|
Post by geoffrey on Sept 6, 2017 14:27:54 GMT -6
One of the things I really like about the encounter tables in 1974 D&D plus supplements are the encounters with "conjurers" or "bishops" or "myrmidons" or etc. This is lost in other versions of the game, replaced by varied groups of different classes and different levels.
The old way makes sense to me. Those seekers after eldritch secrets would confer with one another for mutual knowledge. A necromancer would typically associate with other necromancers, for their parity of power would prevent one from overpowering another for his own advantage. A lowly beginning magic-user could not hope to keep such august company in any case.
Lawful clerics would naturally associate with other lawful clerics, avoiding the irreverent fighting-men and magic-users. All would avoid the (frankly scary) anti-clerics, except for other anti-clerics. Clearly bishops would not spend a lot of time with acolytes.
A veteran would be out of his depth around superheroes, and fighting-men in general would feel more at home with fellow sword-swingers than with clerics (who do not particularly approve of wining and wenching) or with weird bearded men interested only in moldy old tomes.
(Of course, none of the above need apply to PCs, who are a special case.)
What think you?
|
|
|
Post by Zenopus on Sept 6, 2017 16:39:29 GMT -6
Practically, I think Gygax and/or Arneson did this because it was easy to write as a single line on the wandering monster tables. Plus it's easier to stat out a random group that's all a single level: just make them all the same. Flavor-wise, it's a great detail. It begs for interesting explanations for why these homogenous groups are present in the dungeon: guilds, evil cults, ancient customs. I wrote once about the decline of wandering MUs as the editions progressed: zenopusarchives.blogspot.com/2012/09/where-did-all-npc-mus-go.html?m=1
|
|
|
Post by Scott Anderson on Sept 6, 2017 17:45:16 GMT -6
Incidentally there's nothing that says a pc party has to be diverse either. The dwarves questing after Smaug would have been a perfect adventuring party if that one guy didn't have to show up with a halfling instead.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2017 17:50:57 GMT -6
Actually, we often used the rolled NPCs as the basis of an adventurer group. If you have three Myrmadons, why wouldn't they have clerics, magic users, and hirelings of their own?
|
|
|
Post by howandwhy99 on Sept 6, 2017 19:22:02 GMT -6
geoffrey That makes a lot of sense. I never really thought about that before. NPCs of the same level as well as class would tend to hang out together. I know I wouldn't want to lose the ability of having different levels of the same class work together. Or perhaps especially different classes working together. But the real diverse groups do tend to feel more like Adventuring Parties tm, than people doing their own business. Maybe groups could be conceived of according to the adventure area they are in? A magic rich area full of monsters would attract magic-users who need fighting-men and vice versa. Or a buried temple full of giant insects and undead? The thieves guild of the genies? Warring magical cults? Horselord hordes with shamans crossing vast ranges? A forest fire approaching a town? The magic-, trap-, treasure-, and shrine-filled dungeons of some crazed archmage bent on toying with adventurers?
|
|
|
Post by Scott Anderson on Sept 7, 2017 3:58:07 GMT -6
Adventuring parties are supposed to be unusual - especially all the kinds of Demi-men working together. At least, I think so.
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Sept 7, 2017 8:38:34 GMT -6
The three volumes of the Monster & Treasure Assortment (published in 1977 and 1978) continue the old tradition. They are full of encounters with "evil adepts", "champions", "thaumaturgists", etc.
|
|
|
Post by rossik on Sept 9, 2017 8:14:58 GMT -6
Practically, I think Gygax and/or Arneson did this because it was easy to write as a single line on the wandering monster tables. Plus it's easier to stat out a random group that's all a single level: just make them all the same. Flavor-wise, it's a great detail. It begs for interesting explanations for why these homogenous groups are present in the dungeon: guilds, evil cults, ancient customs. I wrote once about the decline of wandering MUs as the editions progressed: zenopusarchives.blogspot.com/2012/09/where-did-all-npc-mus-go.html?m=1nice input!
|
|