Fantasy Monday: OD&D Single Volume Read-Through, Pt. 3

Well, here we are again, gentle readers. Pts. 1 & 2 are here and here. Today, we're looking at Section 5: Encounters & Combat!

The section starts off with movement and reemphasizes the 120' per turn for an unarmored man and also the fact that chase scenes double the speed, but mapping is not allowed. Monsters reactions are next, and each monster is likely to be aggressive, neutral, or friendly, all things being equal.

Dungeon Encounters are next and there is a 1-in-6 chance every turn (or 10 minutes) of a wandering monster encounter. So, there should be at least one per hour; that's pretty steep! Distance of the encounter is 20-80 feet, unless surprise (2-in-6 chance) occurs, then distance is 10-30 feet. A chase sequence mechanic is laid out which seems like it would work well in practice and be easy to adjudicate. It is interesting to note that animals are more likely to stop pursuing for food, and monsters are more likely to stop for treasure; the two are inversely proportional.

Wilderness Encounters are similar, but encounter distances are greater: 40-240 yards normally, 10-30 yards for surprise. Wandering monster checks are only made at the end of the day, however; apparently the Wilderness is more desolate than the Dungeon! Staying in one place is bad, however; for each full day of rest in the Wilderness, two wandering monster checks are performed. Evading in the Wilderness is a little more complex and is "a function of the size of the party of adventurers and the number of monsters, modified by surprise, terrain and comparative speed," (pg. 32).

And now the meat of the Section: (MORTAL) COMBAT! The combat sequence is fairly simple and composed of 8 steps:

Combat Sequence

1. Determine Surprise.
2. Roll Initiative.
3. Winning side acts first. Referee may determine monster action and morale.
4. Movements can be made.
5. Missile attacks/spells cast if applicable.
6. Melee attacks occur, damage rolled.
7. Losing follows steps 4-6 and round ends.
8. Next round begins at step 2.

Surprise is determined by rolling d6 with a 1 or 2 indicating that the party is surprised. The distance is determined (10-30"); if the distance is 10" the non-surprised group will attack; otherwise, they get a free move action to either close, flee, or cast a spell. And then there's the best "eff-you!" rule in OD&D, or any version of D&&D for that matter: "There is a 25% chance that any character surprised by a monster will drop some item." Oops.

Once surprise is determined and acted upon, Initiative is rolled and modified upwards by 1 for high DX or lowered by 1 for low DX (the penalty, but not the bonus, is optional); highest roll on d6 goes first. Simple enough.

Then combat ensues: Movement, Missiles/Spells, Melee by the initiative winner, and then that sequence is followed by the losing side (if any remain able to resist). Initiative is rolled again, and the cycle repeats. Isn't this way simpler than AD&D, even using DM Prata's ADDICT article? 

Some interesting notes: first, AC maxes out at two. Thus, magical armor's bonus adds to the target number to hit, and the plus of a magic weapon adds to the roll. Missile fire is a little different, and medium range adds 1 to the target's AC and long range adds 2. All weapons do 1-6 points of damage. 

Unarmed combat is a single paragraph; each combatant rolls a number dice equal to level/hit dice and the highest number wins the grapple. Attackers pins the victim if he wins, and the if the victim wins, the attacker is thrown off and "stunned for a number of turns equal to the difference between the scores," (pg. 33). (A tie indicates that they're both still up and struggling; try again next round).

Saving throws are next, and there are no surprises here. Of note is the fact that the magic items only need to make a saving throw if they are unattended or the bearer is dead (exception -- helmets). Next follows two sections on aerial and naval combat which are pretty useful and well-written. 

All-all-all, the section is short and to the point. It really doesn't get any easier than this. The only complicated (if one can call it that) parts are the sections on aerial and naval combat, but those are both special situations where a more in-depth look is appreciated.

And that's all for now, Next time, we'll pick up Monsters & Treasures!

Fantasy Monday: OD&D Single Volume Read-Through, Pt. 2

     Well, in an attempt to continue coverage of Greyharp's single volume compilation of the Original Dungeons & Dragons LBBs that I began here. Today, I'll cover "Spells & Magic" and "Adventuring Rules." Let's get to it, then!

Section 3: Spells and Magic

     Spell-casting and memorization seems similar enough to later editions. There is the clarification that more than one of any given spell can be memorized and/or cast from a scroll per day. I remember arguing with a DM back in my early B/X days that that's how it was, but he said if I wanted a second magic missile, then I would have to learn it a second time when leveling. Lame.

     Spell books are next with the charming notation that each level of spells requires its own book! Ouch! And to replace or copy cost 2,000 g.p./level...that's a 2,000 g.p. investment given by the master to his apprentice!

     Apparently only clerics have reversible spells. Interesting. This also seems to be a function of alignment (i.e., Lawful clerics can cast Finger of Death, but they better have a darn good reason!).

     Spell research is merely a function of money and time; each period of research costs the base for the level (2,000 g.p. per) and gives a 20% chance of success. Fairly simple. Creating magic items is the same, but can only be done by Wizards (8th level and above). Pay 2,000 g.p. and spend two months and you too can enchant armor to +1! Of course, the wizard won't be doing anything else and I'm sure he has his own things to do, so....explains why items are worth more than it costs to make them.

     On a side note, there are no rules for clerics making scrolls. A quick glance forward to the magic item section produces this line: "All scrolls are spells for Magic-Users, and regardless of the level of the spell they can be used by any Magic-User capable of reading them." Oops. However, the Type of Scroll chart has the notation: "*There is a 25% chance that any scroll of spells found will contain those usable by clerics." So it makes sense that clerics can produce scrolls in a manner similar to magic-users. Potions are another thing, and they should stay firmly in the hands of Wizards.

