The note about guarded magical treasure...

[foxroe]

I had one of those ridiculous personal "epiphanies" while participating in the "Damage on a flaming sword??" thread, so I thought I'd start another thread so as not to clutter up that one.

I had posted this comment:

Aug 14, 2017 19:30:33 GMT -6 foxroe said:

On a side note, I don't think I have ever paid attention to the note at the top of pg.27 in M&T. All magic items should be guarded by appropriate monsters, with the suggestion that they be creatures typically encountered on the 5th or 6th level of the dungeon! [EDIT: I should have said "creatures of fifth or sixth level here, and not tied it to dungeon level] If one were to strictly follow this, there would be a lot fewer magic items in the possession of low level players...

The note I am referring to is:

All items will be guarded by appropriate monsters. If the referee desires he can simply roll on the Dungeon Encounter Matrix. )see Vol. III) fifth or sixth level moster clauses.

Waysofearth replied:

Aug 15, 2017 5:44:14 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

That's Monster Level Tables 5 and 6. Monsters listed in those two Monster Level Tables occur on dungeon levels 2--12, and 3--13+ respectively.

...which got me thinking more about the note and how it's interpreted. My reply was:

Aug 16, 2017 2:21:45 GMT -6 foxroe said:

Sure... if that's how it's interpreted. Seems to me that the wording is possibly referring directly to the monster* level 5 and 6 tables (despite the use of the word "matrix" in the note). Otherwise, treasure would be unguarded if on the first dungeon* level. Granted, the "rule" is merely a suggestion; I was just surprised by the implications as I had never really paid strict attention to the note before.

*(I use italics just to differentiate between between the uses of level, not to make a point really)

So... how do you interpret it?

[sixdemonbag]

I don't have an opinion other than to point out that there are differences in the printings.

My WotC reprint PDF says:

"NOTE: All items will be guarded by appropriate monsters. If the referee desires he can simply roll on the Monster Level Tables in Book III."

While, an earlier printing (not sure which) says:

"NOTE: All items will be guarded by appropriate monsters. If the referee desires he can simply roll on the Dungeon Encounter Matrix, (see VoI. III) fifth or sixth level monster classes."

I don't know if this helps foxroe .

[foxroe]

Interesting. I was unaware of that difference. My PDF's are from several years ago when they were briefly available. I believe (not 100% sure) that they are 6th printing. I had assumed that the WotC reprints were internally identical to the final printing, but you know what they say about assuming...

[foxroe]

Yes, my PDF's are 6th printing (according to the Acaeum). There was a 7th print run, but the difference in the note is not mentioned. So the WotC PDF's are 7th printing maybe?

[sixdemonbag]

Aug 16, 2017 17:48:43 GMT -6 foxroe said:

Yes, my PDF's are 6th printing (according to the Acaeum). There was a 7th print run, but the difference in the note is not mentioned. So the WotC PDF's are 7th printing maybe?

I bought mine in January of this year if that helps.

[waysoftheearth]

I think the 2014 WotC reprint qualifies as an 8th print. It does have various subtle and not-so-subtle differences to the 6th/7th prints (add the one sixdemonbag points out above).

See also: odd74.proboards.com/thread/9572/reprint-differences

Pity about photobucket. Oh well.

[foxroe]

Wow. I'm glad I talked myself out of getting a reprint...

[talysman]

I don't interpret that note as having anything to do with standard dungeon treasures.

It's specifically a note on the Maps table. In other words, it's telling you that, when adventurers find a treasure map, it leads to a lair of a monster from the 5th and 6th level monsters from Book III. It has nothing to do with treasures rolled for wilderness encounters, which are handled by the monster treasure types table, nor does it have anything to do with treasures rolled using the table on Page 7 of U&WA.

[foxroe]

Interesting. It becomes a matter of formatting at that point I suppose. I personally feel that the wording "All items..." refers back to the beginning of the "Magic Items (and maps)" tables, but I can see the sense in what you are saying talysman.

I'm not arguing that it should be that way, I just like the implication that characters aren't just going to stumble upon the One Ring in an Orc lair somewhere without having to go through a Kraken at the entrance.

... and I like the implication that it applies to "all items". So, even that +1 Dagger will be located behind a Troll that's been chained to the wall by the Orcs...

[coffee]

Aug 17, 2017 14:54:11 GMT -6 talysman said:

I don't interpret that note as having anything to do with standard dungeon treasures.

It's specifically a note on the Maps table. In other words, it's telling you that, when adventurers find a treasure map, it leads to a lair of a monster from the 5th and 6th level monsters from Book III. It has nothing to do with treasures rolled for wilderness encounters, which are handled by the monster treasure types table, nor does it have anything to do with treasures rolled using the table on Page 7 of U&WA.

I have to agree with this interpretation. Otherwise, it seems like it would be pointless to have a possibility of magic items for treasure types that don't correspond to fifth or sixth level monsters.

Basically, since it refers to items in particular, it indicates that the treasures the maps lead to are not necessarily guarded. But the magic items are.

