Joined: Oct 2008 Gender: Male Posts: 679 Location: Lille, France Karma: 45
Re: The % layer of OD&D archaeology « Reply #15 on Nov 17, 2009, 3:34pm »
I searched among various histories of wargame, learned a lot of useful things, but can't get know when exactly the "twenty-sided d10" came in. It seems he was allready well-known among wargamers before the introduction of the other flunky dices (which came with OD&D). I suspect it could have been in use very early in Blackmoor, but as d10 and not as d20 - this is Gary who put the emphase on d20. Does anyone have clues or rememberings about this?
Edit: great, with this message, I turned to be a magician!
Joined: Nov 2012 Gender: Male Posts: 1,554 Location: Austin TX USA Karma: 151
Re: The % layer of OD&D archaeology « Reply #16 on Nov 17, 2009, 4:43pm »
It was the supplier of the dice Gygax (and the early versions of the company that morphed into TSR) used that was the issue, not the availability of d10.
d10 is not a platonic solid, the teaching supply company that sold the dice sets only packaged platonic solids in the set.
I must protest bitterly that my aircraft still has not been painted red.
Joined: Mar 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 1,596 Location: Schenectady Karma: 73
Re: The % layer of OD&D archaeology « Reply #17 on Nov 20, 2009, 10:56am »
While Nic continues to puzzle this out I have some thoughts:
The more I think about the implications of the quotes he has already posted, particularly the one on Strength I commented on above, I think Arneson must indeed have proposed a percentile dice system in those original 18 pages and that it must have been a kind of proto AIF system, at very least in terms of the Ability scores. I would revise the timeline I proposed to suggest that in 1973 Arneson really began to develop the percentile system that shows up in AIF. The question is too what extent this early system is preserved in AIF - and for that I think all we can say for now is that he was primarily using his match or roll under system for "saving throws" versus an ability score, and to generate spell points for the magic system. FFC shows us he was also using percentile dice for all sorts of random tables etc. Nic is suggesting that it may have been a roll over system instead of a roll under and that may be, but I will leave it to him to work that out. In any case I think it is very unlikely the complex way combat is handled in AIF has any roots in this early period. For one thing, the "hit location" system in AIF is radically different from that in Supplement II. Basically, it doesn't locate hits at all but rather dictates what die to use for damage. Nics discovery of a combat system in the Assasins table is a much more likely candidtate for the system Arneson put in his 18 page document.
Okay, so if Arneson was proposing simplifying the dicing to percentiles, why do we have the 3d6 ability scores and "alternate combat system" as they are in OD&D? The short answer is that these all come from Gygax. I've mentioned the attractive selling point of those funny dice and I'm sure that is a factor, but I think most of these things go back to the Greyhawk campaign. Gygax began the campaign in 1972, only a few months after Arneson created Blackmoor, so he would have learned the game from Arnesons earliest system (the 2d6 roll under and 2-9 descending AC we discussed in the combat system thread). That is the system Gygax would have begun experimenting with and I think its the system OD&D grew from via Gygax. At some point he added another die, making it 3d6 for the bell curve. The averaging effect was probably seen as prefferable by Gygax to a 1-100 range for ability scores. So its easy to see why Gygax may have rejected % for ability scores and, having done that, it only makes sense that he would stick with other mechanics already developed in Greyhawk. The OD&D mechanics then, if not from Arneson must arise in Greyhawk, most likely from play situations where Gygax invented a rule or proceedure. Nic has argued that the early players were in touch from time to time and sharing ideas (particularly Barker and Arneson who seem to have been genuine friends), while I absolutely agree that some people were sharing ideas and players no doubt commented on the rule differences between groups when they were aware of them, I think the distances involved between Minneapolis and Lake Geneva also allowed a certain amount of independant development. It no doubt helped that Arneson seems to have been fairly tight lipped about the rules to his players, experimented often, worked off the cuff a lot, and clearly preferred rulings to rules, leaving a kind of vaccuum, as it were for Gygax and others to add their own details and methods. Basically, what I'm arguing is that Arneson moved from 2d6 to the percentile system Nic is uncovering, while Gygax moved from 2d6 to the OD&D system, by adding a d6, expanding the 2-9 armor class and changing it from roll under to a combat matrix, adding Chainmail like saving throw categories, possibly because it seemed more specific and refined than abstract ability scores as saves, and creating the Vancian magic system.
We were in the very beginning using the six siders, but when we started doing the fantasy games, I dug out some 20-sided dice I'd purchased in England in the mid 60s.
Mid-60's! So, my feeling that Dave already knew d20 (double-10) dices before the other funky dices seems right.
