|
Post by Starbeard on Nov 16, 2014 11:50:48 GMT -6
I'm starting up an OD&D campaign on my college campus, and have decided to drop all the house rules I've accumulated over the years and start from scratch for this group, rebuilding as we go along. As I design the first couple of dungeon levels, I'm reconsidering all the possible interpretations on the dungeon treasure table on Volume III p. 7.
I'm leaning on this general method: Vol. III treasure is used in dungeons, and Vol. II monster 'treasure types' are only used when exploring a monster's lair in outdoor adventures. If the monster is clearly using the dungeon as its lair, then I'll switch the treasure out with its Vol. II table. Also, I'm leaning towards interpreting the gems part of the Vol. III table as something like this: 'Level 1: 1d6 gems, each with a 5% chance of being present', instead of 'Level 1: gems will be present 1d6x5% of the time'.
How do you use the Volume III treasure table? How do you integrate the individual monster treasure tables from Vol. II into it? When do you allow monsters to have 'lair treasure' inside a dungeon? Is there a precedent on how these two treasure generation methods were originally designed to be used?
|
|
|
Post by Merctime on Nov 16, 2014 12:13:13 GMT -6
I'm just speaking personally, and not 'how I've done it' since I haven't ever gotten to play OD&D outside of PbP. BUT. I'm working on a dungeon myself, and had the same sort of quandary as you, generally. I've spoken to some others about it. It seems to me your idea is really cool I don't have the LBB, but do have Delving Deeper, so I might be 'off' on some of the stuff you say. I suppose I should say here, that OD&D is my favorite of all the 'versions' also. I think what you mean is using the treasure tables by dungeon level ("Unguarded Treasure") for dungeon treasures, and the "Treasure Type" lists only for outdoor lairs. I bet it's quite workable! It sounds to me, like you are simply using the "Unguarded Treasure" tables to fill in treasures for monsters not really numerous or 'dug in' to have a treasure type with them. I think this is fine, personally... But it might be cool to have a few of those monsters having a full treasure type, just to give the players a chance to luck into a big hoard. And, of course, you're consideration of monsters you place on purpose as being 'in lair' inside the dungeon would definitely warrant treasure type rolls! All of this is based off of advice I've been given by others who've ran dungeons with these rules and this type of 'how did it get played way back when' mindframe. Some of that same advice I was given on the same subject, was not to fiddle too much with number of creatures to amounts of treasure. If your dungeon is large and sprawling enough, you might, say, give only 40% of a treasure roll to a lair with only 40% of the maximum creatures present; But I was advised that it's still fun and rewarding to just give them a full roll, especially if your placing them and not randomly filling a room/rooms. Besides, if the game is fraught with peril, and makes the players really work hard, character death might cull some of the treasures they acquire! For your idea on gems, I think I like it. It seems you're just giving a bit more opportunity for each individual gem to be present, so some gems will be present, but not handfuls of them. Nice. Still, If I were you, I'd make at least a few of the placed encounters that you plan have the kind of treasures you want to be in them. Let the other treasures around the level be randomly determined. This is just me; Like I say, the earliest D&D I got to play was holmes or B/X (Been so long I can't recall which). I can't really speak on precedents. In any event, good luck, have fun, and Fight On!
|
|
|
Post by Starbeard on Nov 16, 2014 14:28:47 GMT -6
Ahah, so Delving Deeper calls it Unguarded Treasure, that makes sense. In OD&D it's simply given as 'the treasure table' to use when a room has treasure in it (based on dungeon level), without mentioning anything about it being unguarded. Still, the table comes after a brief discussion on guarded vs unguarded treaure, and already having individual monster treasure tables in Vol. II it makes it convenient to interpret the 'dungeon level treasure table' as being specifically for unguarded treasure, which is how I had done it before once upon a time. It's good to know that this was/is the accepted interpretation, at least in Delving Deeper and in your experience through others.