     Next we have the Spell Lists. Few surprises here. All fairly basic. No magic missile, making sleep the combat spell du jour. Cleric lists are the same: familiar with some little differences; bless is 2nd level, which is a little different. There is a typo here in that the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd level lists for clerics are marked 4th, 5th, and 6th, but that's minor. (On a side note, this also means that the group in Doctor Demento's "I'm Always the First to Die" are playing B/X because the magic-user learns "the two standard spells, magic missile  and light.")

     Going through the Spell explanation section, little stands out. 

     Charm Person notes that the spells works on "two-legged, generally mammalian figures near to or less than man-size." Lizardmen are out, then? 

     Contact Higher Plane is interesting as the planar cosmology has yet to be defined; there are 10 higher planes rated from the 3rd to the 13th with a greater number of questions and accuracy the higher one goes, but with an increased chance of caster insanity as well. Unlike the AD&D version which caps out a 50% chance of insanity, OD&D takes it up to a 95% chance at the highest level of veracity!

     That's all that really stands out, other than the dimensions of spells being given entirely in map inches (walls, for example).

Section 4: Adventuring Rules

     This section starts off with time and movement. No surprises here: 10 minute turns, with two movements allowed per turn. It is interesting to note that unarmored hobbits have the same movement rate, 12", as unarmored men. Then we come to our old friend: encumbrance. 

     First of, every character has the same encumbrance profile: 750/1000/1500, based on "coin weight" (i.e., 10 coins weight 1 lb.) and conforming to light, heavy, and armored foot movement of 12"/9"/6". No adjustments for size, race, sex, or strength. So, in a way, more simple. Realistic? Well, this is a game not a strict simulation, so it's probably OK as it stands. Encumbrance is still one of those things I eyeball--that is, until the players are saying they're carrying a kitchen sink list.

     Resting is required, 1 turn/hour, although no penalties are mentioned for not doing so. "Light and Darkness" has the interesting note of "Monsters are assumed to have permanent infravision as long as they are not serving some character." So, the orc henchman you pick up loses his infravision for hanging out with a "hoomie?" Tough break, there. On doors, even dwarfs get a better "hear noise" roll than humans (1-2, same as elves and hobbits)! "Traps are usually sprung by a roll or a 1 or a 2 when any character passes over or by them." Good to know. And falling is the familiar 1d6 per 10 feet but without an upper limit. Oh joy!

     The Wilderness section (only about a half-page of material) gives some basic rules and charts for movement on the hex map and chance of becoming lost. Each hex is 5 miles across and a man can cross 3 hexes a day in normal terrain, a man on a light horse 10, for example.

     The section continues with guidelines for hiring retainers, mercenaries, and specialists. Hirelings are more akin to what AD&D calls henchmen, and it is a more expensive and demanding process than getting mercenaries because the player-character is essentially hiring a low-level PC class type. The rules do note the possibility of using charm spells or enticements on Men encountered in dungeons (as they are then considered "monsters"). This seems to be the only way to entice high-level class-types into service.

     Normal hirelings are simpler to hire and require the posting of notices and expense from 100-600 gold pieces. Availability and success is up to the DM. Specialists are "rare" and cover the range from armorer to spy. An interesting note on orcs explains their prevalence among the armies of Chaos: "Chaotic characters may wish to employ Orcs; Orc support and upkeep is only half that of a man." It's a bargain! Well, that and you have do the pesky Chaos thing, but hey, Warduke and Death Dealer for the win, am I right?

     This section ends off with rules for awarding experience. Familiar ground once again. Experience is awarded for monsters defeated and treasure gained. Only one level can be gained per award, and the example given places the character 1 point shy of 3rd level. An interesting part of the passage is as follows:

Gains in experience points will be relative; thus an 8th level Magic-User operating on the 5th dungeon level would be awarded 5/8 experience. Let us assume he gains 7,000 Gold Pieces by defeating a Troll (which is a 7th level monster, as it has over 6 Hit Dice). Had the monster been only a 5th level one experience would be awarded on a 5/8 basis as already stated, but as the monster guarding the treasure was a 7th level one experience would be awarded on a 7/8 basis thus; 7,000 G.P. + 700 for killing the Troll = 7,700 divided by 8 = 962.5 x 7 = 6,037.5. (pg. 30).

Well, that takes care of monster levels versus player levels very simply. Of course, unfortunately for those 1st levels that manage to take out a 4 HD Ogre or even a 6 HD Minotaur, the reverse is not true. "Experience points are never awarded above a 1 for 1 basis, so even if a character defeats a higher level monster he will not receive experience points above the total of treasure combined with the monster's kill value." Oh well.
   That's all for this time, mi amigos. Tune in next time when I go over "Encounters and Combat." Adios! Or, in other words, scram! :)

Fantasy Monday: OD&D Single Volume Read-Through

In an attempt to begin blogging again several times a week, I am starting a re-read of Original Dungeons & Dragons using the 2011 one-volume compilation of the LBBs by Greyharp and edited by il Male. And it's definitely a version I want to run. Even with PDFs of the LBBs available on RPGNow, this compilation has merit in that it is very well organized and usable. In his Foreword, Greyharp states that his purpose in compiling the LBBs was:

....to reorganize the 3LBBs into a single document. In doing so it quickly became apparent to me that Original D&D could be played without possessing Chainmail, and so I removed references to that game. I also removed references to the Outdoor Survival board game, which as far as the rules are concerned provided only a diagram to indicate in which direction a lost party was headed. A small amount of information was imported from The Strategic Review (page 3 & 4 of Vol. 1, No. 2), being Gygax’s official answers to the most frequently asked questions concerning the Dungeons & Dragons rules. Although some light editing was necessary in reformatting the 3LBBs into one volume, I kept it to an absolute minimum. 

