|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 20, 2008 21:44:27 GMT -6
From page 25 of M&M:
So, how do you play this spell? The wording says it's similar to charm person, with no reference to immobilization of opponents at all. Only in later editions of D&D this spells becomes for distinct from charm person and the effect is cleared described as a sort of paralisation.
In your OD&D games, how do you run this spell?
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 23, 2008 11:35:04 GMT -6
In OD&D you don't really need to build. The game is totally playable as is.
The good thing is that it enables building with great ease.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 23, 2008 10:49:56 GMT -6
Share the table!
And talk us about your task resolution system on a new thread ;D
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 22, 2008 13:32:14 GMT -6
I totally agree with you ffilz!
Some characters I played where highly defined by their items.
I once had a halfling that found a "Cloak of the Bat", and that item made him very special and unique, as he constantly used it for all kinds of dirty work. I also role-played how the Cloak was changing his personality and habits. He started to sleep by day, hanging from the ceiling (the cloak made that possible), and he lived mostly by night.
That same halfling character once drank 2 potions, and the DM rolled on a potion miscibility table and the result was: "reduce to 1/2 size!".
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 21, 2008 0:07:54 GMT -6
I think that the power of magic in OD&D, and all D&D, is highly influenced by the way you handle initiative.
Under some systems I've seen out there, magic spells go ALWAYS before melee. No matter if you won the roll. That certainly makes magic much more powerful.
If there is a higher chance to interrupt spells, the power of magic diminishes.
It's a choice that you as a referee must make.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 19, 2008 20:47:17 GMT -6
All of us know 2 things:
1. In OD&D, a Fireball deals 1d6 per level of the caster. 2. OD&D has the lowest hit dice of all D&D versions, thus, making Fireball a MUCH deadlier spell. Because in later editions HD increased, but Fireball remained the same.
Now, a 5th level Fighter rolls 5d6+1 for total hit points. And a 5th level M-U can toss him a 5d6 Fireball, with a high probability wiping him right away with the need of just 1 spell.
Have you runned into a situacion where this seemed too strong?? Where the Fighter's HD seemed to low vs. the all mighty fireball?? What do you think?? Is this an important issue?
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 24, 2008 8:08:30 GMT -6
So a follow-up question is: would it be better to recycle through the chart after 10th level (which is easier since our number system is base-10) or after "name" level. This is a little tricky since for the fighting man they list actual numbers for 10th level even though "name" level is technically 9th. Name levels would still be 9th (F), 11th (M-U) and 8th (C). This is only a method to assign Hit Dice. And I think it's easier to work with a 10 level distribution.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 23, 2008 21:04:33 GMT -6
Ok, so here is how I fixed "Dice of Accumulative Hits"Notes:Fighting-men: I gave them the OETP progression for warriors. This progression only adds some slight bonuses in some levels. Clerics: I gave them the OETP progression. The progression is smaller at the low levels when compared to OD&D, but higher at the upper levels. Both issues I thought they needed a fix Thief: new class I'm working on. I game them the progression of OETP magic-users, that's higher than the OD&D one in levels 1-10. Psion: another new class. His progression lies bewteen the thief and the magic user. Magic-User: I just kept the original progression from OD&D. My system will work just as in OETP, that is: 1. When do I roll for hit points?Upon gaining a level. 2. What do I roll?Instead of rolling 1 die and add it to the previous result, as in all later editions of D&D, you roll all the dice from the scratch. That means, if you reach level 4 of the F-M you roll all 4 dice. 3. What happens if the result turns to be lower than my previous amount?You just keep the previous result. There is no HP gain for that level. Now, this may look bad. But if you had unlucky rolls in previous levels, it gives you a chance to recover from those unlucky rolls. I really like that, and find it more fair. Some players, when they roll a 1 for HPs (or maybe two times or three), they just don't want to keep playing their character, because it sucks, and will suck forever as you can't reroll. This system gives them the hope and a motivation to reach the next level and amend that unlucky roll. 4. What happens when I have passed the top of the table?You roll the top HD for you table, and add the according amount, counting again from the bottom. For example, a 15th level Lord rolls: 10+1 (top hd of the table) plus 5+1 (level 5th).
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 17, 2008 0:44:07 GMT -6
Yeah, but why really? What is the reason? Which was the intent of the author?