Thanks for the kudos on the method for gems. The wording in OD&D is pretty ambiguous ('5% each* … *=multiply by number rolled on a six-sided die'), and could be taken to mean 5% chance of a gem, rolling 1d6 times, or rolling once at 5x1d6%. I haven't crunched the numbers on it yet, but I'm hoping it gives gems a bit of added value for their rarity without overly skimping on treasure rewards.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2014 15:54:55 GMT -6
The outdoor tables in Volume 2 are NEVER NEVER NEVER used in the dungeon. The volume 3 tables are NOT for unguarded treasure. (there is a 1/6 chance of an empty room having treasure, see note 2 on that page)
Also, the table is "X percent chance of 1-6 gems, X percent chance of 1-6 pieces of jewelry."
I never used random tables in the dungeon; I always decided on treasure myself, and so did Gary, Dave, and Rob Kuntz to the best of my knowledge.
|
|
|
Post by Stormcrow on Nov 16, 2014 17:17:06 GMT -6
Here is the correct way to use the treasure tables.
Decide how much treasure you want to place, and place it.
Oh, and once you've placed all the monsters, traps, and treasure in your dungeon that you were sure you wanted, if you can't be bothered to think up any more monsters, traps, and treasure, there's a handy dungeon-stocking generator in Volume III that includes its own treasure table. Use that table when using the generator.
Don't have time to prepare a wilderness? Play an "offhand" game on the Outdoor Survival board—or any similar board you may have handy—and use the rules in Volume III to let the players wander around encountering monsters and castle inhabitants. If one of those has treasure, use the monster's Treasure Type to figure out what it's got in its lair.
The random stuff is only there for when you can't or won't come up with it yourself. It's a tool, not a rule.
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Nov 16, 2014 18:25:03 GMT -6
Here is the correct way to use the treasure tables. Decide how much treasure you want to place, and place it. Oh, and once you've placed all the monsters, traps, and treasure in your dungeon that you were sure you wanted, if you can't be bothered to think up any more monsters, traps, and treasure, there's a handy dungeon-stocking generator in Volume III that includes its own treasure table. Use that table when using the generator. Don't have time to prepare a wilderness? Play an "offhand" game on the Outdoor Survival board—or any similar board you may have handy—and use the rules in Volume III to let the players wander around encountering monsters and castle inhabitants. If one of those has treasure, use the monster's Treasure Type to figure out what it's got in its lair. The random stuff is only there for when you can't or won't come up with it yourself. It's a tool, not a rule. Yep: ( The Underworld & Wilderness Adventures, page 6)
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Nov 16, 2014 19:17:31 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Starbeard on Nov 17, 2014 9:15:14 GMT -6
The outdoor tables in Volume 2 are NEVER NEVER NEVER used in the dungeon. The volume 3 tables are NOT for unguarded treasure. (there is a 1/6 chance of an empty room having treasure, see note 2 on that page) Also, the table is "X percent chance of 1-6 gems, X percent chance of 1-6 pieces of jewelry." I never used random tables in the dungeon; I always decided on treasure myself, and so did Gary, Dave, and Rob Kuntz to the best of my knowledge. Thanks for that insight, Gronan! Once again, it seems like there was a disconnect somewhere between the original design of early D&D and the way it came to be played once it was let loose in the wild. My pre-2e D&D experience only goes back 10 years, but I'm not sure if I've ever played with someone who had any qualms whatsoever about using Vol. II treasures (or their AD&D equivalents) in dungeons—I suppose that's born out in how some retroclones explicitly choose to use the Vol. III tables for unguarded treasure only.