Besides, Frazetta art always sells me. So let's begin.

Section One: Introduction

The only thing that really stands out for me here is this section:

The use of paper, pencil and map boards are standard. Miniature figures can be added if the players have them available and so desire, but miniatures are not required, only esthetically [sic] pleasing; similarly, unit counters can be employed - with or without figures - although by themselves the bits of cardboard lack the eye-appeal of the varied and brightly painted miniature figures (pg. 6, emphasis mine). 

Interesting, eh? Especially for a game gaming out of miniatures wargaming--miniatures are not required but map boards are standard. There might not be a need for positioning figures on a map, but we need to see what's going on. This makes sense--minis can slow down play, but everyone having a visual representation of the terrain is most useful. Of course, this is probably just a reference to the Outdoor Survival game mapboards....but maybe not. These are just my impressions, after all.

Section 2: Characters

No surprises early on: stats are 3d6 in order, 3d6 x 10 for gold pieces. Of course, there are not many bonuses out there yet, just a couple of +/-1s. The most important reason for a high stat is the 5%-10% xp bonus for having a high perquisite.

But there is something I've never caught or thought much on before: Constitution of 13+ does not require system shock/resurrection rolls, 7-12 varies from 40%-90%, and 6- cannot survive at all! So, if one is reasonably hearty, one is pretty safe from all of those death chances!

Charisma affects the number of hirelings, that is to say, "hirelings of unusual nature," as well as affecting the loyalty of normal men-at-arms and the like. AD&D would begin to use the term "henchmen" for these "hirelings of unusual nature."

There are, of course, only three classes: Fighting Man, Magic-User, and Cleric. There is no Thief class, something we think of as "core" in these days. There is an alternative (about which more below), but I am not convinced that I would use it. Oh, poor 1st-level Clerics with no spells! As far as non-human races, only Dwarf, Elf, and Hobbit. All three can be Fighting Men (with level restrictions), only the Elf can be a Magic-User, and none can be clerics. Speaking of which, Clerics can only be Lawful or Chaotic: no Neutral priests! (This would, of course, lead to the Druid class in Eldritch Wizardry.) 

This leads us to the Elf and early multi-classing. Only the Elf can choose to be both a Fighting Man and a Magic-User, but he must choose which class he is to portray at the start of the session and cannot change to the other during the adventure. This has little effect than determining which set of hit points and attack tables to use as the Elf, even when acting as a Magic-User, gets to wear magical armor and wield any weapons. If the Thief as shown below is used, I would limit the Elf to leather armor, possibly magical when acting as a thief.

One last comment on races: "There is no reason that players cannot be allowed to play as virtually anything, provided they begin relatively weak and work up to the top, i.e., a player wishing to be a Dragon would have to begin as let us say, a 'young' one and progress upwards in the usual manner, steps being predetermined by the campaign referee," (pg. 10).   o.O   Headache, definitely a headache. On the other hand, it just shows that tinkering is encouraging and that these are more quick and dirty guidelines instead of hard and strict rules. And hence, my preference for the title of Judge rather than that of Dungeon Master or Referee.

Alignment is the three-part system of Law, Neutrality, and Chaos (thank you, Moorcock), but I did note that Ogres and Orcs are both listed as having Chaotic and Neutral as valid choices. That makes killing off orc and and ogre babies a little problematic. How a Judge handles this in his campaign is up to his discretion, but there could be kingdoms of Neutral orcs who try to hold the line against their Chaotic and barbarian kin. 

"Law, Chaos and Neutrality also have common languages spoken by each respectively" (pg. 11). This doesn't bother me as much as it does in AD&D. I can see the language of Law similar to use of Latin in the Middle Ages by the Church or maybe Celestial from later versions of the game. Maybe it's because there are only 3 and not 9 as in AD&D.

Money and Equipment comes next. 5 copper to the silver, 50 to the gold, 10 silver to the gold. Electrum is either 2 to the gold or 2 gold to the electrum (Judge's choice). There's also the footnote on the list not repeated in the Combat section (I checked!) that states, "Any hit should be given a 10% of striking the Helm." We're going to assume that means head, so that there is a 1-in-10 chance of some cheapskate not wearing a helmet getting a hit to the AC 9 noggin!

And that covers he first two section of the Complied LBBs! Up next: Section 3: Spells & Magic.

Addendum: The Thief Class

This compilation lists the Thief class, as taken from the Greyhawk supplement, in an appendix. However, that is a little unsatisfactory as the class is written under the assumption that hit dice are now different dies for each class, the improved stat bonus also from Greyhawk, etc., and requires tinkering to work with just the original LBBs. What to do?

Well, back in February of this year (2016), the Zenopus Archives had a post about the Thief class as envisioned not in 1975 with Greyhawk, but rather as envisioned in 1974 in the Great Plains Game Players Newsletter (May, 1974).  There is much to recommend this version over the later published version. Climbing sheer surfaces seems to be automatic, shield use is unclear (Judge's discretion!), and, most importantly, the class is open to all races with no level limit on advancement. That stops the crying about maxing out a demi-human's level and is the main reason I would probably use this class. Feel free to check it out as an alternative to the published one if you prefer the 3 LBBs but want a thief class.

B is for Bob

. . . .and not just any Bob but Bob Bledsaw!

