|
Post by waysoftheearth on Aug 14, 2013 5:49:17 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by bestialwarlust on Aug 14, 2013 6:43:46 GMT -6
I'll give it a thorough read through. So with the spell changes you left out spells that were greyhawk but added ones in that were in SR published before the greyhawk supplement?
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Aug 14, 2013 7:09:02 GMT -6
I'll give it a thorough read through. So with the spell changes you left out spells that were greyhawk but added ones in that were in SR published before the greyhawk supplement? Yes, that's it in a nutshell
|
|
|
Post by Zenopus on Aug 14, 2013 7:10:31 GMT -6
The Greyhawk Supplement (2/75) was published before the first issue of Strategic Review (Spring 75), so any Strategic Review spell would be "post-Greyhawk".
It looks like in the revised DD that the Greyhawk MU spells have been replaced with Illusionist spells from Strategic Review #4 (e.g., Color Spray instead of Magic Missile).
SR #4 is from Winter 1975, so it actually after both Greyhawk and Blackmoor (9/75).
|
|
|
Post by mgtremaine on Aug 14, 2013 7:32:10 GMT -6
First thing I see is the + sign under OSX is a funky character. I checked under Linux [Centos 5] and it also is funky.
OSX 10.6 [mgt@vega Tybor]$ echo $LANG en_US.UTF-8
Centos 5 [mgt@polaris ~]$ echo $LANG en_US.UTF-8
When I vi the txt file I see , , ,
====================== Experience Earned ====================== Prime Experience Requisite Adjustment ---------------------- 3-5 <96>20% 6-8 <96>10% 9-12 . 13-15 +5% 16-18 +10% ----------------------
If I change [mgt@vega Tybor]$ export LANG=C [mgt@vega Tybor]$ vi ~/Downloads/DD\ Reliquary\ \(alpha\).txt
. . .
====================== Experience Earned ====================== Prime Experience Requisite Adjustment ---------------------- 3-5 ~V20% 6-8 ~V10% 9-12 . 13-15 +5% 16-18 +10% ----------------------
-Mike
|
|
|
Post by bestialwarlust on Aug 14, 2013 7:49:18 GMT -6
I get an unrecognized character for any minus sign on my mac using libre office for example:
===================================== Dexterity Adjustments ===================================== Dexterity Initiative To Hit Adj. Score Adjustment with Missiles ------------------------------------- 3-6 �1 �1 7-8 . �1 9-12 . . 13-14 . +1 15-18 +1 +1 -------------------------------------
another
============================================ Retainers, Loyalty, & Reaction ============================================ Charisma Maximum Loyalty Reaction Score Retainers Adjustment Adjustment -------------------------------------------- 3 1 �2 �1 4 2 �1 �1 5 2 �1 �1 6 3 . �1 7-8 3 . . 9-12 4 . . 13-14 6 +1 . 15 6 +1 +1 16 8 +2 +1 17 8 +2 +1 18 10 +4 +1 --------------------------------------------
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Aug 14, 2013 8:08:36 GMT -6
Hmm, I made the file on a windows machine, so perhaps it needs a windows to mac script run on it? It's late for me now, but I'll look at it tomorrow. Thanks for letting me know.
|
|
|
Post by bestialwarlust on Aug 14, 2013 8:18:09 GMT -6
No problem I run both so I can check on my windows pc also when I get home from work.
|
|
|
Post by mgtremaine on Aug 14, 2013 8:32:48 GMT -6
If do
iconv -f WINDOWS-1252 -t UTF-8 DD_Reliquary-alpha.txt
It comes out right.
====================== Experience Earned ====================== Prime Experience Requisite Adjustment ---------------------- 3-5 –20% 6-8 –10% 9-12 . 13-15 +5% 16-18 +10% ----------------------
So the issue is Windows uses the WINDOWS-1252 Character sets which of course the rest of the machine world doesn't like. Amazing huh! See if you can set UTF-8 anywhere in your defaults for the document.