|
|
|
Post by Starbeard on Nov 17, 2014 9:26:01 GMT -6
Here is the correct way to use the treasure tables. Decide how much treasure you want to place, and place it. Oh, and once you've placed all the monsters, traps, and treasure in your dungeon that you were sure you wanted, if you can't be bothered to think up any more monsters, traps, and treasure, there's a handy dungeon-stocking generator in Volume III that includes its own treasure table. Use that table when using the generator. Don't have time to prepare a wilderness? Play an "offhand" game on the Outdoor Survival board—or any similar board you may have handy—and use the rules in Volume III to let the players wander around encountering monsters and castle inhabitants. If one of those has treasure, use the monster's Treasure Type to figure out what it's got in its lair. The random stuff is only there for when you can't or won't come up with it yourself. It's a tool, not a rule. Yep: ( The Underworld & Wilderness Adventures, page 6) Agreed 100%. I very much enjoy randomising my AD&D game as much as possible, since there are already so many tables and methods provided, and they tend to integrate really quite beautifully. However, when I run OD&D I retain control over the whole process, and only head to the tables when I can't be bothered to think it up myself. I also often refer to the tanles to set a relative gauge for my dungeon design. For example, if unguarded treasure shows up in an empty room on a 1, then filling more than 11% of the level's rooms with unguarded treasure means that the level has more unguarded treasure than 'normal'. In that case, if 20% of the rooms have unguarded treasure, I might either make each treasure stash a little less impressive, or make the traps and locks protecting them extra devious.
|
|
|
Post by Merctime on Nov 17, 2014 11:45:49 GMT -6
I should note here some discrepancies on my part, but they are specific to Delving Deeper and not necessarily OD&D. This is just for clarification on my post above: Ahah, so Delving Deeper calls it Unguarded Treasure, that makes sense. I need to clarify that I mislead you on this. Delving Deeper allows for both methods of applying treasures to dungeons (rather unlike OD&D), and for rooms containing unguarded treasure (Just like OD&D). The 'unguarded treasure' note starts by talking about 'treasure guarded by traps' and follows with notes that unguarded treasure is determined in the same fashion as those found guarded by traps. This is also useful for placing treasures for monsters present that don't necessarily have the numbers for having a lair in the dungeon, but have some valuables (As far as I understand it). The Delving Deeper text further states that "The number of monsters is best determined by the level being considered and the kind of monster inhabiting the room or space. The Monster Table from Volume II can be most helpful here." This is, as I've spoken to above, different than the rules found in OD&D. It shows us that some monsters do actually lair in the dungeon and can/would use the 'treasure type' tables, and also that if some monsters aren't 'lairing' in the dungeon that they might still have some valuables as determined by the paragraphs concerning the 'treasure guarded by traps/unguarded treasure'. This post is simply meant to show one of the minor differences between Delving Deeper, and the original 1974 TSR rules of the game it's a clone of. While I personally believe it's a great clone of such, there are some differences that I'm still trying to wrap my head around. Of course, @gronanofsimmerya and Stormcrow's advice is of clear value regarding actual OD&D, which I can't really speak on too much. All the best, -Tim ("Merctime")
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2014 12:00:07 GMT -6
I fully agree with @gronanofsimmerya and Stormcrow's great advice.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2014 12:09:55 GMT -6
My pre-2e D&D experience only goes back 10 years, but I'm not sure if I've ever played with someone who had any qualms whatsoever about using Vol. II treasures (or their AD&D equivalents) in dungeons—I suppose that's born out in how some retroclones explicitly choose to use the Vol. III tables for unguarded treasure only. I wouldn't blame retro-clones as that table shows up in B/X where it is specifically listed as being for unguarded treasure. The Vol III table survives in AD&D only as a chart in the random dungeon generator where it is defaulted to no monsters (monsters get two rolls on the chart).