One of the most heated debates in the OSR is who the true Father of Dungeons and Dragons truly is. Is it Gygax or Arneson? The thing that always disturbs me about this is that Bledsaw gets ignored quite a bit it seems. I realize, of course, that he's not in the running for Father, but (no offense to Rob or Ernie or Luke) I feel he deserves the title  First Son of Role-playing. Why, you ask?

1975, not long after D&D was released, Bledsaw created the Judges Guild. Now, that doesn't seem like a lot today with all the gaming companies out there in the wake of the OGL, but at the time, it was revolutionary. He was a man of vision. Judges Guild received permission from TSR to put out adventures and other supplements for D&D. TSR would not put out an adventure module until 1978! Even then, if reports are to be believed from those in the know, Gary was somewhat bewildered as to why people would want to use prepared adventures rather than create their own.

Another good thing was that JG added some organization to the mess. If one plays 0E today, there is no resource more valuable than JG's Ready Ref Sheets. Some collected charts, sure, but the majority was new material for the Judge to use in making his campaign come to life. And the adventures, maps, and settings! Wilderlands, the City-State, Thracia, Duck Tower! Both Kevin Siembieda and Jennell Jacquays started out with JG as well. Imagine what we would have lost without Bledsaw. Don't get me wrong; I love me some Hommlett and some B2. But JG's adventures are somehow better. Much as I love Gary, part of the creativity was channeled into balance and polish leading to what WOTC and Hasbro have become--souless.

And, as an aside, CSIO is coming back. Please support the Kickstarter here.

Until tomorrow, gentle readers, dream of troublesome strumpets in the City-State!

D&D Challenge Day 7: Favorite Edition

Favorite edition? For me that's 1st edition with Unearthed Arcana, followed closely by B/X and the Swords & Wizardry Complete retro-clone.

I don't normally repost my own blogs, but the following is a a blog I posted back in April detailing the various editions and retro-clones. Enjoy, and until tomorrow, gentle readers, pick an edition!

***************

Well, I shall attempt to be brief, but that's going to be hard with today's topic, gentle readers. There are, at last count, 6 editions of D&D (more depending on how you count!) and numerous clones and licensed properties that use the D&D "engine." I also will not mention Chainmail as that is not D&D per se. If I miss some, please chalk it up to a headache I have today!

First up is the edition that started it all: Dungeons and Dragons, also called variously 0e(dition), O(riginal)e(dition), and the LBB (Little Brown Books). The core classes and races as well as statistics are there: Clerics, Men of Magic, Fighting Men (Thieves were added in the Greyhawk Supplement); elves, dwarves, Hobb...er, Halflings; experience points; etc.  Some things are noticeably different from later editions, such as d6 damage for all weapons. This version is not "new player friendly;" it assumes a previous experience with wargaming. One of things to like about this edition is the lack of defined rules. Imagination was key. There were also no hard limits: science and sorcery were mixed in Castle Greyhawk as well as in Blackmoor.

On a sidenote, the impact of D&D was felt in other games. Traveller when it came out, arrived in a LBB (Little Black Book) Edition with a similar division of books: Characters and Combat, Starships, and Worlds mirroring Men and Magic, Creatures and Treasure, and Underworld and Wilderness Adventures.

I'll talk about the next two together. It was quickly apparent as D&D sold rapidly across the country that a hit was on their hands. The deficiency about a lack of instruction was noted. As AD&D was prepared Holmes D&D, a primer on roleplaying that took eh character to 3rd level was introduced as a stopgap measure. Alignments went from three (L, C, N) to 5 (LG, CG, LE, CE, N). Holmes was never intended to be a truly stand alone game but more of a "gateway" game to introduce the game to potential players.  After AD&D was published, D&D Basic and Expert  (B/X or Moldvey/Cook D&D) was introduced. My impression is that D&D was supposed to become the home game that one could tinker with to one's content. AD&D was the framework for the "international" and tournament game, a framework that would allow for greater precision in competition. This is to some extent conjecture, but is the feeling I have. I also like to point put that the blurb on the back of the Basic Book touts it as "family entertainment."  Way different from being a  smelly neckbeard basement-dweller game. There are some important things in B/X: race as class, a return to the 3 alignments, and a less technically precise combat. It is, in many ways, divorced from its wargaming roots; not so AD&D.

I'm using a pic of the current reprints because they are so sweet! For me, this is AD&D. As much as people deride 3.0/3e for becoming a minis game, it is still an important component of first edition as well. All of those fiddly numbers: weapon speed, armor modifiers, the confusing initiative. It is apparent that Gary never really left his wargaming roots. He's the lead author here. B/X and the later BECMI had different leads and therefore way different feels. Here we gain the 9 alignments (LG, NG, CG, LN, NT, CN, LE, NE, CE); more races (gnomes, half orcs and a plethora of elves and dwarves); more classes (assassin, monks, cavaliers, etc.). It can be argued that, like minis, 3e's fascination with "a class for anyone" can be laid at Gygax's feet. And what are the bard and thief-acrobat if not proto-prestige classes. The introductions of skills as "nonweapon proficiencies begins here as well in Oriental Adventures. We also gain most of the campaign worlds: Greyhawk, Toril, Kyrnn, and Ravenloft (as a module, true; it is in 2e that it would become a world).

Basic had a facelift in the mid 1980s. It was truly its own game and a very playable one as well and is termed BECMI (Basic-Expert-Companion-Master-Immortal) by fans. BECMI's lead author was Frank Mentzer. The game took  characters from 1st to 36th level and then beyond to Immortal levels. The expanded game setting of the Known World (to become Mystara in 2e) had its own line of gazetteers. No other D&D campaign world has really had this level of attention to detail.

