Klytus, I'm bored.

[Scott Anderson]

Oct 30, 2017 17:20:06 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Why not just use CHAINMAIL?

Not everyone can play with Mike Mornard or Jeff Perrin sitting at his elbow explaining everything

I would really love to know a system that takes less than several hours to adjudicate a battle.

[Deleted]

Oh, balderdash. I am going to quote Tim Kask here: "If you have trouble understanding CHAINMAIL, you need to work on your reading comprehension."

[robertsconley]

I took another look at the Battlesystem tables. One things I forgot to mention is that they aggregate the result of three rounds of AD&D combat. If you look at the chart I posted for one round of combat basically you get another man hitting every 2 steps on the results. With the odds factored over three rounds of combat, the spread becomes more gradual with results spread from 0 hits to 30 hits.

[Deleted]

This conversation bores me, Klytus.

[Starbeard]

Mike,

I just read on Wikipedia that you were the one who introduced Prof Barker to D&D. What's the history on that? Was he already running wargames set in Tekumel before you showed him D&D? Did you have anything to do with any of the Petal Throne 'house rules' that went into the published game?

I'm sure you've answered all of this many times before, so apologies if these are 'just search the web' questions.

[Deleted]

Phil was the advisor to the U of MN wargame club, the "Conflict Simulation Association." He was also an avid miniatures gamer.

I started running D&D in fall of 1973 there and Phil was a player. His ditto copies of EPT that he produced were the first I heard of Tekumel.

[geoffrey]

Michael, the 1974 D&D rules can be and sometimes are understood to state that ALL magic swords have an alignment (which can be a big problem because if you grasp a magic sword that has a different alignment than you, you get zapped with 1-6 or 2-12 hp of damage).

Question: In Gary's old D&D games, did ALL magic swords have an alignment, or did only SOME magic swords have an alignment? If it was only some, were swords with alignment pretty rare, or were they the norm?

[tetramorph]

I'm looking forward to what @gronanofsimmerya has to say about this.

geoffrey , it seems to me that neutral is not an "alignment," per se. It is opting out of the ONE alignment (line-up, as in, battle lines) between law and chaos.

So you are lawful, chaotic, or you opt-out of the conflict and thus you are neutral. "Neutral" is an alignment like "9" is an "armor" class. Is fills in the blank on your character sheet for alignment when you don't want to pick a side.

So there are swords without alignment: the neutral ones. But they are still magic. So if you are lined-up one way or the other then you are going to get "zapped" trying to pick one up and use it.

Anyway, that is how I make sense of it.

Fight on!

[talysman]

Nov 10, 2017 9:04:15 GMT -6 tetramorph said:

I'm looking forward to what @gronanofsimmerya has to say about this.

geoffrey , it seems to me that neutral is not an "alignment," per se. It is opting out of the ONE alignment (line-up, as in, battle lines) between law and chaos.

So you are lawful, chaotic, or you opt-out of the conflict and thus you are neutral. "Neutral" is an alignment like "9" is an "armor" class. Is fills in the blank on your character sheet for alignment when you don't want to pick a side.

So there are swords without alignment: the neutral ones. But they are still magic. So if you are lined-up one way or the other then you are going to get "zapped" trying to pick one up and use it.

Anyway, that is how I make sense of it.

Fight on!

For intelligent beings, especially humans, I interpret neutral the same way as you. It's not an alignment.

But the rules on magic swords clearly mean something else. Neutral magic swords actively harm anyone aligned with Law or Chaos. So, rather than being unaligned, they are more "anti-aligned".

I kind of hate the idea of Neutral representing The Cosmic Balance, but Neutral magic swords kind of seem to be about that.

[tetramorph]

talysman, I read you, but I think our reading of neutrality as unaligned can work for the swords too. Here is what I mean:

You've decided for Law. You find a sword. It was forged by ancient ones who decided to stay out of the cosmic battle.

You pick up the sword. ZAP! Its very neutrality means that your lawful alignment is repulsed by the thing. (But not as much as if you had picked up a chaotic sword.)

In other words, you are "punished" for interacting with something that is not committed to your side of the battle.

This still makes sense to me without Neutral becoming "the cosmic balance."

[talysman]

Nov 10, 2017 13:34:07 GMT -6 tetramorph said:

talysman, I read you, but I think our reading of neutrality as unaligned can work for the swords too. Here is what I mean:

You've decided for Law. You find a sword. It was forged by ancient ones who decided to stay out of the cosmic battle.

You pick up the sword. ZAP! Its very neutrality means that your lawful alignment is repulsed by the thing. (But not as much as if you had picked up a chaotic sword.)

In other words, you are "punished" for interacting with something that is not committed to your side of the battle.

This still makes sense to me without Neutral becoming "the cosmic balance."

So you're saying the damage from opposite-aligned magic swords is actually a feature of the PC, rather than the sword?