|
|
|
Post by Starbeard on Nov 17, 2014 16:41:02 GMT -6
My pre-2e D&D experience only goes back 10 years, but I'm not sure if I've ever played with someone who had any qualms whatsoever about using Vol. II treasures (or their AD&D equivalents) in dungeons—I suppose that's born out in how some retroclones explicitly choose to use the Vol. III tables for unguarded treasure only. I wouldn't blame retro-clones as that table shows up in B/X where it is specifically listed as being for unguarded treasure. The Vol III table survives in AD&D only as a chart in the random dungeon generator where it is defaulted to no monsters (monsters get two rolls on the chart). That's interesting. Of course I'm not blaming anyone for interpreting tables any which way, or that it began with retroclones, only that they demonstrate that people have interpreted different 'official' meanings out of the tables over time. I doubt one way is inherently better than the other—they are, after all, only tables, and using them either way each has its own pros and cons, which I believe even out in the end . And that's not even touching the slippery edge that is trying to weigh in what was intended by the designers with what was experienced or accepted by the playing public.
Still, it's really interesting to see where the split in interpretation begins (or rather, where the choice to explicitly state what the interpretation is begins), and what effect that had on the gameplay after it. My experience of Basic/Classic is basically limited to skimming through Holmes and the BE part of BECMI, so I was unaware that it shows up in B/X.
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Nov 17, 2014 20:29:38 GMT -6
I don't think the clones can be credited for use of monster treasure types in dungeons since Holmes has: (Holmes p34) The last sentence was apparently added to Holmes' manuscript by TSR (EGG?) and echoes the statement in M&T that "All Treasure is found only in those cases where the encounter takes place in the Lair". Whether this (the Holmes method) is a "good" or "bad" idea depends, I think, on the kind of dungeon being discussed. I tend toward the notion of a "dungeon ecology" where some of the monsters encountered in the dungeon also lair there. In that context I think use of monster lairs (and accompanying treasure types) makes a certain amount of sense, and enables the players to decide whether it's worthwhile tackling a monster (or groups of monsters) based on their expected treasure. This kind of logic might be less applicable to "gonzo" style dungeons where monsters, traps, treasures, etc., are inexplicably present "just because".
|
|
idrahil
Level 6 Magician
The Lighter The Rules, The Better The Game!
Posts: 398
|
Post by idrahil on Nov 18, 2014 17:20:14 GMT -6
I just want to chime in and say this is pretty interesting reading how things were, how things were meant to be and how they are now.
|
|
|
Post by aldarron on Nov 23, 2014 14:22:42 GMT -6
There's loads of evidence, most of which I've gone through before so I won't write a treatise again here. The lair treasure tables, as made clear in Holmes and B1 were created with the intention of being used, for lairs. Any lair, any where, dungeons included. The vol III treasure tables were created for non-lair treasures, which might or might not be guarded or trapped. Historically, the game rather quickly got away from this idea and moved toward the DM fiat method of dungeon stocking. If you use the tables together, you can be sure you will get a "proper" mix of magic items. If you don't, you won't. <shrug>
|
|
|
Post by talysman on Nov 23, 2014 15:06:53 GMT -6
There's loads of evidence, most of which I've gone through before so I won't write a treatise again here. The lair treasure tables, as made clear in Holmes and B1 were created with the intention of being used, for lairs. Any lair, any where, dungeons included. The vol III treasure tables were created for non-lair treasures, which might or might not be guarded or trapped. Historically, the game rather quickly got away from this idea and moved toward the DM fiat method of dungeon stocking. If you use the tables together, you can be sure you will get a "proper" mix of magic items. If you don't, you won't. <shrug> I have more or less settled on the "this table is for lairs, this one is filler" method, myself, whether or not this was ever intended (although it's nice to know there's evidence it might be...) In any case, rolling on the Vol. II table, or just using it as a guideline, is an excellent way to design your "specially placed" treasures mentioned in Vol. III; the second table is then used to fill in additional, secondary treasures. The one thing that's important to realize is that the table in Vol. III is *not* an "unguarded treasure" table, although you would use it to generate unguarded treasure. It's a "treasure by dungeon level" table, in contrast to the "treasure by monster type" table in Vol. II. If you use just the "treasure by dungeon level" table, your dungeons will be woefully treasure-poor, not even considering magic items, and it will take characters much longer to level up. I've been guilty of that myself in a couple old dungeons.