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 15, 2008 22:59:52 GMT -6
I've been developing a new thief class and it's HD progression is going to be somewhere in between the cleric and the magic user. The question would be: Why?
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 15, 2008 16:01:41 GMT -6
Looks like a very reasonable way of doing it. EDIT: That would be great.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 15, 2008 14:34:32 GMT -6
You are right.
This gives more food for thought.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 15, 2008 14:28:50 GMT -6
Hm, I see you have already answered the question about whether you reroll all your hit dice at each level. With the added rule that you keep your previous HP if it was higher, I like it a lot. Especially since the same method can make level drain easier to handle—no need to keep track of how many HP you had at each level previous. Just reroll all your HD and keep the lower result. Regards. Wow, good sighting! I had not realized that, and it's great. :D
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 15, 2008 14:27:34 GMT -6
I think the OD&D system is fine. I don’t like the “power inflation” that comes along with the Greyhawk system (because monster hit dice then moves up to d8). I also like how in OD&D the characters start as very similar at first level (the Veteran’s +1 to HP isn’t going to make much of a difference, neither will the one spell of the Medium, and they attack on the same table, do the same weapon damage), and only as time progresses do they become starkly different. This is almost the opposite of AD&D+UA, where your Barbarian/Cavalier/Fighter with Weapon Spec is a veritable tank against those 1d8 monsters, and your 1-4 HP Prestidigitator is nothing but a liability. I wholly agree here. Wait. Are those red numbers in the book? We don't really know them. And I don't think they can be deduced so easily, because the numbers don't really follow a regular pattern. And if they do, the deduction could be wrong too (even though it's a good and very well thought deduction). EDIT FOR MORE ON THIS: Maybe the cleric would get higher HPs later in the game. We don't know it, and we will never will. Magic-users can still, and certainly are, the most powerful class. And having lower hit points won't change that. My opinion is above. Seems that you were working on the table when I wrote that. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 15, 2008 13:52:55 GMT -6
As appendix to the article, I think that the OETP gave the best answers to the mysteries of OD&D hit dice.
I'll give the answers OETP gives. This are the rules of that game, and not a personal opinion. Of course, they are not D&D, nor the authors official clarifications of the rules.
1. When do I roll for hit points?
Upon gaining a level.
2. What do I roll?
Instead of rolling 1 die and add it to the previous result, as in all later editions of D&D, you roll all the dice from the scratch. That means, if you reach level 4 of the F-M you roll all 4 dice.
3. What happens if the result turns to be lower than my previous amount?
You just keep the previous result. There is no HP gain for that level. Now, this may look bad. But if you had unlucky rolls in previous levels, it gives you a chance to recover from those unlucky rolls. I really like that, and find it more fair. Some players, when they roll a 1 for HPs (or maybe two times or three), they just don't want to keep playing their character, because it sucks, and will suck forever as you can't reroll. This system gives them the hope and a motivation to reach the next level and amend that unlucky roll.
4. What happens when I have passed the top of the table?
You roll the top HD for you table, and add the according amount, counting again from the bottom.
For example, a 15th level Lord rolls: 10+1 (top hd of the table) plus 5+1 (level 5th).
I'll be using this OETP rules in my OD&D.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 15, 2008 12:59:29 GMT -6
When we are reading the original D&D booklets and we get to the section called "STATISTICS REGARDING CLASSES" (p. 17), we are at first astonished because of the weird, and unique to all editions of D&D, system for determining "Dice for Accumulative Hits" or Hit Dice.
In fact, OD&D is the only edition of D&D where the d6 is used for all classes. Looking at the tables we see a series of numbers, that don't really follow a regular pattern but that show a clear intention in the rules: fighting-men get the highest hit points, followed by the cleric, and finally we got the magic user with the lowest hit point expectation (this last issue may be arguable under some interpretations of the rules, but it's not really the point I'm trying to make here).
To many, the greyhawk system that later became the D&D standard, was a great "fix" to the otherwise quirky original system. But I've come to think: "not quite so, not quite so..."