Quote:
We had several mathematicians, and working out percentages for six-sided dice was child's play for them, but it gave me a headache. So really, the dice sat there for three or four years. Then we did fantasy, and I said "Hey, let's use this stuff for it." So when we started on Blackmoor, we started using 20-sided dice at the same time.
I'll give later my views on how Dave solved his headache problem for the conversion from d6 to d100. But clearly, he says they were using the d20 as percentile dices (and not as d20, something which need to tinker the "double-10 dice"). So, clearly, the early Blackmoor game had d6 and d100, nothing else, and such probably since the first sessions.
We're on the good way discovering the "Arneson hidden manuscript"
Edit: Gary probably invented the turning a 'double-ten' d20 into a "twenty-results" d20 by painting half the faces. I can imagine he priced his invention and developped a system around it. I'm not sure the fact 3d6 and 1d20 prefectly matches for roll under, as most of his sugestions abour roll under abilities weren't made with d20 (something which seems to appears written first by Moldvay, but probably in use sooner). But the fact it made the bell curve better is probably a good point - remember the way he explains this in AD&D.
I must protest bitterly that my aircraft still has not been painted red.
Joined: Mar 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 1,596 Location: Schenectady Karma: 73
Re: The % layer of OD&D archaeology « Reply #19 on Nov 20, 2009, 5:59pm »
Thanks Nic. This is fun Looking forward to what you come up with next. I'll try to get you a pdf of at least the relevant parts of AIF when I get a chance, but I'm thinking your research with OD&D, FFC, and EPT will give a better basis of comparison to work from. There is one person who may well know at least the general details of Arnesons early systems - Richard Snider - having been an original player, and having worked with Arneson on both the FFC and AIF. Wouldn't it be great if we could hear from him!
Joined: Oct 2008 Gender: Male Posts: 679 Location: Lille, France Karma: 45
Re: The % layer of OD&D archaeology « Reply #21 on Nov 20, 2009, 6:50pm »
Reading the interview of Greg Svenson made by David Bowman, it seems Dave made real his fmous quote "roll the dice and I will tell you whats happen". This piece is really interesting for depicting the early Blackmoor, before the release of OD&D : http://shamsgrog.blogspot.com/2009_05_01_archive.html.
Quote:
Sham: While refereeing Blackmoor for other players, how did you handle actions by the characters which were not covered by the rules? Was referee ad-libbing a vital aspect of the Blackmoor games?
Greg: I quickly came up with what the possibilities might be and either had the players roll dice against a related character attribute for success or on a table I made up in my head on the fly. This was an area that I felt I was not very good at, however, because Dave would just tell us to roll the dice and he then told us what happened.
Note also the quote on attributes:
Quote:
Attributes were different, we had used two d6’s to get a number from 1 to 10, where we changed to three d6’s and a range from 3 to 18, but most were just changes in mechanics... e were not keeping our own records or character sheets as they are called now. Dave had an index card on each of the players (and NPCs) with their attributes, HP, possessions and other useful notes. I only remember seeing Svenny’s character card a couple of times. Unfortunately, it never occurred to me to copy the information off of it for my own records.
2d6 to 1 to 10 looks like a use of a bell curve to get a linear range. I will continue to think about it, but I guess the way I found is not so bad (to be continued...).
Gygax began the campaign in 1972, only a few months after Arneson created Blackmoor
?
Can you expand on that a bit? I mean why would John Snider be in a better position and would you happen to know how to draw his attention to these threads?
As for the second bit, Gygax started creating the Greyhawk campaign in 1972 after he played a session of Blackmoor with Arneson. I believe it was in the fall and I think the first games in Greyhawk were played with his kids.
Can you expand on that a bit? I mean why would John Snider be in a better position and would you happen to know how to draw his attention to these threads?
John is a closer equivalent to Rob Kuntz, although going into the Army meant that he couldn't carry forward that working relationship in quite the way Rob did. Richard didn't join in until a bit later... I do still have John's email somewhere on the old PC but a cold call might not be the best approach.
As for the second bit, Gygax started creating the Greyhawk campaign in 1972 after he played a session of Blackmoor with Arneson. I believe it was in the fall and I think the first games in Greyhawk were played with his kids.
Squeezing everything from Blackmoor through to Ramshorn Castle into the second half of 1972 is a bit of a tight squeeze and a rather long time from Wesley's Strategos-N (aka Braunstein) games. It might help to get that chronology pinned down c/w http://www.wired.com/gaming/virtualworlds/news/2008/03/ff_gygax?currentPage=3 , say, since the interrelationships with what else was going on are important and help to tally with what little primary evidence is available (e.g. that Chainmail wasn't particularly heavily used in gameplay according to Dave elsewhere tallies with John's copy of Chainmail - 1e, not 2e - which is barely opened).