|
|
|
Post by cadriel on Nov 23, 2014 16:34:03 GMT -6
There's loads of evidence, most of which I've gone through before so I won't write a treatise again here. The lair treasure tables, as made clear in Holmes and B1 were created with the intention of being used, for lairs. Any lair, any where, dungeons included. The vol III treasure tables were created for non-lair treasures, which might or might not be guarded or trapped. Historically, the game rather quickly got away from this idea and moved toward the DM fiat method of dungeon stocking. If you use the tables together, you can be sure you will get a "proper" mix of magic items. If you don't, you won't. <shrug> When you say dungeon lairs, do you mean things like in the First Fantasy Campaign dungeon levels? There were rooms in there with fantastical numbers of goblins or skeletons, matching the Volume II number appearing. And then non-lair chambers would use the treasure from the Volume III tables?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2014 19:04:09 GMT -6
There's loads of evidence, most of which I've gone through before so I won't write a treatise again here. The lair treasure tables, as made clear in Holmes and B1 were created with the intention of being used, for lairs. Any lair, any where, dungeons included. The vol III treasure tables were created for non-lair treasures, which might or might not be guarded or trapped. Historically, the game rather quickly got away from this idea and moved toward the DM fiat method of dungeon stocking. If you use the tables together, you can be sure you will get a "proper" mix of magic items. If you don't, you won't. <shrug> I go by both Gary and Rob telling me face to face "Don't use the outdoor treasure tables in the dungeon." But that's just me.
|
|
|
Post by aldarron on Nov 24, 2014 21:27:47 GMT -6
.....When you say dungeon lairs, do you mean things like in the First Fantasy Campaign dungeon levels? There were rooms in there with fantastical numbers of goblins or skeletons, matching the Volume II number appearing. And then non-lair chambers would use the treasure from the Volume III tables? A monster's lair, to quote Gygax, is "where it domiciles and stores its treasure." (MM:5) That can mean one room or several adjacent rooms, depending on the monster and the situation. You're right that you can see examples of that in Blackmoor dungeon; such as a significant portion of level 9 mapped off as the lair of the "red eye orcs", but I wouldn't cite Blackmoor as a model for the OP because the dungeon was originally stocked using an entirely different procedure from the 3lbb dungeon stocking method (point buy), and the restock of the first 6 levels isn't be BTB either. You could look to Supp II, ToTF dungeon where there are lairs of medusae, trolls, and other things, which do have treasures consistent with their treasure types. Keep in mind however, that by the book you need to determine what rooms have treasure randomly, so if none of the rooms in a lair have treasure, then no lair treasure is there and the treasure type is irrelevant.
|
|
|
Post by aldarron on Nov 24, 2014 22:12:25 GMT -6
There's loads of evidence, most of which I've gone through before so I won't write a treatise again here. The lair treasure tables, as made clear in Holmes and B1 were created with the intention of being used, for lairs. Any lair, any where, dungeons included. The vol III treasure tables were created for non-lair treasures, which might or might not be guarded or trapped. Historically, the game rather quickly got away from this idea and moved toward the DM fiat method of dungeon stocking. If you use the tables together, you can be sure you will get a "proper" mix of magic items. If you don't, you won't. <shrug> I go by both Gary and Rob telling me face to face "Don't use the outdoor treasure tables in the dungeon." But that's just me. Yeah, I'm sure Gary and Rob did at some point, Mike. Unfortunately, treasure values are one of those things Gary seems to have waffled on and I get the sense from conflicting comments and from the descriptions in the MM and from AD&D, he may have been afraid the treasure type tables would give PC's too much money, particularly if referees misunderstood and had every monster encountered carrying a lair treasure in its pockets - hence the outdoor lair thing. But if you look at the Dalluhn draft and your photocopied notes you will find the treasure tables as usual, but you won't find any mention of the "outdoor" business. There are no other treasure tables "by dungeon level" or otherwise. So someone with only the Dalluhn draft as their rule set would absolutely use the treasure types in the dungeon. That and the fact that a number of the monsters with treasure types hardly exist outside of a dungeon (minotaurs are the clearest example) seem convincing enough to me regarding their original purpose. Its also pretty clear that Gary was okay with using treasure tables in the dungeon for the Holmes edit, where it is more clearly explained.