-Mike
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Aug 14, 2013 16:35:14 GMT -6
If do iconv -f WINDOWS-1252 -t UTF-8 DD_Reliquary-alpha.txt It comes out right. Thanks Mike, that's a great help. A question thou; is it eating all the extra spaces in the tables? In the original document the tables were all neatly aligned (in a monospaced font), whereas in your sample above it looks as though all the aligning spaces were removed.
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Aug 14, 2013 17:19:14 GMT -6
The Greyhawk Supplement (2/75) was published before the first issue of Strategic Review (Spring 75), so any Strategic Review spell would be "post-Greyhawk". It looks like in the revised DD that the Greyhawk MU spells have been replaced with Illusionist spells from Strategic Review #4 (e.g., Color Spray instead of Magic Missile). SR #4 is from Winter 1975, so it actually after both Greyhawk and Blackmoor (9/75). Apologies, my previous reply was overly hasty. It's okay that some SR issues appeared post-Greyhawk (from memory, I think the FAQ article in SR#2 mentions that GH is about to go to press); it has always been the case that DD includes a few elements from the 'zines of the time. The changes to the magic-user spell list were motivated partly by numerous complaints about the inclusion of magic missile, which is deemed (by some) to be a game changer due to it being a 1st level spell that directly causes damage. Shield was then replaced partly because it was from Greyhawk, partly because of its overlap with protection from normal missiles (which the SRD also moved to a 2nd level spell), and partly because of its (later) association with magic missile. (Interestingly, perhaps, the Greyhawk shield doesn't annul magic missiles, and nor does the Greyhawk magic missile automatically hit). Jump and floating disk were (from memory) of a later vintage. FWIW -- while I'm happy for the DD 1st level magic-user to have a few "new" options to think about, the preview is an opportunity to see what other folks think too. If everybody hates something, then I still have time to change it before it goes to print. We'll give it a few weeks and see what folks have to say...
|
|
|
Post by bestialwarlust on Aug 14, 2013 19:41:14 GMT -6
The Greyhawk Supplement (2/75) was published before the first issue of Strategic Review (Spring 75), so any Strategic Review spell would be "post-Greyhawk". It looks like in the revised DD that the Greyhawk MU spells have been replaced with Illusionist spells from Strategic Review #4 (e.g., Color Spray instead of Magic Missile). SR #4 is from Winter 1975, so it actually after both Greyhawk and Blackmoor (9/75). Apologies, my previous reply was overly hasty. It's okay that some SR issues appeared post-Greyhawk (from memory, I think the FAQ article in SR#2 mentions that GH is about to go to press); it has always been the case that DD includes a few elements from the 'zines of the time. The changes to the magic-user spell list were motivated partly by numerous complaints about the inclusion of magic missile, which is deemed (by some) to be a game changer due to it being a 1st level spell that directly causes damage. Shield was then replaced partly because it was from Greyhawk, partly because of its overlap with protection from normal missiles (which the SRD also moved to a 2nd level spell), and partly because of its (later) association with magic missile. (Interestingly, perhaps, the Greyhawk shield doesn't annul magic missiles, and nor does the Greyhawk magic missile automatically hit). Jump and floating disk were (from memory) of a later vintage. FWIW -- while I'm happy for the DD 1st level magic-user to have a few "new" options to think about, the preview is an opportunity to see what other folks think too. If everybody hates something, then I still have time to change it before it goes to print. We'll give it a few weeks and see what folks have to say... I'm torn on the MM front on one hand my players would expect it to be there, but it's easy enough for me to add back in. In all honesty I could do without it I can see the logic of removing a direct damage first level spell. To give DD it's own flavor though I'd say leave it out. On another note I did check and it looks like the libre office on the mac is set to use utf-8 as a default. I see there's an update to Libre Office I'll update and report back
|
|
|
Post by mgtremaine on Aug 14, 2013 19:59:34 GMT -6
If do iconv -f WINDOWS-1252 -t UTF-8 DD_Reliquary-alpha.txt It comes out right. Thanks Mike, that's a great help. A question thou; is it eating all the extra spaces in the tables? In the original document the tables were all neatly aligned (in a monospaced font), whereas in your sample above it looks as though all the aligning spaces were removed. Nah that just proboards / html removing the spaces -Mike
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Aug 15, 2013 8:23:46 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by bestialwarlust on Aug 15, 2013 9:28:12 GMT -6
Yup looks like so far that has cleared it up
|
|
|
Post by aldarron on Sept 4, 2013 18:51:00 GMT -6
From the preface "-- it was the first ever role-playing game. ". Something of a problematic statement, given Braunstein (unpublished) and Korns (published), and the contention by Gary and others that role-playing games were as old as time. More accurate to say "first published fantasy role-playing game", or something like that. <shrug>
|
|
|
Post by aldarron on Sept 6, 2013 13:52:22 GMT -6
This statement "Magic-users and clerics can copy spells which they can memorize onto scrolls and can enchant other magical items at 9th level or higher. " is ambiguous as to whether only 9th lvl+ is required to make scrolls. Not sure if that's intentional, but in case it isn't, I thought I'd point it out.
