the importance somewhat. True, he was attempting to follow the outline of the PHB, and that would indicate his thoughts about gems and jewelry as money, a means of exchange. But there is more to it than that.

 

First, there is the idea of jewelry as "easily portable wealth." That is a double-edged sword, however. What is easily transportable is also easily stolen. Tied in with this is the idea of jewelry as experience points. 1 ep for every gp value of treasure taken. Note, however, that the PCs should never receive full g.p value when they fence their jewels: 60-80% seems to be the standard rate of exchange for fences in modules that Gary authored (Cf, "The Village of Hommlett" and "Keep  on the Borderlands"). Buying jewelry is also at 100-120% usually. So, the PC buys a ring worth 1000 g.p. in Hommlett with the 1100 g.p. he carted out of the ruined moathouse and then later sells it in Verbobonc for 600 g.p. Ouch. That of course, assumes that it's not stolen on the road thither!

 

The Star of India, a 536.35 carat star sapphire.

 

 

Second, jewelry and magic: a stunning combination. AD&D does not focus on magic item creation as much as 3.5 did, but there are extant rules for such, if the players at higher level wish to pursue them. One line of particular note is thus, "He or she commissions a platinumsmith to fashion a ring of the finest quality, and pays 5,000 g.p. for materials and labor." I would allow players to use "harvested" jewelry as well, but the point is that magic items should, in general, be flashy, opulent, luxurious. I firmly disagree with the line in the DMG that states, "Furthermore, all magic rings look alike, so that determination of a given ring's magical powers is very difficult." I invoke the magic words "Poppycock!" and "Balderdash!" against such knavery! In fact, I would go so far as to say that the "ring" of protection +1 doesn't need to be a ring at all; how about a nice gorget necklace? change it up; make it different; customize the game to suit both your own style and the style of fantasy literature. Not every bloody magic ring should be a plain gold band like the One Ring!

 

Necklace of Protection +1!

 

Third, jewelry serves a roleplaying function as well. Who will people take more seriously and treat with respect and deference: a scruffy looking ranger and a wizard (Aragorn and Gandalf the Grey) or a properly attired "noble" with a jewels on his fingers and at his throat? And think of the other possibilities! Meeting with a  recalcitrant official, one could easily say, "Look at this lovely emerald ring. It would be a shame if it slipped off my finger and I didn't notice."

 

All-in-all, jewelry is another important area of the game that is often neglected and merely seen as a money grab. Until tomorrow, gentle readers, when I shall lecture about knightly orders!

 

 

I is for Initiative

Initiative. Is there anything else in AD&D that is tinkered with as much in the history of the game? More so even than level limits and spell slots, this is the winner. I loved Gary to death, but the writing on initiative was not his best. One can argue that the way speed factor is described in the DMG that even a thief can get 3 attacks off before an attacker with a pike can.make his first! So how does that work exactly? Does it take 3 rounds? Does the thief actually get "extra attacks" that he is not entitled to? It is somewhat...bewildering at times.

 

Speed factors in practice!

 

[That said, I cannot recommend more highly DM Prata's ADDICT document that breaks down the AD&D initiative system by steps if one want top play initiative BtB (By the Book). ADDICT pdf]

 

I like to tinker. I believe I have said that before. Well, Hackmaster 4e did a really good of merging the AD&D and 2e initiatives together. I played with a variant of that one for a while. Now Kenzer Company, in Hackmaster 5E, has adapted their Aces and Eights Western RPG system for initiative. And this is the current system I'm tinkering with.

 

First of all, there is only one initiative roll at the beginning of combat to determine when each character begins acting. The combat is measured in "tics" and counts up until the combat is over. Once a character begins acting each action takes a number of tics to complete. There is nothing random about it. So, let's start the adaptation.

 

First up, surprise. The DM will determine surprise. Sorry, but that's an adjudication call. It's insane to have a 34% chance (2 in 6) of being surprised each and every combat. If surprise is warranted, the surprised character(s) or side begins acting once everyone else has started.