[tetramorph]

Yes, talysman, I think it is about the person, not the sword per se.

[Deleted]

I was gone last weekend, I'll try to get to this in the next couple of days. Gotta review the rules.

[korvin0starmast]

Apr 20, 2017 11:26:12 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Not much PvP per se, but very MUCH "uneasy alliances between ruthless pirates."

Many thanks for the response, and my apologies for having lost track of having asked the question. I'll blame my advanced age, and leave it at that.  
Best wishes.  
Korvin

[korvin0starmast]

Aug 28, 2017 18:09:48 GMT -6 murquhart72 said:

 And that's why the booklets (as written) lead one to think that Clerics (again, just as an example) cannot use regular armor & weapons, but can use them if they're magical.  

Uh, I started playing in 1975 and we never took it that way regarding clerics.  Not one of the groups I played in, and that would have been about a dozen before AD&D came out.  

[korvin0starmast]

Oct 27, 2017 5:56:27 GMT -6 raisin said:

Was there any situation (E.g. 4HD FM vs 1-1HD Goblins) in which Fighting-Men get multiple attacks against lesser foes? What about high level Clerics and Magic-Users?

I'm trying to figure out where these came from in Delving Deeper.

That was covered in a Strategic Review article that Gary Gygax wrote (Strat Review number 2, page 3 ).

Combat Example:

10 ORCS surprise a lone Hero wandering lost in the dungeons, but the die check reveals they are 30’ distant at the time of surprise, so they use their initiative to close to melee distance.
lnitiative is now  checked. The Hero scores a 3, plus 1 for his high dexterity, so it is counted 4.  The Orcs score 6, and even a minus 1 for their lack of dexterity (optional) still allows them first attack. 
As they outnumber their opponent so heavily it is likely that they will try to over-power him rather than kill, so each hit they score will be counted as attempts to grapple the Hero:

- Assumed armor of the Hero: Chainmail & Shield -- AC 4.   
- Score required to hit AC 4 -- 15 (by monsters with 1 hit die).  
- Only 5 Orcs can attack, as they haven't had time to surround.  

Assume the following dice scores for the Orcs attacks:  Orc #1 - 06; #2 - 10; #3 - 18; #4 - 20; #5 - 03.  

Two of the Orcs have grappled the Hero, and if his score with 4 dice is less than their score with 2 dice he has been pinned helplessly.  

If it is a tie they are struggling, with the Hero still on his feet, but he will be unable to defend himself with his weapon.   
If the Hero scores higher than the Orcs use the positive difference to throw off his attackers, i.e. the Hero scores 15 and the Orcs scored but 8, so the Hero has tossed both aside, stunning them for 7 turns between them.   
- Round 2: lniative goes to the Hero.  
- Score required to hit Orcs -- 11 (4th level fighter vs. AC 6).   
Assume the following dice score by the Hero. Note that he is allowed one attack for each of his combat levels as the ratio of one Orc vs. the Hero is 1:4, so this is treated as normal (non-fantastic) melee, as is any combat where the score of one side is a base 1 hit die or less.  

-Hero: 19; 01; 16; 09. Two out of four blows struck.  
There are 8 orcs which can be possibly hit. An 8-sided die is rolled to determine which have been struck. Assume a 3 and an 8 are rolled. Orcs #3 and #8 are diced for to determine their hit points, and they have 3 and 4 points respectively. Orc #3 takes 6 damage points and is killed. Orc #8 takes 1 damage point and is able to fight.  

- All 7 surviving/non-stunned Orcs are now able to attack.  
 
Continued attempts to over-power the Hero are assumed, and no less than 4 Orcs are able to attack the Hero from positions where his shield cannot be brought into play, so his AC is there considered 5, and those Orcs which attack from behind add +2 to their hit dice. In the case it is quite likely that the Orcs will capture the Hero.  
 

This was OD&D and I am guessing how it was run in Greyhawk, I suspect DA did similar but couldn't prove it. 

(Fuller citation is Strategic Review, Summer 1975, Volume 1 Number 2, page 3) (THE STRATEGIC REVIEW
 542 SAGE STREET LAKE GENEVA, WIS. 53147) 

[Zenopus]

Gronan, a few years ago in another thread (odd74.proboards.com/post/155019/thread) you wrote:

Gary absolutely used the Outdoor Survival map for wilderness adventures. Greyhawk was near the center of the left edge, I don't have the map in front of me.

Here's a decent image of the board:


Would you be able to point out where Greyhawk was on this board? Was it the building right along the west edge?

[Deleted]

I think it was the village just south of the fold in the board in the center panel, but I can't swear to it.

[Deleted]

Nov 11, 2017 7:41:51 GMT -6 tetramorph said:

Yes, talysman, I think it is about the person, not the sword per se.