I got some few but good reasons to think why the original system is better:
1. The Greyhawk system is too random, while the original system provides the guaranty of a more predictable "average total":
I'm NOT against randomness. But the greyhawk system might be too random. Fighters can roll from 1 to 8. There is a BIG difference between rolling an 8 and rolling a 1, that is so frustrating for many players that think their character got "spoiled" by a single unlucky roll. A lucky cleric may well have more hitpoints than an unlucky fighter. But an "all d6 system" that assigns different quantities of d6s to each class, guaranties more "average results". Neither too low, neither too hight. Most results remain in the average. It also better guaranties that fighting men will usually have the highest hit point total, followed by clerics, and finally magic-users. I think it really helps for a more balanced game, where if you elected the high-hitpoint class, you won't lose that significant advantage to an unlucky and irreversible roll. You won't be outclassed by a secondary fighting class if you are playing the primary fighting class.
Also, if you are playing a magic user, giving a lower quantity of d6s to this guy, will better guaranty he stays as the lowest "avarege hitpoint" member of the party.
2. With the original system, fighting-men make the most of a high constitution score:
A character with a constitution of 15 or higher gets +1 to each die they roll for hit points. Note that, as fighting men are the ones who roll most dice, they will get a higher benefit from a high constitution score. And this can be considered an extra benefit for playing the class.
Compare: a 10th level F-M with 15 CON will receive, a +10 hp bonus. While a 10th level cleric with 15 CON will receive a +7.
I really like this. It's another benefit for our no-spellcasting class.
Finally, I'm not saying that the original system is perfect. The tables could get a bit of work for a better distribution of the amount of d6s everybody rolls. But the guiding principle is much better to the excessive randomness of greyhawk and all that came after (that has been house-ruled so much in order to reduce it's randomness).
I hope you liked my article and did not find my poor English difficult to understand.
Cheers,
Santiago
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 17, 2008 10:14:33 GMT -6
Yes. I think I'll do it that way.
Now. If a player wants to research. Would you show them the Greyhawk list for ideas??
Also, even though you may not include Greyhawk spells in the campaign, you can use them as a tool for creating new spells. Using them as a guide of what would be balanced.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 14, 2008 14:18:10 GMT -6
I understand what you mean. But I'm really considering to completely erase certain spells. The most probable candidate: Strength.
Your insight is good.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 14, 2008 14:05:59 GMT -6
We have been discussing why magic missile should not be included in the game. Are there other spells in Greyhawk or other sources worth the inclusion? Which spells make OD&D a better game? I'll go over the magic-user spells of greyhawk and draw some fast conclusions: 1st LevelMagic Missile - NO Shield - with no MM, this spell makes much less sense. It also messes up with the OD&D AC system. NO Ventriloquism - could be considered a worthy inclusion. 2nd levelDarkness, 5' r. - could be. Strength - HELL NO! the beginning of the "buff" madness. I hate this kind of spells. Web - this makes the Staff of Wizardry much less interesting and unique. Mirror Image - i have always loved this spell. Magic Mouth - a fun, but silly IMO spell, that could get into the list. Pyrotechnics - interesting, but a bit boring IMO. Gotta think. 3rd levelExplosive Runes - could be included. Rope Trick - never liked this silly spell and the "hide in another dimension" stuff. Suggestion - Charm person is already stronger than this spell if you follow the M&M description literary. So, NO. Monster Summoning I - could be included. 4th levelIce Storm - is this spell really nessesary if you have Wall of Ice? Fear - I like this spell very much. Monster Summoning II - could be included. Extension I - never liked this kind of spells that help spells. 5th levelMonster Summoning III - could be included. Extension II - nah. 6th levelLegend Lore - thought decision. Repulsion - i really like this spell Monster Summoning IV - could be included Extension III - nah 7th, 8th and 9th level spells are not my cup of tea.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 23, 2008 10:56:51 GMT -6
- at higher level, it's sometimes just the thing a caster needs to take out those enemies that are immune to fire and lightning, yet there's also more flexibility to take the utility spells. No magic missile can help in keeping the fighting-men more important at high level!
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 17, 2008 0:47:06 GMT -6
Hmmmm... I'm not so keen to that kind of things. Gotta think about it. It looks too high magic for my tastes. It reminds PC games where the wizards never stops shooting magic bolts and you just press the button like a madman.
Gotta think about it. I think it makes the M-U far more stronger. Because in the game, they are limited to daggers.