As to non-d6 usage, both Wesley and Arneson were familiar with - and used - these long before D&D, so to be 100% certain that "funny dice" were not in use in any way prior to 1973 (by which time there were at least four or five worlds stated to be in play and it would have been difficult to throttle back the gameplay) might be a bit of a leap in the dark, perhaps.
Since Gygax used 3d6 for ability scores, and Svenson remembers them being 2d6 prior to the publication of OD&D, I suspect that Arneson had not yet switched all his Blackmoor mechanics over to percentile dice when cowriting D&D, but your research suggests that he was using it for some things, things which Gygax preferred to use more of the “funny dice” for so as to give them a broader role in the game. Probably Gygax thought all those novel dice would be a selling point for the game.
Or, to quote Wesley on the sidelines; "Back in 1965, I read the rules to a game published in 1880 that said one could use a "12-sided teetotum" instead of a 6-sided die, for resolving odds of 6:1, 7:1 etc up to 11:1, but did not explain what a teetotum was or how to make one. I had seen a set of models of the regular polyhedra in my High School trig class, and decided that a "12-sided teetotum" must be the 12-sdied thingy (a regular dodecahedron) I had seen in the set. Wanting to try out the game, I went to school, got out the "Edmund Scientific Supplies" catalog, and ordered one set of the polyhedra from them for $6.00 (gasolene was $ 0.20 /gallon then, so that would be about $66.00 in today's money). This set of five polyhedra came with the faces already numbered, to make it easy to see that there were 12 sides on a dodacahedron, or 20 on an icosahedron, which made them easy to use as dice. So they became the ancestors of all the D4, D6, D8, D12 and D20 sets ever sold. ... SO why are my dice the ancestors of all the D&D dice?
Well, while I only saw value in the D12 and D20, the other guys in our wargaming group thought they were all "cool", and we used them in our wargames (and kept buying these expensive sets from Edmund Scientific as they wore out). When Dave Arneson (one of the guys in our group) invented his fantasy role-playing game, and took it to Gary Gygax to be cleaned-up and published, they decided to use the cool polyhedral dice, even though I told them that they should just use regular dice, because "No one is going to buy your game for $10 if they then have to spend another $6 to get the special dice before they can play it". But they ignored me and of course, "Dungeons and Dragons" did not sell, and no one has ever heard of it.
By the way, a 12-sided teetotum is not a D-12! I finally found one in a game published in 1828, which I paid a lot of money for, just to get the teetotum (the game is REALLY stupid, but the teetotum is kind of clever)." , etc.
Ah... and "cowriting D&D" (as published), too?
02c/ymmv, anyhow, d.
« Last Edit: Nov 21, 2009, 10:45am by harami2000 »
John is a closer equivalent to Rob Kuntz, although going into the Army meant that he couldn't carry forward that working relationship in quite the way Rob did. Richard didn't join in until a bit later... I do still have John's email somewhere on the old PC but a cold call might not be the best approach.
Now is probaby not the best of times, but, given that the people who know the early history of the game are becoming fewer and fewer, if you have John Sniders email and could send a short message asking him to respond to these posts or even answer some interview type question (as Greg Svenson has done with Dave Bowman) to post on a blog or in Fight On! orsome such, you would be doing us all a service
As to non-d6 usage, both Wesley and Arneson were familiar with - and used - these long before D&D, so to be 100% certain that "funny dice" were not in use in any way prior to 1973 (by which time there were at least four or five worlds stated to be in play and it would have been difficult to throttle back the gameplay) might be a bit of a leap in the dark, perhaps.
"no funny dice back then" is a quote from Dave Arneson in the Introduction to the FFC. I understand him to mean the "platonic solids" d4, d8, d12, not percentile dice necessarily. He clearly did have d20 percentile dice, but apparently not the others, or wasn't using them if he did.
Edit: Also, this statement can only really be said to apply to Blackmoor. Other groups might well have used the plattonic dice. I presume Gygax was from very early on.