Volume 2 Page 27:

"( magic) Swords have an alignment"

Not "some" swords. Not "intelligent" swords. Swords. All magic swords have an alignment. The text is plain.


Volume 2 page 30:

"Naturally, the origin of each sword is either Law, Neutrality, or Chaos"

Neutrality IS an alignment. There is a Neutral alignment language. (Moorcock makes this plain).

[tetramorph]

Nov 20, 2017 17:43:05 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Nov 11, 2017 7:41:51 GMT -6 tetramorph said:

Yes, talysman, I think it is about the person, not the sword per se.

Volume 2 Page 27:

"( magic) Swords have an alignment"

Not "some" swords. Not "intelligent" swords. Swords. All magic swords have an alignment. The text is plain.


Volume 2 page 30:

"Naturally, the origin of each sword is either Law, Neutrality, or Chaos"

Neutrality IS an alignment. There is a Neutral alignment language. (Moorcock makes this plain).

Good point about neutrality having an alignment language. I don’t really care for Moorcock. I’m more of an Anderson man, myself.

Thanks!

[Deleted]

Me too, but Moorcock is also a huge influence on how Gary looked at alignment.

[talysman]

Nov 21, 2017 12:06:31 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Me too, but Moorcock is also a huge influence on how Gary looked at alignment.

Although the interesting thing about Moorcock's alignment is that you can theoretically start your own.

OK, maybe you have to be a supernatural being to do that. But one tried...

[mgtremaine]

Care to expand on that.. Although he certainly kept throwing in new factions Grey Lords, the Insects Gods, Agak and Gagak, etc... It seems like they all fit neatly into the 3 categories even if they don't explicit state they are aligned with Chaos or Law or whatever their actions tend to give it away. So I was just curious what you mean by "start your own alignment"

(Feel free to move this outside of gronan section if needed.)

-Mike

[talysman]

Nov 22, 2017 11:57:08 GMT -6 mgtremaine said:

Care to expand on that.. Although he certainly kept throwing in new factions Grey Lords, the Insects Gods, Agak and Gagak, etc... It seems like they all fit neatly into the 3 categories even if they don't explicit state they are aligned with Chaos or Law or whatever their actions tend to give it away. So I was just curious what you mean by "start your own alignment"

(Feel free to move this outside of gronan section if needed.)

-Mike

Should just be a quick aside. Balo the Jester explicitly leaves the side of Chaos to form a new alignment, Paradox. He doesn't succeed, but he did try...

[Zenopus]

Nov 20, 2017 17:37:49 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

I think it was the village just south of the fold in the board in the center panel, but I can't swear to it.

Thanks, it makes sense it would be in the middle of the board. Was that the location of both the City and the Castle, or did you have to travel across the board to Greyhawk Castle?

[Scott Anderson]

Gronan, I'm going to pour out some gravy in your honor.

[mgtremaine]

Nov 22, 2017 21:39:25 GMT -6 talysman said:

Nov 22, 2017 11:57:08 GMT -6 mgtremaine said:

Care to expand on that.. Although he certainly kept throwing in new factions Grey Lords, the Insects Gods, Agak and Gagak, etc... It seems like they all fit neatly into the 3 categories even if they don't explicit state they are aligned with Chaos or Law or whatever their actions tend to give it away. So I was just curious what you mean by "start your own alignment"

(Feel free to move this outside of gronan section if needed.)

-Mike

Should just be a quick aside. Balo the Jester explicitly leaves the side of Chaos to form a new alignment, Paradox. He doesn't succeed, but he did try...

Hmmm alignment by intent or outcome? Elric served Chaos by Intent but clearly by outcome he served the Balance. Balo by intent served himself but by outcome served chaos. So I get what you are saying by the 3 Alignment system is pretty hard get away from if you boil it down. Props for reminding me of Balo loved the Signing Citadel.

[korvin0starmast]

Elric was, as a character, somewhat conflicted.  You could say that his story arc through the original 7 books (Ending in Storm bringer) showed his journey through discovering that he world and cosmos were not quite what he knew in  his homeland, which wisdom in the long run led to his self meeting his chaotic and evil other self, the Black Sword. 

[geoffrey]

Another question for Mike Mornard, if I may:

How did you, Gary, and the rest of the old gang do the following?

Suppose the following two PCs go on an adventure together:

an 8th-level human fighter
an 8th-level dwarven fighter (who, according to page 5 of GREYHAWK, has achieved the maximum possible level for dwarven fighters)

Further suppose that at the end of their day's adventure they amass 10,000 experience points. What happens now?

A) Each receives 5,000 experience points, even though the dwarf cannot benefit from the experience points.

B) The human receives 10,000 experience points, and the dwarf receives none.

C) Something else.

[Deleted]

Wrong question.

Experience points come from treasure.

Do you think the Dwarf is going to not want his share of treasure?