I would do this kind of stuff if there were some kind of limit, such as 3 per day, etc.
It's a purely aesthetic issue I got.
YMMV ;D
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 15, 2008 17:51:15 GMT -6
Other than bringing me back fond memories of my first gaming years, I got none.
But I'm trying to get rid of all the purely-nostalgic preferences that old-schoolers are accused of so often.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 14, 2008 13:23:15 GMT -6
Yeah!! That makes for a much more S&S spellcaster indeed!
Hmmmmm... more food for thought.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 14, 2008 13:18:14 GMT -6
Moreover, Fireball and Lighting Bolt DO require more brain-work and strategic thinking, because you can't cast them in complete safety as MM. In the dungeon environment, the party must have a coordinated assault plan, so as to not get blow up by their own fireball. Lighting bolt is also a dangerous spell to be handled with care, because if bouncing becomes wild, it can kill more than just 1 of your party members or even yourself!
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 14, 2008 13:12:12 GMT -6
I agree that Magic Missile has come to be an iconic spell with deep meaning for many players. I say let those players spend the time and money researching the spell if they like it so much! Could certainly be the way of dealing with it as a referee.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 14, 2008 12:57:23 GMT -6
I'm having hard time deciding if MAGIC MISSILE, presented in Supplement I, should be included in my game or not.
MAGIC MISSILE, such an iconic D&D spell, we all love it.
But, there are really some good reasons for not to including it in the game...
Without magic missile, magic-users got no direct damage spells until level 5, when fireball and lighting bolt become available.
Before level 5, they got mostly utilitarian spells. The certainly also have combat spells. But this spells are more "indirect" and require more thinking or group cooperation to use them correctly and to great effect. The spells are more "subtle", and aren't just slinging away magical arrows all over the place. They require more brain-work and creativity from part of the magic-user if he wants to become a successful adventurer.
Flavor-wise, I also like the concept of having less direct damage spells in the game, as magic missiles gets to be cast a lot in a regular D&D game where the spell is available. Without magic missile, the magic user is much more in the tone of the swords & sorcery genre, where magic is used in more subtle, indirect strategies instead of just blowing everything up. The wizard must rely on charmed servants, illusions, his own party as he casts a sleep spell, holding portals to escape from that mean random encounter, read thoughts to anticipate action, get invisible and do all kinds of nasty stuff, etc.
Ok, I hope I make my point. The inclusion of magic missile certainly changes the way magic-users are played, since it's a very common spell choice, because direct damage is easier to play on part of the player and does not need clever strategies.
What say you?
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 13, 2008 9:23:03 GMT -6
OT: That has made me laugh as hell!! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 13, 2008 8:02:52 GMT -6
Consider that normal-men roll 1d6 for HPs. While a veteran rolls 1d6+1.
Considerer that fighting men enjoy the benefits of hight ability scores. While normal men don't have scores.
Also considerer that you might make up a special rule to enhance starting hps of the PC fighting men. Like max hp, or re-rolling 1s and 2s.
That's what makes 1st level fighting-men "veterans" IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 13, 2008 5:42:36 GMT -6
Well, you are right. Not really. They are not called "0-level", that's an AD&Dism. You are right.
But 1st level fighting men are different to "normal-men", who are just 1HD monsters with no abilities.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 13, 2008 4:57:30 GMT -6
I have modified titles to fix many of their "problems". Fighting-MenI Veteran II Warrior III Fighter IV Hero V Battler VI Myrmidon VII Champion VIII Superhero IX Lord X Legend Magic-UsersI Prestidigitator II Conjurer III Arcanist IV Spellmaster V Magician VI Evoker VII Thaumaturgist VIII Magus IX Sorcerer X Mage XI Wizard XII Arch-mage ClericsI Acolyte II Adept III Devotee IV Crusader V Warrior-priest VI Zealot VII Templar VIII Patriarch IX High Patriarch X Grand Patriarch We had an interesting discussion about this some time ago: odd74.proboards76.com/index.cgi?board=menmagic&action=display&thread=1192948324I like the first level fighting men to be a "veteran", since it distinguishes him from the mere "men-at-arms" or "normal men", that are 0-level. A "veteran" is a guy who has survived a battle or two, but not really more than that IMO.
|
|