 

Each player is rolling for each character; no group init (the DM can, of course, roll for groups of monsters for ease; this does actually give the players a bit of an edge. Roll d6, add reaction adjustment for DX. The player begins acting when their number comes up. What are the actions?

 

1. Spells. The player starts casting. If material components are required, 1d4 is added to the count to grab them if they are readily available. Exception: a girdle of many pouches (or the like) only adds a one. Spell components might already be in hand (like an archer with a drawn bow) add nothing. The next spell occurs in its casting time plus a d4 if components are necessary. 1 Segment = 1 Tic. 1 Round =10 Tics. Note that wands are very powerful and can be activated every TIC unless an item description says other wise (Cf.,wand of fire, "pyrotechnics," DMG, pg. 135) ! One will, of course, run through charges really quick in that instance!

 

 

2. Missile Combat. Weapon-in-Hand goes on your first tic. After that, Rate of Fire 3 weapons, 3 tics. RoF 2: 5 tics. RoF 1: 10 tics. RoF 1/2: 20 tics. Exceptions: A Quiver of Ehlonna (or the equivalent) subtracts 1 Tic. A crossbow of speed halves the Tic count (i.e., light in 5, heavy in 10). A specialist bowman with a drawn bow still fires before initiative is rolled.

 

3. Melee Combat. Now it gets a little complex. The first attack with a weapon is easy. Adjacent to foe and swing. After that, the speed factor comes into play: that's the Tic count. Ah, but what about fighters with multiple attacks. Subtract 1 Tic from Speed for every extra attack the fighter has. The same works for cavaliers with weapons of choice or weapon specialists. Alternatively, one can allow two attacks with the weapon when the count comes up. If the charcater is dual wielding, use the rules in the DMG (pg. 70), but note that the off-hand weapon has its own count.

If you disengage, that is, you have active enemy fighters around you, your weapon "resets": move and attack normally when adjacent to a foe.

Monks are a interesting case. Open hand speed factor is 1. Their numbers of attacks per round is based on level. It's best just to go with one attack per tic. That either makes them uber or gives them a bit of an edge, depending. However, they have a lack of AC and, if using AC modifiers to hit, they're balanced in that way as well.

 

4. Movement. 1" of movement (10') per Tic. Other actions (within reason) can combine with this, such as changing weapons on the run, grabbing spell components, etc. Not that to begin casting or to fire a weapon, the character must not be moving. Exceptions: Wands or crossbows can be fired on the run. Bows (of both types) can be fired from a moving horse, as can wands; crossbows (despite evidence in the movie LadyHawke) cannot be reloaded on horseback.

 

 

 

5. Psionics. If one uses psionics then, rather than stop the combat and play it out, each action is a Tic. The DMG (p. 79) states "psionic combat tokes place very quickly - in segments rather than rounds." Since this system 1 Segment = 1 Tic, there is no reason to stop. Take that, Illithid scum! Or not....

 

6. Other actions. Grabbing a potion from a pouch and quaffing it: 1d4 tics. Drawing or sheathing a weapon: 1 Tic. Dropping an item in hand: 1 Tic. Using an "at will" power or ability: 1 Tic. Remember, Tics = Seconds. Also, some actions can combine with movement; use common sense.

All-in-all, there are two things I like about this system. First, the lack of rolling speeds thing up and makes combat more fluid. Two, it keeps everyone engaged; no one is sitting there, twiddling dice, and waiting for the end of the round. things could change rapidly.

Until tomorrow, gentle readers.

 

H is for Heroes

A cavalier in action! A true hero!