However, Foxroe, please don't think I'm ganging up on you. I'd like to see how your game works when you use your interpretation. If you do, please let us know how it worked out.

Because that's the beauty of D&D. We can discuss all day how something should be done, but in the heat of actual play it's up to the individual referee to do what he sees is best for his game.

[foxroe]

Gahh!! Why are you guys picking on me!? Trigger warning, trigger warning!



No, I see your point and Talysman's. My interpretation definitely conflicts with the intent of the treasure type table on pg.22.

But still, any player familiar enough with the rules would be hesitant to follow maps knowing that they lead to certain doom for low-level PC's...

[talysman]

Aug 20, 2017 5:43:38 GMT -6 foxroe said:

Gahh!! Why are you guys picking on me!? Trigger warning, trigger warning!



No, I see your point and Talysman's. My interpretation definitely conflicts with the intent of the treasure type table on pg.22.

But still, any player familiar enough with the rules would be hesitant to follow maps knowing that they lead to certain doom for low-level PC's...

Yes, but under your interpretation, all treasures are guarded by 5th and 6th level monsters, which makes it certain doom for low-level PCs even if they aren't following a map...

It's not so bad if it's just a note about maps. The PCs don't have to follow the map immediately, or ever. They can choose when to take on the challenge... and the map could provide hints as to what the guardian creature is. That, plus just having a map of the area, could give the PCs a chance to form a cunning plan. Walking blindly into a dungeon that's a mummy's lair can be devastating, but a map to a desert location with a note that says "Danger! Ra-Hotep still walks his tomb!" give the PCs a heads-up, and may lead them to stock up on flaming oil. A hydra would be tough, but if a map shows more than one route in an out of the hydra's lair, the PCs could try to lure it down one passage and collapse both ends, trapping it.

[foxroe]

Aug 20, 2017 15:48:08 GMT -6 talysman said:

Yes, but under your interpretation, all treasures are guarded by 5th and 6th level monsters, which makes it certain doom for low-level PCs even if they aren't following a map...

Yes, I agree. My initial interpretation was a bit of a knee jerk reaction to how my addled brain read the note in relation to the whole section. As I said in my previous post, I see your point, and I believe you and Coffee are correctly interpreting the note.

Now stop ganging up on me!

Aug 20, 2017 15:48:08 GMT -6 talysman said:

The PCs don't have to follow the map immediately, or ever. They can choose when to take on the challenge... and the map could provide hints as to what the guardian creature is. That, plus just having a map of the area, could give the PCs a chance to form a cunning plan. Walking blindly into a dungeon that's a mummy's lair can be devastating, but a map to a desert location with a note that says "Danger! Ra-Hotep still walks his tomb!" give the PCs a heads-up, and may lead them to stock up on flaming oil. A hydra would be tough, but if a map shows more than one route in an out of the hydra's lair, the PCs could try to lure it down one passage and collapse both ends, trapping it.

I like your take on maps. I'll have to admit, I've always been lazy with the maps and just let players "claim" the treasure between sessions. How does everyone else handle treasure maps? Do you pre-generate them, and maybe have them lead to a planned encounter? Do you randomly generate them, maybe as a springboard for other parts of the dungeon you haven't laid out yet (maybe they're maps left behind by other less fortunate adventuring parties...)? Do you "worry about it later"? How literally do you handle the note under the map generation tables? Do you provide warnings or clues on the maps as Talysman does? If this has been discussed already, I apologize.

[Starbeard]

One of the interesting things about the D&D treasure tables is that they only scale how likely it is that magic items will be found in a treasure based on dungeon level/monster type, not what the magic items actually are. You could roll up a dragon encounter on level 6 with no magic items, or you could roll up an empty room on level 1 with a +3 flaming sword.

Your interpretation of the note on guarded magic items changes this up a bit, and I could see them suggesting an entirely new method for using dungeon tables. For example, as they stand the tables suggest this order for populating dungeons:

1. Fill the map with encounters.
2. For each encounter, figure out what monster is there.
3. For each monster, figure out what treasure it has, if any.

Recently, in the Number of Magic Items per Dungeon Level thread, Tetramorph took a traditional dungeon stocking table I made (based on Geoffrey's analysis of T1) and turned it around to focus on placing treasure first instead of monsters. You could rewrite all of the dungeon tables this way using the rationale wherein magic items must be guarded by appropriate monsters:

1. Encounters are treasures, not monsters. Instead of a 'Monsters by Dungeon Level' table, draw up a 'Treasures by Dungeon Level' table.
2. Stock the dungeon with those treasures.
3. Monsters don't guard treasure, but rather treasures are guarded. Instead of giving a monster a 'treasure type', give each type of treasure a 'monster type'. Cash, potions, scrolls, armour, etc. will each have their own monster table, and in the case of multiple treasure types the highest 'level' of item determines which monster is used.

This way the focus of dungeon design and exploration is always first, 'What is there to find?', and then, 'What is in the way of getting it?'