With the ouster of Gary from TSR, the company continued on. In 1989, second edition hit the scene. Love it or hate it, it is still the longest in print version. And, boy, were they prolific! Splat books for the classes and the addition of kits to customize classes. Humanoids as viable PC races (The Complete Humanoid). Even Psionics was revamped into an arguably workable system (although it works best where magic is not present). Planescape, Ravenloft, Mystara/Red Steel, Dark Sun for new campaign worlds as well as revamps of Toril, Oerth and Kyrnn. There was much crying over the loss of many of the core classes like moinks and assassins. However, it was a return to those core four classes (Warrior/Mage/Priest/Rogue) seen in 0e. The other problem players had was with the  "unbalancing" kits. I believe that's due to a poor DM, but opinions vary. I don't play this edition enough. It is a complete system, still readily available with reprints of the core books arriving in May. And it is well integrated and planned out.

In the mid 1990s, we got the Player's Option books or 2.5. It did not supplant or replace 2e, but it allowed for point buy character creation, spell point systems and the like. It was really more of a D&D "toolbox" that had "official" ways to change the rules. I never knew anyone to play this; I did own it and wanted to run or play it. The idea of a creating a wizard who could use a sword or have thieving abilities was novel.

Enter the 21st century and the acquisition of the brand by Wizards of the Coast and Monte Cook. Third edition. D20. There has been much written about this over the years. This version focuses more on the mins and the tactical nature of combat. One could argue that was true of 1e as well; it was really B/X and BECMI that were roleplaying focused without the need for minis. I won't go into the mechanics of 3.0/3.5. Suffice to say, though, that it is still recognizably D&D. The strength and weakness of d20 are the same in my opinion: the OGL. The Open Game License allowed third party publishers to use the engine to create games and supplements. That is good in that we got some really outstanding games such as Mutants and Masterminds and Castles and Crusades. The flip side is that there is A LOT of material for players and especially DMs to wade through, some of which is sub-par and mediocre.

Fourth edition....bored yet? This is the version that receives the most vitriol these days. It is arguably not D&D but a MMO with dice and minis. Some of the ideas make sense to some extent: magic-missile as an "at-will power" makes mages more survivable, but also makes it like hitting the 1 button in a video game. Alignment was simplified and the concept of "unaligned" was brought into play. There is a dearth of roleplaying material; 1e was guilty of that as well, but did have material on hirelings, sages, creation of the campaign world. This was a poor attempt to change the brand to appeal to young computer gamers and a mistake that I believe WotC has realized.

And so, on the horizon, is "D&D Next." From what I have seen of the playtest materials, this edition is going to attempt to become "all things for all people." That might work for a Roman Catholic saint, but I have my doubts as to its viability for a RPG. It would appear that it will be a stripped-down version very similar to D&D basic, but without race as class. There will be a plethora of options so one can ramp it up to something akin to 3.5 or anything in between. We'll see how that works. I am cautiously optimistic.

And, now, bring on the clones!

I want to mention first off M.A.R. Barker's Empire of the Petal. The world of Tekumel first published by TSR in 1975 and using an adaptation of the 0e ruleset. Tekumel is a non-western fantasy world and is much beloved of its fans. If you're looking for something not derived from Tolkien and Howard, this is the game for you! A reprint is available at: Tita's House of Games

The Basic Fantasy RPG was probably the first fan reaction to 3.0, if my internal timeline is correct. This is a wonderful product and I can't recommend it enough. It is essentially a B/X clone that is completely free; print copies are sold on Lulu at cost. There are a lot of add-ons for the game that are fan-produced and available for download in pdf and Open Office formats. Please check them out at: Basic Fantasy Roleplaying

One of the first professional responses to 3.0 was Castles and Crusades by Troll Lord Games. Using the OGL the Trolls created a stripped down fantasy game reminiscent of first edition and it is a great game in its own right. Ascending AC and a version of BAB is used. This game plays like D&D lite. I also enjoy that weapons have abilities reminiscent of the AC modifiers tables of 1e but with out a huge chart. For instance, a bec de corbin "receives a +2 when used against chain, plate and scale armors." Another thing that struck me was that the original printings were the same size as the 1e PHB. They also have the distinction of working with Gary Gygax in an attempt to get Castle Greyhawk (as Castle Zagyg) published before Gary died. Check them out at: Troll Lord Games

Kenzer Company's Hackmaster (fourth edition!) was an officially licensed game that used the 1e/2e core system. It was, in many respects, 1e with some 2e things (kits, wild magic, splat books) tacked on. There was even an inkling of 2.5 with their STP (Skills-Talents-Proficiencies) system that allowed some characterization of classes. As a result of the licensing agreement with WotC, KCo had to use a lot of parody in their language. Ignore that, though, and the core system is sound. WotC did not renew the license prior to the release of 4e. Hackmaster lives on in its fifth (actually 2nd) edition but the core mechanics are drastically different. However, it is worth checking out and they are offering the stripped down "basic" book as a FREE pdf (download here). They can be found at: Kenzer Company

Goblinoid Games offers the Labyrinth Lord game, another company that used the OGL to produce an older-style RPG. This is essentially a B/X emulator and is available in print at Lulu and also as a free pdf download (sans artwork). They offer the Advanced Edition Companion to make the game a bit more like AD&D. They also offer Mutant Future (a Gamma World clone) and own the licenses to Timemaster and Starships and Spacemen (in print again!). Their web site is: Goblinoid Games

Swords and Wizardry is another B/X style game and is currenty published by Frog God Games. These are the guys that produced Rappan Athuk and it is another great game. The Whitebox edition takes it back down to 0e if that's your thing. Their web site is: Frog God Games

