Original D&D Discussion - Weapon/Armour Limitations, and Alternative Combat

« Weapon/Armour Limitations, and Alternative Combat »

Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
May 24, 2013, 5:47am

Original D&D Discussion :: Dungeons & Dragons (1971-1978) :: Men & Magic (1974) :: Weapon/Armour Limitations, and Alternative Combat

« Page 2 of 2 Jump to page Go

Author

Topic: Weapon/Armour Limitations, and Alternative Combat (Read 1,492 times)

talysman
Level 7 Enchanter

member is offline

Joined: Nov 2010
Gender: Male

Posts: 663
Karma: 19

Re: Weapon/Armour Limitations, and Alternative Com
« Reply #15 on May 8, 2011, 11:42pm »

May 8, 2011, 11:17pm, cooper wrote:

"all weapons do the same damage" is not true in 0d&d, only in basic d&d.

Hunh?

I guess you mean LBB + Sup I, unless you are referring to giant-sized weapons, which do damage based on size of giant.

Link to Post - Back to Top IP:

Logged

blackbarn
Level 7 Enchanter

member is offline

Joined: Apr 2008
Gender: Male

Posts: 537
Karma: 30

Re: Weapon/Armour Limitations, and Alternative Com
« Reply #16 on May 8, 2011, 11:55pm »

It's things like this that every "Clone" system of OD&D has ignored completely so far, and makes them not clones of the original at all. They are all "tainted" by the later editions perceptions, sometimes strongly. The biggest charm of OD&D to me is that reading it as-is can yield such different and very valid interpretations. If you want those cleared up and set in stone, then why use OD&D at all?

brannalbin, if you are writing a clone that preserves these sorts of things, then I am very interested.

Does it make sense that one could wield a non-magical weapon type but not a magical one? Of course not, but isn't much of the D&D game's logic based on game balance, not realism? Makes as much sense as clerics of, for example, a god of war, or an evil bloody sacrificial priest... who still must wield only blunt weapons. And why do magic-users forget "memorized" spells? Besides, any of these things can be rationalized in your campaign world if you think creatively and really desire it to make sense. For most, I suspect it's enough to just play a fun game.

Link to Post - Back to Top IP:

Logged

cooper
Level 7 Enchanter

member is offline

Joined: Jul 2010
Gender: Male

Posts: 561
Karma: 17

Re: Weapon/Armour Limitations, and Alternative Com
« Reply #17 on May 9, 2011, 11:35am »

May 8, 2011, 11:42pm, talysman wrote:

May 8, 2011, 11:17pm, cooper wrote:

"all weapons do the same damage" is not true in 0d&d, only in basic d&d.

Hunh?

I guess you mean LBB + Sup I, unless you are referring to giant-sized weapons, which do damage based on size of giant.

uh, no. 0d&d provides 4 combat systems only two, the alternate and the fantasy did not adjust damage based on the weapon being wielded.

Link to Post - Back to Top IP:

Logged

talysman
Level 7 Enchanter

member is offline

Joined: Nov 2010
Gender: Male

Posts: 663
Karma: 19

Re: Weapon/Armour Limitations, and Alternative Com
« Reply #18 on May 9, 2011, 1:38pm »

May 9, 2011, 11:35am, cooper wrote:

May 8, 2011, 11:42pm, talysman wrote:

Hunh?

I guess you mean LBB + Sup I, unless you are referring to giant-sized weapons, which do damage based on size of giant.

uh, no. 0d&d provides 4 combat systems only two, the alternate and the fantasy did not adjust damage based on the weapon being wielded.

That's a different statement than " 'All weapons do the same damage' is not true on OD&D." I now see what you're saying: OD&D gave the option (via Chainmail) to adjust weapon damage, but Basic D&D, by limiting itself to the alternate combat system and not implementing Sup I, eliminated the possibility of adjusted weapon damage.

That makes sense.