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Nov 24, 2014 22:53:46 GMT -6
I think it noteworthy that random determination of treasures is secondary to some thoughtfully-placed treasures: ( The Underworld & Wilderness Adventures, p. 6) Therefore the treasure table on page 7 is NOT representative of the types of treasure in the dungeon as a whole. Rather, those are the relatively minor treasures, which are IN ADDITION to the good stuff hand-picked by the referee (i. e., undoubtedly magic items and valuable gems and jewelry).
|
|
|
Post by Zenopus on Nov 25, 2014 7:33:01 GMT -6
For the record, Gary added two statements to the Holmes rulebook regarding the treasure types. The second statement is the last sentence in the paragraph quoted by Ways. It refers back to earlier guidance given at the beginning of the monsters section: "The TREASURE TYPES TABLE (shown hereafter) is recommended for use only when there are exceptionally large numbers of low level monsters guarding them, or if the monsters are of exceptional strength (such as dragons). A good guide to the amount of treasure any given monster should be guarding is given in the MONSTER & TREASURE ASSORTMENTS which are included in the game." I did a little analysis of the first level of the M&TA treasures in this post, which showed that "over time the average GP of the treasure for 1st level encounters (e.g. 3-12 Kobolds, 1-4 Berserkers, 2-8 centipedes) should be about 318 GP."
|
|
|
Post by aldarron on Nov 25, 2014 18:04:22 GMT -6
I think it noteworthy that random determination of treasures is secondary to some thoughtfully-placed treasures: ( The Underworld & Wilderness Adventures, p. 6) Therefore the treasure table on page 7 is NOT representative of the types of treasure in the dungeon as a whole. Rather, those are the relatively minor treasures, which are IN ADDITION to the good stuff hand-picked by the referee (i. e., undoubtedly magic items and valuable gems and jewelry). Personally, I'm not sure it "is a good idea", considering 40 years of monty haul dungeons. The issue isn't the wealth, its the type and distribution of magical treasure and very very few referees ever considered the ratios of magic items found in the tables when creating their own "important treasures". Regardless of my opinion on that, I think your characterization of this statement is overdrawn Geoffrey. Having a few "most important" treasures, perhaps containing key elements of an adventure goal, does not make random treasure determination secondary by any stretch. The great bulk of the treasures on the level should still come from the tables. Further, I also think you may be missing the point. The previous sentence reads "The determination of just where monsters should be placed, and whether or not they will be guarding treasure, and how much of the latter if they are guarding something, can become burdensome when faced with several levels to do at one time." In other words, randomly rolling up all those monsters and treasures can be a chore, so clearly, in the interest of not overburdening his customers, Gygax is you can save yourself some time and trouble by choosing a few key treasures yourself. That's not saying it is in the best interest of campaign design to do so, but in relieving the workload.