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Sept 6, 2013 21:42:33 GMT -6
Thanks Aldarron.
Re: the Preface, I will change it to: "it was the first comprehensive role-playing game". I think I'll also try to smooth the whole preface over a bit, in light of the last year's experience.
Re: creating scrolls, yes that was intentionally ambiguous.
|
|
|
Post by aldarron on Sept 7, 2013 11:15:18 GMT -6
Just finished reading through the rest of it. Every change made from earlier editions that I’ve noticed so far has been a big positive IMHO, Simon. You might consider adding Knights and Magick to your wargames list as it was specifically designed to work with rpgs, and the pdf is now available again here: thegaminggang.com/2013/01/knights-and-magick-classic-miniatures-rule-set-back-in-print-here-at-tgg/Monsters: Ghouls – paralysis is given as 2-8 turns. Shouldn’t that either be indefinite or last one turn per CM? It’s awesome that all the 3lbb monsters, including the mentioned by name only ones, are included. There’s a couple newbies though that seemed out of place to me: Velociraptor - before “Jurassic Park” velociraptors were not well known or part of the standard dino fare in pop culture. Strange as this may sound, it seems anachronistic to include them. Living Statue – I could be wrong, but I think this was a Tom Moldvay creation first appearing in his Basic rulebook. Okay, on to treasure. Couple things I noticed: Rings: most of the lists of magic items have only small differences from those of the 3lbb’s of the sort you'd expect for IP reasons, but the list of rings is an exception. I count 6 rings (Climbing, Feather Falling, Jumping, Resistance to Cold, Swimming, Wizardry) constituting close to 1/3rd of the list that don’t have functional counterparts in the 3lbb’s. Not sure what all sources these rings might be being drawn from, but it seemed like an unusually large amount of difference to me. Magic swords: properly speaking, strength and intelligence instead of charisma and wisdom, should be the stats involved in the “dominance “ check. <shrug>
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2013 11:26:50 GMT -6
Living Statue – I could be wrong, but I think this was a Tom Moldvay creation first appearing in his Basic rulebook. The inclusion of those was my idea. See Volume II: Monsters & Treasure, page 21, list item #4.
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Sept 8, 2013 5:15:53 GMT -6
Thanks again Aldarron; your input is much appreciated.
Ghouls: Yes, I had already noticed that ghoul paralysis should be 1 turn duration (with no saving throw mentioned), and should only affect normals (as per Chainmail).
Velociraptor: A fair comment for sure. I added these ("large animals") primarily so that DD would have a low HD dinosaur as well as all the huge HD ones. I should have called them Deinonychuses instead, since Velociraptors were really about the size of turkeys. Either way, they are certainly an addition.
Living Statues: As Cameron noted these appear in the 3LBBs.
Rings: I can't recall exactly where these extras came from, but it seems likely they're "ring ins" from the SRD. I will review the list and probably replace less "authentic" items with others from the early 'zines.