Dark Dungeons is a another retro-clone, but this one uses BECMI as its reference point. The title is a tongue-in-cheek reference to the horrid Jack T. Chick religious diatribe, Dark Dungeons. In fact, the exanple character that is used throughout the work is Black Leaf, the character who dies in the first panel of the tract. It's always good to have a sense of humor about these things. It is available in pdf form for free and in print for a nominal fee from Lulu. The web site is: Gratis Games

Johnathan Becker's B/X Companion is not a true clone; rather, it is an extension of the B/X game. The public was promised a Companion book to take characters past 14th level when B/X was published, but the rebranding to BECMI meant that the world would never see it...until now. Becker extrapolated what might have been and this is a nice addition for you if prefer the Moldvey/Cook rules. the cover is obviously a homage to the original Erol Otus covers. It is no longer available in print but is available as a pdf at RPGNow. Becker recently released the B/X Adventurer that adds some new classes and magic to the game most notably gnomes, centaurs, and witches (among others). Running Beagle Games is found at: B/X Blackrazor

Finally, we come to the end....and OSRIC. I give these guys a lot of grief, I admit that readily. However, unlike some of the other clones that stay true to their source, this version is not what it purports to be. True, it is AD&D  as it was played in the 1980s; but just because we didn't play with weapon factors, psionics, monks, etc., doesn't mean they're not a part of AD&D. Even Goblinoid Game's Advanced Edition Companion adds the caveat "as it was played." That said, this is a well done work. Even if I disagree with Stuart Marshall's choices, this is a outstanding product. Everything one needs to play something close to AD&D (yes, yes, I can't let it go!) in one beautiful tome with art from James Halloway. It's only $26, so if the $100+ pricetag of the 1e reprints is too much, go here. The web site is: Black Blade Publishing

And that's it! Woo-hoo, finally through. Break out the Faygo! Tomorrow, gentle readers, I shall examine some of my favorite forums!

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!

 

 

G is for Goblins

Goblins. These little fellows are the much maligned cannon fodder of fantasy imaginings. HD 1-1...not even a full d8! In later editions of D&D, they fall by the wayside and receive even less respect than kobolds. This is a true shame because they truly are the first challenge for adventurers. If one views the ranking of monsters as a cursus honorem through which characters must progress, it is vital that goblins are included in the run. How so?

 

Goblins are a threat, even to 1st-3rd level heroes (see tomorrow's post). Goblins have better hit dice than a normal nan (1/2 HD, the same as kobolds!) and better hit dice than half of the core classes: fighters at 1-10, clerics 1-8, thieves at 1-6, and magic-users at 1-4. True, there are hardy newly minted adventurers, such as the ranger and barbarian, but they are outside the norm, even for heroes. The fact is, a warband of goblins (No. Apprearing 40-400, midline is 200!) could easily overwhelm a small town and definitely a small village, even if it has militia.

 

Let's look at Hommlett as an example. Hommlett can field the following:

 

Rufus, Overall Commander, Ftg 6

 

His "squad" of men-at-arms...not defined in the module, surprisingly, so we'll assume 10 well-armed medium-heavy infantry

 

Burne, MU 8

Jaroo, Dr 6 and Brother Smyth, Dr 3

Terjon, Cl 6, and Calmert Cl 3

 

Militia Captain (Elmo's father), Ftg 4 & Elmo, Rng 4

Militia Sgt, Ostler, Ftg 2

Militia, 50 0-lvl humans, most with leather armor, armed with a hand weapon plus as follows:

      spears: 23

      pole arms (various): 4

      long bow: 1

      short bow: 1

      slings: 5

      crossbow: 7

Militia, 4 'skirmishers,' o-lvl Humans with no armor and clubs

Miltia, Black Jay, Ftg 2 with longbow

Militia, Traders's man-at-arms, Ftg 1, with long bow

 

That's a pretty repsectable militia force, with a lot of magic. However, even if a small goblin warband shows ups (low dice rolls but with wolf riders):

 

2 leaders with 8 assistants (1 HD each)

20 wolf riders on worgs (4+4 HD) + an addition 20 worgs

60 goblins (HD 1-1), variously armed, but 24 with spears and 6 with slings

 

Burne and Rufus would be a big help, but it'd still be a tough fight. And these are just goblins! Think about orcs or hobgoblins and how they're armed and weaponed. Lairs have even more sub-types plus the possibility of bugbears. Even if it was the minimum (half the above numbers), the goblins would be formidable. Take away the worgs, not so much, but still they could do some damage.

 

(Incidentially, this is a battle I would love to play out...at the "skirmish" level or using Battlestystem.)

 

My mind changed on this matter sometime in the 1990s. I read Realms of Infamy, an anthology of Forgotten Realms short stories focusing on the "bad guys." There is a story titled "Vision" by Roger E. Moore about goblins. Read it. You will never look at goblins the same way ever again.

 

Until tomorrow, gentle readers, look out for the laughter and red eyes in the night!

 

F is for Forums

I have a lot on my plate today, so just a brief post.

Best one out there is Dragonsfoot. In addition to the forums, they also have A LOT of free downloads: character sheets, modules, etc. They held the line for old school gaming for years, and I'm proud to have been a member for about 12 years or so. they're a great group of guys and it's a very friendly forum. :)

Until Monday, gentle readers!

E is for Editions

Well, I shall attempt to be brief, but that's going to be hard with today's topic, gentle readers. There are, at last count, 6 editions of D&D (more depending on how you count!) and numerous clones and licensed properties that use the D&D "engine." I also will not mention Chainmail as that is not D&D per se. If I miss some, please chalk it up to a headache I have today!