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Nov 25, 2014 20:46:29 GMT -6
The previous sentence reads "The determination of just where monsters should be placed, and whether or not they will be guarding treasure, and how much of the latter if they are guarding something, can become burdensome when faced with several levels to do at one time." In other words, randomly rolling up all those monsters and treasures can be a chore, so clearly, in the interest of not overburdening his customers, Gygax is you can save yourself some time and trouble by choosing a few key treasures yourself. I think you and I are understanding that passage in exactly opposite ways. I understand Gary to be saying, "Hey, I know that thoughtfully choosing treasures and monsters can be a chore, so you can lighten your load by just rolling some random treasures and monsters." In other words: thoughtfully choosing treasures and monsters = a chore rolling dice on treasure and monster tables = easy and a time-saver I'd be interested to hear what other people think about this passage. It never occurred to me that rolling on a few tables could be considered slow and hard, but that thoughtful choices would be fast and easy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2014 2:22:55 GMT -6
I think you and I are understanding that passage in exactly opposite ways. I understand Gary to be saying, "Hey, I know that thoughtfully choosing treasures and monsters can be a chore, so you can lighten your load by just rolling some random treasures and monsters." In other words: thoughtfully choosing treasures and monsters = a chore rolling dice on treasure and monster tables = easy and a time-saver I'd be interested to hear what other people think about this passage. It never occurred to me that rolling on a few tables could be considered slow and hard, but that thoughtful choices would be fast and easy. I agree with your interpretation.
|
|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Nov 26, 2014 6:47:28 GMT -6
thoughtfully choosing treasures and monsters = a chore rolling dice on treasure and monster tables = easy and a time-saver Hmm, that's what I've always thought, too.
|
|
|
Post by aldarron on Nov 26, 2014 9:15:27 GMT -6
The previous sentence reads "The determination of just where monsters should be placed, and whether or not they will be guarding treasure, and how much of the latter if they are guarding something, can become burdensome when faced with several levels to do at one time." In other words, randomly rolling up all those monsters and treasures can be a chore, so clearly, in the interest of not overburdening his customers, Gygax is you can save yourself some time and trouble by choosing a few key treasures yourself. I think you and I are understanding that passage in exactly opposite ways. I understand Gary to be saying, "Hey, I know that thoughtfully choosing treasures and monsters can be a chore, so you can lighten your load by just rolling some random treasures and monsters." In other words: thoughtfully choosing treasures and monsters = a chore rolling dice on treasure and monster tables = easy and a time-saver I'd be interested to hear what other people think about this passage. It never occurred to me that rolling on a few tables could be considered slow and hard, but that thoughtful choices would be fast and easy. Well, lets have a look: Typically a piece of graph paper will give you something like 25-50 rooms per level. So, erring on the smaller side, lets say you draw 30 rooms. Each room must be checked. So that’s 30 dice rolls for occupation and then 30 more rolls for treasure presence – 60 rolls. Next you will roll on the monster determination by level table for each monster. Typically in a 30 room dungeon that will be ten rooms (1/3rd). So that’ 10 more rolls to get the level of the occupying monster(s). Then you have to look on the monster level tables and choose your monster (although you could roll again on the level table if you wanted random monsters. Doing so means more rolls and the possibility of a nonsensical dungeon, so I prefer to hand pick). You might also roll for numbers appearing- most people do - but lets assume you plan to adjust monster numbers on the fly according to party strength per U&WA, and ignore those extra rolls for the moment. So we are up to 70 rolls (ignoring random rolls and # appearing rolls) and just getting started. Next you will have to roll up your treasures. It’s a 1/6th chance in unoccupied rooms and 50% chance in occupied rooms so on our 30 room level that would typically come to 3 + 5, or about 8 or 9 rooms with treasure. Lets make it easy on ourselves and say 8. So then you have to look at a treasure table and roll. Vol III., distribution of treasure requires a percentile presence/absence roll for gold, jems, jewelry, and a magic item – that’s 4*8 = another 32 dice rolls. You also have to roll a d6 or 2d6 depending on dungeon level and multiply the result for the amount of silver – another 