Link to Post - Back to Top IP:

Logged

Zenopus
Level 8 Warlock

member is offline

[avatar]

Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 799
Karma: 95

Re: Weapon/Armour Limitations, and Alternative Com
« Reply #19 on Apr 24, 2012, 10:21am »

Another tidbit from Gygax's letter in #15 (Oct 76):

"Specifically to the point, magic-users are not allowed to wear any form of armor or use any form of weapon other than daggers. We have amended our treatment to allow them to use staves as weapons as well. Characters able to operate in two or more classes at once do not fall under the injunction against armor and weapons. Thieves can use nothing better than leather armor, and they may never use a shield. They may use only daggers and/or swords, magical or not. I would allow them to use a garrot or sling in some cases. Likewise, I would allow the use of a fine chainmail shirt of magical nature. The point is that the DM should make such decisions."

Oct 76 is just after all of the OD&D Supplements were out. AD&D was probably in early development but this is still firmly in the OD&D-era.

Greyhawk says: "Thieves an employ magic daggers and magic swords but none of the other magical weaponry" (pg 4). His statement here indicates he meant for this to apply to non-magical weapons as well. Holmes, for some reason, changed this to "Thieves can use all the weapons of a fighting man including magic swords and magic daggers" (pg 6).

Some interesting additions from his personal campaign:
-magic-users can wield a staff (two-handed? can they cast while holding it in one hand?)
-thieves can use garrots/slings in some cases (when?)
-thieves can wear fine magic chainmail (elven?)

Earlier discussion on this topic:
Weapon Restrictions

« Last Edit: Apr 24, 2012, 10:25am by Zenopus »

Link to Post - Back to Top IP:

Logged

"Story tellers are always careful to point out that the reputed dungeons lie in close proximity to the foundations of an older, pre-human city, to the graveyard, and to the sea.”
- Holmes rulebook

Zenopus Archives - Holmes Basic D&D - website & blog

cooper
Level 7 Enchanter

member is offline

Joined: Jul 2010
Gender: Male

Posts: 561
Karma: 17

Re: Weapon/Armour Limitations, and Alternative Com
« Reply #20 on Apr 24, 2012, 1:07pm »

A couple of things. While the rules state such and such class may not use such and such armor or weapons, it does not describe the penalties for someone doing so. Ad&d can be instructive as it states that an XP penalty can be levied. So in the case of a wizard escaping from a prison. If he doesn't use any fighter implements (sword and armor stolen from a guard for example). The DM may award him "hard mode" XP for the prison escape.

Now, if the wizard felt the need to use a sword, then perhaps no XP for the escape is granted. To a player--especially one with a long term character, sometimes survival of the PC trumps get some XP for something. Another example would be a wizard out of spells, the cleric lies dead and a vampire approaches, in many cases a PC would gladly give up the XP for the adventure to pick up the dead comrades mace of disruption and end the serious threat to his PC. In this case the DM doesn't tell a player he "can't do something". Nor does he impose such an onerous penalty (50% fumble! -10 to hit!!!) so as to make the choice no real choice at all.

A second option is to provide positive benefits to adhering to archetypes. Perhaps wizards who wield staffs throughout an adventure gets a +1 dmg/-1 saving throw bonus to his spells. His apprentice robes and hood gives him a passive detect magic etc. So too, the hammer or the mace can be an instrument of the cleric granting him bonuses to turning undead, spells, wielding a hammer of his faith grants him a passive detect evil 10' etc.

« Last Edit: Apr 24, 2012, 1:11pm by cooper »

Link to Post - Back to Top IP:

Logged

aldarron
Level 9 Sorcerer

member is offline

[avatar]

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: Weapon/Armour Limitations, and Alternative Com
« Reply #21 on Apr 24, 2012, 1:42pm »

If intentions are of any interest in this discussion, (and they needn't be, I admit) it's clear that Gygax intended the passage to mean no edged weapons of any kind, magical or not. In Strategic Review Gygax made fun of rival wargamer Alan Hendrik for creating a Cleric character who was armed with a mundane sword. Vol 1, No. 3, 1975 "... he had gone so far as to play a game of D&D as a Cleric, completely armed with such edged weapons as spear and arrows . . . this so called “review” was so obviously inaccurate..."

Link to Post - Back to Top IP:

Logged

http://boggswood.blogspot.com/

We thought we were crazy, but we had a great time. - Dave Arneson

« Page 2 of 2 Jump to page Go

Click Here To Make This Board Ad-Free