First up is the edition that started it all: Dungeons and Dragons, also called variously 0e(dition), O(riginal)e(dition), and the LBB (Little Brown Books). The core classes and races as well as statistics are there: Clerics, Men of Magic, Fighting Men (Thieves were added in the Greyhawk Supplement); elves, dwarves, Hobb...er, Halflings; experience points; etc.  Some things are noticeably different from later editions, such as d6 damage for all weapons. This version is not "new player friendly;" it assumes a previous experience with wargaming. One of things to like about this edition is the lack of defined rules. Imagination was key. There were also no hard limits: science and sorcery were mixed in Castle Greyhawk as well as in Blackmoor.

 

 

On a sidenote, the impact of D&D was felt in other games. Traveller when it came out, arrived in a LBB (Little Black Book) Edition with a similar division of books: Characters and Combat, Starships, and Worlds mirroring Men and Magic, Creatures and Treasure, and Underworld and Wilderness Adventures.

 

 

 

I'll talk about the next two together. It was quickly apparent as D&D sold rapidly across the country that a hit was on their hands. The deficiency about a lack of instruction was noted. As AD&D was prepared Holmes D&D, a primer on roleplaying that took eh character to 3rd level was introduced as a stopgap measure. Alignments went from three (L, C, N) to 5 (LG, CG, LE, CE, N). Holmes was never intended to be a truly stand alone game but more of a "gateway" game to introduce the game to potential players.  After AD&D was published, D&D Basic and Expert  (B/X or Moldvey/Cook D&D) was introduced. My impression is that D&D was supposed to become the home game that one could tinker with to one's content. AD&D was the framework for the "international" and tournament game, a framework that would allow for greater precision in competition. This is to some extent conjecture, but is the feeling I have. I also like to point put that the blurb on the back of the Basic Book touts it as "family entertainment."  Way different from being a  smelly neckbeard basement-dweller game. There are some important things in B/X: race as class, a return to the 3 alignments, and a less technically precise combat. It is, in many ways, divorced from its wargaming roots; not so AD&D.

 

 

 

I'm using a pic of the current reprints because they are so sweet! For me, this is AD&D. As much as people deride 3.0/3e for becoming a minis game, it is still an important component of first edition as well. All of those fiddly numbers: weapon speed, armor modifiers, the confusing initiative. It is apparent that Gary never really left his wargaming roots. He's the lead author here. B/X and the later BECMI had different leads and therefore way different feels. Here we gain the 9 alignments (LG, NG, CG, LN, NT, CN, LE, NE, CE); more races (gnomes, half orcs and a plethora of elves and dwarves); more classes (assassin, monks, cavaliers, etc.). It can be argued that, like minis, 3e's fascination with "a class for anyone" can be laid at Gygax's feet. And what are the bard and thief-acrobat if not proto-prestige classes. The introductions of skills as "nonweapon proficiencies begins here as well in Oriental Adventures. We also gain most of the campaign worlds: Greyhawk, Toril, Kyrnn, and Ravenloft (as a module, true; it is in 2e that it would become a world).

 

 

Basic had a facelift in the mid 1980s. It was truly its own game and a very playable one as well and is termed BECMI (Basic-Expert-Companion-Master-Immortal) by fans. BECMI's lead author was Frank Mentzer. The game took  characters from 1st to 36th level and then beyond to Immortal levels. The expanded game setting of the Known World (to become Mystara in 2e) had its own line of gazetteers. No other D&D campaign world has really had this level of attention to detail.

 

 

With the ouster of Gary from TSR, the company continued on. In 1989, second edition hit the scene. Love it or hate it, it is still the longest in print version. And, boy, were they prolific! Splat books for the classes and the addition of kits to customize classes. Humanoids as viable PC races (The Complete Humanoid). Even Psionics was revamped into an arguably workable system (although it works best where magic is not present). Planescape, Ravenloft, Mystara/Red Steel, Dark Sun for new campaign worlds as well as revamps of Toril, Oerth and Kyrnn. There was much crying over the loss of many of the core classes like moinks and assassins. However, it was a return to those core four classes (Warrior/Mage/Priest/Rogue) seen in 0e. The other problem players had was with the  "unbalancing" kits. I believe that's due to a poor DM, but opinions vary. I don't play this edition enough. It is a complete system, still readily available with reprints of the core books arriving in May. And it is well integrated and planned out.

 

 

In the mid 1990s, we got the Player's Option books or 2.5. It did not supplant or replace 2e, but it allowed for point buy character creation, spell point systems and the like. It was really more of a D&D "toolbox" that had "official" ways to change the rules. I never knew anyone to play this; I did own it and wanted to run or play it. The idea of a creating a wizard who could use a sword or have thieving abilities was novel.

 

Enter the 21st century and the acquisition of the brand by Wizards of the Coast and Monte Cook. Third edition. D20. There has been much written about this over the years. This version focuses more on the mins and the tactical nature of combat. One could argue that was true of 1e as well; it was really B/X and BECMI that were roleplaying focused without the need for minis. I won't go into the mechanics of 3.0/3.5. Suffice to say, though, that it is still recognizably D&D. The strength and weakness of d20 are the same in my opinion: the OGL. The Open Game License allowed third party publishers to use the engine to create games and supplements. That is good in that we got some really outstanding games such as Mutants and Masterminds and Castles and Crusades. The flip side is that there is A LOT of material for players and especially DMs to wade through, some of which is sub-par and mediocre.