8 rolls. Now if you are rolling on the monster treasure type tables, you will also have to roll for copper and possibly for captives, but we can pretend we aren’t using those tables for now. So we are up to 110 rolls with different dice and have had to make a few calculations. How many more rolls we will need depends on the results of our previous treasure rolls, and chances get much greater the deeper the dungeon level. Lets just suppose you are working on a midway level, like level 6. Four of your rooms (50%) will have gold, at least 2 will have gems (30%), at least 2 will have jewelry (30%) and at least 1 will have a magic item (15%). There will be 1d6 Gems per treasure on level six, (2d6 further down), so about 4 gems per treasure. Each gem requires at least 2 rolls; a value roll (percentiles), and a further d6 value increase check which can explode. Jewelry also is 1d6 per treasure on level six, (2d6 further down), so about 4 pieces per treasure. Each piece of jewelry requires a percentile roll for base category and a second roll of 1 or 3 dice multiplied by a value figure - so 2 rolls and a calculation. (I also like to roll on a table to determine the kind of jewelry (tiara, necklace etc.) but that’s not btb). Okay lastly there’s the magic item. So first you roll percentiles on the items table. At minimum, a second roll on a subtable will be required to determine the specific item – a longevity potion, for example. If you roll a map, or a spell scroll, - and there's a good chance you will -several more rolls will be required to determine the exact contents and nature of the item. Swords are a bit of an odd duck here. Gygax originally created a simple table of 13 different magical swords, but then he also includes his much improved edit of Arnesons magical sword generation protocol. It is simple to just roll percentiles on the table, but if you use the sword generation method, and not the pre-made table (and you should if you want variety and interesting swords), you will have to roll for intelligence, ego, alignment, purpose, damage rating, magical powers and possibly a couple other characteristics. In summary, using a basic, by the book approach for random dungeon stocking, a single level of only 30 rooms requires literally hundreds of die rolls with multiple kinds of dice, scores of calculations (usually multiplying), and continual page flipping and chart look-ups. It is inconceivable to me that anyone, including Gary, who has ever created a multi-level dungeon by the tables would even remotely find it easy or quick. In my experience all that rolling, note taking, and page flipping is very time consuming (as in hours) and can certainly be “burdensome” if not done a little bit at a time at leisure. On the other hand, I think it is temptingly easier and quicker to just “eyeball it”, take shortcuts, or make up a bunch of stuff and write it down. I don’t do that because I feel I owe it to my players to give them an “as designed” OD&D experience in magic, treasure and monsters most of the time. <shrug> Nota Bene: I haven't included anything about rolling for treasure location or for traps or tricks, because that's not covered in the 3lbb's, but is encouraged in some of the later gaming material, and I do think its a good idea to at least follow the Monster & Treasure assortment tables for treasure containers and the table for treasure traps. There's also a note in the Dalluhn manuscript about a chance for cursed gold or gems, for which I usually give a 10% probability (same as cursed scrolls).
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Nov 26, 2014 9:54:03 GMT -6
I agree that that is indeed a daunting number of rolls. I would find it even more daunting, however, if I had to give thought to every room, its treasure (or lack thereof), and its monster (or lack thereof).
|
|
|
Post by inkmeister on Nov 26, 2014 10:11:26 GMT -6
I agree with Geoffrey's interpretation; the assumption is that the ref will plan whatever rooms he or she wants - thoughtfully placing treasure, monster, traps, etc. This can be supplemented with the random rolls. I agree with Aldarron, however, that rolling is just friggin' tedious! I initially thought it would be better to randomly generate my dungeons, so that I would know I was getting the "true D&D experience." But it was so mind numbing trying to generate 40 or 50 rooms randomly. Getting a treasure result for a room was awful, because it meant that many more rolls! I have to roll to see if gold is present, and then how much, then likewise for gems AND jewelry, and then magic treasure. And on the lower levels, the odds of getting anything interesting are very small. So I would vastly prefer just choosing the results. It is far, far faster to do so, and much less tedious. On the other hand, if you have a computer algorithm to assist (and I realize there are random dungeon generators), then that could be fun to play with. Even still, I find random results unsatisfactory much of the time.
|
|