We thought we were crazy, but we had a great time. - Dave Arneson
harami2000 Level 5 Thaumaturgist member is offline
Joined: Aug 2007 Posts: 298 Karma: 7
Re: The % layer of OD&D archaeology « Reply #27 on Nov 21, 2009, 3:30pm »
> Now is probaby not the best of times, but, given that the people who know the early history of the game are becoming fewer and fewer, if you have John Sniders email and could send a short message asking him to respond to these posts or even answer some interview type question (as Greg Svenson has done with Dave Bowman) to post on a blog or in Fight On! orsome such, you would be doing us all a service
Email addy incoming in your mailbox but that's from close to five years ago when I was asking around on various research questions. Certainly not at all comfortable with asking those out the blue and wrapping that in a condolences message, however well meant. :/ That previously went nowhere for in-depth questions to John since I was relying on others to pass me various lines of enquiry which were either under a stack of boxes here (DW interview, etc.) or that they had sourced elsewhere. Wasn't exactly happy to be left high-and-dry on that thanks to "politics", etc., and knowing that it might be easy to ask the "wrong question" given the relationship with EGG, etc.
Re. John rather than Richard, that's not to imply that John was the only person in place but that Richard, in his own words, came along later and also wasn't at the core for D&D developments. Some of the other names on the list are more readily accessible these days vs. 5 years ago and have already replied with their recollections; for which, thanks. Richard; "As I understand it, and saw once I was introduced to the group, those involved were my brother, Greg Svenson, Fred Funk and Dave Megarry. I came in on the periphery as it was getting ready to be put together. Contact with Gygax was restricted to Arneson only as far as I know".
> "no funny dice back then" is a quote from Dave Arneson in the Introduction to the FFC. I understand him to mean the "platonic solids" d4, d8, d12, not percentile dice necessarily. He clearly did have d20 percentile dice, but apparently not the others, or wasn't using them if he did.
"Had" per Wesley, but not using/or else behind the screen as with those d10/20s? The general trend sounds about right but if you move 1972/73 back to 1971/72(?), I'd be happier.
Joined: Oct 2008 Gender: Male Posts: 679 Location: Lille, France Karma: 45
Re: The % layer of OD&D archaeology « Reply #28 on Nov 22, 2009, 4:57pm »
About the changes from d6 chainmail to d100, the solution is not easy to find and I don't think I found it yet. Just some hypothesis and doubts I will try to explain. A bit complicated, but I hope it makes sense – not as the solution, but as a step toward it.
- Dave explained clearly that the conversion gave him headaches, although some good maths wereplaying with him. So we can bet he wasn't searching an exact translation, but something that makes sense in a game session.
- I suspect he used a bell curve, provided by the math’s. Then rounded it (unlike the famous AD&D thieves skills, Blackmoor tables shows only 5 to 5 steps). Then, in order to solve the lower and higher numbers problematic rounding, he bowed a little the curve.
- EPT contains such a bowing, in the chances of failures for spells. Steps are from 10%, from 60% of failure at level I, to 20% at level V, then drop to 5% under 20 (so steps are 20, 15, 10, 5 and 0).
- In OD&D, if my suspicion the % of survival have been first wrote in a 2d6 frame is right [but this need to be clarified], the cap is at 90% with a 12. Using the bases above, I sketched a table of conversion from 2d6 to 1d100 which fits. Your suggestions are more than welcome (and that don’t solve the 1-10 abilities, but I will add my thoughts in a next post].
I must protest bitterly that my aircraft still has not been painted red.
Joined: Mar 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 1,596 Location: Schenectady Karma: 73
Re: The % layer of OD&D archaeology « Reply #29 on Nov 22, 2009, 9:30pm »
You're talking about the Constitution bonus, if I'm following correctly. Wouldn't 2d6 -2 put the 40-50% chance survivial more in line with the Rounding column without smoothing the curve?
![[Home]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif "[Home]")
![[New Topics]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/topics.png "[New Topics]")
![[Help]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif "[Help]")
![[Search]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif "[Search]")
![[Login]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/login.gif "[Login]")
![[Register]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/register.gif "[Register]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/search2.gif "[Search This Thread]")
![[Share Topic]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/share.png "[Share Topic]")
![[Print]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif "[Print]")
Author
![[avatar]](http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/images/avatars/goblinoidgames/210153305548cd4dcd40ac6.gif "[avatar]")
![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif "[homepage]")
Logged![[avatar]](http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z17/tmpiper/90x90.jpg "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://www.jastabinksaviation.com/6614pf.JPG "[avatar]")
Looking forward to what you come up with next. I'll try to get you a pdf of at least the relevant parts of AIF when I get a chance, but I'm thinking your research with OD&D, FFC, and EPT will give a better basis of comparison to work from. There is one person who may well know at least the general details of Arnesons early systems - Richard Snider - having been an original player, and having worked with Arneson on both the FFC and AIF. Wouldn't it be great if we could hear from him!
![[image]](http://i448.photobucket.com/albums/qq210/wizardinabottle/From2d6tod100.gif "[image]")