 

Fourth edition....bored yet? This is the version that receives the most vitriol these days. It is arguably not D&D but a MMO with dice and minis. Some of the ideas make sense to some extent: magic-missile as an "at-will power" makes mages more survivable, but also makes it like hitting the 1 button in a video game. Alignment was simplified and the concept of "unaligned" was brought into play. There is a dearth of roleplaying material; 1e was guilty of that as well, but did have material on hirelings, sages, creation of the campaign world. This was a poor attempt to change the brand to appeal to young computer gamers and a mistake that I believe WotC has realized.

 

And so, on the horizon, is "D&D Next." From what I have seen of the playtest materials, this edition is going to attempt to become "all things for all people." That might work for a Roman Catholic saint, but I have my doubts as to its viability for a RPG. It would appear that it will be a stripped-down version very similar to D&D basic, but without race as class. There will be a plethora of options so one can ramp it up to something akin to 3.5 or anything in between. We'll see how that works. I am cautiously optimistic.

 

And, now, bring on the clones!

 

 

 

I want to mention first off M.A.R. Barker's Empire of the Petal. The world of Tekumel first published by TSR in 1975 and using an adaptation of the 0e ruleset. Tekumel is a non-western fantasy world and is much beloved of its fans. If you're looking for something not derived from Tolkien and Howard, this is the game for you! A reprint is available at: Tita's House of Games

 

The Basic Fantasy RPG was probably the first fan reaction to 3.0, if my internal timeline is correct. This is a wonderful product and I can't recommend it enough. It is essentially a B/X clone that is completely free; print copies are sold on Lulu at cost. There are a lot of add-ons for the game that are fan-produced and available for download in pdf and Open Office formats. Please check them out at: Basic Fantasy Roleplaying

 

 

 

One of the first professional responses to 3.0 was Castles and Crusades by Troll Lord Games. Using the OGL the Trolls created a stripped down fantasy game reminiscent of first edition and it is a great game in its own right. Ascending AC and a version of BAB is used. This game plays like D&D lite. I also enjoy that weapons have abilities reminiscent of the AC modifiers tables of 1e but with out a huge chart. For instance, a bec de corbin "receives a +2 when used against chain, plate and scale armors." Another thing that struck me was that the original printings were the same size as the 1e PHB. They also have the distinction of working with Gary Gygax in an attempt to get Castle Greyhawk (as Castle Zagyg) published before Gary died. Check them out at: Troll Lord Games

 

 

 

Kenzer Company's Hackmaster (fourth edition!) was an officially licensed game that used the 1e/2e core system. It was, in many respects, 1e with some 2e things (kits, wild magic, splat books) tacked on. There was even an inkling of 2.5 with their STP (Skills-Talents-Proficiencies) system that allowed some characterization of classes. As a result of the licensing agreement with WotC, KCo had to use a lot of parody in their language. Ignore that, though, and the core system is sound. WotC did not renew the license prior to the release of 4e. Hackmaster lives on in its fifth (actually 2nd) edition but the core mechanics are drastically different. However, it is worth checking out and they are offering the stripped down "basic" book as a FREE pdf (download here). They can be found at: Kenzer Company

 

 

Goblinoid Games offers the Labyrinth Lord game, another company that used the OGL to produce an older-style RPG. This is essentially a B/X emulator and is available in print at Lulu and also as a free pdf download (sans artwork). They offer the Advanced Edition Companion to make the game a bit more like AD&D. They also offer Mutant Future (a Gamma World clone) and own the licenses to Timemaster and Starships and Spacemen (in print again!). Their web site is: Goblinoid Games

 

Swords and Wizardry is another B/X style game and is currenty published by Frog God Games. These are the guys that produced Rappan Athuk and it is another great game. The Whitebox edition takes it back down to 0e if that's your thing. Their web site is: Frog God Games

 

Dark Dungeons is a another retro-clone, but this one uses BECMI as its reference point. The title is a tongue-in-cheek reference to the horrid Jack T. Chick religious diatribe, Dark Dungeons. In fact, the exanple character that is used throughout the work is Black Leaf, the character who dies in the first panel of the tract. It's always good to have a sense of humor about these things. It is available in pdf form for free and in print for a nominal fee from Lulu. The web site is: Gratis Games

Johnathan Becker's B/X Companion is not a true clone; rather, it is an extension of the B/X game. The public was promised a Companion book to take characters past 14th level when B/X was published, but the rebranding to BECMI meant that the world would never see it...until now. Becker extrapolated what might have been and this is a nice addition for you if prefer the Moldvey/Cook rules. the cover is obviously a homage to the original Erol Otus covers. It is no longer available in print but is available as a pdf at RPGNow. Becker recently released the B/X Adventurer that adds some new classes and magic to the game most notably gnomes, centaurs, and witches (among others). Running Beagle Games is found at: B/X Blackrazor

 

 

Finally, we come to the end....and OSRIC. I give these guys a lot of grief, I admit that readily. However, unlike some of the other clones that stay true to their source, this version is not what it purports to be. True, it is AD&D  as it was played in the 1980s; but just because we didn't play with weapon factors, psionics, monks, etc., doesn't mean they're not a part of AD&D. Even Goblinoid Game's Advanced Edition Companion adds the caveat "as it was played." That said, this is a well done work. Even if I disagree with Stuart Marshall's choices, this is a outstanding product. Everything one needs to play something close to AD&D (yes, yes, I can't let it go!) in one beautiful tome with art from James Halloway. It's only $26, so if the $100+ pricetag of the 1e reprints is too much, go here. The web site is: Black Blade Publishing

 

And that's it! Woo-hoo, finally through. Break out the Faygo! Tomorrow, gentle readers, I shall examine some of my favorite forums!