Swords: Yes, this is an intentional difference.
|
|
|
Post by aldarron on Sept 8, 2013 17:33:02 GMT -6
Living Statue – I could be wrong, but I think this was a Tom Moldvay creation first appearing in his Basic rulebook. The inclusion of those was my idea. See Volume II: Monsters & Treasure, page 21, list item #4. Ah, right your are Cameron. Thanks for pointing to the reference.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2013 21:16:49 GMT -6
Ah, right your are Cameron. Thanks for pointing to the reference. No sweat, man! You have to remember, I've been reading these books since they were published in the 1970's. Living statues, in particular, stood out to my younger self when I read them. My take on them was a bit different than the eventual published versions, but either way what a fun monster!
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Sept 9, 2013 10:35:05 GMT -6
There was also a Magic Statue writeup in Tegel Manor and the Ready Ref Sheets.
I do think Greyhawk elements (like Magic Missile spell) should be left out, with the exception that things that were mentioned in OD&D but only fleshed out in Greyhawk (Golems, Gelatinous Cubes, Salamanders, Titans) should be included basically as they appeared in Greyhawk.
On the other hand, I also favor minimal changes from the BHP Delving Deeper. At some point, you just have to stick with your guns and say, “In Delving Deeper we went with such-and-such,” and it is what it is. How long ghoul paralysis lasts, for instance — it’s just an arbitrary die roll based on something someone ruled once — it’s not important enough to change. It’s not worth it for it to differ depending on which “edition” of Delving Deeper you are playing. Just my opinion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2013 14:12:04 GMT -6
Just downloaded the preview, great work, well-organized and explained.
|
|
|
Post by scottenkainen on Sept 12, 2013 21:05:33 GMT -6
Chiming in on the recent discussion, the weirdest thing I had to get used to when I wrote my Delving Deeper module was having no giant rats. I realize there are no specific stats for giant rats in Monsters & Treasure, but it seems like they quickly became such a cornerstone monster in every low-level dungeon...
~Scott "-enkainen" Casper
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Sept 13, 2013 0:40:05 GMT -6
I do think Greyhawk elements (like Magic Missile spell) should be left out, with the exception that things that were mentioned in OD&D but only fleshed out in Greyhawk (Golems, Gelatinous Cubes, Salamanders, Titans) should be included basically as they appeared in Greyhawk. Yes, that's pretty much exactly the way the hardback has turned out Just downloaded the preview, great work, well-organized and explained. Glad you liked it @relic, and thanks for stopping by to say so Chiming in on the recent discussion, the weirdest thing I had to get used to when I wrote my Delving Deeper module was having no giant rats. I realize there are no specific stats for giant rats in Monsters & Treasure, but it seems like they quickly became such a cornerstone monster in every low-level dungeon... Giant rats get a mention in M&T's vampire description, so they've been added for the hardback. There'll be rats in the walls evermore!
|
|
|
Post by strangebrew on Sept 17, 2013 15:44:35 GMT -6
What's the rationale behind changing the distances from feet to inches? I assume it's to bring it closer to the original, but it just seems like an unnecessary step that will confuse newcomers. All of the changes and things that have gone on since the beginning have been fine, but this one really is puzzling and odd to me. Have you received feedback from players who use miniatures who requested this?
While I understand the history behind inches for distance, they are one of the only things I actively dislike about old school games, and I was originally very happy DD did away with them.
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Sept 17, 2013 17:17:00 GMT -6
What's the rationale behind changing the distances from feet to inches? The use of inch distances makes for a smooth transition to miniatures games, certainly, but "turns" and "inches" have always been elastic things in OD&D (and in AD&D too). Earlier versions of DD partly glossed over this, translating inches to feet for the dungeon scale. Something may have been gained in doing so, but something else was lost. In D&D (and therefore DD too) a turn can represent one minute, ten minutes, or one day depending on what zoom level you're at in the game. Likewise, 12" can represent 120ft at the indoor scale, 120 yards at the outdoor scale, or 12 miles at the outdoor exploration scale. It might be frustrating to need to translate inches to feet if you only ever need to use the feet scale (why not just measure in feet?). But it's really neat to have a single measurement unit that works at all scales if you're using more than one scale in your game. It would be great to think that DD might encourage the latter
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Sept 17, 2013 21:49:08 GMT -6
I for one really like “inches” because of the way ranges triple outdoors compared to indoors. It just aesthetically and practically plays better.
|
|