Heroes. I find the concept is alien to many gamers these days. I say that because, one of the worst things to come out of the 1990s and even the late 1980s is the skill/power concept. No, it did not begin with D20/3.0 (although that was the penultimate expression of the concept). What I mean is two ideas. First, there is the attitude of "If I don't have the skill I cannot attempt to perform a certain action," and its close corollary, "If I fail the skill roll, I miss it all." The gaming community is ripe with stories of failed notice rolls and the inability of the character to see the door in front of him. It's even become a running joke in some webcomics:

 

Elan fumbles a Spot check.

 

 

Second, there is the attitude that the abilities completely define the character. Followed too far, and this leads to 4.0-type skills that are just the "pushing of a keyboard button." At the other extreme, it leads to the ossification of the archetypal system that is a strength of old-school gaming and (1e) AD&D in particular. Allow me to elaborate on this last point.

 

Old-school gamers are quite pleased with the four "archetypal" classes: the armored fighter wielding  a sword and shield, the wise cleric healing and turning back the forces of Undeath, the skulking thief armed with quick-wit and ready blade, and the mysterious magic-user summoning arcane power to slay. In B/X and BECMI we also have the concept of "race as class": the sturdy dwarf fighter, the bright-eyed elf who combines steel with sorcery, and the resolute hobb-, er halfling fighter. These are clearly defined images. Anyone who has lived in western culture can equate these to literary and mythical figures: Lancelot, St. Francis of Assisi, the Grey Mouser, Merlin, Gimli, Lord Elrond of Rivendell, and Samwise. They work.

 

Some might say that the multiclassing in AD&D muddies the waters a bit, but not really. An elf fighter/magic-user is no different from a B/X elf. Even "new" multiclasses are acceptable: isn't Frodo more of a fighter/thief? And opening up new classes to demi-humans is good as well for the same reasons; Bilbo is probably just a straight up thief, for example. New specialty classes open up archetypes; as long as one doesn't go too far, it doesn't dilute things much. Rangers, monks, and druids, o mai! Even brand new classes from dragon are adapted from other games/editions are fine as well. Necromancer? Yes, definitely an archetype.

 

"We don't have a cleric...somebody is going to die, dude!"

 

If everyone is an archetype with their own little niche, what does one do when that niche is empty. So, how does a fighter climb a wall? How does cleric get rid of the trap his spell discovered if the thief is already down? The answer: very carefully! The character is not defined by the character sheet and its stats; the character is defined by the PLAYER!!! Both of the situations above can be solved without a thief. the thing is, the thieving abilities work (by my estimation) in a combat round (lock picking) or without extraneous equipment (wall climbing). Take note of the scene in "Conan the Barbarian." When climbing the Tower of the Serpent the two fighters (Conan and Valeria) are using a rope; the thief (Subodai) is climbing the wall freehand.

 

If the party had to disarm a trap without a thief, it would take them at least 15 minutes. They would describe their plan, and I would assign a chance, usually less than a thief....DEX as a %, add a racial modifier if applicable (a dwarf removing a trap, for instance), possibly doubling it if the plan was solid, halving it without a plan. Easily done.

 

What about other skills? Well, previous profession would be a guide (Secondary Skills Table, DMG pg. 12) and roll a % based on an applicable stat doubled or even tripled. Also class would. A fighter might not ride as well as a cavalier, but he should have some proficiency. As an aside, the reason I do not use the non-weapon proficiency system from DSG/WSG is that it leads down that straitjacket road too easily. Try anything; I'll give the player a chance.

 

I have wandered far from my intended post, but that's ok. Let me wrap up by saying two things. First, the PCs in AD&D are a cut about the average. Of the four archetypal classes, three have more starting hit points than normal men. If one looks at some of the expanded classes, it is possible to have way more than the norm; a ranger or barbarian with the right stats and rolls can start the game with a max of 20 HP at first level! Second, Kevin Siembieda writes in several of his games that it always amazes him that people forget they're playing HEROES! They complain that the character is not normal or realistic. Well, duh! You are a HERO!

 

Until tomorrow, gentle readers, keep the sword blade sharp and the components near to hand!